2007-10-27 22:37:43 · 6 answers · asked by Y!A-FOOL 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
The evidence as to whether Nazareth existed as a settlement at all at the relevant time is being argued over, (what else would you expect?)
I include sites leaning both ways.
Allowance should be made for the leaning.
As well as for one's own bias, to the degree that is possible (and known!)
2007-10-27 22:56:11 · answer #1 · answered by Pedestal 42 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Nazareth was located at the top of a hill opposite the famous city of Sepphoris. There could very well have been cliffs there.
Despite what Theo said, Nazareth actually did exist, though it was not a large city. Herod Antipas rebuilt the city of Sepphoris during what would have been Jesus' childhood, and since Joseph was a carpenter, he would have had plenty of work.
(You have to be careful of non-believers who hate the Bible, Christians, or both. They often make up facts to support their hate. They always get pissed off when someone like me comes along who knows what they're talking about and makes them look foolish.)
2007-10-27 22:49:39 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
the fact that the city of nazareth didn't exist at the time jesus was supposed to have been around is a pretty good clue to the fact that the gosple was somewhat edited at a much later date. the 'luke' who wrote the gospels may not have lied, but somebody did put words into his mouth.
2007-10-27 22:42:44 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
The use of cliff caves for storage and housing at that time is well documented. However modern development has bulldozed many of these sites.
2007-10-27 22:42:06 · answer #4 · answered by ANDREW C 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
That is actually true. People didn;t make things up in the Bible just to fill the pages.
2007-10-27 22:40:39 · answer #5 · answered by paula r 7 · 0⤊ 4⤋
It's ALL made up.
2007-10-27 22:42:54 · answer #6 · answered by katie_london 3 · 0⤊ 5⤋