“Do not be afraid; for see I am bringing you good news of great joy for all the people: to you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, who is the Messiah, the Lord.” - Luke 2:10-11
The “city of David” is Bethlehem. I think many of us just take it for granted that Jesus was born in Bethlehem. But was he? This is actually a point of contention in scholarship. In fact, many commentators conclude that Jesus was born in Nazareth.
To be fair... If you had only ever read Mark, John, Hebrews, or any of the Pauline epistles, you would have heard the entire gospel message and never heard the account of Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem (or the Virgin Birth at all.)
So where do we hear of Jesus’ birth? Well...there are two independent accounts of Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem, the gospels of Matthew and Luke. Do they tell the same story? No. They tell two dramatically different versions of the birth of Jesus. 
One example among many... The Matthean version tells of the visit by the Magi, while the in the Lukan version there are shepherds. Why are they different? Well there are a whole host of theological and literary explanations for the differences, which I won’t get into here.
Keep in mind, it is very common for historical sources that attest to the same event to contradict each other, sometimes wildly. This doesn’t mean the event in question didn’t happen, it just means we need to dig deeper to understand what’s going on…
When sources differ in such a way, we need to think about why those discrepancies exist. What is the author doing here? What reasons does the author have for relaying the story in this particular manner? What does this tell us about the author’s beliefs, purpose, goals, etc?
What similarities exist between the two accounts? What does this indicate? Are these areas of agreement likely to be historical?
When studying ancient history, we often only have one account of an event. Papyrus doesn’t last forever… It’s just the way it is. So, if we have two independent sources in agreement, we become more confident that the event in question happened.
Despite their differences, the Matthean and Lukan accounts agree on a couple of key points. Jesus’ parents were Mary and Joseph and Jesus was born in Bethlehem. We have two independent sources attesting to Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem. Case closed! Right? Well…not so fast.
The authors of both Matthew and Luke have an interest in proclaiming Jesus to be the Jewish messiah. There is a significant prophecy in Micah regarding the birthplace of the coming Messiah.
Matthew even quotes this prophecy. ⬇️
That Jesus was from Nazareth seems to be an awkward fact (which makes it more likely to be historical). Why would the gospel writers include it if they were making this whole story up? This could be an important thing to consider...
Many scholars therefore conclude that both gospel writers needed to find a way to have Jesus born in Bethlehem. This would mean that the differences in the two accounts arise from the creative imaginings of two independent writers with the same goal in mind. Bethlehem or bust!
So we seem to be no closer to answering the question regarding where Jesus was born. Are there any other clues in any other sources? Well there are a couple...
Paul writes in Romans 1:3 that Jesus was “descended from David according to the flesh.” There seems to be an early tradition that Jesus was from the line of David. Could we also infer some connection to Bethlehem, the city of David? Maybe...
We see in John 7:40-44, that people are arguing about whether Jesus is the Messiah. They ask, “Surely the Messiah does not come from Galilee, does he? Has not the scripture said that the Messiah is descended from David and comes from Bethlehem, the village where David lived?”
This could serve as a classic example of Johannine irony… It could imply that the reader ought to know that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, while the characters in the story wrestle with this question.
The issue is far from settled and may never be satisfactorily resolved. Suffice it to say, that in my humble opinion, there is enough evidence on both sides of the equation for reasonable people to take either position.
I think Jesus was born in Bethlehem. To me, the evidence is sufficient to arrive at that conclusion. Was he visited by Magi or shepherds or no one at all? That remains lost to the mists of time. Both versions are beautiful and speak to the deep yearnings of the human heart.
As Christianity moved into the second and third centuries, these early followers of Jesus continued to wonder about his birth and childhood. They began to create stories to fill in some of the gaps left in the now canonical gospels.
If you want to get a better look at some of these stories, I would recommend reading works such as the Protoevangelium of James, Pseudo-Matthew, and the Infancy Gospel of Thomas.
They’re not sources I would use to study the historical Jesus (although they may contain some historical nuggets), but they will give you a glimpse into the questions Christians in the second century grappled with.
Anyway, I thought I’d share some of my thoughts on this Christmas Eve. It’s getting late here and I still have some wrapping to do. Merry Christmas to one and all!
