[Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus]

Er, no.

Jesus wasn’t a Nazirite. He was the Branch (netser), which is the play on words Matthew is employing.

[dangus]

>> Jesus wasn’t a Nazirite. << I didn't SAY he was a Nazarite. I said he would be CALLED a Nazarite. Even if we don't use the evidence of Matthew 2, he still is obviously compared to John the Baptist, he still atones for other sins, and that still negates the objections of those who cite 1 Cor, so the basics hold up.

>> He was the Branch (netser), which is the play on words Matthew is employing. <<

Not buying it. However, I did find something cool about natsar in looking up your assertion. One source says that it means "watcher," which has cool associations with the Book of Enoch... I'm checking into it.