Author Topic: Nazareth and Bethlehem did not exist in the time of Jesus  (Read 6617 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline WhiteWings

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 13158
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahshua heals
    • My sites
Nazareth and Bethlehem did not exist in the time of Jesus
« on: December 20, 2010, 01:23:30 AM »
I use this first post to collect the bits and pieces from the posts below in a more organized way

The town Nazareth didn't exist until long after Jesus died.
Bethlehem in Judah was the birth place of David (1040 BC) but the town was a ruin, at best, during Jesus time.
That's a problem for the credibility of the Bible because mentioning none existent towns in many verses doesn't look very inspired.
There are several possibilities.
a] Copying and/or translation errors. => Impossible to prove without the original documents.
b] Archeologists  and historians are wrong. => No.
c] It's just another puzzle. => Yes.

The archeologists and historians seem to be right because the people at the time of Jesus said He lied because the prophesied Christ should come from Judah not Galilee.
YLTJohn 7
41 others said, `This is the Christ;' and others said, `Why, out of Galilee doth the Christ come?
42 Did not the Writing say, that out of the seed of David, and from Bethlehem--the village where David was--the Christ doth come?'
They refer to:  YLTMic 5 2 And thou, Beth-Lehem Ephratah, Little to be among the chiefs of Judah! From thee to Me he cometh forth--to be ruler in Israel ....

Origen of Caesarea (185-254 AD) lived thirty miles from Nazareth, but could not find it. He concluded that many places mentioned in the gospels never existed. Before Constantine, Nazareth was attested only by the New Testament evangelists.
Bethlehem
As usual many things in the Bible have at least one hidden meaning/gem.
Bethlehem means house of bread. (a town with a quality mill that could grind very fine flour). There were several Bethlehems in the region. Also in Galilee where Jesus was born. So possibly He was born in that Bethlehem
YLTRev 12 1 And a great sign was seen in the heaven, a woman arrayed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars,
That event pinpoints the birth of Jesus. The woman in constellation Virgo=Virgin. The woman hold a few sheaves of wheat in her hand. That's why Virgo is also called "House of bread.
So Virgo=Virgin=Woman=House of Bread=Bethlehem  :winkgrin:
So even if Jesus was born in the middle of Rome He was still born in Bethlehem.
YLTJohn 6 48 I am the bread of the life;
YLTJohn 6 33 for the bread of God is that which is coming down out of the heaven, and giving life to the world.'

Nazareth
Another mystery town that never existed until Constantine. But still many verses refer to it. For example:
YLTJohn 1 46 and Nathanael said to him, `Out of Nazareth is any good thing able to be?' Philip said to him, `Come and see.'

This one is a little harder to explain and requires some background.
Jesus was part of the Essenes sect. That sect split up due to huge disagreements of  teachings. The part that wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls was a xenophobic extremely literal bunch. Jesus was from the sect that looked at the laws with their hearts. So He even helped people and animals during Sabbath.
So we have the Pharisees, Sadducees and Essene. That's 3 sects. The last sect was split of so basically there were 4 sects.
The Dead Sea Essene were the writers of the Temple scrolls. In the NT they are called the scribes. Or Herodians. A nickname they got because they stole the crucifixion idea from Herod. (never heard of that before and I have my doubts) The scribes were always trying to trick Jesus into saying wrong things. They simply hated His teachings/the other sect. And it went very wrong when Jesus healed the leader of the Scribes:
YLTMark 3 3 And he saith to the man having the hand withered, `Rise up in the midst.'
Enough background :winkgrin: The 2 Essene sects had various names. Children of the light/righteousness. The sect of Jesus was called Prince of the world. Nasi Ereth -> Nazareth
So the Scribe simply said: Nothing good can come out of the sect called Nazareth.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2010, 03:37:52 PM by WhiteWings »
1 Timothy 2:3-4  ...God our Savior;  Who will have all men to be saved...
John 12:47  And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
Romans 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous ...

Offline Cardinal

  • < Moderator >
  • *
  • Posts: 8437
  • Gender: Female
Re: Nazareth did not exist in the time of Jesus
« Reply #1 on: December 20, 2010, 01:34:52 AM »
 :cloud9: Interesting that the greatest threat to Jews in the 20th century, were called "Nazis", and holocaust comes from the word for burnt offering. A sickening counterfeit.... :eeew:

I've read some speculation that Jesus was familiar with the Essenes. The Essenes and the Kairites were both Jewish "splinter" groups that existed around the same time period. We mainly hear about the Saducees and the Pharisees. Blessings....
"I would rather train twenty men to pray, than a thousand to preach; A minister's highest mission ought to be to teach his people to pray." -H. MacGregor

Offline WhiteWings

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 13158
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahshua heals
    • My sites
Re: Nazareth did not exist in the time of Jesus
« Reply #2 on: December 20, 2010, 02:03:46 AM »
The speculation I've read goes a bit further...
Jesus was an Essene. John the Baptist too.

