THE SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENTS (MATTHEW 2:16)

The verse narrates an event that took place right after the Holy Family were warned by an angel to flee to Egypt because Herod was planning to destroy the child Jesus. It reads: “When Herod saw that he had been tricked by the wise men, he was infuriated, and he sent and killed all the children in and around Bethlehem who were two years old or under, according to the time that he had learned from the wise men.” (NRSV)

One atheist website I looked at offered this as a prime example of the unhistorical nature of the biblical accounts since there is no independent historical evidence that this horrendous event ever took place, even from Josephus who writes about many other abuses of power of which Herod was guilty.

And there is another reason some scholars are suspicious that this whole account was fabricated. It is well recognized that many times elsewhere Matthew goes out of his way to demonstrate that Moses was a type of Christ. And the infant Moses was subjected to a similar threat from Pharaoh's edict to kill the Israelite newborns.

How should Christians respond to such accusations? Let's take these two issues in turn, beginning with the lack of independent historical evidence for the slaughter at Bethlehem.

Herod

France's comment on this matter, in his massive commentary on Matthew's Gospel, provides a good starting point: “The lack of independent evidence is no more of a problem for this than for virtually every other incident recorded in the gospels, unless it is argued that this event was of such a character and magnitude that Josephus (our only significant source for Jewish history of the period) would be bound to have mentioned it.” Thus, the issue boils down to the seriousness of Herod's action, and on this point commentators representing a wide range of theological views almost all agree.

    “The slaughter of infants two years old or less in a town of the size of Bethlehem (population ca. 300) at this time would not only have been a comparatively minor incident, and so probably unknown to Josephus, but also completely in line with Herod's known character.” (Albright and Mann)

    “...on the scale of atrocities known to have been perpetrated by Herod during his later years this would register very low. Nor should we assume that Josephus had a full record of all the events in the reign of a king who died forty years before he was born.” (France)  France estimates that within the area of Bethlehem “the number of male children up to two years old at any one time could hardly be more than twenty, even allowing for 'all the districts.'”

    Barbieri states that “it is not surprising that he [Josephus] and other secular historians overlooked the death of a few Hebrew children in an insignificant village, for Herod's infamous crimes were many.”

    Nixon agrees with the above comments: “There may have been only a score or so children of that age group in the area, so that there is no reason why this should have been recorded by secular historians in comparison with some of his more notorious deeds.”

The above estimates of the number of children killed are far more realistic than the way this event became exaggerated in later years. Raymond Brown relates the fact that various calendars of the saints and early liturgies quote the number of boys martyred in the range of 14,000-64,000.

    And Hendricksen adds: “In the course of history there have been those who held that Herod killed thousands of infants. In fact, their numerous host has even been identified with the 144,000 mentioned in Rev. 14:1. There is no justification for this. In a town as small as Bethlehem was at that time, even when the immediate surroundings are added as they should be, could the total number of those slain have been more than fifteen or twenty?”

As long as we are on this subject it is well to also put Herod's evil action here into perspective considering his other deeds during his reign to address whether he really had the sort of warped personality to have any innocent children.

    Bond: “Herod certainly was capable of such brutality, particularly in his later troubled years.”

    Bruce: “Herod's suspicious nature is well illustrated by the story of the visit of the Magi and the slaughter of the infants of Bethlehem...any rumor of a rival king of the Jews was bound to rouse his worst fears. This suspicion latterly grew to insane proportions..” For one thing, Herod put to death some of his own children as well as some of his wives for fear that they were plotting to replace him.

    France adds that “a further testimony to Herod's remembered character, is his alleged plan (fortunately not carried out) to have all the Jewish nobility slaughtered at the time of his own death to ensure that mourning was genuine.”

    Thus, “It is against the background of palace intrigue that Matthew recounts the circumstances surrounding the birth of Jesus.” (Hoehner)

Moses

The next problem issue for some people is that it appears that Matthew has purposely made up this story in order to provide the first of many parallels with the life of Moses. Thus, Bond says, “Matthew's concern to present Jesus as a second Moses has prompted some to suggest that the story was created on the analogy of the Pharaoh in Exodus 1.” Seemingly echoing this sentiment, S. Young states, “By this use of Moses typology, Matthew provides his community with an identity rooted in the history of Israel and in the consistency of God's work. By presenting Jesus as the new Moses, he shows that Jesus is in fundamental continuity with the Jewish tradition.” But that is by no means the whole story, as the following commentators point out:

    Hill comments that “the whole [Matthew 2:13-23] gives the impression of a stylized narrative, shorn of inessentials and adapted for the purpose of instruction. The episodes recalled, however contain nothing with is historically impossible...Nevertheless, it must be said that, even if actual events are narrated here, the evangelist's real concern is not with historical exactitudes and details, but with theological reflection on the theme of OT fulfillment.”

    Blomberg: “the fulfillment quotation does not contradict the events of history, but neither does it fit them so closely as to substantiate charges that the narrative was created out of the quotation [vv. 14-15] but the same can be said for vv. 17-18 regarding the killing of the boys.”

    France: “It is clear that this scriptural model [Pharaoh] has been important in Matthew's telling of the story of Jesus, but not so clear that it would have given rise to this narrative without historical basis. In particular, the precise specification that children 'up to two years old' were killed has no basis in the Moses story, which concerns the killing of babies at the time of birth.”

    Similarly, Nixon adds that the differences with the Moses incident “are such that there is clearly no attempt to make the pattern of Jesus' experience the same as that of Moses.”

Egypt

But is it really likely that a Jewish family would pack up and leave their native land and travel to a place like Egypt where their ancestors had been held in bondage? Blomberg explains: “Egypt afforded a natural haven for first-century Jews. A large Jewish community had lived there for several centuries, and even from Old Testament times Egypt had often provided a refuge when danger threatened Israel (e.g. 1 Kgs 11:40; 2Kgs 25:26; Zech 10:10).”

Herod's Overkill

Raymond Brown questions the veracity of one last detail in this narrative. He asks why the literal overkill of boys two years or younger if the magi had already informed him of the exact date of Jesus' birth based on the first appearance of the star in the East. However, astrology was, and is, by no means an exact science for the Magi and the star's appearance could have marked either the date his birth or perhaps the date of his conception. The possibility of the latter may actually have had a part in delaying the Magi's trip to Israel until they were sure that the newborn king had actually been born. That uncertainty would then have been factored in by Herod when he set the wider age limit of those to be killed. It would also have helped to ensure that parents would not simply lie about the ages of their children.