No problem.
So when was Jesus born according to your timeline?
Jesus Christ was born in 2 BCE. There are several events that are used to derive this conclusion.
1) The census issued by Quirinius during his Syrian Governorship.
(I know, I know theres much speculation over this event)
2) During the Roman Rule of Caeser Augustus and toward the close of the reign of Herod the Great.
3) In relation to John the baptist. This is one aspect rarely covered, but if we look at the information provided in scripture compared to documented history it is relevant.
a) Luke chapter one (1:26 and 1:36) mentions twice the six month age difference between Jesus Christ and John the baptist.
b) The beginning of John the baptists ministry began in the 15th year of the reign of Tiberius Caeser(28-29 CE). John was a Levite and the son of Zacharias who was a priest. According to Numbers 4:3,23,30 those going into sancturary started serving 30 years old and upward. Since Gabriel was specific in Luke 1:15-17 as to what type of priestly ministry John would serve he most likely started that service at age 30 according to the law of the covenant. On this basis John's birth occurred 30 years prior to his ministry which would be approximately 3 BCE to 2 BCE. According to Luke 3:23 Jesus began his ministry at age 30, therefore Jesus Christ was born approximately 2 BCE six monrhs after John.
How do you think Joseph (from Bethlehem) got hooked up with Mary (from Nazareth)? Do you realize how improbable that is?
It is not explained how Joseph and Mary met, however why is this improbable? One way they may have met is during passover in Jerusalem.
Only a man would write a story about hauling a pregnant woman on a donkey (there is no donkey in the story, BTW) or walking the 90 miles from Nazareth to Bethlehem. We are talking about a 4 or 5 day journey, at the very least.
http://www.geocities.com/glory_ark/springbirth.html
I like the suggestion that they were in Jerusalem already for the Passover.
Also, there is no mention in ANY history of Herod's slaughter of the innocents... that certainly would have been noteworthy for both the Jews and the Romans.
True, however it did hold true to Herod's wicked dispostion after all he had his own first born son killed.
Did you think that maybe Matthew was trying to bring up memories of Joseph and Jacob, and the final plague and exodus from Egypt with Moses? He certainly was wrong about his reference to the Isaiah 7:14 prophesy, although that made perfect sense to him, I'm sure. Matthew is constantly trying to find tie ins with Jesus to Jewish history and mythology.