When was Jesus born?

[YoursTrue]

Good grief.

Later for that -- not going to touch that right now, but when I have more time I hope to continue learning about the relationship(s) between Judea, Syria and Rome to embed it if possible in my memory. That may be a hard job but if I can, I hope to do it.

 

[YoursTrue]

Imagine a system of taxation based on people returning to their ancestral homes, going back a thousand years in the case of Joseph. By this time the Jews were spread out all over the known world. Can we seriously believe that the Romans would have required them to come back to Palestine, carrying everything they owned? How would the tax officials have assessed their land? In The Rise of Christianity the former Bishop E. W. Barnes remarks: "The Romans were a practical race, skilled in the art of government. It is incredible that they should have taken a census according to such a fantastic system. If any such census had been taken, the dislocation to which it would have led would have been world-wide. Roman historians would not have failed to record it."

As far as a system of taxation goes, I can understand and believe that the Romans wanted to know how many people were living by birth, I suppose, in their territories. I would assume they also wanted to know how many representatives of the Roman republic they would send there.

 

[YoursTrue]

No, there is not.

Even more contentious, however, is the notion that "everyone went to his own town to register." That is complete nonsense. Historians have noted that there is no historical record of Emperor Augustus ever giving such an order, that Quirinius (Cyrenius) was not governor of Syria at the time the birth was supposed to have taken place, and that there were insurmountable logistical problems if everybody in the Roman Empire had to travel to their ancestral towns in order to be accounted for and to pay their taxes.

Not to mention "which" ancestral town. Is it where your father was born? Grand-father? Great-great-great-great grandfather?

This is a complete fabrication by Luke in order to get Joseph and Mary into Bethlehem, in order fulfill the Old Testament prophecy of Israel’s future ruler coming from Bethlehem Ephrathah (Micah 5:2).

So here is what I have learned: Quirinius was a well-known Roman official who lived ca. 51 BCE – 21 CE. He is mentioned by numerous ancient authors, including Josephus, Suetonius, Pliny the Elder, Cassius Dio, Tacitus, Strabo, and Caesar Augustus himself. Thus we see attestations beyond the scriptures that Quirinius was a Roman official.

 

[YoursTrue]

Why do you assume those compilers cared any more about historical accuracy over religious symbology than the authors? After all, those same compliers excluded some gospels from the Bible, not because their authenticity was questioned but that their theology was inconvenient to the religious authorities of the time.

With any historical (or indeed modern) document you're looking at in this way, you have to be aware of the motives and intentions of the writers.

Here's my take on that right now -- we're all imperfect and can transmit events in different ways. I do believe that some comments by historians and/or religious commentators may not be complete. Or accurate.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What I'm "looking at" is the comparison of the two descriptions of Jesus' birth. And also hoping to understand who is who, such as Caesar Augustus and how Syria fits in with Judea at that time. Thanks.

At what time? Are you talking about 6 CE when the Census of Quirinius was held or at the time of the myth in Matthew?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Here's my take on that right now -- we're all imperfect and can transmit events in different ways. I do believe that some comments by historians and/or religious commentators may not be complete. Or accurate.

Ooh, wrong take. You should have concluded that the Bible contradicts itself by now.

There are Christians that do not rely upon the mythical parts of the Bible for their beliefs.

 

[Colt]

Really?

"Scholars point out that there was no single census of the entire Roman Empire under Augustus and the Romans did not directly tax client kingdoms; further, no Roman census required that people travel from their own homes to those of their ancestors."

Oooh! Good idea:

Census of Quirinius - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I saw the quote from the Office for National Statistics. I am rather amazed that they did not think out their response better. The Census office would know what havoc, and to no purpose, that a census as described in Luke would cause. People were taxed where they lived and made money. It would make no sense to have someone go to where they were born. That does not reflect where they live and make money now.

The counting of the Jews in Palestine was done differently apparently. Luke mentions it.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

So here is what I have learned: Quirinius was a well-known Roman official who lived ca. 51 BCE – 21 CE. He is mentioned by numerous ancient authors, including Josephus, Suetonius, Pliny the Elder, Cassius Dio, Tacitus, Strabo, and Caesar Augustus himself. Thus we see attestations beyond the scriptures that Quirinius was a Roman official.

That's it? That's all you've learned?

 

[URAVIP2ME]

That's it? That's all you've learned?

