Why are other civilizations ignored in the Bible?

[discipulus]

If you believe that Jesus was born of a virgin as both Matthew and Luke assert, then it must be admitted that Jesus himself has no connection to either geneology.

Incorrect. Jesus was the physical (biological) descendant of David through his mother Mary. He was the legally adopted son of David through His earthly father Joseph. In this fashion, He fulfills both prophecies i.e the prophecy regarding His virgin birth and the prophecy of Him coming from the line of David.

That makes them rather a moot point since the whole point of these things is to show Jesus' descendancy from David. It's a contradiction in itself to say that Jesus was "born of a virgin" and then try to prove a Davidic lineage through Joseph. Luke and Matthew disagree on that very genealogy though.

It is not a contradiction at all. As I stated previously, both Mary and Joseph were descendants of David. Matthew records Jesus' geneaology through Joseph, who was the legal guardian of Jesus via adoption, and Luke records Jesus' geneaology through Mary, who was Jesus' mother.

Matthew implies that Mary and Joseph were living in Bethlehem when Jesus was born and the magi visit them in a house. Luke says they lived in Nazareth and were only in Bethlehem to register for a census.

Clearly the city of Jesus’ birth was Bethlehem as Micah 5:2 prophesied and as the Gospels of Matthew, Luke and John confirm. (Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:4, 15; John 7:42) Luke proclaims the birth place as Bethlehem, “For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.” 1 Samuel 17:15, confirms Bethlehem as the City of David, “But David went and returned from Saul to feed his father's sheep at Bethlehem.”

Matthew records that Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea. That is all he says. He does not say that Mary and Joseph were living in Bethlehem or that they were residents of Bethlehem so you are simply wrong.

The Magi do indeed visit Jesus, but notice what Matthew writes. He states that: "AFTER Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the King......"

Here, Matthew mentions only that the Magi visited Jesus sometime after He was born. Not that they visited Him while He was lying in a manger as a newborn babe. This is simply a common misconception. It was the shepherds who visited Jesus while lying in a manger. So there is no conflict between Luke and Matthew's accounts. The family lived in Nazareth, journeyed to Bethlehem to be counted and while there, Jesus was born.

Matthew says that Jesus' family fled to Egypt after Jesus was born and then moved to Nazareth only after they had returned from Egypt and an angel told them to move to Galilee.

You think that Matthew here is saying that the family first lived in Nazareth after returning from Egypt which indeed would contradict the account Luke gives of them living in Nazareth and then going to Bethlehem to be counted.

But Matthew never says this. So there is no contradiction. Once again, these objections have been raised by many who have come before you and they are not really objections but rather, misunderstandings of the text.

Notice that both authors are only reporting some of the events—they share the key elements (i.e., Jesus born in royal city of Bethlehem, Jesus ends up in a despised town of Nazareth), and they each select a subset of the history for their particular point (e.g., Luke has the ritual-trip to emphasize the law-biding character of the family and the acceptance of Jesus by godly Jews; Matthew has the Flight/Secret-Return story to emphasize the early rejection of—or indifference to-- Jesus by the Jewish leadership)

Luke says nothing about Herod's "slaughter of the innocents" or a flight to Egypt. He explicitly states that Jesus went to Jerusalem to be circumcised eight days after he was born and then immediately returned to Nazareth.

This is correct. As I stated previously there is no contradiction in the accounts unless you READ INTO the texts words that are not there. In hermeneutics this is called exegeting the text and is one of the main reasons the Bible is misinterpreted.

Luke also says nothing about the magi, or about a star or about the house where the magi visited Jesus in Bethlehem.

So?

These are completely different stories and it seems that neither author has any awareness of the other.

As I stated earlier, both authors are only reporting some of the events—they share the key elements (i.e., Jesus born in royal city of Bethlehem, Jesus ends up in a despised town of Nazareth), and they each select a subset of the history for their particular point (e.g., Luke has the ritual-trip to emphasize the law-biding character of the family and the acceptance of Jesus by godly Jews; Matthew has the Flight/Secret-Return story to emphasize the early rejection of—or indifference to-- Jesus by the Jewish leadership)

We could go on - the last words of Jesus, the last supper discussions, the death of Judas, the details of the resurrection, the account of Jesus' baptism, the beginning of his ministry...

I am anxious to help you better understand the New Testament writings. I enjoy doing so. So yes, let us do go on!