First Jesus-era house found in Nazareth

December 22, 2009

Dwelling suggests that Nazareth was an out-of-the-way hamlet

NAZARETH, Israel - Days before Christmas, archaeologists on Monday unveiled what they said were the remains of the first dwelling in Nazareth that can be dated back to the time of Jesus — a find that could shed new light on what the hamlet was like during the period the New Testament says Jesus lived there as a boy.

The dwelling and older discoveries of nearby tombs in burial caves suggest that Nazareth was an out-of-the-way hamlet of around 50 houses on a patch of about four acres (1.6 hectares). It was evidently populated by Jews of modest means who kept camouflaged grottos to hide from Roman invaders, said archaeologist Yardena Alexandre, excavations director at the Israel Antiquities Authority.
Based on clay and chalk shards found at the site, the dwelling appeared to house a "simple Jewish family," Alexandre added, as workers at the site carefully chipped away at mud with small pickaxes to reveal stone walls.

www.msnbc.msn.com...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/da94bb1f74b7.jpg[/atsimg]
Archaeologists discover the remains of a house in Nazareth that dates back to the time of Jesus.

Check out the video at the link, hope to hear more about this in the future, it's amazing that they can find anything since so much has been covered by sand over the centuries.



[edit on 23-12-2009 by Aquarius1]

Originally posted by Aquarius1
December 22, 2009

Dwelling suggests that Nazareth was an out-of-the-way hamlet

NAZARETH, Israel - Days before Christmas, archaeologists on Monday unveiled what they said were the remains of the first dwelling in Nazareth that can be dated back to the time of Jesus

I had also notice this was NEWS with many other stories all bearing similiar descriptions.

And yes, it is a wonder what they do find under the sands of time.

With that said, I failed to notice anything about the "Storyline" and wished to offer some points for consideration.

Nazareth? Jesus of Nazareth? Is this really correct?

www.eliyah.com...

Result of search for "Nazareth":
3478. Nazareth nad-zar-eth' or Nazaret nad-zar-et'; of uncertain derivation; Nazareth or Nazaret, a place in Palestine:--Nazareth.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3479. Nazarenos nad-zar-ay-nos' from 3478; a Nazarene, i.e. inhabitant of Nazareth:--of Nazareth.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3480. Nazoraios nad-zo-rah'-yos from 3478; a Nazoraean, i.e. inhabitant of Nazareth; by extension, a Christian:--Nazarene, of Nazareth.

So we see, in the Greek, it was a place at some point.

en.wikipedia.org...

However, some modern scholars argue that Nazareth may be, in fact, where Jesus was born,[24] while others argue that Nazareth didn't exist at all. The critical question now under scholarly and polemical (atheist and Christian) debate is when exactly and at what stage in the Roman period Nazareth came into existence, that is, whether settlement there began before or after 70 AD (the First Jewish War).[25]

James Strange, an American archaeologist, notes: “Nazareth is not mentioned in ancient Jewish sources earlier than the third century AD. This likely reflects its lack of prominence both in Galilee and in Judaea.”[26] Strange - supposing the existence of a settlement - originally guessed Nazareth’s population at the time of Christ to be "roughly 1,600 to 2,000 people", but later, in a subsequent publication, at “a maximum of about 480.”[27] Some have argued that the absence of textual references to Nazareth in the Old Testament and the Talmud, as well as the works of Josephus, suggest that a town called 'Nazareth' did not exist in Jesus' day.[28]

So what about the Implication as a Title, instead of a Place of Origin or Habitation?

en.wikipedia.org...(title)

The Gospel of Matthew explains that the title "Nazorean" is derived from the prophecy, "He will be called a Nazorean."[4] Unlike other prophecies that Matthew quotes, this one has no obvious Old Testament source. Some scholars argue that it refers to a passage in the Book of Isaiah,[5] with "Nazorean" a Greek reading of the Hebrew ne·tser (branch), understood as a messianic title.[

Etymology
Nazarene is anglicized from Greek Nazarēne (Ναζαρηνέ), a word applied to Jesus in the New Testament.[9] Several Hebrew words have been suggested as roots:

Nazareth
The issue of whether Nazarene is derived from Nazareth has been the subject of much scholarly conjecture since the 19th century.[10] "Nazareth", in turn, may be derived from either na·tsar, נָצַר, meaning "to watch,"[11] or from ne·tser, נֵ֫צֶר, meaning branch.[12]

