PhilosopherJay

Hi Ben,

Crossnan in "Excavating Jesus" calls it a 3rd or 4th century synagogue. The Near East Tourist Agency calls it a 5th century synagogue. It may be imagined that by the 4th or 5th century, the people doing the inscription may have forgotten where the families of the legendary 24 Founding Rabbies actually went after the war, so they assigned one to Nazareth to please the Christians who controlled the city and might grant them favors if they thought one of the founding Rabbies was from the town of Jesus.

In this age of information, I can trace my ancestry back about 110 years. It would have been a much harder trick to trace one's ancestry back two or three hundred years in the 4th or 5th century when the information available was much less.

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

youngalexander

Witness the present day Palestinians.
I can trace my ancestry back 3C - thru one line. We usually overlook the fact that our ancestry bifurcates - (due to sexism, ie. male line). Can I trace it thru the other 1000 lines?

Magdlyn

PJ, why are you equating "Founding Rabbies" with "Priestly courses?"

Weren't the rabbis the Pharisees, and the priests (Aaronid kohein) the Saducees? Rivals?

PhilosopherJay

Hi Magdlyn,

Sorry, I should have used the word "Priests".

This is what the Near East tourist Agency says (http://www.netours.com/jrs/2003/naz.htm):

Later, Nazareth must have been more substantial. In the 2nd century AD, many Galilean cities still lay in waste as a result of the first revolt against Rome (66-70 AD). Another revolt in 132-135 (led by Bar Kokhba) occurred, it would seem, in Judaea only. The Emperor Hadrian punished the Judaeans by prohibiting circumcision, thus forcing the pious to leave. Among them were the 24 priestly families whose ancestors had officiated in the Temple. Each of these resettled in a town in Galilee. According to an inscription found in a 5th-century synagogue at Caesarea Maritima, one of the priestly families (that of Happizzes, mentioned in 1 Chronicles 24:15) made its home in Nazareth.

Wikipedia has on article on the Priestly courses at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priestly_divisions.

The situation seems to be much less credible than I imagined. We have to believe that 24 priestly families stayed intact for over 1,000 years and Jews in the 3rd, 4th, or 5th centuries could trace all 24 migrations fo their families. Since the inscription is certainly fantasy rather than history, the only interesting thing is why the word "Nazareth" or "Nasareth" appears there. Contemporary Christian influence is as likely an explanation as any other. To take this as historical existence for the existence of Nazareth is like taking the fact that Dorothy goes to the land of Oz in the movie "The Wizard of Oz" as proof that the land of Oz described by Frank Baum in his "Oz" books existed.

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

Magdlyn

Thanks for clearing that up.

As for the info you kindly shared about Nazareth, seems the tourist agency is fluffing up Nazareth's Jesus connection as much as possible for obvious ($$$) reasons.

PhilosopherJay

Hi Magdlyn,

You've Talked the Talk, Now Walk the Walk in the Footsteps of Jesus.

At the end of the trip, they'll even put you up on a cross for a few hours, but that's $500 extra.

Yep, looks like they're grooming him to be the new Elvis.

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

mountainman

The big three-day disappearance is taken care of
for an additional three grand. Meals, transportation
costs to Emmaus, wailers, and a live rock band,
included at no extra cost.

Best wishes,


Pete Brown

Magdlyn

This assertion might be stated a bit too confidently, then? To sum up:


[/QUOTE]

It appears, then, that this inscription of a "priestly course" having settled in "Nasareth" stems from the 3-5th century CE and is of no use in determining if the village existed in the 1st (or actually, the 1st BCE). The inscription might have been fictional, done then for purposes of encouraging pious tourism, or for political favors..

However, perhaps there is more info on this somewhere that is more useful.

Ben C Smith

No. I stand by what I wrote.

Nothing is safe against speculation.

Ben.

PhilosopherJay

Hi Magdlyn and Ben,

Let me echo Magdlyn's call for more information.

I think we need more information about the actual inscription and the archaeologists' interpretation of it before we can make a judgment if this is actual evidence for the existence of Nazareth in the First or Second centuries. If this is referring to the abode of a fictional or mythological Jewish family of Priests, then it cannot be taken as evidence that Nazareth existed at all in the First or Second centuries.

Very often pieces of archaeological evidence are used to support historical theories in quite biased ways. Think about the recent Jesus Coffin stories.

Does anyone have any more information about the original mosaics?

[QUOTE=Magdlyn;4958024]