Luke 2 vv 1,2 - Anachronism on Census?
Luke Ch 2 vv1,2 - An area under attack as having discrepancies on governorship, and census.
(v1)
Now it came about in those days that a decree went out from Caesar Augustus, that a census [enrollment] be taken of all the inhabited earth.
"All the inhabited earth" - does not include Australia, Japan and Russia. It does not mean the whole earth as inhabited today. It meant the Roman World (ie: the known world to the Romans and the Greeks).
(v2)
[This took place as a first census] This was the first census taken while Quirinius (Kyrenios - Greek name) was governor of Syria.Skeptics (rational thinkers) claim that Quirinius had one census only, and was governor of Syria once only (6-9AD). - Lapis Venetus (CIL,3. 6687)
Judea was part of Syria at that time.Matt 4 v24.
And the report of him went forth into all Syria: -asvThis verse of Matt shows that Syria was the area of our concentration on Biblical affair.
Judea, Galilee, River Jordan were taken as parts of Syria at the time of Christ. Our attention is not drawn to any other political or economical or domestic centre.
Abundant papyrological evidence from Egypt has established the 14 - year cycle of the census in that province, and fixes AD 20 as a census year.
Roman census occurred by 20AD, 6AD, 8BC.The difficulty then arises that Sentius Saturninus and not Quirinius was governing Syria from 9 - 7 BC., and Quinctilius Varus from 6 - 4 BC.
A clue to a solution lies in an inscription which suggests that P. Sulpicius Quirinius governed Syria twice. [Lapis Tiburtinus (CIL, 14.3613) - when he (name of officer mutilated) became imperial legate of Syria he entered upon that office for a second time. ] It is clear from the inscription unearthed that a Roman soldier could be governor of an area more than once. This would mean 2 officers could govern the same area in the same period.
W. M. Ramsay suggests that Quirinius was in control of the foreign relations of Syria during the war with the Cilician hill tribe of the Homonadenses in 6 AD. This is consistent with the term used, and with Roman policy. An enrollment in Herod's kingdom would thus be supervised by him.Justin Martyr at 150AD wrote that Kyrenios was governor of Syria when Jesus was born.
As the census at 6 AD by Kyrenios was well-known, Justin would most probably have known of it. He would be suggesting that Kyrenios was governor of Syria twice.
Justin Martyr stated in 3 places that Cyrenius (Kyrenios) was governor of Syria at the time of the nativity, as well as ten years after it.
He says (Apol. i.34), "Jesus was born at Bethlehem, thirty stadia distant from Jerusalem; as you may learn from the enrolments that were held under Quirinus (Kyrenios) your first governor, in Judea." This testimony is more important because it is addressed to the Emperor, Senate, and People of Rome.
He said that Kyrenios was the first governor in Judea; more specific in chronology and in location (rather than referring to Syria). Kyrenios would not be the first governor if he first came to govern Judea in 6 AD.
Justin says also (Apol. i.46), "Christ was born one hundred and fifty years ago, under Quirinus (Kyrenios)."
And in his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew (cap.78) he says that "Joseph went up from Nazareth, where he dwelt, to Bethlehem, whence he derived his origin, when the first taxing in Judea was held under Quirinus." (Cp. Euseb. H. E. i.5.)
There is no indication that Jesus was not born at this time of the first taxing.
This quotation suggests that Justin was aware of the first taxing at 6 AD in Judea under Kyrenios. And he talked of the government of Kyrenios at different period in history.
This statement is consistent with Tertullian's account, that the census of the Nativity was held by Saturninus 9 - 7 BC. (Marcion, iv.19) Sentius Saturninus might have had local jurisdiction in this matter in Judea, while Quirinus was Praeses of Syria. (Joseph. Antt. xviii. 1, Antt. xvi.9) So Saturninus and Quirinus might hold office at the same time.The Roman archives could still be intact in his (Justin Martyr) days, and no despute was found to his claim that the account of Roman governor, and Christ's birth are accurate; and Luke, as he claimed in Luke Ch 1 vv 1-3, wrote the account of eyewitnesses and servants of the word (The word of God referring to God the Son as God) in consecutive order after investigating everything carefully from the beginning.
By all possibility, Luke, being in the days of Caesar Augustus, Christ and other firsthand witnesses, was unlikely to make a (alleged by sceptics) major mistake in chronology.
(Sir W. M. Ramsay's book, Was Christ Born at Bethlehem? esp. ch. XI) The census could have taken place in the autumn of 5 BC, postponed by the dying Herod's devices of obstruction and procrastination.
The other and later census of Quirinus seems to have been known as "the taxing" (see also, Acts v.37). It was the more celebrated of the two, because in the earlier taxing (that of the Nativity) Judea had not been reduced to a Roman province, as it was after the deposition of Archelaus, under Quirinus.
Luke distinguished the first one as "the first census," and the second as "the census."
In confirmation of the above opinion it may be observed that, in the Roman provinces, Land, which could be shown to have been under cultivation for ten years, was liable to taxation. (Ulpian, de Censibus, Jus Civile, i. p.705) And the census of Cyrenius was about ten years after Jesus' birth. The census at the time of the nativity would then come into full operation. In this sense, the earlier census might well be called the first census. We may explain that as taxing was then in operation, an insurrection took place (Acts v.37).
Is Matthew a translation? || Why 4 Gospels? || Prophesy on Tyre ||The lowly and the far-reaching ||
Photography || Photo Gallery || Portrait Gallery || Architecture ||
Design Consultancy || Preacher || Herbalist || Cool Sites ||