There were 2 more Essenes...  The robbers on the cross....
There are two views on that. The Romans called them thieves because they refused to pay taxes.
Or robbers is a transliteration problem between Hebrew and Greek.
Greek robbers ===> Hebrew Holy men.
The Essene were very simple and pure of faith. It seems as close to Jesus as someone can get.
Philo also mentions Essene were called holy.
Not according to the Romans btw because they called the Essene, Early Christians and true Jews atheists because they had no religious rituals and the usual religious "stuff".
When you look a bit deeper in that bit it get an idea what worship for teh Essene meant  Matthew 25:36-40 gets a bit clearer. (and what laws where done away)
At least for me :winkgrin:

 :lazy: good night all  :snor:

Original 1st post in this thread.








I think we had a similar topic a year ago but I can't find it.

There is archeological proof Nazareth didn't exist at the time of Jesus.
Nazareth seems to be Nasi Ereth. Prince of the world/earth. It was a title not a town. Constantine erased parts of Jewish history because obviously a Jew could never be the prince of the earth.
That honor was for a Roman.
So, assuming the above is correct, all verses that read "Jesus of Nazareth" are wrong and should read like "Jesus Prince of the world"


Origen of Caesarea (185-254 AD) lived thirty miles from Nazareth, but could not find it. He concluded that many places mentioned in the gospels never existed. Before Constantine, Nazareth was attested only by the New Testament evangelists. Yet "Nazarene" was a word people understood. In the Qumran scrolls, the Hebrew word "nasi" is a messianic leader. The Nasi had the role of the messiah at the sacred meal of the council of the Essene community. In Ezekiel, nasi means the coming Davidic prince, the messiah. The plural "nesiim" means clouds, enabling the Nasi to come in the nesiim, reminding us of Daniel, but logically it means "princes"—the saints and angels of the heavenly host. Nasi seems to be the origin of "Nazarene". Nazarenes were followers of the messianic leader, the Nasi, either Essenes or their converts.
http://www.thenazareneway.com/nazarene_or_nazareth.htm
The evidence for a 1st century town of Nazareth does not exist – not literary, not archaeologically, and not historically.


To be fair there are also arguments Nazareth did exist at the time of Jesus....
http://www.ichthus.info/CaseForChrist/Archeology/intro.html
« Last Edit: July 04, 2012, 11:51:13 PM by WhiteWings »
1 Timothy 2:3-4  ...God our Savior;  Who will have all men to be saved...
John 12:47  And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
Romans 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous ...

Offline thinktank

  • Silver
  • *
  • Posts: 2672
Re: Nazareth did not exist in the time of Jesus
« Reply #3 on: December 20, 2010, 02:15:12 AM »
Which one is he

Jesus of Gailee

Jesus of Nazareth

Jesus of Bethlehem

Offline WhiteWings

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 13158
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahshua heals
    • My sites
Re: Nazareth did not exist in the time of Jesus
« Reply #4 on: December 20, 2010, 09:14:30 AM »
http://www.religioustolerance.org/xmaswwjb.htm
That article claims there wasn't even  Bethlehem at that time/
Quote
Perhaps the most important reason to suspect the accuracy of Matthew and Luke is that Bethlehem in Judea did not exist as a functioning town between 7 and 4 BCE when Jesus is believed to have been born. Archaeological studies of the town have turned up a great deal of ancient Iron Age material from 1200 to 550 BCE 7 and lots of material from the sixth century CE, but nothing from the 1st century BCE or the 1st century CE.
The original Bethlehem is very old because it's mentioned in first Genesis 35:19


Quote
According to National Geographic:

"Many archaeologists and theological scholars believe Jesus was actually born in either Nazareth or Bethlehem of Galilee, a town just outside Nazareth, citing biblical references and archaeological evidence to support their conclusion. Throughout the Bible, Jesus is referred to as 'Jesus of Nazareth,' not 'Jesus of Bethlehem.' In fact, in John (7:41- 43) there is a passage questioning Jesus' legitimacy because he's from Galilee and not Judaea, as the Hebrew Scriptures say the Messiah must be."
YLTJohn 7
41 others said, `This is the Christ;' and others said, `Why, out of Galilee doth the Christ come?
42 Did not the Writing say, that out of the seed of David, and from Bethlehem--the village where David was--the Christ doth come?'

