Announcement

Collapse

Archeology 201 Guidelines

If Indiana Jones happened to be a member of Tweb, this is where he'd hang out.

Welcome to the Archeology forum. Were you out doing some gardening and dug up a relic from the distant past? would you like to know more about Ancient Egypt? Did you think Memphis was actually a city in Tennessee?

Well, for the answers to those and other burning questions you've found the right digs.

Our forum rules apply here too, if you haven't read them now is the time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Jesus' childhood home discovered?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Jesus' childhood home discovered?

    Interesting but not overly compelling.

    Source: Archaeologist ‘discovers childhood home of Jesus’ in Nazareth


    A prominent British archaeologist has put forward a compelling case arguing that a well-preserved ancient house in Nazareth was the childhood home of Jesus.

    The building dates back to the first century and the site is now home to the Sisters of Nazareth Convent. In modern times, it was first identified as the house where Jesus grew up with Joseph and Mary in the 19th century, but the theory was dismissed in the 1930s and has been rejected ever since.

    However, after 14 years of fieldwork and research on the site, Ken Dark, a professor of archaeology and history at Reading University in the UK, has found that the convent stands on a dwelling that ancient Nazarene believed was Jesus’ first home.

    Significant chunks of the building survive, including a rock-cut staircase. In its first-century heyday, it probably included a number of living and storage rooms around a courtyard, and a roof terrace.

    Professor Dark discovered that people in the area believed that the building was Jesus’ house from at least the 380s. His analysis also confirmed the building’s status as a first-century dwelling. No such case can be made for any other sites in the city.

    The archaeologist’s investigation of the two-story house revealed excellent craftsmanship and an understanding of rock that would be consistent with it having been built and owned by a tekton – the description of Joseph’s profession in the Greek gospels, which means that he was not only a carpenter, but also a stonemason or builder.

    His fieldwork also indicates that a cave church decorated with mosaics was built next to the house’s remains in the fourth century. In the fifth century a church was built over both the house and the cave church and it was the largest church in Nazareth at the time.

    This church was elaborately decorated with marble and mosaics and it exactly matched a seventh-century description of the large Byzantine church that was said to have stood on the site of Jesus’ home and was an important pilgrimage destination.

    In his book, ‘The Sisters of Nazareth Convent: A Roman-Period, Byzantine and Crusader Site in Central Nazareth’, Professor Dark probed the likelihood of memory of a building’s history being transmitted from the first century to the fourth century, when the first church was built at the site. “My conclusion is that, from anthropological evidence and studies of oral tradition, there’s absolutely no reason why they couldn’t have known,” he said.


    Source

    © Copyright Original Source




    I'm always still in trouble again

    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

  • #2
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    Interesting but not overly compelling.

    Source: Archaeologist ‘discovers childhood home of Jesus’ in Nazareth


    A prominent British archaeologist has put forward a compelling case arguing that a well-preserved ancient house in Nazareth was the childhood home of Jesus.

    The building dates back to the first century and the site is now home to the Sisters of Nazareth Convent. In modern times, it was first identified as the house where Jesus grew up with Joseph and Mary in the 19th century, but the theory was dismissed in the 1930s and has been rejected ever since.

    However, after 14 years of fieldwork and research on the site, Ken Dark, a professor of archaeology and history at Reading University in the UK, has found that the convent stands on a dwelling that ancient Nazarene believed was Jesus’ first home.

    Significant chunks of the building survive, including a rock-cut staircase. In its first-century heyday, it probably included a number of living and storage rooms around a courtyard, and a roof terrace.

    Professor Dark discovered that people in the area believed that the building was Jesus’ house from at least the 380s. His analysis also confirmed the building’s status as a first-century dwelling. No such case can be made for any other sites in the city.

    The archaeologist’s investigation of the two-story house revealed excellent craftsmanship and an understanding of rock that would be consistent with it having been built and owned by a tekton – the description of Joseph’s profession in the Greek gospels, which means that he was not only a carpenter, but also a stonemason or builder.

