I recently saw a TV preacher who tired to make the point - and I don't know why - that there was an interval of between several months and over a year between the birth of Jesus and the visit of the Magi.
This, based on the words used in the KJV. "Babe" for the birth, as described by Luke; and "young child" as described by Matthew.
He also used as evidence the story the Herod ordered the killing of every child under the age of two, and not just babies.
As I said, I'm not sure what the point in doing this was/
But I do think it's kind of dumb. It messes with the traditional interpretation of the Nativity, and looks to re-interpret events of the past based on our 'present knowledge' -and, more importantly, our present prejudices.
In other words, we're tending to look at things and saying, "This is how we would act, so this is what probably happened".
Not considering that we are very different from them in many ways. We are softer, and while our knowledge base is broader, our faith is shakier.
If we had been kings of old, would we have taken off to follow a star? Probably not. Even if told by God to do it?
We probably would have talked ourselves out of it.
We're not strong, even though we wish we were. That's why it's important to hang onto what we can, and the places where faith and our culture are interwoven are really the best handholds of all.
As Christians, we're attacked by humanists from all fronts - and one of the favorite avenues is the perception of inaccuracies in the Bible.
The Nativity story is a tiny part of the Gospels. The timing of the Magi's visit is utterly unimportant to the meaning of the events.
But it is important to the way we celebrate Christmas, from songs to Nativity scenes.
It brings us together.
Don't mess with it.