Another strange thing is: Why did Jesus and His parents stay in Bethlem for over a year if they didn't live there? The travelled to Bethlehem for the census. Jesus was born there.
The Magi vistited Jesus in Bethlem. That was at/around the 25 December (Christmas time) But over a year later. Jesus was born at the Rosh Hassana/Feast of Trumpets/Jewish New yeat/10 September over a year earlier. The whole traveling star etc shows that. It's also shown, in a less exact way by word meanings. When the Mgi arrive Jesus is no longer called a baby but a (young) child.

YLTMatt 2
1 And Jesus having been born in Beth-Lehem of Judea, in the days of Herod the king, lo, mages from the east came to Jerusalem,
2 saying, `Where is he who was born king of the Jews? for we saw his star in the east, and we came to bow to him.'
3 And Herod the king having heard, was stirred, and all Jerusalem with him,
4 and having gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people, he was inquiring from them where the Christ is born.
5 And they said to him, `In Beth-Lehem of Judea, for thus it hath been written through the prophet,
6 And thou, Beth-Lehem, the land of Judah, thou art by no means the least among the leaders of Judah, for out of thee shall come one leading, who shall feed My people Israel.'
7 Then Herod, privately having called the mages, did inquire exactly from them the time of the appearing star,
8 and having sent them to Beth-Lehem, he said, `Having gone--inquire ye exactly for the child, and whenever ye may have found, bring me back word, that I also having come may bow to him.'
9 And they, having heard the king, departed, and lo, the star, that they did see in the east, did go before them, till, having come, it stood over where the child was.
10 And having seen the star, they rejoiced with exceeding great joy,
11 and having come to the house, they found the child with Mary his mother, and having fallen down they bowed to him, and having opened their treasures, they presented to him gifts, gold, and frankincense, and myrrh,
12 and having been divinely warned in a dream not to turn back unto Herod, through another way they withdrew to their own region.
13 And on their having withdrawn, lo, a messenger of the Lord doth appear in a dream to Joseph, saying, `Having risen, take the child and his mother, and flee to Egypt, and be thou there till I may speak to thee, for Herod is about to seek the child to destroy him.'
14 And he, having risen, took the child and his mother by night, and withdrew to Egypt,


Quote from: TT
Jesus of Gailee

Jesus of Nazareth

Jesus of Bethlehem
All of them.... :winkgrin:
Galilee is a region.
Someone can be born in another town than he lives in

Quote
'If the historical Jesus were truly born in Bethlehem,' Oshri adds, 'it was most likely the Bethlehem of Galilee, not that in Judaea. The archaeological evidence certainly seems to favor the former, a busy center [of Jewish life] a few miles from the home of Joseph and Mary, as opposed to an unpopulated spot almost a hundred miles from home.'
I think the distance is of importance here. I don't know how fast travel was at those days. But it would mean they traveled when Mary was about 8.5 month pregnant. I'm no doctor but I think it would be a miracle Jesus is even born if His mother walked or rode a donkey for a 100 miles....
« Last Edit: December 22, 2010, 03:54:31 PM by WhiteWings »
1 Timothy 2:3-4  ...God our Savior;  Who will have all men to be saved...
John 12:47  And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
Romans 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous ...

Offline WhiteWings

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 13158
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahshua heals
    • My sites
Re: Nazareth did not exist in the time of Jesus
« Reply #5 on: December 20, 2010, 09:20:12 AM »
:cloud9: Interesting that the greatest threat to Jews in the 20th century, were called "Nazis"
Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei

So it's a different spelling. It didn't sound the same either because the "i" is Nasi is silent.
I highly doubt Hitler would want a Jewish term to be connected to his glorious 3rd Reich.
Even if he probably saw himself as prince (Nasi) I doubt he would use  aJewsih term to describe himself :winkgrin:
« Last Edit: December 20, 2010, 10:02:43 AM by WhiteWings »
1 Timothy 2:3-4  ...God our Savior;  Who will have all men to be saved...
John 12:47  And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
Romans 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous ...