    His fieldwork also indicates that a cave church decorated with mosaics was built next to the house’s remains in the fourth century. In the fifth century a church was built over both the house and the cave church and it was the largest church in Nazareth at the time.

    This church was elaborately decorated with marble and mosaics and it exactly matched a seventh-century description of the large Byzantine church that was said to have stood on the site of Jesus’ home and was an important pilgrimage destination.

    In his book, ‘The Sisters of Nazareth Convent: A Roman-Period, Byzantine and Crusader Site in Central Nazareth’, Professor Dark probed the likelihood of memory of a building’s history being transmitted from the first century to the fourth century, when the first church was built at the site. “My conclusion is that, from anthropological evidence and studies of oral tradition, there’s absolutely no reason why they couldn’t have known,” he said.


    Source

    © Copyright Original Source


    It doesn't look like the "prominent British archaeologist" is a screwball or nutjob: Ken Dark

    But I still think that he'll need to provide a good deal more evidence before his case becomes compelling.

    I'm always still in trouble again

    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

    Comment


    • #3
      It's interesting, but has the potential to become a "holy relics," Shroud of Turin kind of thing. I have really mixed views on those.
      Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

      Beige Nationalist.

      "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

      Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

      Comment


      • #4
        Neat! Some interesting evidence, indeed...

        Blessings,
        Lee
        "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
          Interesting but not overly compelling.

          Source: Archaeologist ‘discovers childhood home of Jesus’ in Nazareth


          A prominent British archaeologist has put forward a compelling case arguing that a well-preserved ancient house in Nazareth was the childhood home of Jesus.

          The building dates back to the first century and the site is now home to the Sisters of Nazareth Convent. In modern times, it was first identified as the house where Jesus grew up with Joseph and Mary in the 19th century, but the theory was dismissed in the 1930s and has been rejected ever since.

          However, after 14 years of fieldwork and research on the site, Ken Dark, a professor of archaeology and history at Reading University in the UK, has found that the convent stands on a dwelling that ancient Nazarene believed was Jesus’ first home.

          Significant chunks of the building survive, including a rock-cut staircase. In its first-century heyday, it probably included a number of living and storage rooms around a courtyard, and a roof terrace.

          Professor Dark discovered that people in the area believed that the building was Jesus’ house from at least the 380s. His analysis also confirmed the building’s status as a first-century dwelling. No such case can be made for any other sites in the city.

          The archaeologist’s investigation of the two-story house revealed excellent craftsmanship and an understanding of rock that would be consistent with it having been built and owned by a tekton – the description of Joseph’s profession in the Greek gospels, which means that he was not only a carpenter, but also a stonemason or builder.

          His fieldwork also indicates that a cave church decorated with mosaics was built next to the house’s remains in the fourth century. In the fifth century a church was built over both the house and the cave church and it was the largest church in Nazareth at the time.

          This church was elaborately decorated with marble and mosaics and it exactly matched a seventh-century description of the large Byzantine church that was said to have stood on the site of Jesus’ home and was an important pilgrimage destination.

          In his book, ‘The Sisters of Nazareth Convent: A Roman-Period, Byzantine and Crusader Site in Central Nazareth’, Professor Dark probed the likelihood of memory of a building’s history being transmitted from the first century to the fourth century, when the first church was built at the site. “My conclusion is that, from anthropological evidence and studies of oral tradition, there’s absolutely no reason why they couldn’t have known,” he said.


          Source

          © Copyright Original Source


          A little too convenient I suspect. The well built and attested first century dwelling has a tradition of being the home of Jesus [to wit the much later 4th century church] but that is as far as Dr Dark can really take his theory. Everything else he is proffering is pure speculation. It is like the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem which is allegedly supposed to be the site of the crucifixion and burial, based again on much later [4th century allegations]. A veritable industry developed from the fourth century producing relics of Jesus, the Holy Family and various saints.

