Birth Narratives

What Luke Claims

1. Jesus was born when Quirinius was governor of Syria.

What Matthew Claims

1. Jesus was born when Herod the Great was king.

What Josephus Claims

1. Herod the Great died in 4 BC. (Josephus, Antiquities, 17.6.4)
2. After Herod's death, his son Archeleus took over Judea. He reigned for 10 years. (Josephus, Antiquities, 17.13.2)
3. Archeleus was summoned to Rome, deposed on account of his merciless ruling, and exiled. (Josephus, Antiquities, 17.13.2)
4. Judea was annexed into the Syria province of the Roman government. (Josephus, Antiquities, 17.11.4)
5. Quirinius was appointed governor of Syria and took a census of Judea to assess resources and population. (Josephus, Antiquities, 18.1.1)

So What?

Luke situates Jesus's birth during Quirinius's census (6 CE), whereas Matthew places it in the time of Herod's reign (who died in 4 BCE; Josephus notes a lunar eclipse, with its exact date/time calculated by NASA here). Josephus indicates that these events were separated by a decade, which included Archelaus's governance of Judea and its later annexation by Rome.

If Matthew and/or Luke are incorrect, then the doctrine of biblical inerrancy falls. If Josephus is incorrect, then our foremost source for first-century Judean history has proven himself to be untrustworthy in these pivotal two decades of history. In this situation, there is little reason to give credence to the historical claims of the Gospels because of the authors' prior theological commitments. It is more reasonable to conclude that the authors of the Gospels prioritized their theological message (Jesus' divinely orchestrated birth) at the expense of historical accuracy.

What Matthew Claims

1. Herod ordered the killing of all male children under two years old in and around Bethlehem.

What Historical Sources Claim

1. Josephus documented Herod's crimes in detail , including the execution of his own sons (Antiquities, 16.392), but never mentions the killing of infants in Bethlehem.
2. Nicolaus of Damascus, Herod's personal historian, makes no mention of this event. (Encyclopedia Britannica, Nicholas of Damascus)
3. No Roman historians (Tacitus, Suetonius, Dio Cassius) record this massacre despite documenting other atrocities from this period (Tacitus on Nero's persecution of Christians, Suetonius on Nero's persecution of Christians, Dio Cassius on the Revolt of Boudica in 60 CE).
4. Jewish rabbinical literature, which preserved memories of other Roman and Herodian atrocities, is silent on this event (Herod slaughtering the Sanhedrin).
5. Archaeological excavations in the Bethlehem region have revealed no mass graves or evidence of such a massacre from this period.

So What?

Matthew's account of the Massacre of the Innocents has no corroboration in any historical source, despite Herod's reign being well-documented by multiple historians. Bethlehem was a small village with an estimated population of 300-1,000 people, meaning the number of male infants under two would have been perhaps 20-30 children. Even a massacre of this limited scale would likely have been recorded by Josephus, who documented far less significant events during Herod's reign.

The narrative closely parallels the Exodus story of Pharaoh ordering the killing of Hebrew infants, from which Moses escaped. This parallel serves Matthew's literary purpose of presenting Jesus as a "new Moses" who will deliver a new law. The story also allows Matthew to include a "fulfillment" of Jeremiah 31:15 ("A voice was heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children..."). The most reasonable conclusion is that this account was created to establish theological parallels rather than to record a historical event.

What Matthew Claims

1. An angel warned Joseph to flee to Egypt with Mary and Jesus.
2. The family remained in Egypt until Herod's death.

What Luke Claims

1. After Jesus's birth, the family presented him at the temple in Jerusalem.
2. They then returned directly to Nazareth in Galilee.

Main Problems

1. Timing: Luke describes the family presenting Jesus at the temple in Jerusalem 40 days after his birth (Luke 2:22-24), which would be impossible if they had immediately fled to Egypt.
2. Omission: Luke's account (Luke 2:22-39) has the family returning directly to Nazareth after Jesus's presentation at the temple, with no mention of Egypt.
3. Geography: Fleeing to Egypt from Bethlehem would require traveling through Herod's territory, including Jerusalem, making it a dangerous escape route.
4. Absence: Paul's letters and Mark's Gospel, the earliest Christian writings, make no mention of Jesus's birth in Bethlehem or a sojourn in Egypt.

So What?

The flight to Egypt narrative appears in Matthew's Gospel but is completely absent from Luke's account, which presents an incompatible timeline. The two narratives cannot be harmonized without significant distortion of one or both texts. Matthew explicitly states that the Egypt journey fulfills the prophecy from Hosea 11:1: "Out of Egypt I called my son." However, the entire verse refers to the Exodus of Israel from Egypt, not a future messiah ("When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.").

Matthew's narrative creates another parallel between Jesus and Moses, who also came out of Egypt to deliver God's people. This literary device strengthens Matthew's presentation of Jesus as a new Moses figure. The flight to Egypt narrative appears designed primarily to create a connection to Old Testament themes rather than to accurately record historical events. It forms part of Matthew's consistent pattern of creating narratives that "fulfill" prophecies, often by taking Old Testament passages out of their original context.