Chronology of Jesus' infancy?

[DOShea]

And why would Joseph and Mary travel to Bethlehem from Nazareth anyway? Quirinius was given control of Judea and conducted a census for tax purposes, never Galalee.

They lived in Nazareth, in Galilee. That is, the area that later became Nazareth. Some historians argue it didn’t exist with that name during either birth period.

Taxes were assessed and paid based on one’s ancestral home, which was, for Joseph, Bethlehem. That is why they needed to travel the 90 miles to Bethlehem so they could be recorded in the census of Quirinius.

 

[JP_Marat]

They lived in Nazareth, in Galilee. That is, the area that later became Nazareth. Some historians argue it didn’t exist with that name during either birth period.

Taxes were assessed and paid based on one’s ancestral home, which was, for Joseph, Bethlehem. That is why they needed to travel the 90 miles to Bethlehem so they could be recorded in the census of Quirinius.

RESPONSE:

Taxes were not assessed by a soveign who did not rule over a particularly province. In the case of Galilee, the ruler was Herod Antipas. In the case of Judea, the ruler was Quirinius. Neither conducted a census or taxed the other territory.

 

[JP_Marat]

Hello!

Why is it silliness? There is certainly only one Gospel, and every detail of each of the four canonical Gospels is an essential piece of this one Gospel.

What do you see in the following accounts? Harmony? Contradiction? Would it be silly to reconcile them?

Gospel 1: There was a man who barely graduated high school. He enlisted in the Army as an infantryman and was discharged for acne. After this, he was living with his mom until she made him leave home. And so he ended up living in his car for a length of time. He went on to marry his wife in a courthouse ceremony, and lived in a townhouse.

Gospel 2: There was a man who, after graduating high school, enlisted in the Air Force as a computer programmer. He became a Body-for-LIFE Grand Champion and graduated college with a bachelor’s majoring in computer science. After separating from the Air Force, he was a personal trainer at a local gym, married his wife in the Catholic Church, and lived in a single-family home.

Gospel 3: After graduating high school, a certain man attended a local community college for a year. Drifting though life, he ended up getting a job doing glass construction on 3 separate occasions, working for a landscaper pulling weeds and building hardscapes, selling paint at SEARS, and variously working as a substitute teacher, a high school teacher, and a home instructor for kids who had been kicked out of school. He tried to get a job as a prison guard but was denied because of certain pacifistic tendencies. He also had a brother who entered the Army and, after serving for 6 years, went on to serve in the Air Force as an F-15 pilot.

RESPONSE:

Poor analogy. Lets take actually passages from scripture.

Jesus sent for and rode one animal when entering Jerusalem (Mark, Luke, John). Or, Jesus sent for and rode two animals of different sizes when entering Jerusalem, (Matthew).

Are both versions inerrant?

 

[fireproofpoodle]

RESPONSE:

Poor analogy. Lets take actually passages from scripture.

Jesus sent for and rode one animal when entering Jerusalem (Mark, Luke, John). Or, Jesus sent for and rode two animals of different sizes when entering Jerusalem, (Matthew).

Are both versions inerrant?

Additional information does not a contradiction make. Perhaps Jesus took both animals, rode the donkey for a time and then rode the colt when actually entering the city. Perhaps the colt was ridden and the donkey used for carrying cloaks and staves, etc.

 

[patg]

hi.

Recently I have been wondering: how does the story of the presentation in the temple fit with the Lord’s journey into Egypt? Presentations had to happen (i think) 40 days after birth and the gospel says that after this Jesus returned to Nazareth, not bethlehem or egypt. Any clues?

You are asking a question which assumes there is literal history in these stories. This is not a required assumption and can indicate a basic misunderstanding of the literary form of the stories. It is very difficult to get exact answers when asking the wrong question. Infancy Narratives, including those in the gospels, were not written to answer the question “What is the literal story of this person’s birth?”

The infancy stories in Matthew and Luke are composed in the literary form known as an “Infancy Narrative” - a form of writing very common in the ancient world and used frequently to add status to the story of a famous or powerful person. This form of writing is not intended to be history and readers of the time were well aware of that. The biographies of most rulers and great warriors contained very similar stories - as in the birth of Alexander the Great, for example.

There are also numerous symbolic passages added to the narratives to indicate other aspects of Jesus’ personality. For example, the slaughter of the innocents by Herod and the flight into Egypt are included to express the author’s belief that Jesus was the new Moses.

While very little, if anything, is historically accurate, there are great truths being taught. The Church allows for these interpretations as is evidenced in Dei Verbum.