          Of course the other possibility is that Dark was having a laugh, given the season that is fast approaching.
          "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful" Attrib. Seneca 4 BCE - 65 CE

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

            A little too convenient I suspect. The well built and attested first century dwelling has a tradition of being the home of Jesus [to wit the much later 4th century church] but that is as far as Dr Dark can really take his theory. Everything else he is proffering is pure speculation. It is like the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem which is allegedly supposed to be the site of the crucifixion and burial, based again on much later [4th century allegations]. A veritable industry developed from the fourth century producing relics of Jesus, the Holy Family and various saints.

            Of course the other possibility is that Dark was having a laugh, given the season that is fast approaching.
            It appears that if anything Dark may have let his enthusiasm get away from him rather than he was having a lark.

            I'm always still in trouble again

            "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
            "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

            Comment


            • #7
              Unless somebody were to come across a title deed for the property with Joseph's name on it, I see absolutely no reason to believe it. It's like the Galilee fishing boat that people claim was the one Jesus taught in. And how many empty tombs have people claimed were the one Jesus was buried in?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                It appears that if anything Dark may have let his enthusiasm get away from him rather than he was having a lark.
                My last remark was jocular - hence the smile emoticon. However, it would be necessary to consult any papers he has recently published on this topic in order to read his theories and conclusions in more detail.
                "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful" Attrib. Seneca 4 BCE - 65 CE

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Faber View Post
                  Unless somebody were to come across a title deed for the property with Joseph's name on it, I see absolutely no reason to believe it. It's like the Galilee fishing boat that people claim was the one Jesus taught in. And how many empty tombs have people claimed were the one Jesus was buried in?
                  And do not forget the various pieces of the "true cross".

                  "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful" Attrib. Seneca 4 BCE - 65 CE

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    For anyone who is interested I recommend Charles Freeman's Holy Bones, Holy Dust: How Relics Shaped the History of Medieval Europe; and Joe Nickell's The Jesus Relics: From the Holy Grail to the Turin Shroud.
                    "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful" Attrib. Seneca 4 BCE - 65 CE

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Another piece on Dark's claim of having located Jesus' childhood home -- in Popular Mechanics of all places, which allows you to vote on it. Currently it is 51% for "Sure why not? He was a real guy, after all" and 49% "I doubt it."

                      Source: Archaeologists Believe They've Unearthed Jesus's Childhood Home


                      The evidence lies beneath a convent in Nazareth.


                      Archaeologists have unearthed evidence at a place believed to be the historical Jesus of Nazareth’s birthplace.

                      Researcher Ken Dark, a professor at the University of Reading, has a new book about more than a century of archaeological digs at the Nazareth Convent site in the north of modern-day Israel.

                      The Sisters of Nazareth Convent goes through the entire history of the Nazareth archaeological site—including the modern side where archaeologists explore it piece by piece, as well as the ancient history they’re trying to recreate with their evidence and artifacts.

                      Standards for archaeology have changed a great deal in the last 100 years, as have standards for how to treat any removable items archaeologists find at sites.

                      Dark is an archaeologist with a 30-year career, and he’s worked on digs at the Nazareth site since at least 2004. The big breakthrough he describes in his new book is discovering evidence of a stone house that most likely belonged to Jesus’s family. (The odds are fairly good.)

                      In terms of the archaeology, this includes evidence of human effort to shape stone into blocks for building. And at the much-studied Nazareth Convent, this evidence joins previously discovered layers of churches and other structures built later.

                      Marks made by different eras of builders can help scientists separate which fragments and discoveries belong to which approximate century. This is how, after a century of different projects, Dark and his colleagues were able to identify a structure they can pinpoint to around Jesus’s lifetime. The surroundings include cultural evidence, too, like stone burial methods that researchers know came from contemporary Rome.

