Nazareth

Jesus’ rejection by those in his hometown is a theme common to all three of the synoptic gospel accounts (cf. Mt 13.54-58; Mk 6.1-5; Lk 4.16-30). However, the placement of this episode strikingly differs amongst these three. Mark and Matthew both record a wholly positive initial preaching tour through Galilee which left the crowds astonished (Mk 1.14-15, 21-28; Mt 4.12-17, 23-25), and only later narrate his rejection at the synagogue of Nazareth after a period of successful ministry elsewhere (Mk 6.1-5; Mt 13.54-58). In contrast, Luke decided to collapse the Markan timeline by relocating the scene in the synagogue in Nazareth to the initial preaching tour through Galilee, and he further heightened the intensity of the event by telling of the unsuccessful attempt to cast Jesus from the cliff outside of town (Lk 4.16-30). The treatment of this theme in these three sources illustrates well the kind of rewriting that occurred in early gospel literature. However, this trajectory of rewriting can be extended further, to include the so-called Diatessaron of Tatian who attempted to incorporate material from all three synoptics in his revised gospel edition. Faced with these three conflicting texts Tatian had to decide how to reconcile his sources so as to produce a coherent narrative. The surviving witnesses to his edition indicate that he resolved this dilemma by splitting the Lukan scene into two parts. The first half of the Lukan pericope, which records a wholly positive reception in Nazareth (Lk 4.16-22), he left in the initial preaching tour through Galilee, and the second half, telling of the rejection and the attempted execution, he placed later in the narrative. In his redaction of prior sources, Tatian’s editorial work is broadly comparable to that of the evangelists Matthew and Luke, and he even adds a further detail of his own, namely that Jesus flew through the air to safety following his being thrown from the cliff. Tatian’s editing of these sources may be interpreted as a response to two ambiguities inherent in Luke’s telling of the episode: the jarring transition from acceptance to rejection in Luke 4.22-23 and the mysterious silence regarding Jesus’ means of escape from the angry crowd in Luke 4.30.

This article was a public response to the much touted “house from the time of Jesus” announced by Dr. Y. Alexandre on Dec. 21, 2009 at a Nazareth news conference. The article was first published in American Atheist Magazine (2010). It has been republished in Salm, NAZARETHGATE, Chapter 7. For a more detailed and up-to-date treatment of Alexandre's excavations at the site, see Salm, NAZARETHGATE, Chapter 10.

Jesus’ rejection by those in his hometown is a theme common to all three of the synoptic gospel accounts (cf. Mt 13.54-58; Mk 6.1-5; Lk 4.16-30). However, the placement of this episode strikingly differs amongst these three. Mark and Matthew both record a wholly positive initial preaching tour through Galilee which left the crowds astonished (Mk 1.14-15, 21-28; Mt 4.12-17, 23-25), and only later narrate his rejection at the synagogue of Nazareth after a period of successful ministry elsewhere (Mk 6.1-5; Mt 13.54-58). In contrast, Luke decided to collapse the Markan timeline by relocating the scene in the synagogue in Nazareth to the initial preaching tour through Galilee, and he further heightened the intensity of the event by telling of the unsuccessful attempt to cast Jesus from the cliff outside of town (Lk 4.16-30). The treatment of this theme in these three sources illustrates well the kind of rewriting that occurred in early gospel literature. However, this trajectory of rewriting can be extended further, to include the so-called Diatessaron of Tatian who attempted to incorporate material from all three synoptics in his revised gospel edition. Faced with these three conflicting texts Tatian had to decide how to reconcile his sources so as to produce a coherent narrative. The surviving witnesses to his edition indicate that he resolved this dilemma by splitting the Lukan scene into two parts. The first half of the Lukan pericope, which records a wholly positive reception in Nazareth (Lk 4.16-22), he left in the initial preaching tour through Galilee, and the second half, telling of the rejection and the attempted execution, he placed later in the narrative. In his redaction of prior sources, Tatian’s editorial work is broadly comparable to that of the evangelists Matthew and Luke, and he even adds a further detail of his own, namely that Jesus flew through the air to safety following his being thrown from the cliff. Tatian’s editing of these sources may be interpreted as a response to two ambiguities inherent in Luke’s telling of the episode: the jarring transition from acceptance to rejection in Luke 4.22-23 and the mysterious silence regarding Jesus’ means of escape from the angry crowd in Luke 4.30.

