Census of Quirinius

Attempted defences

The 2nd-century Christian apologist Justin Martyr claimed, without evidence, that the record of the census was still available and that it showed that Jesus was born in Bethlehem.^[21][22] Another Christian apologist, Tertullian (c. 155 – c. 220), suggested that Jesus' family was recorded in a census of Judaea conducted by Sentius Saturninus,^[23][24] the governor of Syria from 9–7 BCE.^[25]

Some modern scholars have attempted to defend Luke's account,^{[26][27][28][29]} which according to biblical scholar Géza Vermes contradicts historical fact, assuming Luke refers to the Census of Quirinius.^[30] Some conservative scholars have generally posited that an earlier census took place, invoking unproven claims. Historian Ralph Martin Novak explains that both Quirinius's career and the names and dates of the governors are well documented and there is no time before 6 CE when Quirinius could have served an earlier term as governor of Syria.^[1] Novak points out that such views spring from biblical inerrancy, the belief that the Bible is without error.^[31] Vermes describes attempts to defend the historicity of the biblical birth narratives as "exegetical acrobatics".^[30] The USCCB states that the various attempts to resolve the difficulties have proved unsuccessful, suggesting that Luke may simply be combining Jesus' birth in Bethlehem with the census for theological reasons, perhaps vaguely remembering that one was conducted by Quirinius.^[32]

Several unsubstantiated versions of the two-census hypothesis have been advanced by some conservative scholars. Paul Barnett, bishop and historian, theorizes that a census unrelated to taxation took place before Quirinius's tenure.^[26] Wayne Brindle^[who?] argues that the gospel's translation is ambiguous and thus refers to an earlier census held during Herod the Great's reign, as a result of the turbulent circumstances towards the end of his life; Brindle further argues that Quirinus held administrative power in the Syria region around that time, as part of a dual governorship with Gaius Sentius Saturninus, the former holding military and the latter political power.^[33] James A. Nollet^[who?] asserts that Quirinius served two terms as governor of Syria and took two censuses in Judea, the earlier one being a universal census by Augustus allegedly taken in 2 BCE.^[34] Dominican scholar Anthony Giambrone calls for "a more generous interpretation" of Luke to counter Augustan propaganda which purportedly could have been used to obscure a universal census of Roman regions conducted separately over a number of years.^[35]

Additionally, some writers state that in ancient literature, strict chronology is secondary to narrative coherence, and thus events could be excusably reordered.^[36][37] Historian David Armitage claims Luke 3 as an example because it gives an overview of John the Baptist's ministry up to his imprisonment before discussing his baptism of Jesus. Armitage argues that Luke refers to the Census of Quirinius as a similar anachronistic digression, flashing years forward from the nativity before returning to it,^[38][h] with the confusion ostensibly stemming from the author's "overly generous estimation of the historical literacy of his readers".^[38]

More recently, the Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary (SEBTS) defended the gospel by asserting that the Greek word usually translated as first (πρώτη, prote) should be translated as before, with Luke thus mentioning the census only as a chronological point of reference,^[39] despite explicating the family's registration. (Incidentally, Augustus held a census in 8 BCE—two years before Jesus' birth according to the SEBTS.)^[39][40] Some claim that the census of Quirinius was before Herod's death and that Luke was saying the census took place before Quirinius was governor.

John H. Rhoads argues in his journal article Josephus Misdated the Census of Quirinius^[41] that Josephus is known for chronological errors and that he is also known for duplicating the same events. Josephus mentions Judas of Galilee committing a religious revolt shortly after Herod's death and another in 6 CE, mentioning the census during the 6 CE revolt. Most scholars believe that Judas of Galilee caused both revolts but Rhoads claims that these are the same revolt due to similarities, such as the high priest Joazar being deposed in both accounts. Josephus also reports a similar religious revolt before Herod's death by Judas son of the Sepphorean, this revolt also mentions a high priest being deposed and Joazar taking his place. Rhodes argues that this is the same Judas and the same revolt due to these and other similarities. Rhodes concludes by saying that it is likely that all revolts were the same event and it took place before Herod's death and that the census of Quirinius was before Herod's death, not 6 CE. There is no other historical mention of the census of Quirinius besides Josephus and Luke.