1 Topic by Dirk B. (edited by Dirk B. 2019-07-07 22:51:55)

Topic: Which way of traveling the Holy Land is less confusing? - LOTE

As some of you know, my current WIP has a teen named Connor whom the Catholic Church has come to believe may be Christ returned in the flesh. Connor has no memory of a past life, so they send him on a tour of the Holy Land to visit many of the sites where Jesus walked the earth. The book is primarily for a Christian/Catholic audience, but it's also a supernatural thriller, so I hope to pick up some non-Christian readers. Regardless of audience, I need to keep the trip simple to avoid confusion.

Here's the complication. Travelling the Holy Land in the order that most closely resembles Jesus's travels would have the motorcade crisscrossing the Holy Land in haphazard fashion:

Connor and his escorts land at Ben Gurian Airport in Tel Aviv, skirt by Jerusalem to get to Bethlehem (where Jesus was born), then to Nazareth up north next to the Sea of Galilee (where Jesus grew up), then south again to Qasr al-Yahud east of Jerusalem at the Jordan River (the tourist site in Israel commemorating Jesus's baptism at around age 30), then an hour's drive to get to the official baptism site in Jordan, then back to Israel and north again to the Sea of Galilee, where most of His ministry became more localized, except for yearly trips to Jerusalem. When Connor goes north the second time, I'm taking him to Capernaum (Jesus's base), even though He preached in Nazareth first.

The Bible says that Jesus's parents went to Jerusalem every year for Passover. He was there at least once as a child at age twelve, and at least three more times as an adult. Since Jerusalem is the climax of Jesus's ministry, I decided not to take Connor there until the end of the journey, where they finish up in the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, the location where Jesus was crucified and entombed.

I'm worried the crisscrossing will be confusing, especially for non-Christian readers, who aren't used to Jesus wandering back and forth as he does in the Gospels. The alternative is to follow this route:

Bethlehem, baptism sites, north to Nazareth, then Capernaum and the surrounding region. This is much easier to picture on a mental map, but requires delaying discussion of His childhood until they actually get to Nazareth. In other words, he'll be visiting the baptism sites (which happened when Jesus was an adult) before His hometown where He spent the first thirty years of his life.

Thoughts?

Quote Post 1

Re: Which way of traveling the Holy Land is less confusing? - LOTE

What do you want your reader to believe?  The church thinks he may be Christ who has returned.  Do you want the readers to think the same thing?  Using the same route he used in the Bible will be more convincing to Christian readers.  To non-Christian readers, it won't make a difference because they are most likely unfamiliar with the original route unless they've studied the Bible as a history lesson.  So, in my opinion, it depends on what you want your readers to think.  I personally think discussing his life in chronological order makes more sense than hopping all over the place. 

For what it's worth! 
MJ

Quote Post 2

3 Reply by Dirk B. (edited by Dirk B. 2018-09-13 04:22:43)

Re: Which way of traveling the Holy Land is less confusing? - LOTE

Thanks, MJ. The question of whether Connor is Christ is one of two key mysteries in the book, both answered at the climax of the story. He has special (supernatural) gifts, which is why the Church thinks he may be Christ. Unfortunately, if I discuss Jesus's life in chronological order then I have to hop around (Start in Tel Aviv, bypass Jerusalem, head south to Bethlehem, then north to Nazareth in Galilee, then south near Jerusalem on the Jordan River, then back north again to Galilee not far from Nazareth).

If I make the route logical, then the events of His life will be told out of sequence. If I put them in proper sequence, then there has to be some back and forth between Galilee and Judea. I'm leaning toward a chronological route. Christians know he goes back and forth (even more often than I do in the story), so I think they'd be fine with it. I think non-Christians would understand the story better if told chronologically, with brief mention of the fact that they're moving around Israel to follow Christ's movements through the Holy Land. Jerusalem is the major exception. It played a huge role in Jesus's life, so I want to build up to it by only going there once, leading directly to the climax.

Quote Post 3

Re: Which way of traveling the Holy Land is less confusing? - LOTE

I would suggest using the route which best works for what you want to relay at a particular time. In the telling of the story you will be guiding the reader to the next location regardless of where it is and in so doing the reader will understand the purpose of this location whether it is in the historical sequence or not.

Say you take a child to a place which was a part of your earlier life and explain what it meant to you during that time period and then you take him to another place you lived before the child was born and explain your time there; it will not matter to the child that the places you visit are not in the original order you are familiar with. The reader will understand that also within the context of the story presented. Make it easy on yourself in the writing. Simple is generally the correct solution. Good luck. Take care. Vern

Quote Post 4

Re: Which way of traveling the Holy Land is less confusing? - LOTE

Have him go by a tour bus.

Quote Post 5

Re: Which way of traveling the Holy Land is less confusing? - LOTE

He's a target of the Antichrist, so he'll be traveling in a motorcade of three armored Mercedes SUVs loaded with heavily armed Swiss Guards. There's a Catholic expert on the Holy Land in the group. How's that for a tour? :-)

Quote Post 6

Re: Which way of traveling the Holy Land is less confusing? - LOTE

Dirk B. wrote:

He's a target of the Antichrist, so he'll be traveling in a motorcade of three armored Mercedes SUVs loaded with heavily armed Swiss Guards. There's a Catholic expert on the Holy Land in the group. How's that for a tour? :-)

Perfect. And that anwers your question--just research what a tour bus would do and substitute the armored convoy for it.

Quote Post 7

Re: Which way of traveling the Holy Land is less confusing? - LOTE

The tours I've read about don't travel chronologically. They take the short route. In thinking about this since yesterday, I've settled on a chronological presentation.

Quote Post 8

Re: Which way of traveling the Holy Land is less confusing? - LOTE

If he has a target on his back, then I would think the Catholic Church would want to get him through his tour as quickly as possible. Out in the open like that, even with an armed escort, he'd be vulnerable.

Quote Post 9

Re: Which way of traveling the Holy Land is less confusing? - LOTE

If they really thought he was Christ, you'd think they'd know He doesn't need their protection; more likely they need His. Amazing how some folks, the church, think God is helpless. Armed motorcades for Christ -- I suppose the noise will wake Him up in their minds. Just a thought in passing. Take care. Vern

Quote Post 10

Re: Which way of traveling the Holy Land is less confusing? - LOTE

He will indeed demonstrate that he can take care of himself before the tour is over. One of the reasons he's there is that he's being hunted in Rome, even inside the Vatican. They send him to the Holy Land not just to jog his memory, but also to keep him relatively safe while they hunt for a killer of cardinals and bishops in Rome. That killer is believed to be the Antichrist.

Quote Post 11

Re: Which way of traveling the Holy Land is less confusing? - LOTE

Dirk B. wrote:

He will indeed demonstrate that he can take care of himself before the tour is over.

Thank God! Christ needing protection by the church seems oxymoronic. Take care. Vern

Quote Post 12