Matthew 2:23 refers to a prophecy that Jesus would be called a Nazarene: “And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.”
Scholars have long noted that there is no prophecy anywhere in the Old Testament that could associate Jesus with being called a Nazarene. Yet we can not just brush the mystery aside and say it is not worth looking for answers. There has to be an explanation for Matthew’s reference to a prophecy that Jesus will be called a Nazarene: one that makes good sense for Matthew’s author.

Le 14 août 1962, une importante découverte archéologique à Césarée Maritime allait révolutionner la question relative à Nazareth, une ville inconnue des sources non chrétiennes. Cet article tend à montrer l’étonnante série de coïncidences dont à partir d’un petit fragment de marbre contenant une douzaine des lettres, il a été possible de prouver l’existence de la prétendue patrie du Nazaréen, au moins à partir du II siècle. Mais là où il y a coïncidences surprenantes, il est raisonnable de se méfier. S’agit-il d’une fraude ?Il y a un mobile et le principal acteur s’avérait suspect d’un grave délit.

Corroborating contemporary biographers report that Jesus of Nazareth was born of a virgin, changed water to wine, made the blind see, healed the lame, raised the dead, walked on water, calmed a violent storm, fed 5,000 people with five loaves and two fishes, lived again after his execution, and ascended into the clouds. According to witnesses and contemporary biographers, this Jesus also made the listed claims.

In 2020 the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA) published an extensive article in its journal 'Atiqot authored by one of its archaeologists, Dr. Yardenna Alexandre, a name familiar to readers of my books and to those interested in the archaeological history of Nazareth, Israel. The IAA article goes far beyond a standard excavation report and functions also as an updated history of Nazareth. I point out that many of the structural features that Alexandre claims were walls of a "house" do not exist in the material remains, and that claims to have found a large quantity of Hellenistic pottery shards at the Mary of Nazareth Center site are improbable and in some cases impossible. The archaeologist has nevertheless used these dubious ceramic claims to date the alleged dwelling to "the time of Jesus."

Mark did not create Christianity but wrote a compelling account about a faith that he already knew. Some modern scholars recognise that in so writing, the author we now know as Mark developed the story’s characters in order to focus on Jesus himself. At least some of these characters were probably created by Mark, who seems to have assigned them names that helped develop hidden insights.

On 14 August 1962, an outstanding archaeological discovery at Caesarea Maritima went to revolutionize the question about Nazareth, a village unknown to non-Christian sources. This article intends to show the remarkable series of coincidences that ensured that, from a small marble fragment containing a dozen letters, it was possible to prove the existence, from at least the second century, of the presumed native land of the Nazarene.But where there are surprising coincidences, there is also a reason to be suspicious.Is this a fraud? There is a mobile and the main suspect has a serious criminal history

One of the critical issues when pursuing historical Jesus research has been to distinguish the ‘voice print’ of one man (Jesus) from the larger crowd (Second Temple Judaism) at the time. Historians always find it easier to describe movements than individuals, places rather than events, technologies rather than artifacts. For that reason, searching for the historical Nazareth may be an easier task than the quest for the historical Jesus.

