i always hate threads like these where the OP never comes back.
What are those accounts? Are there any corroborating accounts other than those in the New Testament?
Give it three days.
Sorry, gonna have to disagree with you here. Of course there’s “reference” to a “House of David”… the Davidic line was a dynasty that ruled the southern kingdom of Judah for something like twenty-five generations until the Jews were carried away into Babylonian exile in 586 BC. There is pretty strong historical evidence that there was a southern kingdom of Judah, there was a northern kingdom of Israel, that both followed roughly the same Yahvistic religion, that they had cultural memories of having once been a united kingdom, and that after the northern kingdom was destroyed by the Assyrians, the southerners considered them to be lost brethren. That united kingdom, the kingdom of David and Solomon, before they split in the third generation, would not have been unreasonably large for a conquering king to hold (especially if it proved too much for his descendants to keep together), and while the stories of the wealth and glory of David and Solomon are surely exaggerated, as are many of the tales in the books of Kings and Chronicles, there’s no reason to consider them imaginary.
The archaeological evidence strongly contradicts the notion of a united kingdom. There is also no evidence of any continuous David line, or even definitive confirmation of a historical David or Solomon.
What all accounts? If you refer to the gospels, Matthew 2:1 says that he was born in Bethlehem (and has the magis, but not the rest). Mark skips everything about birth and childhood, and simply says in 1:9 that Jesus came from Nazareth. Luke 2:1-20 has the familiar Christmas narrative - census forces Josph and Mary to Bethlehem, shepherds in the fields, manger, angels singing (but no magi). John, of course, is on another level entirely.
Outside the Bible, there are not even certain accounts that the Jesus of the New Testament existed, only that people who were his followers were around later.
However, as this Staff Reportpoints out, the consensus of the serious Biblical scholars is that Luke invented the birth in Bethlehem to fulfill one prophey (you, Bethlehem, smallest of all houses etc. - plus of the symbolism: the name means “house of bread” and Jesus is the bread of life), and then had them move to Egypt because of Herod’s murder of children (most likely invented, too, because there’s no record of it; and it fits the pattern by repeating the Moses story of being saved from great danger), and then had the family move to Nazareth, because all the followers of Jesus knew he was from Nazareth in Galilee.
It would be more precise to say “all accounts that actually say anything at all about his birth”, but that’s generally assumed in that construction. If you know of any accounts of Jesus’ birth other than those in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, and if any of those accounts give a different birthplace than Bethlehem, I’m sure we’d all be interested in hearing of them.
John and Mark both imply that Jesus was born in Nazareth.
Why do I have the feelings that you’ve forgotten to tell us that you’re an Assyrian and that Christ was Assyrian as well!?