Ted Hoffman

The following is a section of the paper I am writing. I need your comments on whether I have taken out the above argument. Decisively. What are the weaknesses of my arguments, how can I strengthen them? Is it too long?

Incredible Shrinking City of Nazareth

As early as 1906, W. B. Smith, A. Drews and G.T. Sadler and others argued that Nazareth is not attested outside the gospels because it never existed in the first century. W. B. Smith[1] argued that the names of Jewish sect of Nazarenes, known to Epiphanius, and the sect of Nassenes, known to Hippolytus, could not have derived their names from Nazareth, whose existence, he argued, was doubtful based on the failure of non-Christian documents to mention it .

In 1926, M. Goguel responded that “there is nothing astonishing in the supposition that Nazareth, a village of very trifling importance, should be among the number�[2] mentioned by Josephus and the Talmud.

As if on cue, 80 years later, J.B. Crossan and J. Reed wrote:
“It's no surprise that Nazareth is never mentioned. Writing in antiquity was an upper-class activity, so that references to Nazareth increase dramatically after Christianity rose to political power in the fourth century C.E. Those who had learned to read and write in antiquity were the rulers, the wealthy, or their scribes, so that the histories, biographies, and narratives surviving from the past were mostly penned or dictated by powerful men. They were interested primarily in public persons and political conflicts. These very few atop the social pyramid cared little about the vast majority of people and what went on in small towns, rural villages, or countryside hamlets like Nazareth, unless they caused trouble or threatened stability and income.� [3] "Small Jewish village without any political significance� [4] echoes J.L. Reed.

Dr. Stephen Pfann, Director of the Jerusalem School for the Study of Early Christianity and of the Nazareth Village, declared that “Nazareth was tiny, with two or three clans living in 35 homes spread over 2.5 hectares�

As we can see, Nazareth has been arbitrarily described by scholars as an isolated village, a village of trifling importance and as a hamlet (a small village).

There are several difficulties with these arguments that seek to belittle Nazareth:

a) There is no clear definition of what “small village� means as used by Crossan and Reed, or how the idea that Nazareth was a village of no importance (Goguel, Wellhausen) was arrived at. As such, it is an arbitrary designation of little meaning if any. It is comparable to declaring that because four different world chroniclers fail to mention a certain country, it was therefore a small country of trifling importance.

Nowhere does Josephus, or the OT, or the Talmud state that they only mention big and important villages, as such, the whole “tiny village� argument rests on an unproven assumption.

One may be interested in knowing whether there were other “small� Galilean villages and whether their archaeological digs have been characterized by burial shafts and tombs. It is unclear for example, whether “big villages� also existed.

b) The designation of Nazareth as a small, almost unknown village is inconsistent with Luke and Matthew’s characterization of Nazareth as a city (Greek polis), as we see in Luke 2.3,39,40 and Matt 2.22,23 (YLT).

A cogent explanation is required with regard to the synoptic use of the word “city� because the word “village� is also used in Luke severally. Barring an explanation that can account for this, there is no reason to believe that Nazareth was a village against gospel testimony that it was a city.

c) A. Edersheim wrote that among the major cities located along the caravan route from the Mediterranean to Damascus was Nazareth hence it was an important, and well-known city[5].

The Semitic Scholar Gustav Dalman (1935:63) thought Nazareth was “a radiating point of important roads and a thoroughfare for extensive traffic�
The above point to us that Nazareth may not have been of trifling importance as Goguel argued.

As if to directly disagree with Crossan and Reed, J.P. Meier states that “Nazareth was not a totally isolated village� and that it was close to the district capital (Sepphoris) and that the “north-south road between Jerusalem and Sepphoris also ran close to Nazareth� [7]

Thus, the arbitrary designation of Nazareth as an isolated, little-known city also runs into serious difficulties.

d) Reed, who argues that Nazareth was a small village, relies on Meyers and Strange to suggest a population of Nazareth of “less than 400 people� [8]. We would assume, based on this, that a “small village� had around 350 people.

