If you study the scriptures, the wise men found Jesus at home - not at the stable. So, this tells us that the portrayal of the Christmas story where the wise men are at the stable is incorrect. I do believe Jesus was about 2 years old when they arrived - otherwise, the Biblical account would have used different terminology - such as baby , or babe, instead of child.
I like Appendix 179 the Companion Bible I. Parallel Datings of the Times of our Lord. II. Dates of the “begetting” and the Nativity, &c. III. The Course of Abia
Given the element of time -and the habit of man to forget- or to rearrange memory that modern telling of the tale would be a mix of the elements remembered and not a mirror image.
The important point is the Word became flesh and tabernacled among us.The account in Luke’s gospel adds eyewitness detail common to the Christian Bible. And Luke suggests Mary visited Elizabeth prior to the Nativity. I have heard -and find credible the idea that the Jews ,certainly in Jesus time, told their accounts with focus on
what happened -not always in exact chronological order- and I believe that ethnocentrism , time, and location all affect the telling of a tale. So this makes sense. That Matthew and Luke each told essentially the same story,differently—and that this supposed Syriac telling from point of view of one of the wise men from the East all differ in certain detail and yet all appear to tell of the same event poses no
difficulty. Unless this Syriac telling can be proven to be
based upon known autographs of much earlier date. A fragment—or as with the Dead Sea Scrolls a library — I find the Gospels of Matthew and Luke more reliable.
I am aware that the wise men found Jesus at home. He was most likely born in a first century Judean home (though not in the home’s guest room; see the word kataluma.)
I think the assumption that Christ was two years old is a bit of a stretch. Mary and Joseph, after completing the census requirements and the time of her purification, would have been more likely to want to return to Nazareth, where they both had nearer kin.
Furthermore, if you study the Scriptures, the Greek word used in Matthew 2 can be used of an infant or child. The word even has attested usage of a newborn child.
No, Herod was acting thoroughly. He couldn’t trust the wise men’s word that they would return, therefore, he couldn’t trust their estimation of the child’s age. Better (in the mind of an insane king who did not fear God) to be safe and eliminate all baby boys two and under than to be sorry and deposed by a rival king when the babe became a man.