No Evidence for 1st Century Nazareth

[godnotgod]

I keep insisting upon that as I understand history.

You insist upon it because you want the tail to wag the dog to fit your view, and that is precisely why you do NOT understand history, and why you probably never will.

More so, you have shown no reason to not accept that. So of course, since you can't offer a logical rebuttal, I'm going to keep that position.

You really should'nt keep your position for such a stupid reason. You should keep it because it is factual. Unfortunately, there is enough about Josephus, as has been pointed out by many scholars, to make it NOT factual. In fact, it is not only not factual, it is fraudulent. Add to this the FACT that no other historical accounts exist for THE single most important allegedly HISTORICAL figure, and you've essentially got zilch. However, if we are talking about the mystical Essene that was Yeshu, that such historical information is lacking would fit perfectly with who and what he was, as one of the things mystics do is to seek anonymity.

And no, that is not the only historical scrap I have to defend such a position. The NT itself should be more than enough; however, people ignorantly dismiss it because simply, they don't understand history.

No, it is because the NT is not written as a historical work; it is written as a religious document, and religious accounts cannot be relied upon as being historically accurate. Why? Because religious scripture based upon BELIEF rather than FACTS, as history is, though some facts may be present in the Bible.

Finally, my position at least has more historical evidence than yours. Where are the historical documents speaking about a Nazarene sect of Essenes, or even Essenes at Mt. Caramel? You simply have nothing.

I gave it to you twice, but you chose to ignore it, and I am NOT going to reference it one more time! :no:

 

[angellous_evangellous]

'Oh, the Bible says this and the Bible says that, and blah blah blah....and this is very serious stuff, folks!'

Same old boring crap.

You're more fun when you spam.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

You insist upon it because you want the tail to wag the dog to fit your view, and that is precisely why you do NOT understand history, and why you probably never will.



You really should'nt keep your position for such a stupid reason. You should keep it because it is factual. Unfortunately, there is enough about Josephus, as has been pointed out by many scholars, to make it NOT factual. In fact, it is not only not factual, it is fraudulent. Add to this the FACT that no other historical accounts exist for THE single most important allegedly HISTORICAL figure, and you've essentially got zilch. However, if we are talking about the mystical Essene that was Yeshu, that such historical information is lacking would fit perfectly with who and what he was, as one of the things mystics do is to seek anonymity.



No, it is because the NT is not written as a historical work; it is written as a religious document, and religious accounts cannot be relied upon as being historically accurate. Why? Because religious scripture based upon BELIEF rather than FACTS, as history is, though some facts may be present in the Bible.



I gave it to you twice, but you chose to ignore it, and I am NOT going to reference it one more time! :no:

Now this is ironic.

The existence of Nazareth doesn't rely on the Bible, but here godnotgod asserts that it does.

godnotgod relies on spam to attack the idea, and then attacks others for something that they don't even believe, using less reliable sources and even worse thinking.

The solution: godnotgod should post his views only in lyrical form. Or sing them (or both). Maybe strap on a one man band outfit and really jam.

Because this stuff just isn't spam. It's old, rotten cheeseless spam. Yuck.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

*shakes fist at the sky*

Why oh why can't I make money off of suckers like these?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

No matter how hard you try to go deeper and deeper into denial, you cannot erase the archaeological evidence of a large, first century, sophisticated, heated, ROMAN, bath house that has been discovered beneath Nazareth.

The Ancient Bath House of Nazareth was discovered in the late 1990s by Elias and Martina Shama during renovations inside their shop near Mary's Well in Nazareth. Archaeologists that examined the bath house have assigned its construction to various periods, the oldest of these being the Greek or Roman period in Palestine.

< -- snip -- >​

In 2003, archaeologist Richard Freund stated his belief that the site was clearly of Roman-era origins: ""I am sure that what we have here is a bathhouse from the time of Jesus," he says, "and the consequences of that for archaeology, and for our knowledge of the life of Jesus, are enormous."

Carbon 14 dating was done on 3 samples of charcoal, each was found to come from a very different time period, indicating the bath house had been used in multiple periods, and at least was used sometime between 1300-1400, although with only 3 samples dated, it is possible for the bath house to be older.

[source]

Am I missing something important here or are you simply babbling as usual?

 

[Tellurian]

Same old boring crap.

You're more fun when you spam.

To you anything that does not agree with biblical mythologies is "spam", even though the information may come from leading archaeologists in the field or academic sources that have scientifically researched the topic.

Obviously, you also do not even know the definition of "spam".

From spam - Wiktionary

Spam is the use of electronic messaging systems (including most broadcast media, digital delivery systems) to send unsolicited bulk messages indiscriminately.

Email spam, also known as junk email or unsolicited bulk email (UBE), is a subset of spam that involves nearly identical messages sent to numerous recipients by email. Definitions of spam usually include the aspects that email is unsolicited and sent in bulk

 

[Tellurian]

​

Am I missing something important here or are you simply babbling as usual?

