This letter was unpublished. The editor brought the correspondence to an end on publishing two letters objecting to Stephen B2’s assertion the Jews killed Christ as an incitement to racial hatred.
Stephen B1 is confusing Origen with orthodoxy. Uniformity of belief was imposed on all Christians by Constantine the Great at Nicaea in AD 325. The Nicene creed continued to be the basis of Xian belief, whether orthodox or catholic, after the schism of 1054.
Jesus of Nazareth had to be born in Bethlehem in order to meet the rôle the Nazarenes assigned him, that of being the Jewish messiah, which necessitated his being of the line of David through Joseph. Augustus’ census, according to The Oxyrhyncus papyri, volume 2, was in 9 BC though not when Quirinius was governor, as Luke would have it, which was in AD 7. Luke was writing long after the event. Even later, Tertullian connects the birth with a provincial census held by Sentius Saturninus, 7 BC. Luke also has Bethlehem as Joseph’s own city, to which he goes from Nazareth, an improbability, but elsewhere has Nazareth as Joseph’s own city. The inference from another account, Matthew’s, is that before the birth Bethlehem, not Nazareth, was Joseph’s permanent home town. These are inconsistencies at best. You have to keep in mind, Stephen B2, the Nazarenes were arguing a case that entailed Jesus’ being born in Bethlehem and would insist he was whether he was or not (though if god was his father, what did it matter? since Joseph couldn’t be, could he? How would require considerable explanation.) You may not take the gospels as, well, gospel when gospel truth may well have to be redefined. It’s quite inconceivable, for example, any Roman governor would abdicate to those under him his power to execute the seditious. Only Rome wielded that power. The responsibility for Jesus’ death is Pilate’s and his alone, however much the Jews, and god, may have wanted it.
I wasn’t disputing JC was Jewish. I was concluding that now any second coming could be from anywhere, including Richmond, and, for all you know, has. Oh ye of little faith, you’re so fixated on the first coming in the flesh that the second, implicit on the first, doesn’t impinge on you at all even when explicitly and clearly stated! Neither Stephen, however, is in any danger of the sin of putting realisation of self before Christ.