I know, I know. But their “nazirite” hypothesis is still worth mentioning in this thread, if only to give somebody a chance to refute it.
Hmmm. Just worked for me when I clicked on it. Try this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkHNNPM7pJA
I think that all this talk about Jesus being a Nazirite is a colossal red herring. (Again, let’s remember that the authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail were not historians or Bible scholars, and that their book contained some rather appalling factual errors.)
In the Old Testament, the Messiah was repeatedly (by Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Zechariah) described as a branch (e.g. “There shall come forth a Rod from the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots” – Isaiah 11:1) – a small thing of humble beginnings, growing inconspicuously and inauspiciously, coming from humble origins. (Note, for example, that the Messiah is said to sprout from the lineage of the humble Jesse, rather than the mighty king David.) The word for “branch” is almost identical to the word “Nazareth,” soMatthew was apparently making a reference to this bit of wordplay. This ties in with the entirety of the Matthew account, which emphasized Jesus’ lowly origins,