We only have Matthew's word on it. Or a text that some claim to be his word. Second hand. Through a third party. So, yeah, there's that.

I shall definitely be celebrating December 28th for it is Saturday and I don't have to work. Now I'm going to go back and read that long one.
Update, yeah way to serious. I like my reason better.

Slaughter of Innocents

In Matthew's Gospel, Chapter 2, verses 13-18, part of the

Christmas Story is called ""the Slaughter of the Innocents"

At verse 8, King Herod tells the Magi.....

"Go and search carefully for the Child; and when you have

found Him, report to me, so that I too may come and worship Him."

But the Magi find Jesus, don't tell King Herod, and go home.

When Herod realizes he has been duped, he is furious and

gives the order to kill all the boys, two years old and under,

who live in Bethlehem and its vicinity.

But an angel appears to Joseph tells him to take Jesus to Egypt.

"""And [Jesus] was there [In Egypt] until the death of Herod:

that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the

prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son"""(Matthew 2:15)

The words spoken by the prophet, which Matthew claims were

fulfilled at Matthew 2:15 are found at Hosea 11:1.......

"""When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt."""

As you can clearly see, Matthew's supposed fulfillment is totally bogus.

The complete verse Matthew quotes is not about Jesus or the Messiah,

but is a verse about Israel being called out of Egypt during the time of Pharaoh.

So King Herod slaughters all the innocent children under two years of age,

and Matthew again quotes the OT to supposedly show that Scripture has

been fulfilled. (Matthew 2:17-18)

Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet, saying,

"""In Ramah was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, and

great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted,

because they are not."""

The first problem with this supposed fulfillment is that Ramah is a town

located about 5 miles North of Jerusalem, and Bethlehem is a town

located about 5 miles South of Jerusalem. This quote isn't even about

Bethlehem. I purposely mention Jerusalem, in case a Christian thinks

that 10 miles from Bethlehem is still in the "vicinity."

If all the innocents in Jerusalem, a city, were slaughtered it certainly would

have made the news. As it was, there is absolutely no mention of this event

by any Historian, not even the famous Jewish Historian, Josephus, who

very carefully and completely wrote about King Herod.

The next problem with this supposed fulfillment is that the woman weeping

is Rachel, one of the wives of Jacob, the father of the 12 tribes of Israel.

Bethlehem is in the tribal land allocated to the tribe of Judah. King David,

was from the tribe of Judah, and had been born in Bethlehem. The problem

is that Rachel was not the mother of Judah. Leah was the mother of Judah.

If symbolically a woman was weeping for her children it should have been

Leah, weeping for the dead children of Judah, and not Rachel.

But there is an even GREATER problem with Matthew's supposed

Scripture fulfillment. I will quote the Scripture, Jeremiah 31:15-17, in its

entirety.....See if you can spot this GREAT problem?

Thus saith the LORD; A voice was heard in Ramah, lamentation, and

bitter weeping; Rachel weeping for her children refused to be comforted

for her children, because they were not.

Thus saith the LORD; Refrain thy voice from weeping, and thine

eyes from tears: for thy work shall be rewarded, saith the LORD;

and they shall come again from the land of the enemy.

And there is hope in thine end, saith the LORD, that thy children

shall come again to their own border.

This Scripture isn't even about dead children. This Scripture is about

children who were taken into captivity, and would be restored to their

homeland.

Matthew totally misquotes Scripture.

Marvellous story telling from Matthew as always. The drama, the clear good/bad division, the supernature, puts Matthew up there with Stephen King.

As Bob says,no record of it, but it’s the usual mistake people make that the gospels are historical. The Synoptics are the best stories of their kind that were extant at the construction of the gospels.

Take the Christian rhetoric out and they become great fiction and social commentaries of C1st Judea.

Actually unproven no one has found records of it