Somewhere I picked up the notion that a Bible verse specifically forbids preaching in Asia. I dunno where this idea came from, but is there any scriptural background for it?
Jesus did all of his preaching in Asia, so it cannot really have been prohibited.
Perhaps you recollect Acts 16:6, where Paul and Barnabas were prohibited to preach in the Roman province of Asia, on one specific occasion?
The Bible, itself, was written in Asia. And wouldn’t that be considered preaching?
Well…
The Bible is generally against sin.
“Sin” is Hebrew for “China.”
Therefore, the Bible is against China?
I got nothing.
Oh god. Please tell that to Mother teresa. Except you can’t since she’s dead.
What, India isn’t considered Asia?
Well, you can; she just might not answer.
In the Roman Empire, Asia was a specific province in what’s now western Turkey.
Yes, but that’s a modern translation. The Jews wandered in the “Wilderness of Sin” during their 40 years. They certainly didn’t make it to China.
Zev Steinhardt
Two very different words – **Alessan **was referring to “Sin” - סין - spelled with an initial “Samekh.” I don’t recall the word appearing in the Tanakh (but I am no scholar so I may be wrong.) I believe you are referring to the “Wilderness of Tsin” - מדבר צין - spelled with an initial “Tsade”
I believe that the usual present-day meaning of “Asia” is a generalisation of that Roman province. Similarly, Africa used to be name of a Roman province convering part of present-day Libya and Tunisia, and the scope of “Africa” grew to cover the whole continent
Nope… see Numbers 33:11-12. It’s spelled there with a Samech as well.
Zev Steinhardt
Like I said… some kind of Biblical Scholar I am… :smack:
Well, it helps that I’ve been a ba’al kriah for the last 19 years. It gives me a bit of en edge concerning knowledge of the pentatuch.
(Translation: ba’al kriah = person who reads the Torah for the congregation in the synagogue.)
Zev Steinhardt
If she did, it would be a miracle. And then she can be a saint.
But, I think tschild got it right, as far as the actual question in the OP (barring semitic semantics). On one occasion, Paul was encouraged to go elsewhere than Asia.
The final book was to the churches in Asia:
So I’d say no
That would explain why the trip took 40 years. And also why Jews like Chinese food.
Four lines into the first book of Revelation, it looks like John is sent there specifically:
This is from KJV, if that’s too modern a translation, but I don’t think it differs substantially from earlier versions. Since many of the Apostles weren’t on speaking terms at this point in their careers, I suspect Paul’s reluctance to go there is the result of territorialism and infighting, not any divine prohibition.
And Acts says that Paul preached in Ephesus (and started a riot there), so the prohibition of preaching in Asia wasn’t even a permanent one for Paul.