Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I did. It's contains all kinds of speculation popular with apologists, but it's weak on facts.
Let's outline footnotes to Luke 2 in the New American Bible. It summarizes the matter pretty well.
(1) There were universal registrations of Roman citizens in 28 BC, 8 BC., and 14 AD. Luke is the only one claiming a 6 AD universal census. No other historian claims such a census.
(2) "Quirinius became legate of the province of Syria in A.D. 6-7 when Judea was annexed to the province of Syria. At that time, a provincial census of Judea was taken up. If Quirinius had been legate of Syria previously, it would have to have been before 10 B.C. because the various legates of Syria from 10 B.C. to 4 B.C. (the death of Herod) are known."
(3) Claiming an earlier census under Quirinius creates a conflict with the beginning of Jesus' ministry a dating for an earlier census under Quirinius would create additional problems for dating the beginning of Jesus' ministry:
Luke 23:1 "In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, and Herod was tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias was tetrarch of Abilene, during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John the son of Zechariah in the desert.
I'm presently going over what Lardner found out in my set of Lardner's Works. I started before work this morning and will have to take it up again after work when I have time. He has done a very exhaustive research on this matter.
One thing I do know is that Luke is so exact in his treatise that I see no reason he would make a mistake on this matter.
He was writing to Theophilus and it would seem odd to me Luke would be careful about everything else he wrote but sloppy in Luke 2:2.
Why would he ruin his credibility at the outset of his treatise?
We know for a fact Christ was born when Herod was king.
Anyway, I'll have to get back later on this after I have taken more time to research what Lardner found out.
The passage, thus translated, does not say that this assessment was made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria, which would not have been the truth, but that this was the first assessment which Cyrenius, who was (i.e. afterwards) governor of Syria, made; for after he became governor, he made a second. Lardner defends this opinion in a very satisfactory and masterly manner. See vol. i. p. 317. etc.
RESPONSE:
Adam Clark seems to miss the point that Luke's passage requires that:
1. Quirinius is governor of Syria. 2. The census included Judea. 3. This is unrealated to Augustus's census (which did not occur in 6 A.D.) 4. The census was occassioned by the exile of Archelaus, the son of King Herod the Great, and the client ruler of Judea. 5. Until his exile in 6 AD, Archelaus levied and collected the taxes, not the Romans.
I'm presently going over what Lardner found out in my set of Lardner's Works. I started before work this morning and will have to take it up again after work when I have time. He has done a very exhaustive research on this matter.
One thing I do know is that Luke is so exact in his treatise that I see no reason he would make a mistake on this matter.
He was writing to Theophilus and it would seem odd to me Luke would be careful about everything else he wrote but sloppy in Luke 2:2.
Why would he ruin his credibility at the outset of his treatise?
We know for a fact Christ was born when Herod was king.
Anyway, I'll have to get back later on this after I have taken more time to research what Lardner found out.
1. No. We don't "know for a fact that Herod" was king when Jesus was born. Only Matthew makes this claim. Note there is no Magi and Star, no Slaughter of the Innocent, no flight into Egypt, in either Luke's account. The historian Josephus makes no mention of the slaughter which he most assuredly would have reported in his extensive writings of Herod.
>>One thing I do know is that Luke is so exact in his treatise that I see no reason he would make a mistake on this matter.<<
Really? Did you happen to notice that Luke has Mary and Joseph included in the census of Judea. Nazareth is in Galilee, not Judea, and it remained solidly under the client ruler Antipas' control until 39 AD.
Hence, Galileans were NOT counted in Quirinius' census of Judea.
Note also, that Luke has Mary and Joseph immediately return to Nazareth after the Purification (40 days after the birth of Jesus). No trip to Egypt in Luke's nativity narrative.
1. No. We don't "know for a fact that Herod" was king when Jesus was born. Only Matthew makes this claim. Note there is no Magi and Star, no Slaughter of the Innocent, no flight into Egypt, in either Luke's account. The historian Josephus makes no mention of the slaughter which he most assuredly would have reported in his extensive writings of Herod.
>>One thing I do know is that Luke is so exact in his treatise that I see no reason he would make a mistake on this matter.<<
Really? Did you happen to notice that Luke has Mary and Joseph included in the census of Judea. Nazareth is in Galilee, not Judea, and it remained solidly under the client ruler Antipas' control until 39 AD.
Hence, Galileans were NOT counted in Quirinius' census of Judea.
Note also, that Luke has Mary and Joseph immediately return to Nazareth after the Purification (40 days after the birth of Jesus). No trip to Egypt in Luke's nativity narrative.
The writers of the New Testament knew for a fact Herod was king when Jesus was born. You don't, they did.
Mary and Joseph may have presently lived in Nazareth when the order was given but their place for being registered was in Bethlehem being the city of David since they were of David's seed.