Offline WhiteWings

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 13158
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahshua heals
    • My sites
Re: Nazareth did not exist in the time of Jesus
« Reply #6 on: December 20, 2010, 10:00:05 AM »
I want to reqoute this part of mu first  post again
Quote
Origen of Caesarea (185-254 AD) lived thirty miles from Nazareth, but could not find it. He concluded that many places mentioned in the gospels never existed. Before Constantine, Nazareth was attested only by the New Testament evangelists. Yet "Nazarene" was a word people understood. In the Qumran scrolls, the Hebrew word "nasi" is a messianic leader. The Nasi had the role of the messiah at the sacred meal of the council of the Essene community. In Ezekiel, nasi means the coming Davidic prince, the messiah. The plural "nesiim" means clouds, enabling the Nasi to come in the nesiim, reminding us of Daniel, but logically it means "princes"—the saints and angels of the heavenly host. Nasi seems to be the origin of "Nazarene". Nazarenes were followers of the messianic leader, the Nasi, either Essenes or their converts.
I think it can be safely said Origen in no way wanted to use that quote as proof the whole Jesus story is a hoax.
I knew Constantine changed history a bit in favor of Rome. Including the town Nazareth. But reading the quote from Origen it seems that even before Constantine and before Christianity  became the Roman state religion people claimed the existance of a town that never existed....?

But if it Nasi Ereth really is a title then the Jewish converts should have known that. I wonder why they didn't tell that to the none Hebrew speaking converts...?
As earlier noted in this thread Jesus (possibly) was an Essene. Origen also links Nazareth to the Essenes.  It's estimated there were 4000 Essene scattered over the region.
So Jesus of Nazareth can be read as:
a] Jesus of Nasi Ereth ==> Jesus Prince of the world.
---> Several Rabbi's took that title too. The Romans wern't very fond of it....
b] Jesus of the Essene. ---> Essene was (almost) a synonym for holy. So that does fit quite well to.

Considering what Jesus was but suggestions fit quite well. Also in most verses.

So with Galilee (TT) being a region and Nazareth a title/sect 2 problems with towns seem to be (possibly) solved.
1 Timothy 2:3-4  ...God our Savior;  Who will have all men to be saved...
John 12:47  And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
Romans 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous ...

Offline WhiteWings

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 13158
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahshua heals
    • My sites
Re: Nazareth did not exist in the time of Jesus
« Reply #7 on: December 20, 2010, 11:20:54 AM »
Quote from: WW
So with Galilee (TT) being a region and Nazareth a title/sect 2 problems with towns seem to be (possibly) solved.

The third town, Bethlem, possibly is no town either

http://www.jesuspolice.com/common_error.php?id=3
"Everyone thinks "Bethlehem" is a place, and indeed there were towns named "House of Bread" in Judea and in Galilee, but...the term Bethlehem-Ephrath/Ephratah is the name of a clan of Judah--children of Caleb through Hur, who was the firstborn of an extraordinary woman named Ephrathah..."(Tabor, 2006)

Bethlehem Ephrathah refers to the clan who are descendants from a man called Bethlehem, the son of Caleb's second wife Ephrathah referred to in 1 Chronicles - it does not refer to a town at all." (Humphreys, 2005, p. 257)
"In both Gospels the Bethlehem tradition is tenuous at best. It appears to have been created under the influence of the Book of Micah to meet apologetic needs." (Spong, 1992, 142-3)
WW--> "But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, the least of the clans of Judah, out of you will be born for me the one who is to rule over Israel" (Micah 5:2)
WW--> "I am sending you to Jesse of Bethlehem, for I have chosen myself a king among his sons."  (1 Samuel 16:1)
.....
In other words, there was no evidence that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, but his "history" was made to fit into the prophecies of the Old Testament. But these prophesies referred to a person, not a place. Bethlehem Ephrathah refers to the descendants of Bethlehem who was the son of Caleb's second wife Ephrathah (1 Chronicles). It isn't a reference to a place. This is the result of a mistaken translation, one of many made by Matthew, and later copied by Luke.
WW--> Assuming the Gospels were written in Greek

A careful reading of the Gospel of John shows that Jesus was not born in Bethlehem. During the Festival of Booths, as Jesus was recruiting new followers, the crowd questioned his credentials. One asked: "How does this man have such learning, when he has never been taught?" (7:15) and Jesus replied in an extended passage to the effect that what he was teaching came from God. But when others asked: "Surely the Messiah does not come from Galilee [3], does he? Has not the scripture said that the Messiah is descended from David and comes from Bethlehem, the village where David lived?" (7: 41-42). To this question, Jesus offered no reply. Given his penchant to reply to even the most oblique questions, his omission here was telling. Had he been born in Bethlehem, Jesus probably would have said something, but he doesn't [4].
[4] One author (Wilson, 1992) interprets this verse as follows: "…the Fourth Gospel very specifically states that Jesus was not born in Bethlehem." (p. 75)

