A Critique of Ken Dark’s Nazareth Archaeology — Pt. 7

General Overview and Series Landing Page This post is part of an ongoing series examining Ken Dark’s three recent books on Nazareth archaeology (2020 – 2023). The series focuses specifically on the archaeologist’s claims about the first century CE, especially his argument that a dwelling “from the time of Jesus” existed at the Sisters of Nazareth site. Topics include kokhim, Galilean chronology, rolling stones, and superposition. I will be posting an expanded and fully footnoted version of this critique to Academia.edu after the series concludes. General Overview (Mobile) and Series Landing Page This post is part of a series examining Ken Dark’s recent claims about first‑century Nazareth. The focus: his argument for a dwelling “from the time of Jesus” at … Continue reading

A Critique of Ken Dark’s Nazareth Archaeology — Pt. 6

General Overview and Series Landing Page This post is part of an ongoing series examining Ken Dark’s three recent books on Nazareth archaeology (2020 – 2023). The series focuses specifically on the archaeologist’s claims about the first century CE, especially his argument that a dwelling “from the time of Jesus” existed at the Sisters of Nazareth site. Topics include kokhim, Galilean chronology, rolling stones, and superposition. I will be posting an expanded and fully footnoted version of this critique to Academia.edu after the series concludes. General Overview (Mobile) and Series Landing Page This post is part of a series examining Ken Dark’s recent claims about first‑century Nazareth. The focus: his argument for a dwelling “from the time of Jesus” at … Continue reading

A Critique of Ken Dark’s Nazareth Archaeology — Pt. 5

General Overview and Series Landing Page This post is part of an ongoing series examining Ken Dark’s three recent books on Nazareth archaeology (2020 – 2023). The series focuses specifically on the archaeologist’s claims about the first century CE, especially his argument that a dwelling “from the time of Jesus” existed at the Sisters of Nazareth site. Topics include kokhim, Galilean chronology, rolling stones, and superposition. I will be posting an expanded and fully footnoted version of this critique to Academia.edu after the series concludes. General Overview (Mobile) and Series Landing Page This post is part of a series examining Ken Dark’s recent claims about first‑century Nazareth. The focus: his argument for a dwelling “from the time of Jesus” at … Continue reading

A Critique of Ken Dark’s Nazareth Archaeology — Pt. 4

General Overview and Series Landing Page This post is part of an ongoing series examining Ken Dark’s three recent books on Nazareth archaeology (2020 – 2023). The series focuses specifically on the archaeologist’s claims about the first century CE, especially his argument that a dwelling “from the time of Jesus” existed at the Sisters of Nazareth site. Topics include kokhim, Galilean chronology, rolling stones, and superposition. I will be posting an expanded and fully footnoted version of this critique to Academia.edu after the series concludes. General Overview (Mobile) and Series Landing Page This post is part of a series examining Ken Dark’s recent claims about first‑century Nazareth. The focus: his argument for a dwelling “from the time of Jesus” at … Continue reading

A Critique of Ken Dark’s Nazareth Archaeology — Pt. 3

General Overview and Series Landing Page This post is part of an ongoing series examining Ken Dark’s three recent books on Nazareth archaeology (2020 – 2023). The series focuses specifically on the archaeologist’s claims about the first century CE, especially his argument that a dwelling “from the time of Jesus” existed at the Sisters of Nazareth site. Topics include kokhim, Galilean chronology, rolling stones, and superposition. I will be posting an expanded and fully footnoted version of this critique to Academia.edu after the series concludes. General Overview (Mobile) and Series Landing Page This post is part of a series examining Ken Dark’s recent claims about first‑century Nazareth. The focus: his argument for a dwelling “from the time of Jesus” at … Continue reading

A Critique of Ken Dark’s Nazareth Archaeology — Pt. 2

General Overview and Series Landing Page This post is part of an ongoing series examining Ken Dark’s three recent books on Nazareth archaeology (2020 – 2023). The series focuses specifically on the archaeologist’s claims about the first century CE, especially his argument that a dwelling “from the time of Jesus” existed at the Sisters of Nazareth site. Topics include kokhim, Galilean chronology, rolling stones, and superposition. I will be posting an expanded and fully footnoted version of this critique to Academia.edu after the series concludes. General Overview (Mobile) and Series Landing Page This post is part of a series examining Ken Dark’s recent claims about first‑century Nazareth. The focus: his argument for a dwelling “from the time of Jesus” at … Continue reading

A Critique of Ken Dark’s Nazareth Archaeology — Pt. 1

General Overview and Series Landing Page This post is part of an ongoing series examining Ken Dark’s three recent books on Nazareth archaeology (2020 – 2023). The series focuses specifically on the archaeologist’s claims about the first century CE, especially his argument that a dwelling “from the time of Jesus” existed at the Sisters of Nazareth site. Topics include kokhim, Galilean chronology, rolling stones, and superposition. An expanded and fully footnoted version of this critique will be uploaded to Academia.edu after the series concludes. General Overview (Mobile) and Series Landing Page This post is part of a series examining Ken Dark’s recent claims about first‑century Nazareth. The focus: his argument for a dwelling “from the time of Jesus” at the … Continue reading

AI: Jesus mythicists beware!

Recently I had some time to spare and wondered how artificial intelligence—now revolutionizing everyone’s information landscape—deals with Jesus mythicism. I use Copilot, owned by Microsoft, and began to type in the question: “What is the general opinion today regarding Jesus mythicism?” But I can pretty much guess the answer to that question, so I decided to get specific and instead asked Copilot about the uproar that took place almost twenty years ago, after BAIAS (Bulletin of the Anglo-Israel Archaeological Society) published my paper critical of then-current fieldwork in Nazareth. (TOC and entire 2008 volume available for download HERE.) My paper elicited several published reactions in the same issue. What follows is the Nazareth-related material in the BAIAS 2008 issue: • René … Continue reading

Nazareth update

Ken Dark For the last couple of years I have refrained from commenting on Prof. Ken Dark’s 2020 book, The Sisters of Nazareth Convent: A Roman-period, Byzantine, and Crusader site in central Nazareth. Already in 2006 Dark wrote that his goal in examining the Sisters of Nazareth site over several summers was to produce “a book-length report—fully illustrated with detailed scale drawings and photographs—covering all of the data.” I have already extensively rebutted Dark’s claims of a first century dwelling on the site, both in my book NazarethGate (Chapter 6) and also online (academia.edu). The Sisters of Nazareth Convent is located about 100m west of the Church of the Annunciation. No one (not even Dark) contests the presence of a … Continue reading

Ehrman and Nazareth archeology—2

In a prior post I discussed Bart Ehrman’s comments on Nazareth archeology made during the Price-Ehrman debate. Here I rebut a number of Ehrman’s errors regarding Nazareth expressed recently on his semi-private weblog. General considerations I’ve often wondered why Bart Ehrman expresses any opinion at all on the archeology of Nazareth. After almost a decade (my first book came out in 2008) he obviously has not taken the time to acquaint himself with my work or with the subject. And yet he expresses himself on both counts with ill-founded confidence. His training was “in the study of the Greek manuscript tradition of the New Testament” under Bruce Metzger, among others. There is nothing in Ehrman’s background, training, or personal study … Continue reading