Starting in Matthew there are some very curious things that lead to the disagreement about the dating of Jesus' birth. Quirinius is governor of Syria and Judea. Yet, Luke dates the birth of Jesus during the reign of Herod the Great. Matthew simply says "Herod the king." Quirinius did not rule over Syria until ten years after the death of Herod the Great. These are somewhat contradictory, leaving many to believe that Luke was simply wrong and writing in hindsight. These trouble many of those wishing to decide on inerrancy, yet I see no problem. The Bible was written by men.
The mass bloodshed of the infants in Matthew 2:16 is not recorded in the writings of Josephus nor in any other record of the time period, though it is typical of the bloodshed that would commence with the reign of Herod.
The judgement of what is good in Matthew 7:18 tells one about the nature of things. Evil begets evil. Violence begets more violence. Happiness brings more happiness. Good begets more good. In this day and age, what is called bad is not always bad. People may find more benefit from doing what is not politically correct in order to be pleasing to God. The story in Acts 5:1-10 reflects this.