I see little here that is actually mutually exclusive, and no reason the accounts could not both be "true" (if incomplete).
Matthew is writing to Jews, and trying to convince his Jewish readers that Jesus is the fulfillment of prophecy. The tale of Herod is crucial to this theme--Jesus' Egyptian background and the slaughter of the children at Rama (about ten miles from Bethlehem) were, per Matthew's interpretation, foretold. (By the way, Matthew does not say that either Mary or Joseph were natives of Bethlehem. It just says Jesus was born there.) Similarly, the story of the wise men reinforces Jesus' status as king to a naturally skeptical Jewish readership.
Luke is writing to Gentiles. The Gentiles didn't have unfulfilled prophecies about a king of kings, so Luke didn't need to waste time trying to explain how Jesus fit into that mold.
|