Christmas 2024: Scientists reveal exactly where Jesus was born - it probably WASN'T in Bethlehem
By Shweta Kumari | First Published Dec 24, 2024, 7:00 AM ISTFor centuries, Christians have cherished the imagery of shepherds, wise men, and a manger in Bethlehem of Judea, a town six miles south of Jerusalem and a revered pilgrimage site. But was this truly where Jesus was born?
As Christmas approaches, carolers and nativity scenes around the world celebrate the age-old story of Jesus' birth in Bethlehem. Yet, historians and archaeologists argue that this beloved narrative may not align with historical realities. For centuries, Christians have cherished the imagery of shepherds, wise men, and a manger in Bethlehem of Judea, a town six miles south of Jerusalem and a revered pilgrimage site. But was this truly where Jesus was born?
The Bible is the primary source supporting Bethlehem of Judea as Jesus’ birthplace. Dr. Clyde Billington, a biblical scholar and executive director of the Institute for Biblical Archaeology, asserts, "Bethlehem in Judea is mentioned in Matthew, Luke, and John as the birthplace of Christ. Thus, the identification of Bethlehem in Judea as the birthplace of Christ dates to the earliest days of the Church."
Latest Videos
Archaeological evidence adds some weight to this claim. Pottery fragments from the Iron Age and first-century artifacts near the Church of the Nativity suggest a settlement existed during Jesus' time.
Yet, this narrative is not without its challenges. The Gospel of Mark, the earliest account of Jesus' life, omits his birth entirely. The Apostle Paul, who knew Jesus’ family, also makes no mention of Bethlehem.
Contradictions in Gospel accounts
The Gospels of Matthew and Luke, which detail Jesus’ birth, differ significantly. Matthew places the Holy Family in Bethlehem and describes their escape to Egypt to avoid King Herod's massacre. Luke, however, has Mary and Joseph traveling from Nazareth to Bethlehem for a Roman census—a scenario historians deem historically implausible.
Professor Helen Bond of the University of Edinburgh explains, "There's no evidence for a whole-empire census at this point, and ancient people did not need to find an 'ancestral home' to be counted."
A second Bethlehem?
An alternative theory posits that Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Galilee, a small village near Nazareth. Archaeologist Aviram Oshri, who excavated the site for over a decade, suggests its proximity makes more sense for a pregnant Mary, "How would a woman who is nine months pregnant travel 175 kilometers on a donkey all the way to Bethlehem of Judea? It makes much more sense that she would have traveled seven kilometers to Bethlehem of Galilee."
Oshri's findings include a Byzantine-era church and artifacts resembling elements of the nativity story. However, critics argue there’s no ancient source linking Jesus’ birth to this location.
The case for Nazareth
The simplest explanation may be that Jesus was born in Nazareth, his hometown. The Gospels consistently identify him as "Jesus of Nazareth," and the village's intensely religious and anti-Roman climate might explain his early influences.
Recent excavations reveal Nazareth was larger than previously thought, with evidence of a deeply devout Jewish community. This setting aligns with the spiritual fervor later attributed to Jesus.
Why Bethlehem matters?
So, why the insistence on Bethlehem? The answer lies in Jewish prophecy. The Old Testament foretold that the Messiah would emerge from Bethlehem, the city of King David.
"Once Jesus was believed to be the Messiah and a 'son of David,' it made sense to link his birth with that of David," Professor Bond explains.
Ultimately, the nativity story may serve more as symbolic poetry than historical fact, emphasizing Jesus' significance rather than pinpointing geographical accuracy.
subscribe to Asianet Newsable WhatsApp channel by clicking here.