Replies

https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=Nazareth&qs_version=YLT

https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=%CE%9D%CE%B1%CE%B6%CE%B1%CF%81%CE%B5%CF%84&qs_version=TR1550

“Nazareth” occurs 18 times in Young’s literal translation and 12 times in a 1550 Stephanus Greek version of the Bible, so I find it hard to imagine that the town would not have existed at that time. Considering how many religious letters we have, even outside the Bible, from that time, only a fool could believe no one would have noticed a major factual error, such as central reference to a town that did not exist, in the first two centuries of Christianity.

...so I find it hard to imagine that the town would not have existed at that time.

Did historical Jesus really exist? The evidence just doesn't add up.

There are clearly good reasons to doubt Jesus' historical existence.

"Numerous secular scholars have presented their own versions of the so-called "Historical Jesus" - and most of them are, as biblical scholar J.D. Crossan puts it, "an academic embarrassment." From Crossan's view of Jesus as the wise sage, to Robert Eisenman's Jesus the revolutionary, and Bart Ehrman's apocalyptic prophet, about the only thing New Testament scholars seem to agree on is Jesus' historical existence. But can even that be questioned?"

"The Washington Post"
By Raphael Lataster

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/12/18/did-historical-jesus-exist-the-traditional-evidence-doesnt-hold-up/

Jesus was an Essene and Nazareth did not Exist.

So yes, it is VERY important to disprove claims Nazareth never existed. If not for those who believe, then for those led astray - "The truth shall set [them] free."