                      Modern-day Nazareth is both a site of high Christian pilgrimage traffic and, interestingly, one of the most Muslim cities in Israel. In fact, Arab Israelis are the majority in the Northern District of Israel, where Nazareth is located. In Jesus’s time, Nazareth was part of the region called Galilee. The very fact that Jesus is thought to be from there has meant that, in the centuries since, the area has been trampled and fought over—something that can only make archaeology even more difficult.

                      The debate rages on over whether Jesus was the miracle-doing savior in the origin story of Christianity. But the historical reality, from dozens or even hundreds of pieces of corroborating evidence from all walks of life at the time, is that he was, at the very least, a real guy. That means finding things like the place where he might have been born, with all the trappings of daily life at the very turn from BCE to CE.

                      While Nazareth was near the center of human development at the time, places farther from the traditional human origin in the Fertile Crescent were still using a previous epoch of technology. What we find in each location can help to document how people lived and even how technology moved around the world.

                      This is one reason the archaeological record is so important—and why there are still insights to be found beneath the Nazareth Convent after more than a century of excavation.


                      Source

                      © Copyright Original Source




                      So it appears that Dark has written a book about it.

                      I'm always still in trouble again

                      "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                        Another piece on Dark's claim of having located Jesus' childhood home -- in Popular Mechanics of all places, which allows you to vote on it. Currently it is 51% for "Sure why not? He was a real guy, after all" and 49% "I doubt it."

                        Source: Archaeologists Believe They've Unearthed Jesus's Childhood Home


                        The evidence lies beneath a convent in Nazareth.


                        Archaeologists have unearthed evidence at a place believed to be the historical Jesus of Nazareth’s birthplace.

                        Researcher Ken Dark, a professor at the University of Reading, has a new book about more than a century of archaeological digs at the Nazareth Convent site in the north of modern-day Israel.

                        The Sisters of Nazareth Convent goes through the entire history of the Nazareth archaeological site—including the modern side where archaeologists explore it piece by piece, as well as the ancient history they’re trying to recreate with their evidence and artifacts.

                        Standards for archaeology have changed a great deal in the last 100 years, as have standards for how to treat any removable items archaeologists find at sites.

                        Dark is an archaeologist with a 30-year career, and he’s worked on digs at the Nazareth site since at least 2004. The big breakthrough he describes in his new book is discovering evidence of a stone house that most likely belonged to Jesus’s family. (The odds are fairly good.)

                        In terms of the archaeology, this includes evidence of human effort to shape stone into blocks for building. And at the much-studied Nazareth Convent, this evidence joins previously discovered layers of churches and other structures built later.

                        Marks made by different eras of builders can help scientists separate which fragments and discoveries belong to which approximate century. This is how, after a century of different projects, Dark and his colleagues were able to identify a structure they can pinpoint to around Jesus’s lifetime. The surroundings include cultural evidence, too, like stone burial methods that researchers know came from contemporary Rome.

                        Modern-day Nazareth is both a site of high Christian pilgrimage traffic and, interestingly, one of the most Muslim cities in Israel. In fact, Arab Israelis are the majority in the Northern District of Israel, where Nazareth is located. In Jesus’s time, Nazareth was part of the region called Galilee. The very fact that Jesus is thought to be from there has meant that, in the centuries since, the area has been trampled and fought over—something that can only make archaeology even more difficult.

                        The debate rages on over whether Jesus was the miracle-doing savior in the origin story of Christianity. But the historical reality, from dozens or even hundreds of pieces of corroborating evidence from all walks of life at the time, is that he was, at the very least, a real guy. That means finding things like the place where he might have been born, with all the trappings of daily life at the very turn from BCE to CE.

                        While Nazareth was near the center of human development at the time, places farther from the traditional human origin in the Fertile Crescent were still using a previous epoch of technology. What we find in each location can help to document how people lived and even how technology moved around the world.

                        This is one reason the archaeological record is so important—and why there are still insights to be found beneath the Nazareth Convent after more than a century of excavation.