Les découvertes et analyses nouvelles ne cessent de s'accumuler au sujet des origines réelles de l'islam, dévoilant une tout autre histoire que celle des traditions musulmanes.
Pour défendre l'islam, un auteur musulman s'est ainsi essayé à la réfutation de certaines de ces recherches nouvelles, hélas au mépris de l'esprit scientifique, et s'enferrant dans une attitude de déni de la réalité de ces découvertes.
Répliquant point par point à cette tentative de réfutation, cet article permet de mettre au clair pour le grand public les avancées de la recherche dans les domaines suivants :
- Archéologie de La Mecque
- Formation de la tradition musulmane (jahiliya, tradition orale coranique)
- Elaboration du Coran
- Christianisme des origines et développement du courant judéonazaréen

This paper, The Nasara in the Koran, focuses precisely on the Koranic Text and Historical Primary Evidences that written in the 7th and 8th Century.

The Found Primary Evidences of the Syriac and Greek sources, alongside with the Koranic Text ,we are proposing the term ‘’Nasara’’ is a Judeo-Christian denomination that had lived in Jordan region throughout their lives. Yet the term ‘’Nasara’’ in the Koranic text indicates this Denomination in the Jordan region instead of whole Christians and Christianity.

This is the third incarnation of an article originally published in the compilation book "Bart Ehrman and the Quest of the Historical Jesus of Nazareth" (F. Zindler, editor, 2013 chapter 12). The article appeared again with minor changes in my recent book, "NazarethGate: Quack Archeology, Holy Hoaxes, and the Invented Town of Jesus" (American Atheist Press, December 2015, chapter 9). The piece is now made digitally available here to those interested. It responds to Dr. Bart Ehrman’s published statements regarding the archaeology of Nazareth, beginning with his book "Did Jesus Exist?" (2012, pp. 191–97). I critique Ehrman’s factually incorrect statements regarding the material record, his modus operandi of resorting to hearsay instead of evidence in the ground, his reflexive appeal to reputation and majority opinion, and a certain sloppiness that characterizes his writing, e.g. confusing “Bronze” with “Iron” Age and conflating “Jesus” with “Christ.”

Das Johannesevangelium bestätigt die Herkunft Jesu aus Nazaret und trägt damit ein Detail zur historischen Rückfrage nach Jesus bei. Die Betlehem-Tradition ist in den Augen des vierten Evangelisten nicht nur historisch unkorrekt, sie versperrt vor allem auch die Einsicht in die eigentlich himmlische Herkunft Jesu.

On winter solstice, 2009, four days before Christmas and twenty months after publication of my first book, The Myth of Nazareth (http://www.nazarethmyth.info/) archeologist Yardenna of the Israel Antiquities Authority gave a press conference in Nazareth, Israel, at newly excavated ground across the street from the Church of the Annunciation. International news agencies were present, including AP, UPI, Reuters, and Agence France Presse. Enigmatic advance notices had already alerted the general public that news of major religious significance was imminent.
    When Dr. Alexandre stepped up to the microphone on that blustery morning, she announced that incontrovertible evidence of a village from “the time of Jesus” had been found for the very first time. The evidence, she explained, was in front of their eyes: remains of a dwelling which—in all likelihood—Jesus himself knew as a child.
    But the claim is bogus, as this chapter from my recent second book NazarethGate (http://www.mythicistpapers.com/2015/11/15/the-book-nazarethgate/) shows. The site was obviously a wine producing complex beginning in the Byzantine era, with clear remains of low walls, a sloping treading floor, collecting vat, and storage cellars.

The Church of the Annunciation is built on one of the most sacred
places for the Catholic world. According to the New Testament, this is
where the angel Gabriel announced to the Virgin Mary that she would
bear the son of God (Luke 1:26–38). In 1969, an Italian architect,
Giovanni Muzio, built the modern church on the site, and this monumental
Christian symbol stimulates political struggles to the present
day. This article analyzes the various tensions and decisions pertaining
to the Church of the Annunciation, including attempts to thwart its
construction and to limit its size, as well as the political interests that
enabled the largest Franciscan church in the Middle East to be built.

