The Census Problem

There are some biblical scholars, and others who express an anti-Christian sentiment, who question certain historical facts integral to the incarnation and birth of Jesus of Nazareth. One of those disputed facts is found in the Gospel of Luke. Luke cites a historical marker timing Jesus’ birth with a census which was taken while Quirinius (aka Cyrenius) was governor of Syria (Luke 2:1-2).

This census refers to the enrollment of the Roman provinces of Syria and Judaea for tax purposes. This taxation occurred during the reign of Emperor Caesar Augustus (27 BC – AD 14). The taxation was overseen by Publius Sulpicius Quirinius. Apparently this census required the inhabitants to return to their birthplaces for official recording. The Gospel of Luke uses this information to resolve the issue of how a Galilean could be born in Bethlehem in Judah. The factuality of this census is supported, historically, by the first century Jewish historian, Josephus.

The Problem

The problem of the census centers upon the lack of Roman records requiring people to return to their ancestral homelands for a census, the date of the census presided over by Quirinius, and the fact that the Gospel of Matthew links Jesus’ birth, chronologically, to the reign of Herod the Great who died in 4 BC – almost 10 years before the census allegedly occurred.

If there is no evidence that the Romans required the inhabitants of the Empire to return to their homelands for taxation and if the date of the census mentioned by Luke is actually the one which occurred in AD 6/7 at the installment of Quirinius as the governor of Syria, then there is a genuine biblical contradiction which casts dispersions on Jesus’ birth and incarnation.

The Resolution

Resolving these issues is not easy, nor is it simple. I will, however, endeavor to summarize how to resolve such issues with enough detail to make it interesting, but without being too overwhelming.

A Worldwide Census

Some object to Luke’s accuracy; pointing out that in the Book of Acts Luke records the words of Gamaliel who places the census after a revolt by Theudas which took place around AD 46 and during the days of one Judas the Galilean (Acts 5:34-37). If this was the same census ordered by Augustus, then it could not be the same census to which Luke refers in his Gospel. In the Gospel account, Luke states that Augustus ordered that the “whole world” should be taxed. Luke uses the term οἰκουμένην (oikoumenen) to state this. This term literally means “inhabited world,” but was frequently used to indicate the Roman Empire proper. Skeptics state that no Empire-wide census in Augustus’ time is attested to outside of Luke’s Gospel. However, one must keep in mind that Luke’s language does not have to imply that the entire Empire was enrolled in the census simultaneously. It may very well be that Luke’s wording only suggests that Augustus’ decree was that the registration practices that had been employed in Italy for centuries and the in the provinces for quite some time should be extended throughout the rest of the Roman world; including client kingdoms such as Syria and Judaea. This Empire-wide registration policy decreed by Augustus was first implemented in Judaea under the oversight of Quirinius.

Census Practices

Luke’s statement that Joseph had to travel to Bethlehem, his ancestral home, to register in the census and pay his taxes is often called into question; stating that this was not generally a Roman practice and was quite impractical given the size of the Empire. In answer to this objection, I would point out an Egyptian papyrus dated to AD 104 which required people to return to their homes for a census. Admittedly, this papyrus does only refer to migrant workers returning to their family homes, not their ancestral homes, and not to Roman inhabitants en masse. It should be remembered that the Roman Empire often adapted its administration to local circumstances. A census conducted in Syria and Judaea would undoubtedly have respected the strong attachment of Jewish tribal and ancestral relationships. It is not outside the realm of possibility that the citation in Luke’s Gospel took into account such Roman practices and that the Empire began the census Luke mentions in Syria and Judaea and that the Judean leader of the time required the Jews to return to their ancestral homes; that this return was not Empire-wide.

Quirinius & the Census

According to Luke 2:2, Quirinius was governor of Syria at the time Jesus was born. Some object that Luke’s account contradicts Matthew’s account where he states that Jesus’ birth was during the reign of Herod the Great. The problem here is that Herod died in 4 BC, but the census when Quirinius was governor of Syria is said by Josephus to have occurred in AD 6/7, almost 10 years after Herod’s death. No one really objects to Matthew’s account and the historicity of Jesus’ birth occurring during the reign of Herod the Great; probably around 6 BC. So, either Luke made a mistake or we are missing something in our understanding of his reference to Quirinius.

There is a plausible, and historical, explanation to this problem. There were two censuses and the census cited in Luke 2:1-2 occurred before the second which is mentioned in Acts 5:37. Since Josephus clearly states that Quirinius was appointed governor of Syria and oversaw the census dated to AD 6/7, how do we handle the two census scenario? The first solution is in the text itself. Luke writes that this census was the “first census that took place while Quirinius was governor of Syria” (NIV). Luke uses the word πρώτη (prote) which is translated “first.” The word can also be translated as “former” as he uses it in Acts 1:1 to refer to his former letter to Theophilus; namely Luke’s Gospel. Thus, a retranslation of Luke 2:1-2 would read, “the former census that took place when Quirinius was governor of Syria.”

The retranslation answers the question of to which census Luke was referring, but doesn’t answer the question of Quirinius governorship of Syria. The known governors of the province of Syria are Titius (before 10 BC), Saturninus (10-6 BC), and Varus (6-4 BC). There is no mention of Quirinius until AD 6/7. However, we do know, historically, that Quirinius was a military general who led a very successful campaign against the Homanadenses in Galatia around 12 BC. This brought him into the eye of Augustus as a trusted tactician and trustworthy leader. Historical record puts Quirinius in the Syrian province, as a military leader of some sort, from 10-6 BC. We know that Saturninus was the governor of Syria from 9-6 BC and Varus was the governor of Syria from 7 BC – AD 4 (note the 1 year overlap there). One would expect one of these men to have overseen the census in 7 BC, but neither is cited as having done so. It is of note that Luke uses the Greek participle ἡγεμονεύοντος (hegemoneuontos) which is a general term for a leader; typically one that rules as a governor, not the noun form found elsewhere in Luke/Acts which is commonly translated as governor. It may very well have been that Augustus placed Quirinius in charge of the census in Syria during the transition from Saturninus to Varus around 7 BC. If the time lapse between Syrian censuses was 14 years, as it commonly was in the Roman provinces, this puts Quirinius in Syria at the right time for a first census which predates the one Josephus cites in AD 6/7.

Conclusion

These historical and textual evidences should help you understand the congruity between Matthew’s and Luke’s accounts and dispel any dispersions against the biblical account of Jesus’ birth. I have merely touched on this issue very basically. Entire dissertations have been written on the issue. It should be noted that if Luke was a myth-builder, why would he give such intricate, verifiable historical details like names, dates, places, etc.? Luke wrote both his Gospel and the Book of Acts to Theophilus, most likely a pseudonym of a high ranking Roman official who would have known if Luke got his Roman facts wrong.