I'd like to add that Luke 2:2 mentions the FIRST registration thus showing there was more than one time frame involved.

 

[YoursTrue]

That's it? That's all you've learned?

That's not all I read so far, but that is how I intend to follow this logically, if possible so that I understand it.
I found another interesting analysis which I consider reasonable, here: Quirinius: An Archaeological Biography
I am not quoting all of it, but here is a portion of what it says --
"If we step back and analyze what is known from history and what Scripture does and does not say, we will see that Luke’s comments about Quirinius are consistent with the type of roles this famous Roman official was given by Caesar. He was a man whose “zealous services” had benefited Rome in various ways, including conducting a census in 6 AD, and may well have overseen some sort of “registration” (ESV) at an earlier date."
(Bolding and underlining added by me.)

 

[YoursTrue]

I'd like to add that Luke 2:2 mentions the FIRST registration thus showing there was more than one time frame involved.

Yes.

 

[YoursTrue]

That's it? That's all you've learned?

No, I didn't read all the extrabiblical sources mentioning Quirinius, did you, said to mention Quirinius, such as Josephus, Suetonius, Pliny the Elder, Cassius Dio, Tacitus, Strabo, and Caesar Augustus himself.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The counting of the Jews in Palestine was done differently apparently. Luke mentions it.

You mean the author of Luke Where does he mention it? He has to acknowledge that it was different from the norm. I think that you are just referring to his Nativity Myth.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

No, I didn't read all the extrabiblical sources mentioning Quirinius, did you, said to mention Quirinius, such as Josephus, Suetonius, Pliny the Elder, Cassius Dio, Tacitus, Strabo, and Caesar Augustus himself.

Then what I am seeing is that you are ignoring everything that doesn't take you in the direction you appear to want to go -- which is that "Quirinius is mentioned, and Quirinius is true, therefore the story is true." This is extremely poor reasoning.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'd like to add that Luke 2:2 mentions the FIRST registration thus showing there was more than one time frame involved.

No, that is a misinterpretation. Here let me quote it for you:

" 2 This was the first enrollment, when Quirin′i-us was governor of Syria. "

We know when Quirinius became governor of Syria, so it would have to be sometime after he became governor:

"After the banishment of the ethnarch Herod Archelaus in 6 AD, Judaea (the conglomeration of Samaria, Judea and Idumea) came under direct Roman administration, with Coponius appointed as prefect. At the same time, Quirinius was appointed Legate of Syria, with instructions to assess Judea Province for taxation purposes.[9] One of his first duties was to carry out a census as part of this order.[10]"

Quirinius - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Colt]

You mean the author of Luke Where does he mention it? He has to acknowledge that it was different from the norm. I think that you are just referring to his Nativity Myth.

It’s in Luke 2. You cannot prove its myth.
.

4 So Joseph also went up from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to Bethlehem the town of David, because he belonged to the house and line of David.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It’s in Luke 2. You cannot prove its myth.
.

4 So Joseph also went up from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to Bethlehem the town of David, because he belonged to the house and line of David.

LOL! That is not an explanation. That is a claim. And yes, I can and I have proved beyond a reasonable doubt that it is a myth. We can go over it point by point by point.

Do you know how we know that the Census of Quirinius was the first census of the area?

 

[YoursTrue]

Then what I am seeing is that you are ignoring everything that doesn't take you in the direction you appear to want to go -- which is that "Quirinius is mentioned, and Quirinius is true, therefore the story is true." This is extremely poor reasoning.

Certainly not ignoring everything. Not at all. You are making things up about me. With that in mind...have a good evening.

 

[YoursTrue]

Then what I am seeing is that you are ignoring everything that doesn't take you in the direction you appear to want to go -- which is that "Quirinius is mentioned, and Quirinius is true, therefore the story is true." This is extremely poor reasoning.

While I am considering a conversation with you to reach its end I am wondering if you read all the reasoning and commentary about Quirinius and his relationship with Judea.

 

[YoursTrue]

More about the year Jesus was born. I guess there are lots of things we learn in school that may not be accurate later. Written by James A. Nollett:
"When I attended Catholic parochial schools, the nuns taught us that Jesus was born “in the Year 0. Today, it is generally taught that Jesus was born during or before 4 BC. But there is no actual record of this date."
A very detailed account.

https://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2012/PSCF12-12Nollet.pdf