Jesus’ inaugural speech in the synagogue in Nazareth opens an important part of the Gospel of Luke, i.e., the ministry of Jesus in Galilee (Luke 4:14–9:50). It serves as a temporal marker that opens a new part of the gospel that sets into motion a chain of events. It also functions as the exposé of the program which Jesus will carry out during his mission starting in Galilee and leading him up to the cross on Calvary. The present study contends that inaugural speech in the synagogue of Nazareth gives also a glimpse into Luke’s own writing skills and his intention to present an orderly account of “what happened among us” (Luke 1:1-4). Thus, the story in the synagogue of Nazareth not only presents the program of Jesus’ mission, it also familiarizes the reader with different kind of rhetorical strategies and techniques employed by the author of the Third Gospel aiming to persuade the implied reader / listener of the solidity and certainty of the teaching received.

This paper aims to review the various attempts to create a permanent Jewish presence in Nazareth, during the first half of the twentieth century:  From Haim Kalvarisky and the jca`s activity in the city at the turn of the century; Through the local Jewish presence which was established during WW1; And up to the limited yet stable Jewish settlement – of clear national character - that existed in the city during the first half of the British Mandate period.
Besides reviewing  the various attempts, as well as their characteristics and scope, this paper also aims to define the different ideological positions that were the basis for the attempts of several Jewish national institutions to act in the city; to portray the character of local Jewish/Arab relations during those years; and to determine the various factors that eventually led to the disappearance of permanent Jewish presence in Nazareth, since the mid 1930`s.
The case of the Jewish presence in Nazareth is presented against the background of similar events that took place in a large number of Arab cities throughout the country, in the late Ottoman period and during the British Mandate period.

The paper discusses the legendary transfer of the Holy House from Nazareth (Palestine), via Croatian coast to the town of Loreto in Italy. According to legend, the transfer took place at the end of the 13th century, and it was depicted on several maps, including the cartographic representation from Loreto called Descriptio translationis Sanctæ Domus Beatissimæ Virginis e Nazareth in Dalmatiam et inde Lavretv[m] which was probably made at the end of the 16th century. Regardless of the authenticity of the relic, the fact that the content of the legendary transfer was depicted cartographically on one of the most valuable works of art of the Loreto Marian shrine witnesses the need for spatial identification of imaginary geography, but it also indicates the importance and influence of cartography of that time, because maps were important sources of spatial data and means of geographic expression.

The paper discusses the legendary transfer of the Holy House from Nazareth (Palestine), via Croatian coast to the town of Loreto in Italy. According to legend, the transfer took place at the end of the 13th century, and it was depicted on several maps, including the cartographic representation from Loreto called Descriptio translationis Sanctae Domus Beatissimae Virginis e Nazareth in Dalmati-am et inde Lavretv[m] which was probably made at the end of the 16th century. Regardless of the authenticity of the relic, the fact that the content of the legendary transfer was depicted cartographically on one of the most valuable works of art of the Loreto Marian shrine witnesses the need for spatial identification of imaginary geography, but it also indicates the importance and influence of cartography of that time, because maps were important sources of spatial data and means of geographic expression.

El presente ensayo tiene dos objetivos primordiales: 1) Partiendo de que por las condiciones del orden social la responsabilidad fundamental del filósofo requiere también la acción transformadora del mundo para que devenga uno equitativo e incluyente, el autor propone al lector un texto que muestre una breve manera, dentro de las muchas posibles, de vincular el discurso de la razón práctica ilustrada, aclamada novedad de la modernidad, con aquel de la razón simbólica, frecuentemente denostada por el discurso de las comunidades científicas y académicas pero vivida diariamente por los pueblos del mundo; y 2) presentar una interpretación de la noción de Justicia que se encuentra en los textos considerados sagrados para las comunidades judías y cristianas en contraste con la tradicional manera de definir dicha noción, la manera romana de Ulpiano, que es en la que se fundamenta la normatividad de los pueblos auto-proclamados modernos.


