andrewcriddle

I've been trying to look into this.

The first association of Helena with Nazareth is apparently found in an anonymous Life of Constantine dating from c 800 CE. It is presumably sheer legend.

Taylor in Christians and the Holy Places: The Myth of Jewish-Christian Origins (or via: amazon.co.uk) plausibly argues that the first Christian church at Nazareth was a small shrine constructed by Joseph of Tiberias, a leading Jew who converted to Christianity in the early 4th century CE.

Epiphanius of Salamis claims in the Panarion that Joseph obtained permission from Constantine to build churches in entirely Jewish towns such as Nazareth.

If this scenario is true then IMO it implies that Nazareth was called Nazareth before Joseph of Tiberias built a shrine there as an act of pious private initiative.

The absence of any indigenous Christian minority may partly explain the paucity of references to Nazareth by early Christian writers.

Andrew Criddle

PhilosopherJay

Hi Andrewcriddle,

Epiphanius is simply saying that Josephus got permission from Constantine to build churches in entirely Jewish towns. He gives examples of entirely Jewish towns where churches are not permitted: Tiberias, Diocaesaerea, Sepphoris, Nazareth and Capernaum.

It seems quite possible that Josephus of Tiberias, because he was a converted Jew, got permission from Constantine the emperor to build a small church in his hometown of Tiberias, which apparently was entirely Jewish except for him. One wonders if he did not convert precisely because he saw a money-making opportunity in building a church in Jewish Tiberias. With a constant stream of rich Christians passing through the town, who wouldn't recognize the financial opportunity to service their spiritual needs.

It seems unimaginable that Josephus of Tiberias would tell Epiphanius about building a small church in Tiberias, but not tell him anythiing about building a church in Nazareth, if indeed he had built a church in Nazareth.

What seems to be the case is that Epiphanius is trying to suggest that Constantine gave general permission to build Christian churches in Jewish towns. He says that he got this fact directly from Josephus of Tiberias in order to give the idea more authority. It is not necessarily a true fact, but may be invented by Epiphanius for political reasons.

What this indicates is that Epiphanius and other Christian Bishops around 375 were seeking permision to build churches in entirely Jewish towns such as Tiberias, Diocasaerea, Sepphoris, Nazareth and Capernaum. This suggest that except for the one small Church in Tiberias, there were no Christian Churches in these towns before 375, but that Christians were attempting to build ones to the dismay of Jews living there.

It is a little ironic that in the main towns where Jesus is alleged to have preached, Nazareth and Capernaum, there appears to not have been a single Christian (follower of Jesus) till after 375 CE. In Tiberias, it appears Jesus did somewhat better: a single rich man converted to Christianity around 325 CE.

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

andrewcriddle

FWIW Epiphanius provides a detailed and very different account by Joseph as to why he converted to Christianity.

Andrew Criddle

Toto

Converts' stories of their conversions are notoriously unreliable, even in modern times.

Minimalist

Actually, it is more than a fair question. After Yodfat was destroyed by the Romans in 67 it was rebuilt in a slightly different location.

Rene Salm in his book on Nazareth suggests that the traditional site of the town up on the hillside makes little sense compared to building a town on the valley floor. Of course, that undercuts his own argument since no one has excavated on the valley floor.

So there is some precedent for "moving" a town.

There is archaeological evidence for Herod's Temple. Not for "Solomon's."

spamandham

I can buy this, but archaeological evidence of Herod's temple (or even Jupiter's temple) still proves that modern Jerusalem is in the same spot as it was 2000 years ago.

Though it might not be in the same location it was 2500 years ago... :constern01:

Minimalist

The raison d'etre for Jerusalem being where it is, is the Gihon Spring. Without water, it's just another dry spot.

Still, there are plenty of examples (tels) of towns being built up over and over in the same spot. Megiddo, for instance, has 26 habitation layers. Whether they were brought down by earthquake or armed attack, the survivors (or the winners!) always felt compelled to rebuild on the same spot.

Contrast that with Meso-America where cities were built and then abandoned.

What can I say? People are strange.