Of course Jesus was born in Bethlehem. Just not the Bethlehem on Earth. Bethlehem translates to "House of Bread". The constellaton of Virgo is always depicted as carrying a chaff of wheat. What do you make with wheat? Bread of course! This is why Virgo is referred to as the "House of Bread" also. On December 25th The Sun rises in the constellation of Virgo. Hence born of a virgin in Bethlehem. The Bible was NEVER meant to be taken as literal truth, but rather allegory to greater knowlege.
WW==>Interesting. That alligns perfectly with the "Woman standing on the moon, clothed with the sun."


Short but very interesting article about Jesus being born in a regular house: http://www.ancientsandals.com/articles/01_jesus_birth.htm

« Last Edit: December 20, 2010, 11:29:22 AM by WhiteWings »
1 Timothy 2:3-4  ...God our Savior;  Who will have all men to be saved...
John 12:47  And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
Romans 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous ...

Offline shawn

  • Bronze
  • *
  • Posts: 1585
Re: Nazareth did not exist in the time of Jesus
« Reply #8 on: December 20, 2010, 06:57:25 PM »
According to this theory this verse would be tough to explain.

John 1:46

"Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?" Nathanael asked. "Come and see," said Philip

Offline shawn

  • Bronze
  • *
  • Posts: 1585
Re: Nazareth did not exist in the time of Jesus
« Reply #9 on: December 20, 2010, 07:21:36 PM »
A concerning quote from the link you have provided WW.

In summary, Jesus was probably born in Galilee (possibly in the village of Bethlehem in Galilee). The two Gospels that claim he was born in Bethlehem of Judea have an agenda of proving that Jesus fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies, and for that reason, they misshape the truth to place him there. Jesus himself never claimed to have been born in Bethlehem, even when he was being taunted to so declare. And there is no reason to believe that he was born there.

While that might seem like a nice theory, it brings up many problems.  Specifically, if parts of the Bible were written with "an agenda" then wouldn't that place the Holy Scriptures into the world of man made literature?


Offline WhiteWings

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 13158
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahshua heals
    • My sites
Re: Nazareth did not exist in the time of Jesus
« Reply #10 on: December 20, 2010, 07:42:16 PM »
According to this theory this verse would be tough to explain.

John 1:46

"Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?" Nathanael asked. "Come and see," said Philip
Problematic. I have no answer. Maybe later but right now I'm exploring the various bits of evidence.
Maybe both are true...? When reading the OT certain places quite often are named after a certain event.
Scholars just don't agree. And I have  astrong feeling many are pushing an agenda.
I reserve the right to change my opinion....  :winkgrin:
However there are claims Constantine deliberately changed things.
His Christianity not much more that his pagan believes with a thin layer of paint. Chistianity should support the Roman empire. So at various places titles etc are changed into names of towns. So the whole verse is possibly corrupted.

That said there are more problematic verse.
YLTMatt 2
6 And thou, Beth-Lehem, the land of Judah, thou art by no means the least among the leaders of Judah, for out of thee shall come one leading, who shall feed My people Israel.'
===> Judah should be Galilee

Or the verses Jesus went to a town that did not exist (because it was title)
Or the verse in which Jesus preaches in a synagoge in a none existing town. A Synagoge can't stand in title and I think they only stood in fairly large (=older) towns.
1 Timothy 2:3-4  ...God our Savior;  Who will have all men to be saved...
John 12:47  And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
Romans 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous ...

Offline shawn

  • Bronze
  • *
  • Posts: 1585
Re: Nazareth did not exist in the time of Jesus
« Reply #11 on: December 20, 2010, 07:45:46 PM »
So is your belief these verses were corrupted by the original authors?

Offline Molly

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 11315
Re: Nazareth did not exist in the time of Jesus
« Reply #12 on: December 20, 2010, 07:48:46 PM »
Quote from: ww
The Nasi had the role of the messiah at the sacred meal of the council of the Essene community. In Ezekiel, nasi means the coming Davidic prince, the messiah. The plural "nesiim" means clouds, enabling the Nasi to come in the nesiim, reminding us of Daniel, but logically it means "princes"—the saints and angels of the heavenly host.

