New evidence has surfaced from Aviram Oshri, an Israel Antiquities Authority archaeologist, that seems to suggest a new place of Jesus’ birth: while it is true that the name of the place was “Bethlehem,” it is not necessarily true that the city of Bethlehem is the place. Rather, the Bethlehem in which Jesus was born was the village of Bethlehem in Galilee rather than the city of David. What are the reasons for Oshri’s conclusion?
The village was inhabited by Jews in the first century, while the city of Bethlehem was uninhabited in the first centuryMary’s travel to the village of Bethlehem would have been easier to make (7km) than her journal to Bethlehem City (150km)Christians did not pay attention to the City of Bethlehem until the fourth century, when Constantine made Christianity the Roman Empire’s official religion
Your new post is loading...
Hmmm would like to see some backing evidence to this.