.
>> “One of the Gospels has to be wrong.”
Or possibly misunderstood.
The alignment with astronomic events sides with Matthew.
Luke was not a disciple of Yeshua, and got his information handed down to him by people that were not themselves literate.
All that we have of the NT writings other than Matthew, are copies of copies, of coies... and in most cases translations from the native language into Greek, likely through the assistance of Pharisee sages that were not believers!
Fortunately in the case of Matthew’s gospel, there are still copies in the native language spread throughout the world. (and still not much discrepancy with the other gospels)
.
.
We're taking about two historical figures that we have hard dates for outside the Gospel texts. One died 10 years before the other took power.
Luke was not a disciple of Yeshua, and got his information handed down to him by people that were not themselves literate.
So the texts can't be trusted? If they aren't reliable with regard to reportage, then there can't be any larger religious point it seems to me. How do we know ANYTHING?
That said.The amazing thing I have witnessed over the course of my life is how our scientific and historical information, as it advances, conforms to the Bible. My original discussion presupposes that the Bible is Gods word and therefore is truth. That is why supposed contradictions are treasures, as they expose/clarify something not understood. These contradictions are critical for the purpose of prophecy. Prophecy is not there to tell us the future. Its purpose is to authenticate the message. Apparent contradictions are cross-hairs that zero in on specific fulfilments to confirm the message. In comparing the Bible to historical fact, it amazes me how our understanding of the facts always moves in the direction of the accuracy of the Bible. A century ago the book of Daniel was considered nothing but a fiction, that couldn't even get the players correct. Because of archaeological discoveries, we now know it was written by a contemporary eye-witness, (Daniel.)
Back to my original point, just like my earlier example of the crucifixion week, the Bible is completely accurate, though our understanding and therefore our translations may be flawed.