Quote
Nazareth seems to be Nasi Ereth. Prince of the world/earth.  So, assuming the above is correct, all verses that read "Jesus of Nazareth" are wrong and should read like "Jesus Prince of the world"

That's beautiful, ww.   The stuff you come up with!

Nāśī' (נָשִׂיא) is a Hebrew title meaning prince, in Biblical Hebrew, Patriarch, (of the Sanhedrin) in Mishnaic Hebrew, or president, in Modern Hebrew.


 This ties into what we discussed in another thread--Jesus returning with clouds.

Quote
The plural "nesiim" means clouds, enabling the Nasi to come in the nesiim, reminding us of Daniel, but logically it means "princes"—the saints and angels of the heavenly host.
« Last Edit: December 20, 2010, 07:54:44 PM by Molly »

Offline WhiteWings

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 13158
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahshua heals
    • My sites
Re: Nazareth did not exist in the time of Jesus
« Reply #13 on: December 20, 2010, 07:49:22 PM »
While that might seem like a nice theory, it brings up many problems.  Specifically, if parts of the Bible were written with "an agenda" then wouldn't that place the Holy Scriptures into the world of man made literature?
You can also use other terms like:
- Divine literature changed by man to push an agenda. Political or doctrinal.
- Divine literature changed because of honest translation errors.
- Divine literature changed because honest mistakes were made during copying the various manustripts. Even Church father complained about that.
- Divine literature changed because of translation errors.
- Divine literature changed ........
1 Timothy 2:3-4  ...God our Savior;  Who will have all men to be saved...
John 12:47  And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
Romans 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous ...

Offline WhiteWings

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 13158
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahshua heals
    • My sites
Re: Nazareth did not exist in the time of Jesus
« Reply #14 on: December 20, 2010, 08:00:27 PM »
So is your belief these verses were corrupted by the original authors?
While it of course it possible to assume they are guilty of the points I mentioned in post #13 it would mean the HS inspiration is nonsense or useless.
By that I mean what is the use of HS inspiration if the writers just write down what they think is best.
And I think that path is way beyond the boundaries of allowed critism of translation errors like aion; because it simple means the whole NT is (potentially) mademade. So let not go that path or we will see a lot of <MOD NOTE :punish:>
But I think that it possible to explore much interesting things without even going near to that path :2c:
« Last Edit: December 20, 2010, 08:04:11 PM by WhiteWings »
1 Timothy 2:3-4  ...God our Savior;  Who will have all men to be saved...
John 12:47  And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
Romans 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous ...

Offline shawn

  • Bronze
  • *
  • Posts: 1585
Re: Nazareth did not exist in the time of Jesus
« Reply #15 on: December 20, 2010, 08:01:18 PM »
While that might seem like a nice theory, it brings up many problems.  Specifically, if parts of the Bible were written with "an agenda" then wouldn't that place the Holy Scriptures into the world of man made literature?
You can also use other terms like:
- Divine literature changed by man to push an agenda. Political or doctrinal.
- Divine literature changed because of honest translation errors.
- Divine literature changed because honest mistakes were made during copying the various manustripts. Even Church father complained about that.
- Divine literature changed because of translation errors.
- Divine literature changed ........

The only problem is some suggesting the original authors changed events.  Obviously, I do not accept this theory.  One note of caution to all who take journeys like this one.  History is "history" and I believe many things have been corrupted including secular history to fit agendas.  Trying to fit this all together 2000 years after the fact is quite the project filled with many pitfalls.  If one chooses to go down this road they might find that they have a choice to make man's word or God's word.

I'm glad we have believers willing to take on these challenges, but they are not for everyone. 

Offline shawn

  • Bronze
  • *
  • Posts: 1585
Re: Nazareth did not exist in the time of Jesus
« Reply #16 on: December 20, 2010, 08:04:31 PM »
So is your belief these verses were corrupted by the original authors?
While it of course it possible to assume they are guilty of the points I mentioned in post #13 it would mean the HS inspiration is nonsense or useless.
By that I mean what is the use of HS inspiration if the writers just write down what they think is best.
And I think that path is way beyond the boundaries of allowed critism of translation errors like aion; because it simple means the whole NT is (potentially) mademade. So let not go that path or we will see a lot of <MOD NOTE :punish:>
But I think that it possible to explore much interesting things without even coming near to that path :2c:

Oh I wasn't suggesting it.  I wanted to clarify your stance.  That's the problem with these journeys.  Tough questions will be asked.  They are a natural progression of thought.  It's why these journeys are not for weaker Christians.  When approaching some of these "problems" you had better be in a place of unshakeable faith.  Because, I assure you not everything will make sense.

