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

Help with Wikipedia editing

Would somebody who has read chapter 12 (“The 1962 Forgery of the Caesarea Inscription”) of my book NazarethGate, and who has some expertise editing Wikipedia, please amend the Wiki Nazareth page that presently reads: “A Hebrew inscription found in Caesarea dating to the late 3rd or early 4th century mentions Nazareth as the home of the priestly Hapizzez/Hafizaz family after the Bar Kokhba revolt (AD 132–135).” In fact: the inscription was discovered by the noted forger Dr. Jerry Vardaman (of microletter infamy). He was arrested by the Israeli authorities within hours of his “discovery” of the Nazareth inscription in Caesarea Maritima in 1962. (He was later arrested again on an excavation in Jordan.) There are many additional reasons why the … Continue reading

The infancy narratives–conclusion

A New Account of Christian Origins / pt. 28 In this post I’d like to wrap up my survey of the Christian literature devoted to the birth of Jesus. As mentioned in a prior post, this literature is surprisingly extensive. In fact, it was once as popular as it is now obscure. The reasons are that the infancy literature gave scope for endearing domestic scenes, to portray the family of Jesus, and to bring a common touch to the otherwise exalted messiah, the awe-inspiring Son of God. In modern times, the only infancy gospel to have been accorded a modicum of scholarly attention is the so-called Protevangelium of James (PrJ).  It was once a very popular work, surviving in many different editions. … 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

My new 2021 article on archaeological shenanigans in Nazareth

I have just uploaded a 29 page rebuttal to Academia.edu. My article refutes a 2020 “primary report” by Yardenna Alexandre, an archaeologist with the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA). Her article concerns the site in Nazareth commonly known as “the house from the time of Jesus.” The abstract of my rebuttal article follows: In 2020 the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA) published an extensive article in its journal ‘Atiqot authored by one of its archaeologists, Dr. Yardenna Alexandre, a name familiar to readers of my books and to those interested in the archaeological history of Nazareth, Israel. The IAA article goes far beyond a standard excavation report and functions also as an updated history of Nazareth. I point out that many of … 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