Publicado en el Vol. 6, No 1 (2014): Páginas de Filosofia; Curso de Filosofia da Faculdade de Humanidades e Direito da Universidade Metodista de São Paulo
ISSN: 2175-7747

Mixed Towns, Trapped Communities: Historical Narratives, Spatial Dynamics, Gender Relations and Cultural Encounters in Palestinian-Israeli Towns

Editors: Daniel Monterescu and Dan Rabinowitz

Modern urban spaces are, by definition, mixed socio-spatial configurations. In many ways, their enduring success and vitality lie in the richness of their ethnic texture and ongoing exchange of economic goods, cultural practices, political ideas and social movements. This mixture, however, is rarely harmonious and has often led to violent conflict over land and identity. Focusing on mixed towns in Israel/Palestine, this insightful volume theorizes the relationship between modernity and nationalism and the social dynamics which engender and characterize the growth of urban spaces and the emergence therein of inter-communal relations.

For more than a century, Arabs and Jews have been interacting in the workplaces, residential areas, commercial enterprises, cultural arenas and political theatres of mixed towns. Defying prevailing Manichean oppositions, these towns both exemplify and resist the forces of nationalist segregation. In this interdisciplinary volume, a new generation of Israeli and Palestinian scholars come together to explore ways in which these towns have been perceived as utopian or dystopian and whether they are best conceptualized as divided, dual or colonial. Identifying ethnically mixed towns as a historically specific analytic category, this volume calls for further research, comparison and debate.

Contents: Preface; Introduction: the transformation of urban mix in Palestine/Israel in the modern era, Dan Rabinowitz and Daniel Monterescu; Part 1 History, Representation and Collective Memory: Bourgeois nostalgia and the abandoned city, Salim Tamari; 'The Arabs just left': othering and the construction of self amongst Jews in Haifa before and after 1948, Dan Rabinowitz; 'We were living in a different country': Palestinian nostalgia and the future past, Jasmin Habib; Cross-national collective action in Palestine's mixed towns: the 1946 civil servants strike, David de Vries; How is a mixed town to be administered? Haifa's municipal council, 1940–1947, Tamir Goren. Part 2 Spatial Dynamics: Ethnic Urban Mix and its Contradictions: Planning, control and spatial protest: the case of the Jewish-Arab town od Lydd/Lod, Haim Yacobi; Heteronomy: the cultural logic of urban space and sociality in Jaffa, Daniel Monterescu; A nixed, not mixed, city: mapping obstacles to democracy in the Nazareth/Nazerat Illit conurbation, Laurie King-Irani; Exit from the scene: reflections on the public space of the Palestinians in Israel, Raef Zreik. Part 3 Gendered Perspectives on Mixed Spaces: Contested contact: proximity and social control in pre-1948 Jaffa and Tel-Aviv, Deborah S. Bernstein; Mixed cities as a place of choice: the Palestinian women's perspective, Hanna Herzog. Part 4 Cultural Encounters and Civil Society: ECooperation and conflict in the zone of civil society: Arab-Jewish activism in Jaffa, Amalia Sa'ar; Nationalism, religion and urban politics in Israel: struggles over modernity and identity in 'global' Jaffa, Mark LeVine; Mixed as in pidgin: the vanishing Arabic of a 'bilingual' city, Anton Shammas; Index

We’ve all heard from Biblical teachings that Jesus was raised in a town called Nazareth; he’s specifically called “Jesus of Nazareth” in the KJV version of the New Testament 17 times, 12 times in the Gospels and 5 times in the Book of Acts.

So, lets take a look at where the word “Nazareth” and its vocabulary cousins, “Nazarene” and “Nazirite”, come from and why it is important.  First off, there is a very important verse in Matthew, that suggests that Jesus must be “from Nazareth” to fulfill a specific messianic prophecy.

Aquí van 10 textos más del "Libro de Cielo" de Luisa Piccarreta sobre el Rey, su Reino y su Reinado.  Estos nuevos textos serán agregados y consolidados a la primera versión que fue publicada al finalizar la sesión en Academia.edu.  Sigan participando enviando sus comentarios y propuestas de textos. Gracias y bendiciones en la Divina Voluntad. FIAT.