Matthew 2:12-14 CLV And, being apprised in a trance not to go back to Herod, through another way they retire into their country. (13) Now, at their retiring into their country, [Luke agrees with Matthew] lo! a messenger of the Lord is appearing in a trance
to Joseph, saying, "Being roused, take along the little Boy and His mother and flee into
Egypt, and be there till I should speak to you, for Herod is about to be seeking the little
Boy to destroy Him" (14) Now he, being roused, took along the little Boy and His mother
by night and retires into Egypt.
Just because Luke does not say He went into Egypt does not mean he did not. There are lots of things each writer of the four accounts bring in and leave out.
Luke says:
Luk 2:22 And when the days of their cleansing are fulfilled according to the law of Moses, they brought Him up into Jerusalem to present Him to the Lord"
Luk 2:39 And, as they accomplish all according to the law of the Lord, they return into Galilee, into their own city, Nazareth."
So they went back to their city, Nazareth as Matthew affirms and THEN went to Egypt according to Matthew.
Also, there is nothing stated that if Josephus did not record an event it could not have happened. Matthew is no less an historian as it pertains to the Christian history then Josephus is of secular history.
Was the census taken when quirinius was governor of Syria?
I've been reading Lardner's Works on this matter and he looks at some scholars of the Greek language on this verse. This caused me to look at the Greek.
It states:
"This registration occurred *before* Quirinius is governing Syria." (Luke 2:2).
In the Greek sublinear it states:
"The from-writing before-most (Sinaticus Greek text has "became before") of-leadershipping of-the Syria of-Quirinius."
So it could be written according to Sinaticus:
"The first registration came before the governing of Syria by Quirinius."
[quote=Eusebius;17083857]>>The writers of the New Testament knew for a fact Herod was king when Jesus was born. You don't, they did.<<
RESPONSE:
Not "they." "He" there was only one writer for Luke's gospel. And evidently he didn't know that Jesus was born before 4 BC and not in 6 AD.
>>Mary and Joseph may have presently lived in Nazareth when the order was given but their place for being registered was in Bethlehem being the city of David since they were of David's seed.<<
RESPONSE:
That's the reason Luke had to come up with the story of the census to get them to Bethelem. He overlooked the fact that as Galileans, they were not subject to Quirinus's census. Matthew evidently has them already living in a house in Bethlehem so the cessus and manger story was unnecessary.
>>Matthew 2:12-14 CLV And, being apprised in a trance not to go back to Herod, through another way they retire into their country. (13) Now, at their retiring into their country, [Luke agrees with Matthew] lo! a messenger of the Lord is appearing in a trance
to Joseph, saying, "Being roused, take along the little Boy and His mother and flee into
Egypt, and be there till I should speak to you, for Herod is about to be seeking the little
Boy to destroy Him" (14) Now he, being roused, took along the little Boy and His mother
by night and retires into Egypt.<<
RESPONSE:
Luke 2:39 “When they had finished everything required by the law of the Lord, they returned to Galilee, to their own town of Nazareth
Luke has the Holy Family returning to Nazareth about 40 days after Jesus’ birth. There is no trip to Egypt since Herod has been dead for ten years. You are confusing Matthew’s story with Luke’s story.
>>Just because Luke does not say He went into Egypt does not mean he did not. There are lots of things each writer of the four accounts bring in and leave out.<<
RESPONSE:
Luke 2: 41 “ Now every year his parents went to Jerusalem for the festival of the Passover”
>>Luke says:Luk 2:22 And when the days of their cleansing are fulfilled according to the law of Moses, they brought Him up into Jerusalem to present Him to the Lord"
Luk 2:39 And, as they accomplish all according to the law of the Lord, they return into Galilee, into their own city, Nazareth."
So they went back to their city, Nazareth as Matthew affirms and THEN went to Egypt according to Matthew.<<
RESPONSE:
Matthew does not state in the beginning of his account that Joseph and Mary were residing in Nazareth. After the death of Herod, Matthew has Mary and Joseph not return to their home in Judea, but making a home in Nazareth.
Matt 2:22-23 "But when he heard that Archelaus was ruling over Judea in place of his father Herod, he was afraid to go there. And after being warned in a dream, he went away to the district of Galilee. 23There he made his home in a town called Nazareth."
Note: He went "away" to Galilee.
Again, only Matthew has the Slaughter of the Innocents and Egypt story. Luke doesn't because King Herod has been dead for ten years at the time of the exile of Archelaus and the census of Quirinius.
>>Also, there is nothing stated that if Josephus did not record an event it could not have happened. Matthew is no less an historian as it pertains to the Christian history then Josephus is of secular history.<<
RESPONSE:
We’re talking about what Matthew and Luke recorded. Josephus gives a clear summary and dating (after ten years when Archelaus had inherited Judea from Herod) and reason for the Quirinius census (exile of Archelaus)during which Luke reports Jesus to be born.
(see above)
Last edited by ancient warrior; 12-22-2010 at 07:03 AM..
Reason: remove multiple [SIZE]
By the way the slaughter of the babies is recorded by extrabilical sources of Early Christanity.
RESPONSE:
Yes. There are a number of "extrabiblical" yarns based on the Gospels which, due to their spurious nature, never made it into the canon of scripture.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