It is quite simple to understand that the Roman military occupied the area of Nazareth in the early first century, and they built a large bath house there for their soldiers.

The bath house continued to be used when the Roman military relocated after the first Jewish revolt that ended in 70 CE or after the bar Kokhba revolt that ended in 135 CE. Jewish families moving into the area of Nazareth continued to use some of the buildings and facilities left behind when the Romans moved out. The bath house continued to be used into the middle ages according to some records that mention its existence. The charcoal that was tested and dated came from the later period. The older charcoal would have been removed when newer wood was installed for heating the bath house, which is why there was no older charcoal found in the bath house. The bath house is dated to the early first century because of its design. The design of the Roman bath houses was changed in the later half of the first century when a more efficient design was invented.

Ancient Bath House: Excavation History & Archaeology

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

It is quite simple to understand that ...

And where is this (peer-reviewed) evidence for "a large, first century, sophisticated, heated, ROMAN, bath house that has been discovered beneath Nazareth"?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

To you anything that does not agree with biblical mythologies is "spam",

I wasn't talking to you.

 

[fallingblood]

To you anything that does not agree with biblical mythologies is "spam", even though the information may come from leading archaeologists in the field or academic sources that have scientifically researched the topic.

Obviously, you also do not even know the definition of "spam".

From spam - Wiktionary

Spam is the use of electronic messaging systems (including most broadcast media, digital delivery systems) to send unsolicited bulk messages indiscriminately.

Email spam, also known as junk email or unsolicited bulk email (UBE), is a subset of spam that involves nearly identical messages sent to numerous recipients by email. Definitions of spam usually include the aspects that email is unsolicited and sent in bulk

Hahaha. You are quite funny. Rene Salm is an expert on anything? Yeah, that is great.

You really have nothing besides a couple of extremists who deny what the vast majority of all other scholars are saying.

 

[fallingblood]

It is quite simple to understand that the Roman military occupied the area of Nazareth in the early first century, and they built a large bath house there for their soldiers.

The bath house continued to be used when the Roman military relocated after the first Jewish revolt that ended in 70 CE or after the bar Kokhba revolt that ended in 135 CE. Jewish families moving into the area of Nazareth continued to use some of the buildings and facilities left behind when the Romans moved out. The bath house continued to be used into the middle ages according to some records that mention its existence. The charcoal that was tested and dated came from the later period. The older charcoal would have been removed when newer wood was installed for heating the bath house, which is why there was no older charcoal found in the bath house. The bath house is dated to the early first century because of its design. The design of the Roman bath houses was changed in the later half of the first century when a more efficient design was invented.

Ancient Bath House: Excavation History & Archaeology

Haha. This is even better than your other post. The site you posted even said that the theory is based on a tourist, who said that it looked like something from her own country. Yes, a tourist being the foundation for such an idea is always a good place to start.

You have no real evidence for such a claim. The site you even linked to doesn't support your claim. Really, you have nothing at all. Yet you continue to support this baseless claim simply because it fits your preconceived idea. Yet, you can't show any evidence. That seems to be a common thread for you. All bark and no bite.

 

[Tellurian]

Haha. This is even better than your other post. The site you posted even said that the theory is based on a tourist, who said that it looked like something from her own country. Yes, a tourist being the foundation for such an idea is always a good place to start.

You have no real evidence for such a claim. The site you even linked to doesn't support your claim. Really, you have nothing at all. Yet you continue to support this baseless claim simply because it fits your preconceived idea. Yet, you can't show any evidence. That seems to be a common thread for you. All bark and no bite.

I told you about some of the serious archaeological research into the site before, but apparently you are in denial about that information also.

From Under Nazareth, secrets in stone - 17 December 2002

For the first time the Antiquities Authority took Shama's story seriously. After inspecting the site last month senior officials now say it looks Roman and that more excavation is needed.

From Is this where Jesus bathed? | World news | The Guardian

Professor Richard Freund, an academic behind important Holy Land digs at the ancient city of Bethsaida, near Tiberias, and Qumran in the Jordan Valley, says the significance of the find cannot be overstated. Over the summer he put aside other excavation projects to concentrate on the Nazareth site. "I am sure that what we have here is a bathhouse from the time of Jesus," he says, "and the consequences of that for archaeology, and for our knowledge of the life of Jesus, are enormous."

Freund's confidence has been shored up by radar and ground-penetrating surveys his team carried out showing the floor of another, older bathhouse under the one excavated by Shama. He hopes to use carbon-dating to establish whether the upper or lower bathhouse is Roman.

