One of the handful of facts that Sunday school students seem to retain about the life of Christ is that he was born in Bethlehem and grew up in the city of Nazareth. Anyone who has observed a nativity set would assume the two cities in question were robust and well-known Jewish hamlets. For its part, Bethlehem is certainly known – particularly for its ancient connection with King David. However, the historicity of Nazareth is slightly murkier. Today there is a town in Galilee called ‘Nazareth’ that remains the site of significant Christian pilgrimage. This small hamlet outside of the larger metropolis of Sepphoris in Galilee is referenced in the Gospel accounts[i]. However, Nazareth is a strange place, or rather, an obscure place in the topography of ancient Galilee.
The Old Testament does not mention it, nor do Jewish contemporaries like Philo or Josephus. Greek and Roman geographers did not identify the town in their works either. Outside of the Gospels, the first reference to a place called “Nazareth” is in the writings of Justin Martyr[ii], who grew up in nearby Samaria and had some intimate association with the region. Other early church fathers referred to a place called “Nazareth” in their writings[iii]. However, even in the Gospel narratives, Nazareth seems to have been relatively unknown since its spelling lacked consistency: Nazara [Ναζαρά][iv] and Nazareth [Ναζαρέθ][v].
Similarly, the collection of rabbinic writings from the period makes no mention of a place called Nazareth in its extensive commentary on the land of Galilee. This is strange because the Palestinian Talmud was itself composed in Galilee. Rabbinic writings do, however, refer to the person of Christ as a ‘Nazarene’ [הנוצרי][vi]. This distinction might not seem obvious, as it has long been assumed that this was the moniker for someone from the town of Nazareth. However, we see in both the afore mentioned rabbinic passages and the early biblical accounts (i.e., Acts 24:5) that this is a sectarian distinction. Later church records also make note of a group that called themselves Nazarenes and confessed the divinity of Christ but observed Jewish customs[vii]. These records indicate several separate locations where this group abided, but none of them are connected to a place called “Nazareth.”
Among scholars, the line from Matt. 2:23 – “He shall be called a Nazarene” – has also been cited as a source of confusion. The allusion that the text is making is unknown, as it does not correspond to any known reference in the Hebrew Scriptures. Later interpretations of this passage have been made, most of which render an allegorical reading based upon the similarity to the Hebrew word for “Branch” [נֵצֶר][viii]. Alternatively, there have been suggestions that the title is associated with the Nazirite vow found elsewhere in the Hebrew scriptures[ix] and likely taken by Jesus’ cousin, St. John the Baptist. However, no contemporary source provides a direct link with such vows.
The little information that can be gleaned about Nazareth comes from passing references. When combined, these indicate that Nazareth was a village of poor reputation, as it is noted in the Gospel account “Can anything good come from Nazareth?” (John 1:46). St. Jerome makes note of Nazareth in his record of his journey to the Holy Land. He says that it is “small and obscure”[x] and seemingly unimportant given the events that transpired there. Contemporary to Jerome was the alleged Anonymous Pilgrim of Bordeaux, who wrote about the various villages that Christ went through in Galilee, but found Nazareth to be so unextraordinary that he only mentioned it in passing. Similarly, during the same century, the Christian pilgrim, Egeria, visited Nazareth and again described it as obscure, but added that early Christians revered it. She noted that the house of Joseph and Mary was still present in the village during her time[xi]. In sum, these accounts depict Nazareth as a village of stunning mediocracy, a farm village occupied by perhaps a hundred people with no notoriety.
Archaeological accounts of Nazareth reiterate this commonness. They cite a small village that likely began around 100 BC and was built on bedrock. The coins, pottery shards, and stone vessels that were discovered in Nazareth are mundane enough to belong to any Jewish village in the region. They are perfectly ordinary.
I think that those who are looking to find something of the historical Christ among the vagaries of the past are often disappointed. The deepest academic dives into the childhood of Christ yield very little in return. They do grant some color to the Gospel accounts that we would otherwise not have: the texture of daily life, the modesty of Galilean homes, the rhythms of a Jewish village under Roman rule. Yet, these discoveries, as insightful as they are, tell us little of the mystery that surrounds the person of Christ, the meaning of his life, and his purpose on earth that transcends any flimsy attempt at historical reconstruction. It might be said that God dwells in the obscurity of history, not fully hidden, but woven into the ordinary, unnoticed fabric of life, which our eyes often fail to notice. Nazareth is a case study in this par excellence.
The vision of God is rarely revealed through grand monuments, signs in the clouds, or miraculous visions, but through subtle threads that run through the fabric of civilization. The Lutheran theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer reminds us, “a God that could be known would become an idol.” This reality can easily be forgotten in our image conscious world. However, nowhere is this more clearly seen than in Nazareth itself. By all accounts, it appears to have been an entirely unremarkable Galilean village, scarcely worth mentioning. Yet, it became the home of the greatest mystery in human history: the Incarnation. The divine presence dwelt in an unnoticed and provincial backwater, sanctifying the ordinary world by inhabiting it. The obscurity of Nazareth is not accidental, but essential. It reveals something of the nature of God. The God of Israel does not compete with the self-congratulatory grandeur of empires or the spectacles of the political world. Instead, He is found in what the world calls insignificant — in the livery stable, the workshop, and the peasant home in the frontier of empire.
[i] Mark 1:9; Matt. 2:23; Luke 1:26, 2:39, 4:16; John 1:45-46
[ii] Dialogue with Trypho, 78
[iii] Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3.9.3; 3.16.2; Origen, Contra Celsum 1.51; Clement, Stromata 1.21; Paedagogus 2.8; Tertullian, Adversus Marcionem 4.8; Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 6.12; Eusebius, Onomasticon §138.3; Jerome, Letter XLVI; Araphat, Demonstrations 17.8
[iv] Matt. 4:13; Luke 4:16
[v] Matt. 2:23; Luke 1:26
[vi] Sanhedrin 43a, 107b; Sotah 47a; Hullin 2:22–24
[vii] Epiphanius, Panarion 29.7
[viii] Jerome, Commentary on Matthew 2:23; Eusbius, Demonstratio Evangelica 9.1; Origen, Contra Celsum 1.51; John Chrysostom, Homilies on Matthew 8.3
[ix] Num. 6; Jud. 13:5
[x] Commentary on Isaiah 11:1
[xi] Itinerarium Egeriae, Epistula 24–25
Image: “Nazareth_galilian_view_flowers_2” (CC BY-ND 2.0) by StateofIsrael
Dr. D.P. Curtin is an Irish-American Psychologist and Translator. His work has appeared in Catholic Exchange, The Irish Catholic, Public Orthodoxy, and Catholic Stand in the past. He is also Editor-in-Chief of theScriptorium Project.
Popular Posts