Right. I made that quite clear.Bernard Muller wrote:But the text does not have the (bolded) "outside the camp".
Since the exodus camp had a gate, as I have shown, what exactly about the term outside the gate suggests that it is not the gate of the exodus camp? (Bear in mind that the author in the very next verse will invite his or her readers to join Jesus outside the camp.)Instead it is "outside the gate", suggesting that gate is not necessarily one of the camp (during the exodus)....
I am not suggesting that Jerusalem is not allowed as a possible interpretive option. I am asking what it is about the word gate, in and of itself, that positively suggests Jerusalem instead of camp, given that both of them had gates....allowing it to be understood as one of Jerusalem city gates.
(This is my last attempt here to get you to see my point. If you still cannot see it, then that is fine. I will move on.)
Ben.