But Richard Horsley estimates that a “standard village� would have between 300 to 400 persons [9]. William E. Arnal estimates Nazareth to have had between 400 to 500 persons [10].

J.P. Meier estimates Nazareth’s population to have been between 1600 and 2000 [11] . The Jewish Historian Josephus estimated Nazareth’s population to be not less than 15,000 [12]. Note that Josephus was at one time a Governor in Galilee and must have participated in tax collection to be able to estimate the population of the villages. Golomb B. and Y. Kedar accede to Josephan estimates. Klausner’s estimates also appear close to Josephus figure [13]. Joachim Jeremias also gives estimates that are close to the Josephan figure [14].
World travel guides indicate that Nazareth today has a population of around 60,000 people [15].

It is instructive to note that, going by Reed’s estimates, if we examine the feeding miracles, for example, the one in John 6:1-14, we are told “all of them-the men alone numbered five thousand�. If we assume there were 3000 women and 3000 Children in that crowd, it means there was a crowd of 11000. If each village had 350 people (assuming 100 people were left in each village), that means there were 250 people from each village. That means that the crowd comprised people from 48 villages! With some having to travel 40 miles!

Ponder the Implications of that. [still thinking of a punchline for this]
And oh, in an honour and shame society (Crossan) the women and children should outnumber the men idly watching a magician - right?

References

1. W. B. Smith, The pre-Christian Jesus (American Journal of Theology, 1911).
2. M. Goguel, Jesus the Nazarene: Myth or Fact, 1926, http://www.christianorigins.com/goguel/ch2.html
3. J.D. Crossan and J. Reed, Excavating Jesus, 2001
4. J.L. Reed, Archaeology and the Galilean Jesus, p132
5. A. Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus Messiah, 1993, p147
7. J.P. Meier, Marginal Jew, p.301
8. ibid, p.131
9. Horsley R. A., Archaeology, History and Society in Galilee: The Social Context of Judas and the Rabbis, 1996
10. Arnal W.E., Jesus and The Village Scribes, 2001, p.232
11. ibid, p301
12. Josephus, The Wars of the Jews, Book III, Chapter 3,3
13. Golomb B. and Y. Kedar, Ancient Agriculture in the Galilee Mountains, 1971, p.136-140.
14. Jeremias J., Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus, 1969
15. http://www.world66.com/asia/middleeast/israel/nazareth

JoeWallack

JW:
http://www.ccel.org/j/josephus/works/war-3.htm

"3. In short, if any one will suppose that Galilee is inferior to Perea in magnitude, he will be obliged to prefer it before it in its strength; for this is all capable of cultivation, and is every where fruitful; but for Perea, which is indeed much larger in extent, the greater part of it is desert and rough, and much less disposed for the production of the milder kinds of fruits; yet hath it a moist soil [in other parts], and produces all kinds of fruits, and its plains are planted with trees of all sorts, while yet the olive tree, the vine, and the palm tree are chiefly cultivated there. It is also sufficiently watered with torrents, which issue out of the mountains, and with springs that never fail to run, even when the torrents fail them, as they do in the dog-days. Now the length of Perea is from Macherus to Pella, and its breadth from Philadelphia to Jordan; its northern parts are bounded by Pella, as we have already said, as well as its Western with Jordan; the land of Moab is its southern border, and its eastern limits reach to Arabia, and Silbonitis, and besides to Philadelphene and Gerasa."

I would know without looking up anything that The Jewish Historian Josephus never estimated 1st century Nazareth’s population to be not less than 15,000 but what the hell are you talking about here Ted?



Joseph

Toto

Ted meant War III 3:2

Josephus does not mention Nazareth, but he does say that the smallest village in Galilee contains over 15,000 inhabitants, which would tend to disprove the contention that Nazareth was a small village in Galilee.

(Clearly, Ted needs to revise this part for clarity.)

Ted Hoffman

My bad. Thanks Toto, thats the passage I meant to refer to.