From Ancient Bath House of Nazareth - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A North American research team conducted high-resolution ground penetrating radar (GPR) surveys at a number of locations in and around Mary’s Well in 2004-5 to determine appropriate locations for further digging to be conducted beneath the bathhouse. Samples were collected for radio-carbon dating and the initial data from GPR readings seem to confirm the presence of additional subterranean structures. [3]

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I told you about some of the serious archaeological research into the site before, but apparently you are in denial about that information also.

From Under Nazareth, secrets in stone - 17 December 2002

For the first time the Antiquities Authority took Shama's story seriously. After inspecting the site last month senior officials now say it looks Roman and that more excavation is needed.

From Is this where Jesus bathed? | World news | The Guardian

Professor Richard Freund, an academic behind important Holy Land digs at the ancient city of Bethsaida, near Tiberias, and Qumran in the Jordan Valley, says the significance of the find cannot be overstated. Over the summer he put aside other excavation projects to concentrate on the Nazareth site. "I am sure that what we have here is a bathhouse from the time of Jesus," he says, "and the consequences of that for archaeology, and for our knowledge of the life of Jesus, are enormous."

Freund's confidence has been shored up by radar and ground-penetrating surveys his team carried out showing the floor of another, older bathhouse under the one excavated by Shama. He hopes to use carbon-dating to establish whether the upper or lower bathhouse is Roman.

From Ancient Bath House of Nazareth - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A North American research team conducted high-resolution ground penetrating radar (GPR) surveys at a number of locations in and around Mary’s Well in 2004-5 to determine appropriate locations for further digging to be conducted beneath the bathhouse. Samples were collected for radio-carbon dating and the initial data from GPR readings seem to confirm the presence of additional subterranean structures. [3]

... and none of this is serious archaeological work

... none of it is an archaeological report - or even a preliminary report

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I told you about some of the serious archaeological ...

I suggest that you are incapable of discerning and evaluating serious archaeological research. You simply mine the internet for soundbites that you barely understand.

 

[That Dude]

[youtube]WSzQC1zKesU[/youtube]
James Randi Speaks: Questioning the Bible - YouTube

See here for Rene Salm's website re: the myth of Nazareth:The truth about Nazareth

The (La géographie du Talmud,on p. 190, in the library at Oxford University, discusses a document that dates to 70 A.D which describes the destruction of a church in Nazareth by the Romans when they attacked in 70 A.D.

 

[fallingblood]

You insist upon it because you want the tail to wag the dog to fit your view, and that is precisely why you do NOT understand history, and why you probably never will.

Priceless. Wait, I meant worthless.

You really should'nt keep your position for such a stupid reason. You should keep it because it is factual. Unfortunately, there is enough about Josephus, as has been pointed out by many scholars, to make it NOT factual. In fact, it is not only not factual, it is fraudulent. Add to this the FACT that no other historical accounts exist for THE single most important allegedly HISTORICAL figure, and you've essentially got zilch. However, if we are talking about the mystical Essene that was Yeshu, that such historical information is lacking would fit perfectly with who and what he was, as one of the things mystics do is to seek anonymity.

My position is factual. You can't show that it isn't factual. You can't offer a rebuttal to my arguments. So it is a smart reason to keep a position. It is factual, and you haven't shown any reason to doubt it.

If you did any research on Josephus (I have provided you a link already to my thread on the subject), you would see that the vast majority of scholars agree that Josephus wrote about Jesus. The general consensus is that the passage (TF) in Josephus is partially authentic. Pretty much every scholar accepts this.

And what is he the most important historical figure? Alexander the Great could be argued as being more important. Paul, in many studies, usually ties with Jesus, and they are only in the top five. Your misunderstanding of who Jesus is shows that you have done no credible research into what scholars are saying about the Historical Jesus. If you even took the time to read a credible source, you would see you have no idea what you are talking about.

As for a mystical Essene called Yeshu. You have no evidence. There are no historical documents saying that. The historical documents we have concerning the Essenes contradict what you say. And there is no evidence what so ever that they had a community at Mt. Caramel, like you claim.

When my position is compared to yours, I have a mountain of evidence compared to what you have: nothing.

No, it is because the NT is not written as a historical work; it is written as a religious document, and religious accounts cannot be relied upon as being historically accurate. Why? Because religious scripture based upon BELIEF rather than FACTS, as history is, though some facts may be present in the Bible.

More ignorance. The NT is composed of a variety of different genres. There are letters. There are historical works (Luke and Acts fit the bill well enough). There are Gospels (which fit somewhat into the genre Lives). Then there is the apocalypse.

Yes, there are some religious aspects, yet we see that in many ancient historical sources. The NT was not something that the writers of the various books thought of, or even knew was going to happen. To simply dismiss it all is just ignorant, and shows no level of understanding of history, or what the NT is.

I gave it to you twice, but you chose to ignore it, and I am NOT going to reference it one more time!

You gave me a website from this century. That is only about 2,000 years off. You have never supplied ancient documents supporting your claim.