For me, when I approach anything like this...I ask myself...will it further my walk or the walk of another.  If the answer is no...I move on.

Offline WhiteWings

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 13158
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahshua heals
    • My sites
Re: Nazareth did not exist in the time of Jesus
« Reply #17 on: December 20, 2010, 08:25:02 PM »
For me, when I approach anything like this...I ask myself...will it further my walk or the walk of another.  If the answer is no...I move on.
The problem (or whatever the correct expression is) is that often one can't know if it furthers the walk until after a while being on that path.
In my personal experience even unfruitful paths often show other interesing things too. For example this topic is something I found when searching for proof the originals were in Hebrew.
- Does it change salvation if one knows Nazareth is a town or title? WW:No
- Is worth studying? WW:Yes because all things must be approved by study but it can be argued other studies are more fruitful.

For me little bits of random "useless" knowledge have come in handy at unexpected places. Maybe that's what Molly means by this qoute:
This ties into what we discussed in another thread--Jesus returning with clouds.

For me personally it's simple. My experience is that every weird little study is fruitful. Just pick something at look at it closely.
For example tree. Trace it trough the Bible and you learn a lot of things. And often it's not about the subject itself but all the verses you have to examine with a microscope.
1 Timothy 2:3-4  ...God our Savior;  Who will have all men to be saved...
John 12:47  And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
Romans 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous ...

Offline shawn

  • Bronze
  • *
  • Posts: 1585
Re: Nazareth did not exist in the time of Jesus
« Reply #18 on: December 20, 2010, 08:36:45 PM »
For me, when I approach anything like this...I ask myself...will it further my walk or the walk of another.  If the answer is no...I move on.
The problem (or whatever the correct expression is) is that often one can't know if it furthers the walk until after a while being on that path.
In my personal experience even unfruitful paths often show other interesing things too. For example this topic is something I found when searching for proof the originals were in Hebrew.
- Does it change salvation if one knows Nazareth is a town or title? WW:No
- Is worth studying? WW:Yes because all things must be approved by study but it can be argued other studies are more fruitful.

For me little bits of random "useless" knowledge have come in handy at unexpected places. Maybe that's what Molly means by this qoute:
This ties into what we discussed in another thread--Jesus returning with clouds.

For me personally it's simple. My experience is that every weird little study is fruitful. Just pick something at look at it closely.
For example tree. Trace it trough the Bible and you learn a lot of things. And often it's not about the subject itself but all the verses you have to examine with a microscope.

Fair enough and I can understand your views.  I suppose that is why some of us were made as trumpets, and others as flutes.  Each serve their own purpose in the melody of God's creation. 

Offline WhiteWings

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 13158
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahshua heals
    • My sites
Re: Nazareth did not exist in the time of Jesus
« Reply #19 on: December 20, 2010, 08:40:58 PM »
That's the problem with these journeys.  Tough questions will be asked.  They are a natural progression of thought.  It's why these journeys are not for weaker Christians.  When approaching some of these "problems" you had better be in a place of unshakeable faith.  Because, I assure you not everything will make sense.
Often such studies lead to more  questions. Although irritating it doesn't really bother me.
In Dutch we have a saying that can be roughly translated as: Only the wise know they know little.

For the weak in faith it may be best to stay in the safety zone. But personally I can't understand how someone can learn without facing problems. Ok, I admit such studies may lead to very wrong paths. But at least the studier has the chance to go stronger.
And thinking back to a quote from a book author I wonder if Jesus asks to have faith as we define it.
It (possibly) meant something like: To know absolutely sure. And that different from assuming your pastor is right.
The Bereans didn't study because they wanted to get of the right path but to make very sure they were on the right path.
 :2c:
1 Timothy 2:3-4  ...God our Savior;  Who will have all men to be saved...
John 12:47  And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
Romans 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous ...

Quaesitor

  • Guest
Re: Nazareth did not exist in the time of Jesus
« Reply #20 on: December 20, 2010, 08:46:30 PM »
"Can anything good come from Nazareth?"

A title?

Offline shawn

  • Bronze
  • *
  • Posts: 1585
Re: Nazareth did not exist in the time of Jesus
« Reply #21 on: December 20, 2010, 08:53:05 PM »
That's the problem with these journeys.  Tough questions will be asked.  They are a natural progression of thought.  It's why these journeys are not for weaker Christians.  When approaching some of these "problems" you had better be in a place of unshakeable faith.  Because, I assure you not everything will make sense.
Often such studies lead to more  questions. Although irritating it doesn't really bother me.
In Dutch we have a saying that can be roughly translated as: Only the wise know they know little.

