No Evidence for 1st Century Nazareth

[godnotgod]

Godnotgod- until you can actually read what I say and do so carefully so you understand it, there really is no point continuing with you. You keep saying the same ridiculous things and refuse to back them up. I can say that Jesus was a giant elf and had magic powers and be just as close to the truth as your position is.

But that is, in effect, what you are saying! Not only that, but your doctrine makes things up around such claims, like that an OT prophecy exists which refers to Jesus being called a Nazarene. Pure fluff!

OK, then, cop out. I will leave you with the fact that you failed to provide the requested information:

Show us all the OT prophecy which Matthew 2 refers to, namely that of Jesus being called a Nazarene. Until you do, Matthew 2 is a total fabrication, both in terms of Jesus coming from Nazareth, and to any such place as Nazareth having existed in the 1st century.

Until you provide such information as requested, it shall be regarded as Total Fluff and Official Holy Garbage.:yes:

 

[Shermana]

Show us all the OT prophecy which Matthew 2 refers to, namely that of Jesus being called a Nazarene.

There's the possibility its referring to "Apocryphal" literature and what became lost. For instance, Jesus said "Moses spoke of me"....where? In the Assumption of Moses.

 

[godnotgod]

There's the possibility its referring to "Apocryphal" literature and what became lost. For instance, Jesus said "Moses spoke of me"....where? In the Assumption of Moses.

One problem with your theory is that Matthew 2 refers not to just one prophet/prophecy, but to several, meaning that all would have been lost had they belonged to a single Apocryphal source. Is that likely, or should we find the same prophecy in several places in the OT?

There is also the possibility that the reference is to the 'rod of Jesse' out of which a nazir or netzer (branch or shoot) shall come, and 'Nazarene' refers to the Essene community just 10 miles outside of modern Nazareth, where it is reputed that Yeshu was raised, was taught, and taught as well. This was a family-oriented monastery, so Joseph and Mary would have lived here with Yeshu as well, this being the 'Order of Nazorean Essenes', a Nazarene sect.

This to me seems far more probable since we have zero archaeological evidence to support a 1st century Nazareth, which Christians suggest that Matt 2 is referring to.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

This to me seems far more probable since we have zero archaeological evidence to support a 1st century Nazareth, which Christians suggest that Matt 2 is referring to.

NOW, finally, you're entertaining. It's poor rhetoric, but it's still funny.

The only people who think that 1st century Nazareth didn't exist are sensationalists who get their rocks off by discrediting well established facts and sell it to people like you, who get warm-fuzzies by reading reconstructions of history that discredit Christians.

If you were honest, instead of "Christians" it should read "the overwhelming consensus of all scholars everywhere who have looked into the topic."

The non-existence of Nazareth argument is a cheap gimmick designed to sell books. And it probably doesn't even work.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Whoever those two sleezy used car salesmen who wrote the website material and the book (is it two?) need to get whoever writes the titles for Bart Ehrman's books.

I mean how does "Nazareth: The Town that Theology Built" compete with "Lost Christianities: The Battle for Scripture and the Faiths we Never Knew."

Now THAT, ladies and gentlemen, is how to use a gimmick to sell a book.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

The only people who think that 1st century Nazareth didn't exist are sensationalists who get their rocks off by discrediting well established facts and sell it to people like you, who get warm-fuzzies by reading reconstructions of history that discredit Christians.

If you were honest, instead of "Christians" it should read "the overwhelming consensus of all scholars everywhere who have looked into the topic."

The non-existence of Nazareth argument is a cheap gimmick designed to sell books. And it probably doesn't even work.

What he said.

 

[fallingblood]

Whoever those two sleezy used car salesmen who wrote the website material and the book (is it two?) need to get whoever writes the titles for Bart Ehrman's books.

I mean how does "Nazareth: The Town that Theology Built" compete with "Lost Christianities: The Battle for Scripture and the Faiths we Never Knew."

Now THAT, ladies and gentlemen, is how to use a gimmick to sell a book.

I think Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh, and Henry Lincoln also are pretty good at naming books: The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail. That and even though their book was bunk, it read almost like a mystery novel.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I think Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh, and Henry Lincoln also are pretty good at naming books: The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail. That and even though their book was bunk, it read almost like a mystery novel.

Many can tie for second place, but Ehrman is prince of the awesome titles - at least to me. I don't think that he titles his books - if he does, well, that's why he's Ehrman. haha

 

[godnotgod]

Many can tie for second place, but Ehrman is prince of the awesome titles - at least to me. I don't think that he titles his books - if he does, well, that's why he's Ehrman. haha

You and Ehrman need to get together. Both of you love making things up, entertainment, and sensation.

Oh, the thrill of it all!

 

[angellous_evangellous]

You and Ehrman need to get together. Both of you love making things up, entertainment, and sensation.

Oh, the thrill of it all!

hahaha I don't think you know who Ehrman is.

But he is entertaining and you could learn a lot from him.

I could teach you, but I'd have to charge.

 

[fallingblood]

Many can tie for second place, but Ehrman is prince of the awesome titles - at least to me. I don't think that he titles his books - if he does, well, that's why he's Ehrman. haha

I liked the title of his last book: Forged. Not much new in content, but it definitely is attention grabbing.

Maybe when or if I decided to write a book, I will take a lesson from him.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I liked the title of his last book: Forged. Not much new in content, but it definitely is attention grabbing.

Maybe when or if I decided to write a book, I will take a lesson from him.

I've thought about it too. But I think that I have a great title "Reading 1 Corinthians with Philosophically Educated Women."

And then I can just add all the Paulines one at a time after that. Then the Gospels. I might change it, but who knows. That's far off.