 

[godnotgod]

The (La géographie du Talmud,on p. 190, in the library at Oxford University, discusses a document that dates to 70 A.D which describes the destruction of a church in Nazareth by the Romans when they attacked in 70 A.D.

70AD is not during the lifetime of Jesus.

So when we go and look for the remains of such a church, do we find anything?

 

[godnotgod]

Priceless. Wait, I meant worthless.

...that you make the tail wag the dog, yes indeed.

My position is factual. You can't show that it isn't factual. You can't offer a rebuttal to my arguments. So it is a smart reason to keep a position. It is factual, and you haven't shown any reason to doubt it.

Even if the remaining text, after deleting the interpolated text, is factual, that is to say, that Josephus is the authentic author, that means nothing, as Josephus has no first-hand evidence to base his statement upon.

Show me first-hand historical documentation of Jesus having walked this earth. I have shown you the contents of an ancient manuscript which was read to Yeshu, James, and Peter on Mt. Carmel upon John the Baptist's death, when they were still young.

If you did any research on Josephus (I have provided you a link already to my thread on the subject), you would see that the vast majority of scholars agree that Josephus wrote about Jesus. The general consensus is that the passage (TF) in Josephus is partially authentic. Pretty much every scholar accepts this.

Man! You still don't get it: I am not contesting the partially authentic text, but the interpolated text has nothing to do with whether Josephus's original text points to a historical Jesus. The interpolation is an indication of fraud on the part of later Christian writers, for whatever their reasons are for having executed such fraud is. That is a separate issue. What I am contesting is whether the original text has any validity in establishing a historical Jesus, and since Josephus was not a contemporary of Jesus, and since we have no first-hand account from any other contemporary historian of Jesus upon which Josephus could have based his account upon, we have, essentially, nothing!

And what is he the most important historical figure? Alexander the Great could be argued as being more important. Paul, in many studies, usually ties with Jesus, and they are only in the top five. Your misunderstanding of who Jesus is shows that you have done no credible research into what scholars are saying about the Historical Jesus. If you even took the time to read a credible source, you would see you have no idea what you are talking about.

Are Paul and Alexander figures considered to have supernatural powers of salvation for all of mankind, even after his death? No! Paul and Alexander are in their graves; Christians would and do argue that Jesus ascended into heaven. Do people pray to Paul or Alexander? No! Were Paul or Alexander reputed to have had a miraculous birth? Nope! Did they have the power to turn water into wine? Nah! Alexander conquered several nations, but Christians claim Jesus conquered the world.

As for a mystical Essene called Yeshu. You have no evidence. There are no historical documents saying that. The historical documents we have concerning the Essenes contradict what you say. And there is no evidence what so ever that they had a community at Mt. Caramel, like you claim.

When my position is compared to yours, I have a mountain of evidence compared to what you have: nothing.

You have a scrap of paper written decades after Jesus's death whose statement is based uponl....what?...hearsay?

More ignorance. The NT is composed of a variety of different genres. There are letters. There are historical works (Luke and Acts fit the bill well enough). There are Gospels (which fit somewhat into the genre Lives). Then there is the apocalypse.

There was a Yeshu upon which such writings are based, but no resurrected Jesus.

Yes, there are some religious aspects, yet we see that in many ancient historical sources. The NT was not something that the writers of the various books thought of, or even knew was going to happen. To simply dismiss it all is just ignorant, and shows no level of understanding of history, or what the NT is.

Well, for one thing, if the mention of Nazareth as a city in the NT is a historical fact, why are there no archaeological remains to be found?

The NT accounts for a Resurrection and Ascension: are you saying these accounts are historical facts?

You gave me a website from this century. That is only about 2,000 years off. You have never supplied ancient documents supporting your claim.

That website references the ancient manuscript I mentioned above, placing Yeshu at Mt. Carmel just after John's death.

 

[godnotgod]

...quoted from another forum on the subject of Nazareth:

"Josephus, in his reporting of the actions of his campaign prior to Jotapata ( japha) notes that after a failed attempt on Sepphoris he withdrew to Jotapata. A withdrawal to Japha from Sepphoris would, of necessity, have taken him right through Nazareth had it been there. Further, noting the Roman siege preparations for Japha he is clear that the approach to Japha is only from the north. He also states that Vespasian set up his camp 7 leagues to the north of Japha. This is equivalent to 7/8 of a mile and would have meant that Vespasian's camp was virtually on top of Nazareth....yet Josephus never mentions the place."

Proof of Nazareth.

Also, some of you may find the following site of some interest:


Visual Timeline of the Roman-Jewish War ARTchive @ PreteristArchive.com, The Internet's Only Balanced Look at Preterist Eschatology and Preterism

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

(I see he's still at it. It's a compulsive disorder that's best ignored.)