Someone remarked recently that the Bible is not a science book. I would add that neither is it a history book. The writers often manipulated chronologies, events, and words to fit whatever message they wished to convey.
There are many examples of that, and one of them is the “Flight to Egypt,” which, as we have seen, is a subject found not only in Eastern Orthodox icons but in western European religious art as well.
As you know, there are four gospels in the New Testament, but only one gives the story of the Flight to Egypt. We find it in Matthew 2:13-1, continued in 19-23:
13 And when they [the Magi] 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.
14 When he arose, he took the young child and his mother by night, and departed into Egypt:
15 And was there 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.
19 But when Herod was dead, behold, an angel of the Lord appeareth in a dream to Joseph in Egypt,
20 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.
21 And he arose, and took the young child and his mother, and came into the land of Israel.
22 But when he heard that Archelaus did reign in Judaea in the room of his father Herod, he was afraid to go thither: notwithstanding, being warned of God in a dream, he turned aside into the parts of Galilee:
23 And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.
It makes a nice story, but when we look at the birth narrative given in Luke (the only other gospel that has a birth narrative of Jesus), we find significant differences, among them:
There is no visit of the Magi.
There is no “Slaughter of the Innocents.”
There is no angel warning Joseph to flee to Egypt with the child and mother.
There is no “Flight to Egypt.”
There is no chronology that would even make a “Flight to Egypt” possible.
Instead, Luke simply says that eight days after the birth, Jesus was circumcised (Ouch!); and according to the rules of purification, Joseph and Mary went with Jesus to Jerusalem forty days after the birth, where they meet the aged Simeon and Anna in the temple.
And Luke 2 continues:
39 And when they had performed all things according to the law of the Lord, they returned into Galilee, to their own city Nazareth.
40 And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom: and the grace of God was upon him.
41 Now his parents went to Jerusalem every year at the feast of the passover.
42 And when he was twelve years old, they went up to Jerusalem after the custom of the feast.
So not only is there no “Flight to Egypt” in the Lukan narrative, there is also no chronology that would permit such an event. The family simply goes from Bethlehem to to Jerusalem forty days after the birth, then they return to Nazareth in Galilee, where Jesus grows into adolescence.
So where does the Matthew “Flight to Egypt” come from? Well, the author of that narrative seemed to like quoting what he presents as prophecy. And in the Old Testament there is a statement made of the Israelite exodus from Egypt. We find it in Hosea 11:1
When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt.
And of course “Matthew” says in 2:15:
And was there 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.
That writer has a predilection for taking quotes from the Old Testament and making events out of them. So here he has taken an Old Testament quote referring to the Israelites, and out of it he has made a prophecy referring to Jesus and a “Flight to Egypt” requiring a return from Egypt, that according to Luke would have been chronologically impossible and simply never happened. So does that mean we should take Luke’s account as literal history? No, because Luke had his purposes in conveying his version of the story as well. We cannot take either version of the birth narratives as literal history.
So to repeat, the Bible is not a science book, nor is it a history book. Once we understand that, we can easily see how the differing narratives of the birth of Jesus in the New Testament have been woven together to make an impossible single story (the substance of Christmas plays), and were combined with elements from apocryphal works and various traditions to create the iconography of the Nativity story as a whole that we find both in Eastern Orthodox icons and in traditional western European religious art.
Speaking of which, it is interesting to see how the art of Giotto — the 14th century Italian painter — did what Cennino Cennini described as having “translated the art of painting from Greek to Latin.” By that he meant Giotto transformed the Byzantine manner of painting icons into a style that was more specifically Western — and a significant step toward greater realism:
It is instructive to compare a 14th century “Flight to Egypt” Eastern Orthodox fresco from Vysokie Dechani in Serbia …
With Giotto’s re-molding of Byzantine influence in his version of the “Flight to Egypt”:
ICONS AND THEIR INTERPRETATION 