You people can debate all you like but it is much better if there was no Nazareth because "foxes have liars, the birds of the sky have nests, but son of man has no place to lie his head."

Read careful and find that Christ was born who from a dream was to be called Jesus of Nazareth which did not exist to make him "resident without residence" and therefore as illusory as an ego wherefore it can easily to crucified. Very clever and I love it!

Amos

Toto

Metacrock: Please fix your link, if there was a link there. Please read the prior articles cited so you know the issues. The claims are that the archeology shows graves, but minimal habitation if any, and that the layout of the present site of Nazareth is clearly not the place mentioned in the Bible as Nazareth.

No, I noticed it, I just didn't care to respond. After all, I can put up a link to an unknown author who has found Noah's Ark. He has pictures of it, too. You can't deny that!

I recognize many of the scholars that this guy is using. Many of them are "fringe scholars" and only much more reading will tell you that, I'm afraid. Give me a break, they even use the apocryphal, gnostic, fourth century Gospel of Philip.

This will be my last post on the topic unless and until there are some better arguments. The weight of the evidence lies in favor of the existence of a small city named Nazareth in the 1st century where Jesus grew up.

Ish

Toto

I didn't pay any attention to his sources, except for Josephus. I thought his arguement based on the actual geography of the area was worth something.

In the meantime, no one has posted a link to a source detailing the evidence for Nazareth.