Did Jesus come from Nazareth?
Ed Tyler etyler@truman.edu
Wed, 10 Feb 1999 09:22:23 -0600 (00918681743, 4.1.19990210091818.00a271f0@pop.truman.edu)
At 09:43 AM 2/10/99 -0500, Achilles wrote:
>On 10 Feb 99, at 8:19, Ed Tyler wrote:
>
>> >POOBAH
>> >Did anyone read the article posted here the other day on this subject?
>> >
>> >http://www.americanatheist.org/win96-7/T1/ozjesus.html
>> >
>> >The author, Frank Zindler, asserts that "Nazareth" is in fact a corruption
>> >of the Hebrew term "Netzer," meaning Branch, and that the term "Yeshua
>> >Netzer" was meant to be understand as meaning "The Savior, the Branch" (of
>> >Jesse), and was later corrupted to Jesus of Nazareth. He makes the point
>> >that Origen had no idea where Nazareth was, even though he was living less
>> >than thirty miles away from it.
>> >
>> >I have to confess I don't have the expertise to evaluate his article,
but it
>> >is the sort of revisionism that I find appealing, so I personally would be
>> >very interested in any analysis more scholarly members of this list
might be
>> >able to provide.
>> >
>>
>> Ed
>>
>> I can buy the linguistic corruption, but you still need a town of Nazareth
>> if people are going to assign it as Jesus' home turf.
>>
>> By the way, he's overstating his claim about Origen living some 30 miles
>> from Nazareth (or Galilee at all for that matter). It'd be closer to 50,
>> and it'd be perfectly reasonable that Origen wouldn't have known the exact
>> location of a village that size.
>
>Achilles
>He asserts that the evidence produced by the franciscan dig I mentioned is
>consistent with it's use prior to it's "refounding" as essentially a
>necropolis, rather than a habitation. This agrees with my memory of a
critique
>I read once in an archaeological journal, but still no luck on finding the
>reference for it.
>
>More on topic, he also points out some matters of errancy, in that it appears
>Nazareth had no synagogue, and no cliff, two items that play roles in the
>Gospel story.
Ed
I was checking that out. If it was a necropolis, it certainly wasn't
inhabited by the living in those days. Of course, the hill or cliff and
the synagogue would be more or less irrelevant to the question, because
both tales are obvious fictions. The necropolis must have been unused for
a really long time before it was repopulated.