                        Source

                        © Copyright Original Source




                        So it appears that Dark has written a book about it.
                        An odd site to feature an article on archaeology, although, as its name suggests it offers popular information on various serious topics. Its comments on this topic are very "populist", to wit, "The big breakthrough he describes in his new book is discovering evidence of a stone house that most likely belonged to Jesus’s family. (The odds are fairly good.)" . What "odds" might these be and why does Ms Delbert think they are "fairly good"? She does not inform us

                        Furthermore we do not have a shred of contemporary evidence [i.e. anything that predates Josephus' comments at the end of the first century CE ] for Jesus of Nazareth despite the article's later contention that "But the historical reality, from dozens or even hundreds of pieces of corroborating evidence from all walks of life at the time, is that he was, at the very least, a real guy". What is this "corroborating evidence" and what specific "walks of life " does it come from?What does Ms Delbert actually mean by "at the time" ? Again, she does not inform us.


                        As for Dark's latest book, the hard copy of which is retailing at three figures, a not uncommon price range for for such scholarly tomes. It is hardly surprising that a serious academic has decided to publish after so many years of work.
                        "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful" Attrib. Seneca 4 BCE - 65 CE

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

                          An odd site to feature an article on archaeology, although, as its name suggests it offers popular information on various serious topics. Its comments on this topic are very "populist", to wit, "The big breakthrough he describes in his new book is discovering evidence of a stone house that most likely belonged to Jesus’s family. (The odds are fairly good.)" . What "odds" might these be and why does Ms Delbert think they are "fairly good"? She does not inform us

                          Furthermore we do not have a shred of contemporary evidence [i.e. anything that predates Josephus' comments at the end of the first century CE ] for Jesus of Nazareth despite the article's later contention that "But the historical reality, from dozens or even hundreds of pieces of corroborating evidence from all walks of life at the time, is that he was, at the very least, a real guy". What is this "corroborating evidence" and what specific "walks of life " does it come from?What does Ms Delbert actually mean by "at the time" ? Again, she does not inform us.


                          As for Dark's latest book, the hard copy of which is retailing at three figures, a not uncommon price range for for such scholarly tomes. It is hardly surprising that a serious academic has decided to publish after so many years of work.
                          Are you saying that you are a Jesus Myther?

                          I'm always still in trouble again

                          "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                            Are you saying that you are a Jesus Myther?
                            No, but what I stated is fact.

                            Given the prevailing situation within the region and the Messianic sects we know arose from the late first century BCE, I consider it very likely that a man, or possibly various men, upon whom the different characters of Jesus we are presented with in the Synoptic gospels, existed. How realistically those gospel characters reflect any real man/men is, of course, another matter.

                            However, I also recognise the fact that we lack any contemporary extraneous evidence for a figure we now know as Jesus of Nazareth.

                            Therefore, while I strongly lean to the view that a real man [or men] lie behind the gospel accounts, I have to accept the possibility that no such individual ever actually existed.
                            "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful" Attrib. Seneca 4 BCE - 65 CE

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

                              No, but what I stated is fact.

                              Given the prevailing situation within the region and the Messianic sects we know arose from the late first century BCE, I consider it very likely that a man, or possibly various men, upon whom the different characters of Jesus we are presented with in the Synoptic gospels, existed. How realistically those gospel characters reflect any real man/men is, of course, another matter.

                              However, I also recognise the fact that we lack any contemporary extraneous evidence for a figure we now know as Jesus of Nazareth.

                              Therefore, while I strongly lean to the view that a real man [or men] lie behind the gospel accounts, I have to accept the possibility that no such individual ever actually existed.
                              So you're trying to have it both ways.

                              I'm always still in trouble again

                              "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                              "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by rogue06, 12-21-2020, 04:25 PM
                              218 responses
                              1,133 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post Cow Poke  
                              Working...
                              X