MrMacSon wrote: ↑Fri Aug 24, 2018 11:02 pm
Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Fri Aug 24, 2018 9:57 pm
Okay, but how does that apply to Nazareth? The Caesarea Maritima inscription has a
tsade, not a
zayin.
The Caesarea Maritima inscriptions are on initially two, now three, fragments and are part of a synagogue inscription that listed the twenty-four priestly courses and their Galilean settlements (after the fall of Jerusalem [A.D. 70], or, more probably, after the fall of Beth-Ther [A.D. 135]).
Apparently one gives the a name in Hebrew as "נצרת" (n-ṣ-r-t) - I have no skills at interpreting the significance of that.
It is simply that the place name Nazareth here is spelled with a
tsade (like the Hebrew word for Branch), not with a
zayin (like the Hebrew word for Nazirite, and like what the Greek transliteration for Nazara/Nazareth would suggest). One of the arguments against Nazareth really being the name behind the term Nazarene is that Nazarene is spelled with a Greek
zeta, suggesting a Hebrew
zayin behind it, not a
tsade, which is what we find in the inscription. It is this mismatch between the
tsade and the
zeta that suggests that Nazareth is not what lies behind the sect of the Nazarenes in the first place.
To call up a flexibility between the
zayin and the
tsade in between voiced consonants is fine and dandy, but it is a bit like pointing out that a vowel in English is usually long when followed by a single consonant and an e (plāne, mēre, tīme, rо̄pe, jūke) in a discussion about the word "give" (in which the vowel is short: gĭve). The effect, to me, is: sure, "give"
could be pronounced to rhyme with "alive," but
is it?
And you yourself say
Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Fri Aug 24, 2018 5:38 am
One clue that Nazareth was not the original namesake of the Nazarenes is that the Caesarea Maritima inscription spells the village's Hebrew name with a
tsade (נצרת), which would usually produce a
sigma in Greek, not a
zeta (which generally corresponds to
zayin).
though you do qualify that with
the match was not perfect; it was just "close enough" to explain the term "Nazarene."
That is not a qualification. That is support.
and
[while]This observation speaks against both the traditional position (Nazareth > Nazara > Nazarene), [it also speaks against] the extreme position that somebody made up the name of the village precisely in order to create a hometown for Jesus, since in both of these scenarios the Greek zeta should have been retrofitted with a zayin, not with a tsade.
And that is a conclusion.
This is a qualification:
and acknowledge -
Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Fri Aug 24, 2018 5:38 am
It is not a 100% solid argument, since rare exceptions exist, but it is something to consider.
Yes, you and the traditional interpreters may be right: Nazareth may be an exception to the rule that Greek
zeta follows Hebrew
zayin, not Hebrew
tsade. I absolutely accept that possibility. But I am glad I am the one arguing for the rule here and not for the exception.