I thought there was no place called "Nazareth" in Jesus' time. I don't think "Nazareth" was a community until hundreds of years later. I always thought that "Jesus of Nazareth" was sort of a mis-translation of "Jesus the Nazarene" which meant something like "Jesus the Peaceful" or something like that?

Mike

I have a friend who tells me Jesus was a time traveler.

Another who says he was a space alien.

Some say "Superman".

Who knows...

From Wiki:

Archaeological digs conducted in Nazareth and surrounding areas have confirmed human habitation from roughly 8000 years ago in what is known as the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B era.

Most notable of these are the discovery not 2 miles from the center of present-day Nazareth of the remains of some 65 individuals, buried under huge horizontal headstone structures, some of which were made with up of some 3 tons of locally-produced white plaster. Decorated human skulls have led archaeologists to believe that Nazareth was a major pre-Christian cult center. [4]



The word nazur, meaning separate in Aramaic. The word is related to Nazir. There are a number of references to Nazirites in the Old Testament and New Testament. A Nazirite (ðÀæÄéø) was a Jew who had taken special vows of dedication to the Lord whereby he abstained for a specified period of time from using alcohol and grape products, cutting his hair, and approaching corpses. At the end of the period he was required to immerse himself in water. Thus the baptism of Jesus by his relative John the Baptist could have been one "to fulfill all righteousness" at the end of a nazirite vow

I had been considering opening a "Shoppe de Frommage" in northern Israel.

How's "Cheeses of Nazareth" grab you?

Thanks for the nose coffee :p

Well Scott, I don't think your Wiki info is very compelling, but will resist the urge to beat this horse any longer.

Mike

Jesus Is Magic

Extremely funny movie, IMO.

I find this whole Thread to offensive.

Thats very amusing, Isa !

Although personally I am not convinced Jesus was at all.

Since we are on the subject of Jesus.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2566269671806009973&q=Jesus+I+will+survive

Someone should study their history a little better. Whether he was a diety or not is up to everyone to decide on their own, however you'd have to discard massive amounts of historical documents to make an argument that Jesus never existed.

Then again, there are those that don't believe dinosaurs ever existed, so there is no shortage of people willing to ignore the facts.

I think even Jesus himself would either laugh or cry at the insanity that occurs in his name today. . .

I seriously doubt he ever intended to found a religion - more like set an example of a way to live. And yes, there's a difference. Institutionalized religion exists for its own (normally secular) motives and for control. Personal spirituality is more of what Jesus was getting at - at least that's the way I read it.

+1

How come all the names in the bible sound like White guy names. John, Mark, Matthew, Tom, Pete.

Most peopel I know from the middle east have names like Kumar, Akbar, Sing, Naga..Nager...Not gonna work here anymore.(oops getten of topic).?

Re: Re: Jesus was
 

I think this is kinda like the chicken and the egg argument...

that's what happens when white guys are the editors ;)

Because King James was a white guy.

Your average Aglican didn't want to hear about the story of some guy called Yeshua, or the Gospel according to Ayad Futayyih Khalifa Al-Rama-lama-ding-dong. The bible had to be written to relate to your average 17th century wanker.


'E sez e's come t'eal th' blind, 'e does.
Wot...dis bloke in sandles?
Aie.. dats 'im, govna.

how can people who know very little about Jesus or the bible make statements as if they were subject matter experts?

I did not claim Jesus never existed. I humbly stated that I am personally not convinced he did. The comparison with dinosaurs is not fair. Any attempt to 'prove' his existence is point less anyway. If a person beliefs thats good enough. If a person does not - well thats fine too.

Besides the whole thread theme from the start was on the joking side - no need scrutinizing possible evidence pro or con.