Whether, or not, grapes destined for temple sacrificial offerings were grown in Nazareth is similar to the question of whether sacrificial sheep were raised in the area of Bethlehem. It has a bearing on the teachings of Jesus and their spiritual meanings in that it functions in a typological sense to help illuminate the prophetic fulfillment of Jesus as the paschal "lamb of God" and the "vine" that represents Israel. Did Jesus grow up in a town where wine grapes were grown that were destined for temple sacrificial libations? If so, it would impact Christian devotional reflections on Jesus' parable of the vine and the branches. In two different places on *Stack Exchange* I have inquired about where certain locations, mentioned in the Mishnah, are in modern times. Contained in the Mishnah are exact locations where wine grapes destined for temple sacrifices were located. This quote from Asaph Goor, in reference to those specific locations in which sacrificial wine grape growing took place, got me interested in the subject: > The Mishna also (Menahot, 8, 6) points to the regions where the best wine-making grapes were grown: ‘Kerutim and Hatoulim were alpha (first class) for wine (both are points in Judaea); second to them are Beit-Rima and Beit-Lavan in the mountains of Samaria and Kfar Signa in the valley’ (in Lower Galilee). Where can these regions be found on a map? I have asked it at Judaism.SE and also the History section . In one of the responses , LаngLаngС writes (emphasis added):

 > Beit Lavan–ּבית ָלָבן:ֵ Some identify this as the Arab village Luban, > located near Beit Rima. This region was home to an extensive > production of wine, even in later eras. **Others suggest this is the > city of Nazareth located in the Galilee, which was known in ancient > times as Beit Lavan.** I have not been able to verify that Nazareth was ever called Beit Lavan (a second class place for sacrificial wine grape growing). And considering it is not in mountains of Samaria, as Asaph Goor suggests, it is rather odd for it to be Nazareth. Still, a devotional question comes up, "Is there is any church literature that contains such a suggestion?


 What makes this question especially provocative is that the first century writers, Columella (R.R.4.19) and Pliny (N.H. 17.178-81) describe high end trellis systems that utilized reeds for supporting the vines along with high wooden posts and one cross bar per post. They describe how the poles should be at least 4’ tall, but not more than 7’ tall. This was likely done to allow sheep to graze underneath - e.g. nibbling at suckers, doing leaf pruning, adding fertilizer and working the cover crops on the ground.

The Star of Bethlehem has become an indispensable part of the Christmas Crib. But, we do not see the star in Gospel narrations till the time Magi arrive : In the time of King Herod, after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea, wise men from the East came to Jerusalem, asking, “Where is the child who has been born king of the Jews? For we observed his star at its rising,...... Then Herod secretly called for the wise men and learned from them the exact time when the star had appeared. ................ When they had heard the king, they set out; and there, ahead of them, went the star that they had seen at its rising, until it stopped over the place where the child was. It is possible that the Magi had set out from their homeland(s) on seeing the star, the rising of which coincided with the Nativity. But, it is strange that there is no mention of the star at the time of Nativity in the gospels. The star could be mentioned along with the celestial song of the angels , and could work as a sign for the shepherds(Lk 2: 8-16). My question therefore, is: According to Catholic scholars, was the Star visible over Bethlehem on the day of Nativity ?

In Eusesbius we have an interesting reference from the 2nd century Christian historian, Hegesippus, to property owned by the family of Jesus: > But when this same Domitian had commanded that the descendants of > David should be slain, an ancient tradition says that some of the > heretics brought accusation against the descendants of Jude (said to > have been a brother of the Saviour according to the flesh), on the > ground that they were of the lineage of David and were related to > Christ himself. Hegesippus relates these facts in the following words. > > The Relatives of our Saviour. > 1. Of the family of the Lord there were still living the grandchildren of Jude, who is said to have been the Lord's brother according to the > flesh. > 2. Information was given that they belonged to the family of David, and they were brought to the Emperor Domitian by the Evocatus. For > Domitian feared the coming of Christ as Herod also had feared it. And > he asked them if they were descendants of David, and they confessed > that they were. Then he asked them how much property they had, or how > much money they owned. And both of them answered that they had only > nine thousand denarii, half of which belonged to each of them. > 4. And this property did not consist of silver, but of a piece of land which contained only thirty-nine acres, and from which they raised > their taxes and supported themselves by their own labor. 5. Then they > showed their hands, exhibiting the hardness of their bodies and the > callousness produced upon their hands by continuous toil as evidence > of their own labor. Is this a reference to property owned in Bethlehem? If so, was Joseph (Jesus father) land rich (at least middle class), but cash poor when they went to Bethlehem for the census? And again cash poor when bringing the child to the temple to be dedicated? It is interesting to reflect upon the fifth pope; consecrated about 100; died about 109. The breviary of Pope Pius V. reserves Oct. 26 to the memory of *Evaristus Græcus ex Judæo parte Trajano Imperatore Pontificatum gessit.* From this it would follow that this pope was a Jew, whose father was a native of Bethlehem, and therefore, no doubt, a Roman provincial. Evaristus, then, must have been a Greek-speaking Jew, and, under the laws of the empire, a Roman subject. Another possibility is that at the time of Emperor Domitian, Jesus' family (i.e. the grandchildren of his brother Jude) owned 39 acres in Nazareth. If my calculations are correct, of those 39 acres of the approximately 60 acres in Nazareth, 65% of the land was owned by Jude’s grandchildren. If so, that's a lot of land owned in Nazareth.