INF280

Is Luke 2.39 compatible with Matthew 2.1-23?

Yes, Luke 2.39 and Matthew 2.13‑23 are perfectly compatible, provided we understand that Luke summarizes while Matthew gives the details. There is no contradiction…

14 min 20 verses 3 books

Is Luke 2.39 compatible with Matthew 2.1-23?

Yes, Luke 2.39 and Matthew 2.13-23 are perfectly compatible, provided we understand that Luke summarizes while Matthew gives the details.

There is no real contradiction between the two accounts, only two different levels of detail.

Here is the explanation we propose.

  1. Luke 2.39 is a summary, not an exhaustive chronology

Luke writes:

“When they had accomplished everything required by the law of the Lord, they returned to Galilee, to Nazareth.”
(Luke 2.39)

This verse summarizes the final itinerary without mentioning the intermediate stages.

Luke often does this:

  • he summarizes entire periods in a single sentence,
  • he recounts only what serves his theological purpose (Jesus, true man, subject to the Law).

Luke does not say, “they returned immediately”; he simply says:
“they returned”, that is, eventually.

It is exactly as if one said:
“After their vacation, they went back home”,
without specifying that they made a detour to visit friends.

  1. Matthew, for his part, recounts what Luke does not mention

Matthew reports:

  • the visit of the Magi (Matthew 2.1-12),
  • the flight into Egypt (Matthew 2.13-15),
  • the death of Herod (Matthew 2.19),
  • the return to Israel, then to Galilee (Matthew 2.22-23).

Luke does not recount these events, but he does not contradict them.

Matthew fills the “gaps” left by Luke.

  1. How to harmonize the two accounts (a coherent chronology)

1) Birth in Bethlehem

→ (Luke 2.1-7) on 12 October 2 BC according to our conclusions.

2) Visit of the shepherds

→ Jesus is a brephos (newborn) (Luke 2.12).

3) Presentation at the Temple (40th day)

→ around the end of November 2 BC if Jesus was born on 12 October 2 BC
→ (Luke 2.22-24)

4) Temporary stay in Bethlehem

→ Matthew speaks of a house (Matthew 2.11).

5) Arrival of the Magi (a few weeks or months later)

→ Jesus is a paidion (young child) (Matthew 2.11).

6) Flight into Egypt

→ (Matthew 2.13-15)

7) Death of Herod (26 January 1 BC)

→ according to this hypothesis, read the study: Where does the date of 2 Shebat come from?

8) Return from Egypt → Israel → Nazareth

→ Matthew 2.19-23
→ This is what Luke sums up in one sentence:
“They returned to Galilee, to Nazareth” (Luke 2.39).

Luke recounts the starting point and the end point.
Matthew recounts the journey between the two.

  1. Why does Luke not mention Egypt?

Several reasons are possible:

1) Luke follows a theological logic, not a geographical one

He wants to show:

  • Jesus’ conformity to the Law,
  • the piety of his parents,
  • the Galilean roots of the family.

Egypt is of no use to his purpose.

2) Luke’s aim is not to recount the whole childhood

He says so himself:

“Many have undertaken to compile an account of the events…”
(Luke 1.1-4)

He selects.

3) Matthew, for his part, wants to show the fulfillment of the prophecies

Notably:

  • “Out of Egypt I called my son” (Matthew 2.15; Hosea 11.1),
  • the birth in Bethlehem (Matthew 2.6),
  • the coming of the nations to the Messiah (Matthew 2.1-12).

Egypt is therefore essential in his account.

Conclusion: the two accounts fit together perfectly

  • Luke: recounts the birth, the Law, the final return to Nazareth.
  • Matthew: recounts the visit of the Magi, the flight into Egypt, the death of Herod, the return.

Luke does not contradict Matthew. He summarizes what Matthew details.

This hypothesis (birth on 12 October 2 BC, death of Herod on 26 January 1 BC) makes the whole picture even more coherent.