Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

So many assumptions stated as if facts.

"....original...period....quite obvious...originally...because...."
Those parts are evidence-less.

Do I know whether child rgprice had, say, the chicken pox or not...no?, then [insert non-sequitur]

rgprice, above, in part: "....The original claim was simple: Jesus descended from heaven, period. ....But really it is quite obvious that Jesus himself originally descended from heaven, because there is no account of Jesus before his appearance to John...." Those are dogmatic, evidence-fre...

fwiw, I travelled to Israel seven times and dug at Sepphoris in four summer seasons. Nazareth is near Sepphoris. The late James Francis Strange--a very experienced and excellent archaeologist--also dug at Sepphoris; his crew was housed in Nazareth. JFS wrote on Nazareth, including in Anchor Bible Di...

I agree with Ken, and also note that RevBib is not the best abbreviation in this case as it more often suggests, at least to me, a different journal, Revue Biblique.

CW, these are separate locations of the 24 mishmarot, but their relevance here is not clear.

MrMacSon, above, in part: "ne.tser (etc., a branch; a descendant) —> nazir —> Nazarite —> Nazarene/.(etc.) —> Natzeret" and that post's first link includes: "netser is transliterated to Nazir" That is false. Those are two different words, and "transliterated" means repr...

rgprice, above, in part:
"....The opening of Mark tells us what "he saw". If "he" in this case is Jesus, then this is the only place in all of the Gospels that we are told what Jesus himself experienced and witnessed...."

Not true.

I recommend the Anchor Bible Dictionary article on Nazareth.

rgprice, above, in part: "....I guess overall I think part of the problem has been working from the assumption that the Gospels we have are the earliest or main forms of the narrative, but this doesn't appear to be the case...." Though some have assumed such, many have not. Not news. See, ...