Born in Nazareth?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Faith1960
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

Faith1960

Guest
I’ve been reading quite a bit that says most scholars believe Jesus was born in Nazareth. Is that true, do they believe that?

Can someone debunk this from scholarly sources other than the Bible?
 
I’ve been reading quite a bit that says most scholars believe Jesus was born in Nazareth. Is that true, do they believe that?

Can someone debunk this from scholarly sources other than the Bible?
The Washington Post says it’s a myth that Jesus was born in Bethlehem.
 
I’ve been reading quite a bit that says most scholars believe Jesus was born in Nazareth. Is that true, do they believe that?

Can someone debunk this from scholarly sources other than the Bible?
I’m not sure there’s any evidence that he was born in Nazareth. They start with a secular assumption about the story that it is false, then sit back in their arm chairs and talk about what must *really *have happened with this rabbi.
 
Can someone find a reason some (most?) Scholars think He was born in Nazareth besides the fact Hes called the Nazarine? Or is that their only reason?
 
I’ve been reading quite a bit that says most scholars believe Jesus was born in Nazareth. Is that true, do they believe that?

Can someone debunk this from scholarly sources other than the Bible?
The birth of the promised Messiah was foretold hundreds of years prior
by the prophet Micheas Ch.5 V2 “And thou Bethlehem Ephrata, art a little one
among the thousands of Juda: out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be
the ruler in Israel; and his going forth is from the beginning, from the days of eternity”
Its man’s word versus the Word of God . 🤷
 
Didn’t we just go round and round about this on another thread?
I don’t take my Scripture lessons from the Washington Post or ABC news or any other secular source.
The house of bread is much more plausible to me.
 
Funny, there are also scholars who say that Nazareth didn’t exist at all. Who are you gonna believe?
 
Of course the Washington Post is interested in trying to get rid of the story of how bureaucrats inconvenienced God’s own family, and how God turned even that into a fulfilment of Scripture.

The whole article is pretty much a compendium of stupid.

Nobody says, “You know, we don’t have many sources about Julius Caesar, and it seems so unlikely that a guy would go from being a Roman senator to becoming an emperor. And then, this whole business about him being stabbed by a mob of other Senators, so none of them could be sure who really killed him? Obviously mythical! And if he did exist, obviously all this stuff about him sleeping around with other people’s wives and sons is just made up, to go along with his family and him claiming to be descended from the goddess Venus.”

Or at least, we don’t do that now. There was a time when every historical figure got his turn at being reclassified as a “solar myth,” and were supposed to be fictional or not to have had any interesting things really happen in their lives; everything was invented by storytellers or worshippers. Historians eventually got over that, but some people are still trying this weird history denial with Jesus.
 
There is no more evidence or tradition (apart from Scripture) for a Nativity in Nazareth than there is for the classical Bethlehem scenario. I’d not waste neurons on this question.

ICXC NIKA
 
Then you have been reading …less than good sources there.

Bethlehem.
 
I can’t pull it back up, Gorgias.

Try googling Five Myths About Jesus The Wasington Post
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top