Please explain these problems with the Gospels

mako · **mako**

Could any Christians out there explain these problems with the inerrancy of the New Testament?
Matthew states that, “Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem”. Since Herod died in 4 BCE, that means that Jesus born prior to that time. Also since, as Matthew reports, “And when they were departed, behold, the angel of the Lord appeareth to Joseph in a dream, saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and be thou there until I bring thee word: for Herod will seek the young child to destroy him.” Still later reporting, “Saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and go into the land of Israel: for they are dead which sought the young child's life.” This would put the birth as occurring sometime between 8 and 6 BCE, and assuming that he started his ministry at about 30 (as reported by Luke), he would have started his ministry around 22 to 24 CE. This would be 5 to 7 years before John the Baptist started his ministry (13th year of Tiberius which was 29 CE) and would have been executed 4 years prior to or the year Pontius Pilate arrived in Judea and 5 to 3 years before John the Baptist began his mission. Since John the Baptist was not executed (as per Josephus) until 35 CE, Jesus would have died before John, not after him. My question is, “Why does Matthew’s report not agree with recorded history and why does it contradict Luke’s report?”
Luke reports, “ And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be taxed. And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.)” This taxing can be precisely dated and does not (contrary to Christ Cultist desires) involve a second governorship of Syria by Cyrenius.
What most people do not realize is that Augustus issued a report of the important aspects of his reign just shortly before his death. This document (which comes to us from several ancient sources) is called the Res Gestae Divi Augusti and consists of 35 short chapters covering the period from his 19th year to his 76th year. In this document, he reports conducting 3 separate censuses, the first in 28 BCE after a 40 year space since the last one conducted by the Republic, his next census was conducted in 8 BCE and his final census was conducted in 14 CE. We know that these censuses were conducted only for the purpose of counting Roman citizens because he reports conducting a Listrum (a special sacrifice to the Gods conducted only after a counting of the Romans) after each of these censuses. He reports that he contributed over 100,000 to the military treasury in 6 CE and Dio Cassius reports in his “Roman History” that when that was not enough to solve the problem, that Augustus decreed that a fund be set up and a “world wide” (Rome and its provinces) inheritance tax of 5% be collected to benefit the military. So the date of the “census” is easily demonstrated once you get your nose out of the mythology.
Now that we have determined the actual year of Jesus birth according to Luke, we can see that it does not agree with the period given by Matthew. If we extrapolate the dates, we will find Jesus starting his mission in 36 CE and being executed in 38 CE. He misses being baptized by John the Baptist, who died the previous year and died after JTB by 3 years, instead of after him. He also started his ministry in the last year of Pilate’s term of service and died two years after Pilate was recalled to Rome. Now, My question is, “Why does Matthew’s report not agree with recorded history and why does it contradict Luke’s report?”
My final (for now) question requires some background. In 37 BCE, Herod the Great was declared the King of Judea by Marc Anthony (backed by Augustus and the Roman Senate). His status was that of a client King and his kingdom’s status was that of an independent kingdom but because it depended to some extent on Roman protection was considered a client state and submitted a tax to Rome each year. Other than this tax (which was collected by Herod along with his own and submitted to Rome annually), Judea was a totally independent nation and ally to Rome. When Herod died in 4 BCE, Rome divided his kingdom up among his heirs, with Archelaus getting Judea proper and Antipas getting Petra and Galilee. Both “kingdoms” were considered a continuation of the clientship status of Herod’s kingdom and as such independent nations allied to Rome, paying an annual tax. In 6 CE, the people of Judea rose up and asked Rome to remove Archelaus, which Rome did, making Judea a part of the Roman province of Judea. Antipas’ kingdom of Galilee and Petra remained a client state as before, with the rights and responsibilities of a client. Now that we have this all established, my question is, “Why would Joseph and Mary, who are established by Luke to be citizens of Antipas’ kingdom (“And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth,”… “And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judaea”) answer the taxation call of another country? It would be like the descendants of those Confederate soldiers that fled to Mexico at the close of the American Civil War returning to America to pay a tax imposed on all American citizens. It wouldn’t make sense today and would make no more sense back then.