Advent Apologetics: Do the Infancy Narratives Conflict or Contain Historical Errors?

Sometimes skeptics have claimed that the infancy narratives found in Matthew 1-2 and Luke 1-2 contradict each other. For example, it is pointed out that Luke has Mary living in Nazareth before going to Bethlehem, whereas in Matthew they don’t go to Nazareth until later. It has also been claimed that they contain historical errors, such as Matthew’s mention of Herod’s slaughter of boys in Bethlehem (Matt. 2:16) or Luke’s mention of the enrollment that took place when Jesus was born (Luke 2:1-5).

All these difficulties are resolvable. First, the infancy narratives don’t contradict each other. They fit together very well. Here’s an interwoven narrative:

Initially, Gabriel appears to Zechariah to announce the birth of John the Baptist (Luke 1:5-25). A few months later, Gabriel appears to Mary in Nazareth to announce the birth of Jesus (Luke 1:26-38), and Mary goes to visit Elizabeth before returning to Nazareth (Luke 1:39-56). Then John the Baptist is born (Luke 1:57-80).

Around this time, Joseph is informed that Mary is pregnant. He plans to divorce her, but an angel tells him to continue the marriage (Matt. 1:18-23). The two begin cohabiting (Matt. 1:24). This would be in Nazareth, per Luke’s account.

Because of the enrollment announced by Caesar Augustus, the Holy Family travels to Bethlehem (Luke 2:1-5), where Jesus is born (Luke 2:7, Matt. 1:25a). That night, the shepherds visit them (Luke 2:8-20). Around the same time, the magi observe the star in their homeland (cf. Matt. 2:2, 9).

Eight days after birth, Jesus is circumcised and named (Luke 2:21; Matt. 1:25b), and after forty days he is presented at the temple (Luke 2:22-38).

At this point, the Holy Family either returns to Nazareth or remains in Bethlehem (which they did is not clear). If they returned to Nazareth, they continued to visit Jerusalem and their relatives in Bethlehem multiple times every year for the three annual pilgrimage feasts (Exod. 23:14-17; cf. Luke 2:41).

Between one and two years after the birth (cf. Matt. 2:16), the magi arrive and are directed to Bethlehem, where they find the Holy Family (Matt. 2:1-11). They are warned in a dream to return to their country by a different route (Matt. 2:12). Also warned in a dream, the Holy Family flees to Egypt (Matt. 2:13-15) to avoid the slaughter of the innocents (Matt. 2:16-18).

When Herod the Great dies, the Holy Family returns to Israel (Matt. 2:19-21), but Joseph learns Herod Archelaus is ruling in Judea and so takes the family to Nazareth (Matt. 2:22-23).vii

Regarding Herod’s slaughter of Bethlehem’s baby boys, it is claimed that this is a myth, as we don’t have extrabiblical records of it happening. However, the Gospel of Matthew is itself a record, and it cannot simply be set aside.

Further, we would not expect surviving extrabiblical records to mention the event. Bethlehem was small (Micah 5:2), and in Jesus’ day its population was between 300 and 1,000. The number of males under two was likely no more than twenty-five to thirty; perhaps no more than six or seven.viii Given the small scale of the event, most people outside of Bethlehem wouldn’t have been aware of it.

We don’t have any of Herod’s court records, and what knowledge we have of his acts is spotty, being principally derived from the Jewish historian Josephus, who was born decades after Herod died. Although Josephus does briefly mention Jesus in a couple of passages, it is unlikely he would have mentioned a small event like the slaughter of the innocents, if he was even aware of it.

Despite this, the story fits what was known about Herod. During the latter part of his reign he became paranoid and obsessed with keeping power. He saw plots everywhere and consequently executed his favorite wife and three of his sons. Caesar Augustus allegedly quipped, “It is better to be Herod’s pig than son”ix—the joke being that, as a Jew, Herod wouldn’t eat pork and his pig would be safe. Herod is also known to have ordered mass executions. As his own death approached, he had a large number of prominent men confined in a stadium and ordered that they be killed so every family would grieve upon his death.x

The slaughter of the innocents is precisely what we would expect of Herod upon learning a baby was born who had a rival claim to the Jewish throne.

Concerning Luke’s enrollment, claims are made that it wouldn’t have been empire-wide, Joseph wouldn’t have gone to Bethlehem, and Mary wouldn’t have accompanied him. However, there are solutions to each challenge.

Augustus was emperor from 27 B.C. to A.D. 14, and he began the practice of empire-wide census taking: “Every five years, the Romans enumerated citizens and their property to determine their liabilities. This practice was extended to include the entire Roman Empire in 5 B.C.”xi Because of the size of the empire, census taking was done in stages, taking place in different countries in different years. The decree of 5 B.C. thus likely wasn’t implemented in Palestine for a few years. If the census was being done for tax purposes—as was normal—it would explain why Joseph returned to Bethlehem: he was from there and still had property there.

However, the enrollment may not have been a census. It may be an event that took place in 3-2 B.C. when the people of the empire swore allegiance to Augustus. In this case, Joseph may have returned to Bethlehem because Israel was organized tribally, and the Romans may have used the tribal structure to ensure that the locals took the oath. Since Bethlehem was the ancestral home of Joseph’s clan, that is where he went.

Mary went with Joseph because she was his wife and could be better cared for by him and other relatives in Bethlehem than if left at home. Contrary to popular depictions in art, we need not suppose that she made the journey to Bethlehem in the last stages of pregnancy. Luke merely says that “while they were there, the time came for her to be delivered” (Luke 2:6).

Finally, Luke and his readers were familiar with the way such enrollments worked. They had taken part in such events themselves. Even critical scholar Raymond Brown notes: “It is dangerous to assume that [Luke] described a process of registration that would have been patently opposed to everything that he and his readers knew.” From 20 Answers: Bible Difficulties