Smoodock's Blog

In my previous study we considered the time of Jesus’ birth, as that pertained to Herod’s death. However, that is only one of the problems surrounding an accurate understanding of the time Jesus was born. We also need to consider the problem of Quirinus’ registration in Luke 2. According to most scholars that registration took place in AD 6. How can the time of Jesus’ birth be in BC 3, if the registration didn’t take place until AD 6?

Before we even begin to consider Quirinus’ registration mentioned by Josephus, we need to understand that Luke mentions a worldwide registration, not merely one that occurred in the Jewish lands after Herod Archelaus’ removal and exile in AD 6. Luke tells us, “This was the first registration made…” and this registration was performed throughout the empire (Luke 2:1). The Greek oikoumene (G3625) is used 15 times in the New Covenant text and refers to the “world” with the only exception in Luke 21:26, where it is translated “earth” in the KJV and seems to refer to Jewish lands. So, why would the scholars automatically believe Luke 2:1 **must** mean Jewish lands, when the predominant meaning is “world”? Is this done out of a bias to support their dogma that Luke **must** be wrong about when Jesus was born?

In BC 2 Caesar Augustus celebrated his silver jubilee as Emperor of Rome, and the senate awarded him the title of Pater Patriae (Father of the Country). Beginning in BC 3, an empire wide census was taken, where the citizens of the Empire registered their names as a token of their oath of loyalty to Caesar. An archeological inscription dating to BC 3 states:

“taken by the inhabitants of Paphlagonia and the Roman businessmen dwelling among them…

…(and) the same oath was sworn by all the people in the land at the altars of Augustus in the temples of Augustus in the various districts.” (emphasis mine) [Lewis & Reinhold, Roman Civilization, vol. II, pps. 34 and 35, Harper Torchbooks Edition.]

Josephus seems to refer to this same census, saying 6000 Pharisees refused to take the oath of allegiance, when “all the people of the Jews gave assurance of their good-will to Caesar, and to the king’s government…”[1] The fact that Quirinius took this census and is referred to as governor, is a technicality that’s solvable. If Quirinius was in Syria, when either Saturninus or Varus were governing Syria, Quirinius would also be referred to as governor, as he was given the responsibility of conducting the registration.[2] On the other hand, he may also have been the temporary governor in Syria, while the official governor went to Rome to attend the festivities surrounding Augustus’ Silver Jubilee. We simply aren’t given that specific information, but there was, indeed, a registration of the world taken in BC 3, and Luke tells us Quirinius officiated it and drew his authority from Syria. This was the first registration of the people’s oath of allegiance, but it was also conducted later for other emperors.[3]

Therefore, I don’t believe critical scholarship has an argument here that Luke contradicts himself and Matthew. Jesus was, indeed, born prior to Herod’s death, and a census was taken to swear allegiance Caesar. Moreover, Herod also required the Jews to swear allegiance to himself at the same time, and, considering Herod’s suspicion of folks desiring to overthrow him, it is not hard to believe he would have required any Jew who had a right to the Davidic throne to register in Jerusalem or Bethlehem, just so he could keep an eye on possible offenders.

__________________________________________________________________

[1] See JOSEPHUS: Antiquities of the Jews; 17.2.4.

[2] See JOSEPHUS: Antiquities of the Jews; 16.10.8, where both Saturninus and Volumnius were joint presidents of Syria (see also Note 12). Thus, Quirinius may have had joint authority with on or both of these two governors, but Quirinus’ responsibility was the registration of the oaths.

[3] See JOSEPHUS; Wars of the Jews; 4.10.6. See also my earlier study in the Gospel of Luke: Quirinius, Governor of Syria.