ARE THERE CONTRADICTIONS IN THE NATIVITY ACCOUNTS?

The American Humanist Association continues to come up with ridiculous reasons to reject the Bible due to its many contradictions. Try this one on for size:

    “The story of Jesus’ birth is also contradictory. Matthew 2:13-15 depicts Joseph and Mary as fleeing      to Egypt with the baby Jesus immediately after the wise men from the east had brought gifts. But            Luke 2:22-40 claims that after the birth of Jesus, his parents remained in Bethlehem for the time of         Mary’s purification (which was 40 days, under the Mosaic law). Afterward, they brought Jesus to         Jerusalem “to present him to the Lord,” and then returned to their home in Nazareth. Luke mentions      no journey into Egypt or visit by wise men from the east.”

Apparently, the person who came up with this one has probably gotten his information regarding the birth of Jesus by looking at a Christmas nativity scene in which the shepherds and wise men are pictured as gathered together around the manger at the same time. And even though this may be the condensed story we tell school children, it is of course totally false to the actual Gospel accounts.

We know that the wise men came much later after the birth itself for the following reasons:

    1. There was a widespread belief among people at the time that unusual events in the sky announced either the birth or death of a prominent person. Thus, when the astrologers (Magi) from Persia saw the “star” in the East, it must have occurred at the time of Jesus' birth, not beforehand. It would have taken them some time to prepare for and complete an extended trip by land to Israel after witnessing this event.

Possible confirmation of the above scenario comes from the fact that a rare (every 800 years) triple conjunction of planets took place in March, October and December of 7BC, right around the best modern estimate of Jesus' birth. (Magruder) Bernard Ramm provides other proposed scientific explanations of the sign in the sky.

    2. More definite confirmation of this scenario comes from the fact that Herod, based on what the Magi had told him, decided to kill all the male children in that area up to two years old, not just the newborns. As Porter says, “That Herod is reported in the Gospels [Matthew 2:16] to have killed children of two years and younger may be related to the difference between when the magi saw the star (possibly in 7 B.C.) and when they appeared in Judea (5/4 B.C.)...”

Nixon echoes these thoughts: “The Magi probably told Herod when they first saw the star, and his killing of the children under two years old (v. 16) suggests that there was a fair period of time involved.”

    3. Next, whereas Luke has the shepherds see the newborn Jesus while he is in the manger, “the mention of a 'house' [in Matthew 2:11 during the visit of the Magi] is often supposed either to contradict Luke's account of Jesus' birth in a stable or to indicate a sufficient time-lapse to allow the family to relocate to better quarters in Bethlehem.” (France) But this evidence is not fool-proof since Bartina notes that the Greek word for “house” (oikos) can also mean “village.” Hendricksen firmly rejects this explanation, pointing to the same word used in Matthew 7:24-27 and 24:43 to indicate a building.

In any case, France explains that the manger was probably only a temporary arrangement while the guest room (not “inn”) was occupied, perhaps by other census visitors. As soon as that room was vacated (after some unknown time period), Joseph and Mary could have moved into it since it was likely (according to Riesner) that the house actually belonged to Joseph's family.

    4. Then there is the designations used by Matthew and Luke for the young child Jesus. It has been claimed by some that the fact that beginning with Matthew 2:8, he is called paidion nine times (designating 'child' rather than 'babe') indicates that he was no longer a newborn when the magi came. Thus, Nixon says, “The reference to the child [in Matthew 2:11] suggests that this may have been a considerable number of months after His birth.” That may be normally true; however, it should be pointed out that in Luke's Gospel (2:17), Jesus is called paidion when the shepherds visit him soon after his birth, assuming of course that their visit was within a few days at most.

    5. Hendricksen offers a final piece of evidence: “If the wise men from the east, bringing precious gifts, had arrived within this period of forty days, then, on the fortieth day Mary's purification offering would probably have been something better than 'a pair of turtle-doves or two young pigeons.'”

Theological Emphases

Some readers are still concerned that the accounts of Jesus' birth by Matthew and Luke differ so much. As in other cases where the four Gospels read differently, the cause can usually be traced in the specific narratives or details that each author chooses to emphasize in order to bring out his own theological points. Consider the following statements by New Testament scholars:

    Craddock usefully brings up three points in his commentary on Luke in stating “Matthew...when recalling the birth of Jesus, speaks of dreams as an avenue of revelation (Matt. 1:20; 2:12,13,19). Luke has a large place for angels as God's means of announcing, instructing, guiding and protecting (1:11,26; 2:8-15; Acts 8:26; 12:7).”

“The reader of Luke may be surprised at the amount of attention given to John; after all, this unit [1:57-80] contains 24 verses, while the parallel account of Jesus' birth contains only 21...thus treating the matter [of their respective roles] even before John and Jesus appear in the story as adults.”

“A third and final word here of Luke's theology concerns his focus on the shepherds. They belong in the story not only because they serve to tie Jesus to the shepherd king, David (II Sam. 7:8), but also because they belong on Luke's guest list for the kingdom of God: the maimed the blind, the lame (14:13,21).” To have brought in the story of the relatively wealthy magi into his story would have been to dilute that theme.

    “Matthew's interest in tying his narrative to Israel's Scripture is also clear from its extensive use of Moses typology...The explicit citation in Matthew 2:15, 'Out of Egypt have I called my son,' prepares the reader to interpret Matthew 1-2 in light of the story of Moses and Israel's exodus from Egypt. He also notes the many similarities between the birth of Jesus under adverse circumstances and that of Moses' birth. Even the magi themselves fit Matthew's overall thematic emphases. “The magi in Matthew thus represent the Gentiles with no knowledge of the Messiah who yet are drawn to him by a divine messenger, foreshadowing the important Matthean theme of the Gentile inclusion in the people of God.” (S. Young)

    By contrast, in Luke's account the emphasis in the birth narrative is on joy (see Luke 1:14,44,47,58; 2:1-11), a theme which would have been severely attenuated if he had included the story of Herod's persecution in his narrative.