For the weak in faith it may be best to stay in the safety zone. But personally I can't understand how someone can learn without facing problems. Ok, I admit such studies may lead to very wrong paths. But at least the studier has the chance to go stronger.
And thinking back to a quote from a book author I wonder if Jesus asks to have faith as we define it.
It (possibly) meant something like: To know absolutely sure. And that different from assuming your pastor is right.
The Bereans didn't study because they wanted to get of the right path but to make very sure they were on the right path.
 :2c:

I would have to agree with that saying. "Only the wise know they know little".  Maybe that is the reason some of us take these paths.  I have taken these journeys.  I have walked these paths.  I'm not saying I have dug to the depths of some on these boards but the journey did bear fruit for me.  What did I learn?  That I know very little.  I am not a scholar of early church history, nor well versed in Greek and Hebrew.  Often, I must assume the words of a man who is learned in these subjects is telling me the truth.  Therefore, today I stick to the only teacher I trust and that is the Holy Spirit that resides within me.  He has given me what I need to know for today.  He will reveal what I need to know for tomorrow.  For me, that is what I learned from the journey.

Offline WhiteWings

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 13158
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahshua heals
    • My sites
Re: Nazareth did not exist in the time of Jesus
« Reply #22 on: December 20, 2010, 09:11:58 PM »
"Can anything good come from Nazareth?"

A title?
Nazareth was also a name given to the Essene. One of the 3 sects o that time (Pharisees, Saducees, Essene)
Many scholars believe Jesus (an John the Baptist) was thaught by the Essene or likely was one Himself.
Jesus is also likely/possibly "The evil priest" of the Dead Sea Scrolls.
The Pharisees had added lots of manmade stuff to the religion. The Saducees were not perfect either. The Essene possible had it all right. Not exactly because they were so extremely strickt even high priests were liberal people.....
They also believed their (Essene) religion was for Jews only. Jesus didn't agree as you know. So He broke up with them. According to them He was false/evil priest.
Anyway the Essene were a small sect (4000 spread over the whole region). Usually not very loved by non-Essene because of their extreme behavior.
Now to the answer:

"Can anything good come from Nazareth?"
Should/could read
"Can anything good come from (the) Essene?"
1 Timothy 2:3-4  ...God our Savior;  Who will have all men to be saved...
John 12:47  And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
Romans 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous ...

Offline WhiteWings

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 13158
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahshua heals
    • My sites
Re: Nazareth did not exist in the time of Jesus
« Reply #23 on: December 20, 2010, 09:23:04 PM »
I have walked these paths.  I'm not saying I have dug to the depths of some on these boards but the journey did bear fruit for me.  What did I learn?  That I know very little.  I am not a scholar of early church history, nor well versed in Greek and Hebrew.  Often, I must assume the words of a man who is learned in these subjects is telling me the truth.
That's so for everyone Shawn. Just pick up a random scholary work and it's filled with footnotes refering to works of other scholars.
Often it takes a scholar a decade or more to finish some research. So obviously it's simply impossible to cover every angle by own research. To make matters worse to get a complete picture you need: Archeologists, historians and linguists.
Not many, if any master all those area's.

Quote
Therefore, today I stick to the only teacher I trust and that is the Holy Spirit that resides within me.  He has given me what I need to know for today.  He will reveal what I need to know for tomorrow.  For me, that is what I learned from the journey.
Do what you feel is right. But I have to think of what Micah(?) once answered me in a thread "how did you discover UR" I answered I was just Googling lyricks of a song. Micha answered someting like: "HS can also use Google as a tool."
So how do you know one of the links or replies by others isn't the HS pushing you on a path?
(not that I know the answer to that question)
1 Timothy 2:3-4  ...God our Savior;  Who will have all men to be saved...
John 12:47  And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
Romans 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous ...

Offline Cardinal

  • < Moderator >
  • *
  • Posts: 8437
  • Gender: Female
Re: Nazareth did not exist in the time of Jesus
« Reply #24 on: December 21, 2010, 07:15:26 AM »
 :cloud9: Personally, I love digging, I love following His "rabbit trails". Always find something I didn't know before. It's truly inexhaustable riches, no matter what direction you go in.
"I would rather train twenty men to pray, than a thousand to preach; A minister's highest mission ought to be to teach his people to pray." -H. MacGregor