Above is a topographical map of traditional Nazareth.4
The above map shows the location of traditional Nazareth in northern
Israel.
Introduction
The traditional town of Nazareth does not meet the description of Nazareth given in the Bible. This document explains why, and then shows photographs of an unexcavated town in Galillee that fits the Bible's description of the real Nazareth.
Traditional Nazareth
The traditional site of Nazareth has no cliff at the brow of a hill, as described in Luke 4:29, "...and they led [Jesus] to the brow of the hill on which their city was built, that they might throw Him down over the cliff." The Greek word in the verse translated "brow of a hill" is "off-roos". The word means, literally, "eyebrow".1-1 The word "eyebrow" is defined: "1. The bony ridge extending over the eye. 2. The arch of short hairs covering this ridge."1-2 Figuratively, "offroos" means, "any overhanging prominence on a hill, as a cliff brow."2 The Greek word in the verse that means "throw down over a cliff" is "kat-ak-rame-nid-zo". The word means "to throw something or someone down a cliff."3 Below is a topographical map (scale 1:100,000) of traditional Nazareth. It is the town slightly left of center, identified by a word of four Hebrew letters in the center of the map. Notice that there are no contour lines that show a cliff in or near the town (the thin brown lines are contour lines; the thick red lines and thick brown lines are roads).
Above is a topographical map of traditional Nazareth.4
The above map shows the location of traditional Nazareth in northern
Israel.
Below is a photograph of traditional Nazareth. The town is not
on a hill that has a brow and cliff. No hill with a brow and cliff
is near this town, thus it is disqualified from being the town of Jesus'
upbringing based on Luke 4:29, quoted above.
Above is traditional Nazareth. The most famous site in the
town is the Basilica of the Anunciation, the prominent white building with
a cone-shaped black roof, near the far right side of the photograph.
This basilica is traditionally believed to be built over the site where
Mary lived when the angel Gabriel appeared to her. This and many
sites traditionally believed to be a part of New Testament Nazareth are
not on a hill that has a brow and cliff.
About 3/4 mile southeast of the center of traditional Nazareth is the traditional site of the place where the crowd attempted to throw Jesus down a cliff. The site is traditionally called, "The Leap of the Lord." The ruins of an old church building, near the summit of a low-lying hill, mark the site. There are no cliffs on that hill, nor does the hill have a steep enough grade anywhere that could be defined as a cliff. Below, a red arrow shows the location of the church ruins on that hill.
The red arrow indicates the traditional
site of the place near traditional Nazareth
where an attempt was made to throw Jesus
down a cliff. No cliff is there.
According to Luke 4:29, Nazareth was built on a hill that had a brow and cliff. The verse states: "...and they led Him to the brow of the hill on which their city was built..." Not only does the hill containing the site traditionally called "The Leap of the Lord" lack a brow and cliff, but traditional Nazareth is not on that hill.
Above, a ruined church building marks the traditional site where
an attempt was made to
throw Jesus over a cliff. The traditional town of Nazareth
is not on this hill, nor is there a cliff
on this hill. Traditional Nazareth is visible in the
background.
Above are traditional Nazareth's nearest cliffs. The cliffs
do not qualify as the "brow of the hill
on which the city was built" since they are a mile south of traditional
Nazareth. Traditional Nazareth is not on either of these hills.
Above is a photograph taken about a mile-and-a-half southeast of
the center of
traditional Nazareth looking east-northeast, toward Mount Tabor.
These thirty-
degree slopes are among the steepest in the area. They overlook
the Jezreel Valley.
The slopes are not steep enough to qualify as cliffs. A person
can walk down
these slopes.
Around three hundred years after Jesus walked the earth, Eusebius wrote the earliest known recorded statement that mentions a location for Nazareth. In that statement, Eusebius placed Nazareth in today's traditional location.5 Eusebius, however, gave no grounds for his statement. In fact, no archaelogical evidence exists to suggest that the traditional site of Nazareth was the Nazareth of Jesus' day. Based on Luke 4:29, traditional Nazareth does not meet the New Testament's description of the town.
Many towns in the land of Israel were abandoned and lost in the first
two centuries after Rome devastated Judean Israel. It should come
as no surprise that the true site Nazareth was also lost.
Continue to Part 2, "Har Nitai"
Return to the Table of Contents of this document
1-1 Friberg Lexicon from Bushell, Michael S. Bible Works for Windows 95/NT Release Version 3.5.050p (3549) Lotus Development Corporation, 1996.
1-2 The American Heritage Dictionary, Second College Edition. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1982, page 482.
2 Friberg Lexicon from Bushell, Michael S. Bible Works for Windows 95/NT Release Version 3.5.050p (3549) Lotus Development Corporation, 1996.
3 Louw-Nida Lexicon from Bushell, Michael S. Bible Works for Windows 95/NT Release Version 3.5.050p (3549) Lotus Development Corporation, 1996.
4 From map #1 (1:100,000) of a 6 map collection. The words on the cover of the package containing the collection are written in Hebrew without vowel points. They appear to read "Shamorot Tava Ganim Lomim Vatrim Orkholugim b'Yisrael."
5 Bagatti, B. Excavations in Nazareth. Jerusalem Franciscan Press, 1969, page 20.