The Word in Focus with Dr Larry Taylor

^{Luke 2:1} In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the [Roman] world should be registered. ² This was the first registration and was taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria. 

To begin with, when was Jesus born? It’s clear from Matthew’s nativity account in chapter 2 that Jesus was born while Herod the Great ruled in Judea. Herod the Great died in 4 BC. Of that, everyone is certain. The records are well collaborated. So, Jesus had to be born somewhere around 6-4 BC.

Now we turn to Luke, which reads: ^2:1 In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the [Roman] world should be registered. ² This was the first registration and was taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria. 

The historical record leaves no doubt that Quirinius was appointed Propraetorial Imperial Legate of Roman Syria in 6 AD and subsequently, under orders from Rome, carried out a census. That census provoked a violent uprising among Jewish zealots. But Jesus was born around 6 BC, not 6 AD.

If we start with the preconceived assumed belief that a perfect God dictated a perfect book and then hovered over it for millennia preventing any copyist errors, coupled with the presumption that biblical authors are primarily interested in communicating historical dates, then we might speculate that Quirinius may have been appointed governor of Syria twice – once around 6 BC, the other in 6 AD. That, however, is pure speculation. There is no evidence that it happened.

Alternatively, we might speculate that the collaborating historical record is mistaken. Again, however, we’re simply guessing without any evidence.

If we maintain that the original text was perfect, but copyist errors may have crept in, we could conjecture that Luke originally wrote, “This was the first registration and was taken while Gaius Sentius Saturninus was governor of Syria.” (Saturninus was Propraetorial Imperial Legate of Roman Syria from 9-6 BC.) Or perhaps he originally wrote, “This was the first registration and was taken before Quirinius was governor of Syria. Others suggest, also without evidence, that maybe there was a census that began in 6 BC but took many years to complete.

If we start from the assumption that a perfect God produced a perfect book, we wind up engaging in all sorts of mental gymnastics and speculation. But why start there? Our perfect God uses imperfect, mistake prone people all the time to advance the Kingdom.

That does not mean that the Bible is riddled with errors and is unreliable. The historicity of the scriptures, especially the gospels, is well established. These events happened. They are not legends. Whatever version of the Bible you are reading is reliable. You can trust it. All scripture is God-breathed. (1Timothy 3:16) But it wasn’t dictated to automatons. The personalities of the writers and editors shine through. 

But I don’t think there are any errors in Luke chapter 2. My guess is that Luke purposely placed the birth narrative next to Quirinius’ census and subsequent zealot revolt, not because he didn’t know the history, but because the order of historical events was not nearly as important to ancient writers as it is to most of us. Ancient, especially biblical writers, often rearrange events to make literary and theological points. They are not cold journalists listing a bunch of facts. They are teaching us deep theological truth. 

Luke most likely places the census next to the nativity narrative to contrast the birth of the Prince of Peace with the zealots’ violence. Jesus came to establish an upside-down kingdom of love. His methods are never violent or coercive. He conquers hate with love and death by dying. Jesus never rides the red horse, always forbids weaponry, and calls us to follow him in cruciform, self-sacrificial, nonviolent resistance to evil.

Luke’s original readers would have been familiar with the various violent revolts against Rome that eventually led to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. By placing the birth narrative next to one of them, Luke is emphasizing the radical difference between the kingdoms of this world and the Kingdom of God. 

We are called to follow the Lamb into the new creation. Ours is not the way of violence, revolt, riot, insurrection, or political takeover. Ours is the way of the cross.