Why was Jesus rejected in his hometown?

[Ben C. Smith]

It's a single word, and scribes seemed to have problems with "Nazarene" or "Nazaraios". .

Do you deny it has the possibility for dual usage ?

Is that question supposed to mean anything? The evidence in gMark points against "Nazarene" referring to a place, because of the way the word is used.

Can you expand on this ("because of the way the word is used")?

As for the topic question, it doesn't matter one bit, as gMark doesn't identify what town is referred to in 6.1. It's obviously a larger town, as it's contrasted with villages.

Interestingly, the parallel passages in John 6 are placed in Capernaum.

[Kunigunde Kreuzerin]

So, if the usual concept is that having faith leads to being healed, why the contrast between the "many" who know that Jesus can work wonders in Mark 6.2 and the "few" who are actually healed in 6.5? Mark is still leaving something out here, I think.

This is understandable and I can not answer conclusively the question.

But let's have a look how Matthew react to Mark.

I think that it is highly likely that Mark has created a triple and not just a sandwich

belief of the bleeding woman – belief of Jairus – unbelief in the hometown

and that the hometown story should be read in relation to the two preceding stories. I think the opening phrase of Mark 6:1 is an indication for this:

He went away from there

Matthew changed everything and placed the parables before the hometown story. His version has a completely new background. But he also wished obviously that the story should be read in relation to the preceding parables. He understood Mark's opening phrase in Mark 6:1 and did exactly the same.

13:53 And when Jesus had finished these parables, he went away from there, 54 and coming to his hometown

But Matthew's significant change of the story is that he repeated one phrase

Mark	Matthew
6:1 He went away from there and came to his hometown, and his disciples followed him. 2 And on the Sabbath he began to teach in the synagogue, and many who heard him were astonished, saying, “Where did this man get these things? What is the wisdom given to him? How are such mighty works done by his hands?	13:53 And when Jesus had finished these parables (among others the parable of the sower!), he went away from there, 54 and coming to his hometown he taught them in their synagogue, so that they were astonished, and said, “Where did this man get this wisdom and these mighty works?
3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon? And are not his sisters here with us?”	55 Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not his mother called Mary? And are not his brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? 56 And are not all his sisters with us?
X	56 Where then did this man get all these things?

And now a simple question: Why not trust Matthew? We may not understand everything. But we can see that Matthew worked carefully. When he thought that this repetition is sufficient why should we not trust him.

[outhouse]

Is that question supposed to mean anything? .

I asked a very straight forward question, it means by me asking, if you are open to the possibility that it could mean location instead of a specific religious sect.

Also a person who knew what he was debating would have also asked if there are actually more then two meanings

the evidence in gMark points against "Nazarene" referring to a place

What evidence is that?


The use of Capernaum? the multiple uses of Galilee ?????

It's obviously a larger town, as it's contrasted with villages.

Obviously you have no evidence.

But if there was it would simply be rhetorical in nature knowing the authors had never been there or even witnessed such a place first hand.

,

[outhouse]

But Matthew's significant change of the story is that he repeated one phrase

No, but do you know why he made the change is the question. You did not mention it.


Matthew is taking the embarrassing word tekton in its usage in Mark, and he is downplaying the fact as it looks to be embarrassing to that author/s

He is making Joseph the tekton and removing the previous title of Jesus being a tekton that he used as a source.

[Ulan]

Is that question supposed to mean anything? The evidence in gMark points against "Nazarene" referring to a place, because of the way the word is used.

Can you expand on this ("because of the way the word is used")?

The most peculiar use is here (1:24): "Saying, Let us alone; what have we to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth? art thou come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God."
Nazarenos is used like a word of power here. A small village that nobody knows around that time does not exactly qualify as a word of power.

As for the topic question, it doesn't matter one bit, as gMark doesn't identify what town is referred to in 6.1. It's obviously a larger town, as it's contrasted with villages.

Interestingly, the parallel passages in John 6 are placed in Capernaum.

Chapter 3 of gMark also identifies Capernaum as Jesus hometown.

[Kunigunde Kreuzerin]

But Matthew's significant change of the story is that he repeated one phrase

No, but do you know why he made the change is the question. You did not mention it.
Matthew is taking the embarrassing word tekton in its usage in Mark, and he is downplaying the fact as it looks to be embarrassing to that author/s
He is making Joseph the tekton and removing the previous title of Jesus being a tekton that he used as a source.

Yes, but all that has nothing to do with the "why" of the rejection.

[outhouse]

Nazarenos is used like a word of power here.

.

I see no evidence beyond a descriptive nature.

Power would be the word "Jesus" if one understand how they rhetorical built authority

[Secret Alias]

Note further that he is going to his hometown, literally his "father's town" (πατρίδα). gMark doesn't know of Joseph or any other father than God.

It is difficult to square Nazareth being his 'own country' when all the gospels are taken together. It was at best a place that Jesus visited when he was young. If - as I have suggested - the Marcionite gospel paralleled John chapter 2's identification of the temple as 'his Father's house' there are several ideas worth considering to edify Jerusalem in someway as the true πατρίδα of Jesus. The statement in Galatians (which may or may not have been specifically Marcionite but a variant anyway - viz. "but the Jerusalem above is free, which is our mother" - as well as the statement in Hebrews where Paul refers to the future “homeland” (πατρίδα, 11:14) and to the city to come (11:16; 13:14), which is also described as “the heavenly Jerusalem” (12:22).

[Secret Alias]

"Saying, Let us alone; what have we to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth? art thou come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God."

The gospel of Marcion - Adv Marc 4.7 "What have we to do with thee, Jesus? Thou art come to destroy us. I know who thou art, the Holy One of God"

[Ulan]

I asked a very straight forward question, it means by me asking, if you are open to the possibility that it could mean location instead of a specific religious sect.

Also a person who knew what he was debating would have also asked if there are actually more then two meanings

The most common meaning given by scholars is "netser", the sprout. Nazirite is also a possibility.

It's obviously a larger town, as it's contrasted with villages.

Obviously you have no evidence.

But if there was it would simply be rhetorical in nature knowing the authors had never been there or even witnessed such a place first hand.

The text itself says it. There's your evidence. The point that you throw out evidence that doesn't suit your personal leanings all the time doesn't change anything about that.