MOUNT, MOUNTAIN (ὄ?ρος).—Mountains figure often in the narratives of Christ’s life. This is natural, considering the highly mountainous character of the country in which He lived. At no point in His journeyings were the mountains out of sight; and if He was not actually on or among them, they were never a great way off.
The Mount of Olives (wh. see) alone is named in the Gospels—the mountain that rises beyond the kidron valley, east of Jerusalem, from the S. E. slope of which Bethany looks out over the wilderness. In two passages we see from the context which mountains are referred to. In Matthew 21:21 ‘to this mountain’ points clearly to Olivet, on which Jesus and His disciples stood, viewing the cursed and withered fig-tree. In John 4:20 ‘this mountain’ can be no other than Gerizim, on whose rocky summit, amid the ruins of ancient splendour, the remnant of Samaritans still annually chant their weird service at the feast of the Passover. In other places, such as Matthew 24:16, ‘mountain’ must be taken generally as meaning the wilder and more inaccessible parts, forming natural places of refuge, Judaea itself being almost entirely mountainous (cf. Revelation 6:15). So also with the haunts of the demoniac (Mark 5:5). The ‘mountain’ on (Luke 8:32) or near (Mark 5:11) which the swine were feeding must have been the western edge of the great plateau which stretches from the desert to the lip of the Ghôr, and drops a distance of some 2000 feet to the eastern shore of the Sea of Galilee. The place intended is probably a little north of the old fortress of Gamala, where the foot of the swift slope runs almost to the water.
Perhaps only men familiar with the steep cliffs and beetling crags of Palestinian mountains would think of calling in their terror upon the mountains to fall and cover them (Luke 23:30).
Regarding the position of three mountains there has been much discussion—the mountain of the Temptation (Matthew 4:8, Luke 4:5), the Mount of Beatitudes (Matthew 5:1), and the Mount of Transfiguration (Matthew 17:1 etc.).
The evidence we possess is mainly negative, tending to show that traditional identifications are impossible. As to the first, if any actual height is intended, Jebel Kuruntul, with its cave-fretted brows frowning over Jericho, and the district to the south, are bleak and inhospitable enough, and there certainly the sojourner by night would be ‘with the wild beasts’ (Mark 1:13) but there is no height at all suggesting the description ‘an exceeding high mountain.’
The tradition identifying Karn Hattin with the scene of the Sermon on the Mount dates only from Crusading times. To the traveller journeying towards Tiberias from Nazareth or Tabor, the double-peaked hill seems easy of approach. but from any part of the seashore the ascent is steep, and from Gennesaret, where our Lord was at work, the way, as the present writer knows from much experience, is both long and toilsome. With so many heights near the plain, quite suitable for the Master’s purpose, the necessity for this difficult journey is not apparent. ‘Further, certain traces of ancient buildings lend colour to the idea that, in our Lord’s time, the hill may have been occupied.
The Roman and Greek Churches still maintain the traditional identification of Mount Tabor with the scene of the Transfiguration, and, in accordance with their separate calendars, that august event is annually commemorated there. It must be remembered, however, that they have much valuable property on the mountain—the great monasteries—which an admission of error would render worthless, while the contributions received from streams of pilgrims would be diverted. Most modern students of the question locate the Transfiguration on Mount Hermon; if not on the summit itself, on one of the lower spurs. This would satisfy the requirements of the narrative; whereas the journey south to Tabor, through Galilee, and back again to Capernaum, within the time specified, while possible, is highly improbable. The present writer spent some weeks in the summer of 1891 on the top of Tabor, and was led to emphatic agreement with the opinion that the presence of a town or fortress on the mountain in the days of Christ makes the traditional identification utterly impossible. See art. Transfiguration.
On a mountain in Galilee the risen Jesus gave His disciples their great commission (Matthew 28:16). The circumstances suggest some height familiar to all, not far from the scenes of the Galilaean ministry, commanding a wide prospect. Certain identification is, of course, impossible, but these conditions are well fulfilled by Jebel Kan‘ân, a bold headland projecting southward from the great bulk of Naphtali. The spacious view ranges from Carmel and the Mediterranean to the eastern ridges of Bashan, and from snowy Hermon to the dim mountains guarding the Dead Sea. In the great hollow below sleep the blue waters of Galilee, the white-sailed fishing boats recalling imperishable memories.
In hours of devotion Jesus seemed to long for the solitude and stillness to be found only on lonely heights by night (Matthew 14:23, Mark 6:46, Luke 6:12, Luke 9:28, John 6:15). From a mountain at last He passed into the invisible (Luke 24:50, Acts 1:9, Acts 1:12). See also art. Hill.
Literature.—G. A. Smith, HGHL [Note: GHL Historical Geog. of Holy Land.] , p. 47 ff.; W. M. Ramsay, Education of Christ, cf. ExpT [Note: xpT Expository Times.] xiv. [1903] p. 194.
W. Ewing.