The Greek phrase usually translated as "Jesus of Nazareth" (iēsous o nazōraios) can be translated more literally as "Jesus the Nazorean."[13] No one else is referred to in scripture in this way, not even other people from Nazareth. For example, the father of Jesus is iōsēph ton apo nazaret (Joseph of Nazareth).[14]

Ne·tzer
ne·tser (נֵ֫צֶר, n-ts-r), pronounced nay'·tser, meaning "branch", "flower", or "offshoot". Derived from na·tsar. (See below.)[15] Jerome (c. 347 – 420) linked "Nazarene" to a messianic prophecy by Isaiah, claiming that "Nazarene" was the Hebrew reading of a word modern scholars read as ne·tzer (branch).[16] The text from Isaiah is:

“ There shall come forth a Rod from the stem of Jesse, And a Branch shall grow out of his roots.
ve·ya·tza cho·ter mig·ge·za yi·shai ve·ne·tzer mi·sha·ra·shav yif·reh.[5]
”
In ancient Hebrew texts, vowels were not indicated, so a wider variety of readings was possible in Jerome's time. Here branch/Nazarene is metaphorically "descendant" (of Jesse, father of King David). Eusebius, a fourth century Christian polemicist, also argued that Isaiah was the source of "Nazarene." This prophecy by Isaiah was extremely popular in New Testament times and is also referred to in Romans and Revelation.[17]

Other suggested roots

na·tsar (נָצַר, n-ts-r), pronounced naw·tsar', meaning "to watch, guard, keep".[18] This word also has a messianic association based on a passage in Jeremiah.[19]

na·zir (נָזִיר, n-z-r), pronounced naw·zeer', meaning "one consecrated, devoted".[20] This word has a messianic association based on passages in Genesis and Deuteronomy.[21] A Nazirite was a person consecrated to God either from birth, such as Samson or Samuel; or for a limited time.[22] "Nazorite" is only one letter off from "Nazorean" in Greek.[7]

So lets see what other words are associated within Root Group in the Hebrew.

www.eliyah.com...

4216 mazzarah maz-zaw-raw' apparently from 5144 in the sense of distinction; some noted constellation (only in the plural), perhaps collectively, the zodiac:--Mazzoroth. Compare 4208.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4502 minnzar min-ez-awr' from 5144; a prince:--crowned.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5139 naziyr naw-zeer' or nazir [naw-zeer']; from 5144; separate, i.e. consecrated (as prince, a Nazirite); hence (figuratively from the latter) an unpruned vine (like an unshorn Nazirite):--Nazarite (by a false alliteration with Nazareth), separate(-d), vine undressed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5144 nazar naw-zar' a primitive root; to hold aloof, i.e. (intransitivey) abstain (from food and drink, from impurity, and even from divine worship (i.e. apostatize)); specifically, to set apart (to sacred purposes), i.e. devote:--consecrate, separate(-ing, self).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5145 nezer neh'-zer or nezer [nay'-zer]; from 5144; properly, something set apart, i.e. (abstractly) dedication (of a priet or Nazirite); hence (concretely) unshorn locks; also (by implication) a chaplet (especially of royalty):--consecration, crown, hair, separation.

So from this, can it truely be said, "Jesus of Nazareth", such as the headlines are suggesting, was even from Nazareth, a Town of Questionable Origin (70AD at the earliest) in name, when much more meaning is within the Title.

Just thought that despite the various accounts of your news story, some alternative thoughts should also be included for consideration.

This does not even take into account the various works that suggest Jesus lived in many other places, such a E Raymond Capt's Traditions of Glastonbury for example.

www.greatdreams.com...

"As a boy He was brought merely for a visit by Joseph of Arimathea on one of his voyages. Later as a young man He returned and settled at Glastonbury for the purpose of quiet study, prayer, and meditation...."

Much has been written about the Lost Years of Jesus. Many accounts place him in India. One South American tradition sounds very much like Jesus visiting that continent.

Thrown in for fun. Have a good day

Ciao

Shane

reply to post by Shane

I had also notice this was NEWS with many other stories all bearing similiar descriptions.

And yes, it is a wonder what they do find under the sands of time.

With that said, I failed to notice anything about the "Storyline" and wished to offer some points for consideration.

Nazareth? Jesus of Nazareth? Is this really correct?

Thank you for the infomation Shane, very interesting, didn't have time to look for more at the time I posted.