CADRE Comments

Since the most prolific of my blogging partners, Layman, has been tied up at work (and looks to be for some time), I thought that in light of the Christmas season, I would repost two pieces that he wrote a couple of years ago about the Census in Luke 2 because we have an number of new readers who may never have read through his thoughts on this issue from two years ago. They are republished as originally written with only my correcting some typographical errors. Enjoy. =============== Luke, the Census, and Quirinius: A Matter of Translation Introducing the Issue One of the more well-known criticisms of the Gospel of Luke’s infancy narratives is that it puts the census (also called a “registration”), that caused Joseph and Mary to travel to Bethlehem, at the wrong time. Most versions translate Luke 2:1 along the lines of the New Revised Standard Version: Luke 2:2: This was the first registration and was taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria. The problem is that the registration th...

I finally got around to ordering a book that was on my Amazon Wish List. It was one of those that I could not remember exactly why it ended up on my list but I am glad it did: Paul, Luke and the Graeco-Roman World . It is a part of the Journal for the Study of the New Testament Series; Volume 217 to be exact. It is one of those topically oriented compilation of articles in honor of a leading New Testament Scholar. This one honors Sandy Wedderburn. The book contains many interesting articles but I have only had time to fully read two of them. The first is a critique of Loveday Alexander’s conclusion that the Gospel of Luke is akin to ancient scientific treatises, by David Aune: "Luke 1.1-4: Historical or Scientific Proomiion." Aune is well-positioned to write such a critique given his past work in the study of New Testament genre. He raises some excellent points, but the article is relatively short and is more of a launching pad for areas of further investigation. Th...

Could There Have Been An Earlier Census? -- Further Thoughts on Luke's Nativity Even if Luke is properly translated to refer to a registration which occurred before the famous one under Quirinius, it is argued that it is impossible that there was any census in Judea prior to the one under Quirinius. This is mostly an argument from silence based on the fact that -- other than Luke's reference -- there are no direct mentions of any such census. Since arguments from silence are problematic, especially when -- as here -- our records and history are incomplete, critics attempt to bolster this argument by arguing that there were no census' in client-kingdoms under Roman rule. That is, though under the control of Rome, Rome let a local king run the province. At the time of Jesus’ birth, that king was King Herod. However, there are at least two responses to this argument. First that Herod conducted his own system and second that Rome ordered such a census be conducted. I wil...

Luke, the Census, and Quirinius: A Matter of Translation Introducing the Issue One of the more well-known criticisms of the Gospel of Luke’s infancy narratives is that it puts the census (also called a “registration”), that caused Joseph and Mary to travel to Bethlehem, at the wrong time. Most versions translate Luke 2:1 along the lines of the New Revised Standard Version: Luke 2:2: This was the first registration and was taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria. The problem is that the registration that occurred under Quirinius took place in 6 AD, a few years after the reign of King Herod. But Luke places the birth of Jesus during the reign of King Herod, between 4-7 BC. The registration under Quirnius was significant because it signaled the beginning of direct Roman control over Judea. Prior to that time, King Herod – not a respected Jew, but also not a Roman – governed all of Israel as a client king of Rome. Not too long after he passed away, Judea came to be ruled directl...

The birth narrative in the Gospel of Luke typically faces many challenges and criticisms that are facially unrelated to its miraculous nature. Most of these arise from the first five verses in Luke’s second chapter. Now in those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus, that a census be taken of all the inhabited earth. This was the first census taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria. And everyone was on his way to register for the census, each to his own city. Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the city of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and family of David, in order to register along with Mary, who was engaged to him, and was with child. Questions about Quirinius and the timing of the census are challenging and legitimate, though not without sound responses. Other issues which are typically raised in conjunction, however, are overblown. Indeed, once the relevant verses are properly understood, these othe...

More on the Census in Luke 2 Over at Hypotyposeis, Stephen C. Carlson continues his exploration into his alternative reading of Luke 2:2 ("this became a very important registration when Quirinius was governing Syria"). In his latest argument, Carlson focuses on the implications of the context of Luke 2:1-7 on his translation. Therein, he makes a point I had earlier made -- the "decree" of Augustus ("Now in those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus, that a census be taken of all the inhabited earth") should not be understood to require a single one-time census. Carlson states: If full credit is given to the precise and apparently deliberate usage of the present vs. aorist infinitives in this passage, then it looks like the writer is not envisioning that Augustus's decree or decision (δόγμα) has inaugurated a single-census to be conducted all at once but a policy of conducting censuses throughout the whole civilized world, which to a ...

Another Alternative Translation of Luke 2:2 On his blog today, Stephen C. Carlson states his disagreement with the translation of Luke 2:2, favored by Nigel Turner and N.T. Wright (among others) which has Luke referring to a census "before" the one under Quirinius. I recently posted about this translation and on the likelihood that there could have been an earlier census. Nevertheless, Carlson agrees that the more common translation, "first registration, taken when Quirinius was Governor," is problematic. He agrees that the entire passage is -- as he puts it -- "exegetically challenging." As a result, Carlson would translate Luke 2:2 to state: This registration became most prominent when Quirinius was governing Syria. or This [decree to get registered] became the/a most important registration when Quirinius was governing Syria. So, Carlson has Luke writing about the registration process begun by Augustus, but continuing over the years...