The problem with Ehrman is that he comes off sensationalist but he plainly tells the reader that he's just saying what other scholars have been saying for the past 200 years. Almost everyone that I've seen - my students and folks here on RF - reference Ehrman like he's some kind of rebel against the establishment.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I liked the title of his last book: Forged. Not much new in content, but it definitely is attention grabbing.

Maybe when or if I decided to write a book, I will take a lesson from him.

Really, all of his titles are great.

I absolutely adore "Misquoting Jesus."

Funny thing is I've been asking around at conferences trying to see who titles those books. I might just send him an email, haha.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

fallingblood, I gotta tell you -

When I really want a student to read a book on an elementary subject in the NT (etc), I refer them to Ehrman. I'm like, oh that's in "Lost Christianities" and I know that they will get hooked. They never know what hit them. lol

 

[fallingblood]

fallingblood, I gotta tell you -

When I really want a student to read a book on an elementary subject in the NT (etc), I refer them to Ehrman. I'm like, oh that's in "Lost Christianities" and I know that they will get hooked. They never know what hit them. lol

I know I got hooked by him. He knows how to write for the general public. But as you said, he really just says what others have been saying. He's very effective in introducing a subject.

 

[godnotgod]

NOW, finally, you're entertaining. It's poor rhetoric, but it's still funny.

The only people who think that 1st century Nazareth didn't exist are sensationalists who get their rocks off by discrediting well established facts and sell it to people like you, who get warm-fuzzies by reading reconstructions of history that discredit Christians.

Here, allow me to add some entertainment to that:

"The only people who think that the earth goes around the Sun are sensationalists who get their rocks off by discrediting well established facts and sell it to people like you, who get warm-fuzzies by reading reconstructions of history that discredit Christians."

(Galileo rolls over in his grave)

So, if the 'facts' are so 'well established', as you claim, how is it that they manage to get themselves discredited? Gee. Maybe they were'nt 'facts' after all. Ah, but they DID give you those warm, fuzzy feelings of thumb-sucking security, now, did'nt they? Reason enough to keep them around. Shhhhh! Don't let on that the Sun does'nt actually orbit the Earth. Might cause a bit of a stir, you know. Throngs of people may throw themselves off the edge of the Earth in despair.

Uh, 'well established facts'? Perhaps you mean 'entrenched', as in 'indoctrinated'.

If you were honest, instead of "Christians" it should read "the overwhelming consensus of all scholars everywhere who have looked into the topic."

Ha ha ha ha....:biglaugh: Right..a million people watched, but no one saw a thing. 'Scholars' who looked into the topic? Oooooh! We should be so impressed! Ignoramuses with credentials, even. Gee. I wonder if they know Greek and have studied their lexicons. That way, they would know to spell 'potatoe' with an 'e', as that renowned potato-headed scholar, Dan Quail advised.:biglaugh:

The non-existence of Nazareth argument is a cheap gimmick designed to sell books. And it probably doesn't even work.

Now, if you really want to know about a cheap gimmick to raise milliions, that would be the Nazareth Village project:

The Nazareth Village Farm lies on fifteen acres to the south and west of the ancient settlement area, which was on the valley floor. The NVF was obviously the site of ancient agricultural activity and terracing. Though it was too steep for ancient habitations (20% grade), it is here that an ambitious plan is now underway to recreate Jesus’ hometown, known as “Nazareth Village.” When complete, this project will contain streets and stone houses “inhabited by actors and storytellers in authentic garb, [who] will illuminate the life and teachings of Jesus. A Parable Walk, museum, study center and restaurant are also planned…” (according to the NVF publicity). According to the first page of the report we are considering in this Scandal Sheet, “For nearly two decades, the University of the Holy Land (UHL) and its subsidiary, the Center for the Study of Early Christianity (CSEC), has laboured to lay the academic foundation for the construction of a first-century Galilean village or town based upon archaeology and early Jewish and Christian sources.” As of 1999, an international consortium of Christian groups (called the Miracle of Nazareth International Foundation) raised $60 million for the project. Contributors in the U.S. include former President Jimmy Carter, Pat Boone and Rev. Reggie White, the former Green Bay Packer football star.

The Myth of Nazareth

So, what'cha got? NT scripture for a 1st Century Nazareth that alludes to non-existent OT prophecies; a 'town' where the alleged Jesus lived, a Jesus whose only historical evidence comes from a historian whose short mention of him turns out to include probable interpolations added by Christian copyists over the centuries in an attempt to make Josephus seem to support faith in Jesus as the Christ, something a real historian would not do. The hard archaeological evidence amounts to a single dwelling, a wine press, and other evidences of a single family farm. That's it.

(You see, folks, AE has no real arguments against the real facts, so he now resorts to cheap and loud carnie-barking to discredit and drown out the voices of dissent, while hiding behind the color of authority. Ah, security!)

I will shortly be turning to the actual archaeogical findings to separate facts from fiction. Stay tuned, folks, and ignore the hype from so-called 'scholars'.

 

[godnotgod]

hahaha I don't think you know who Ehrman is.

But he is entertaining and you could learn a lot from him.

I could teach you, but I'd have to charge.

You see? The both of you know how to work the crowd.

'Step right up, folks...just one thin dime....'

 

[krsnaraja]

Does it matter?

Yes, it matters to me. What is your religion?

 

[fallingblood]

Yes, it matters to me. What is your religion?

Why does it matter? And I'm pretty sure if you look under my name it says it.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

You see? The both of you know how to work the crowd.

'Step right up, folks...just one thin dime....'

You can't afford me, godnotgod.

You can buy one of Ehrman's books for around $16 on Amazon -- or just look him up on YouTube.