The next Non Issue in Luke’s birth narrative is Joseph’s return to his ancestral home, Bethlehem, to register for the census. (I deal with the first Non Issue -- the scope of the Augustun decree --, here ). Many commentators are completely dismissive, conjuring up images of an empire-wide census requiring everyone to return to the city of their ancient ancestors. E.P. Sanders, for example, claims that "the entirety of the Roman Empire would be uprooted by such a decree" and asks, "Why should Joseph have had to register in the town of one of his ancestors forty-two generations later?" The Historical Figure of Jesus , pages 86-87. Paying closer attention to the Gospel of Luke itself, however, reveals that the author is careful not to describe the census itself as requiring registration in one's ancestral home. Rather, Luke only references any ancestor when noting that Joseph registered in Bethlehem because he was of the House of David. When referring to the ...

Note: Part 4 of this series can be found here. It discusses how Dr. Richard Pervo, in his 2006 edition of Dating Acts , ends up having to imagine a reason for why the author of Acts would intentionally change a rhetorically impressive generalization from Josephus into a sober and realistic number--for a purpose that directly contravenes the author's own enumerations just previously in his own narrative. We'll be getting back to that problem again later... Part 5 -- Circling The Shell Game Around Rather than face this clear problem with his explanation, Dr. Pervo hops over to a completely different argument: Acts 5 shows Luke only knew about one census, namely the one at the time of Judas the Galilean, so Luke had to have been either mistaken or just making things up for the GosLuke prologue, so there, nyah! Or words to that effect; what Dr. Pervo is aiming at, is to strengthen the appearance of his thesis concerning Luke’s source for Acts 5 by appealing to a different argument...

Some Comments on the Newsweek Article – The Census The Newsweek article picks up on the usual criticism that the Gospel of Luke is wrong about the census. It argues that Luke erroneously claims that there was a global census ordered by August: “Augustus conducted no global census, and no more local one makes sense in Luke's time frame.” Here is what the Gospel of Luke actually says: Luke 2:1 In those days a decree went out from Emperor Augustus that all the world should be registered. (NRSV). The notion that a census would occur simultaneously throughout the entire Empire at one point is an anachronism. That’s the way we do it in the United States, in a highly centralized process administered by the federal (central) government during a discrete time period. Such a feat was not possible in ancient times. And note that Luke does not actually describe the census being carried out through the entire empire. He merely states that Augustus decided and made it official policy th...

Every Christmas its the Same Newsweek and Time expose the myths of Christmas In a Charlie Brown Christmas, Charlie Brown converses with Lucy who complains, "Every Christmas its the same . . . ." I feel much the same way about the news that I found in the following article from the New York Daily News : Just in time for Christmas, America's two largest news magazines devote this week's cover stories to debunking the story of Jesus' birth. Among the conclusions in Time and Newsweek: Jesus was born in Nazareth, not Bethlehem; there is little evidence of three kings following a star, and the story of the virgin birth may have been borrowed. "The Nativity saga is neither fully fanciful nor fully factual but a layered narrative of early tradition and enduring theology," Newsweek writes in examining the Sunday-school version of the birth of Christ. This may be unwelcome "news" to most Americans. A Newsweek poll found that 55% of Americans believe ever...

As I stated earlier, the Gospels found in the New Testament canon should be given pre-eminence in discerning what happened in the life of Jesus Christ. Yet, some people believe that these books of (often of doubtful authenticity) should be reviewed to determine what, if any, details they can add about Jesus’ life. Certainly, it is true that some of the earlier of the Gospels may have information that could be from independent witnesses, but there is usually more misinformation than real information in these so-called “gospels.” To that end, using the information provided on Please Convince Me as a jumping off point, I have done a brief examination of the various non-canonical Gospels. If one were to look at the books that have been labeled as Gospels and Histories but which have been left out of the Canonical Gospels, one would discover that these non-canonical works do not tell a different tale about Jesus birth. Infancy Gospel of James One such Gospel is the Infancy Go...

In an earlier post , I blogged about Prof. Jack Kinneer, Adjunct Professor of New Testament Studies, Reformed Presbyterian Theological Seminary, concerning a short article that he had written answering some of the commonly held myths of Christmas. I noted my disappointment that Prof. Kinneer had not given more details in support of his propositions. Well, I spoke too soon. It turns out that the article I cited previously was only a summary of some of the arguments he made as to why certain stories about Christmas are actually a myth. (Let me clarify, he is not saying that the Christmas stories as found in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke are myths. Rather, he is saying that there are certain myths that have grown up around those accounts that are myths. For example, one such myth is that the magi showed up in Bethlehem when Jesus was two or three years old. Another myth is that Jesus stayed in Egypt for a couple of years before returning to Israel.) He has actually written a much longer...