Not all truth is historical truth and fiction is NOT a synonym for lying. And please don’t take my word for this as I am just summarizing what some of the church’s most respected scripture scholars have taught.

 

[JP_Marat]

Additional information does not a contradiction make. Perhaps Jesus took both animals, rode the donkey for a time and then rode the colt when actually entering the city. Perhaps the colt was ridden and the donkey used for carrying cloaks and staves, etc.

RESPONSE:

That would make no sense at all. First of all, Matthew had Jesus send for two animals. Secondly, he did so so the prophecy in Zec 9:9 could be fulfilled, which Matthew interpreted as riding two animals. Thirdly, the scripture itself states:

"The disciples went and did as Jesus had directed them; they brought the donkey and the colt, and put their cloaks on them, and he sat on them.

Fourth, Mark, Luke, and John all say Jesus sent for and rode only one animal.

 

[Pete_Holter]

Hi fireproofpoodle!

I discussed the issue about the donkey and her colt with JP Marat beginning here. We had several exchanges. Read on, if you would like!

Please let me know if you have any other questions.

Your brother in Christ,
Pete

 

[JP_Marat]

Hi fireproofpoodle!

I discussed the issue about the donkey and her colt with JP Marat beginning here. We had several exchanges. Read on, if you would like!

Please let me know if you have any other questions.

Your brother in Christ,
Pete

RESPONSE:

However, your post does not disprove the facts as I presented them.

 

[patrick457]

RESPONSE:

That’s a nice version. But tell me, doesn’t Matthew have Mary and Joseph already living in a house in Bethlehem? Does he have any journey, manger, etc.?

Nitpick on this one:

Personally, I don’t need to see the requirement that the house be Joseph’s (Matthew just says “the house”, without any definite statement as to whom that house belongs to). For all we know, the house could be somebody elses’; Joseph and Mary are just guests (come to think of it, the word usually translated as “inn” in Luke’s account may not have been referring a commercial inn at all!).

 

[AmbroseSJ]

RESPONSE:

That’s a nice version. But tell me, doesn’t Matthew have Mary and Joseph already living in a house in Bethlehem? Does he have any journey, manger, etc.?

And why would Joseph and Mary travel to Bethlehem from Nazareth anyway? Quirinius was given control of Judea and conducted a census for tax purposes, never Galalee.

Nazareth was in Galilee which remained under Herod Antipas who governed and collected the taxes. Hence, their was no requirement that they travel to Bethlehem (Judea) to register.

“The Facts of History” by Vererable JPM

You are conflating different censuses. The census of Caesar Augustus which occurred in the 752nd year of Rome, and in the final years of the reign of Caesar Augustus was not for tax purposes, but merely for counting purposes. This is the census the Evangelist clearly speaks of in Matt 2:1. The censuses of Quirinus were for Tax purposes. The Evangelist only mentions this census to date the Augustan census, and to give its historical precedence and procedure. But it is not the census that caused Our Lady and St. Joseph to journey to Bethlehem, it was the Augustan census. see here. Yes, it’s strange that we have to go to the Protestant churches nowadays to get orthodox biblical exegesis, as so many liberal Catholic ones have abandoned truth in favor of their own conceits.

 

[JP_Marat]

Nitpick on this one:

Personally, I don’t need to see the requirement that the house be Joseph’s (Matthew just says “the house”, without any definite statement as to whom that house belongs to). For all we know, the house could be somebody elses’; Joseph and Mary are just guests (come to think of it, the word usually translated as “inn” in Luke’s account may not have been referring a commercial inn at all!).

RESPONSE:

The point is that Matthew already has Joesph and Mary living in Bethlehem. Thus he describes no journey from Nazarath to Bethlehem, manger, choirs of angels, shepherds, etc., etc.

And according to Matthew’s account, Joseph and Mary would have been included in the census. As citizens of Nazarth in Galilee (not Judea), they would not have been included in Quirinius’ censes in 6 AD.

 

[JP_Marat]

You are conflating different censuses. The census of Caesar Augustus which occurred in the 752nd year of Rome, and in the final years of the reign of Caesar Augustus was not for tax purposes, but merely for counting purposes. This is the census the Evangelist clearly speaks of in Matt 2:1. The censuses of Quirinus were for Tax purposes. The Evangelist only mentions this census to date the Augustan census, and to give its historical precedence and procedure. But it is not the census that caused Our Lady and St. Joseph to journey to Bethlehem, it was the Augustan census. see here. Yes, it’s strange that we have to go to the Protestant churches nowadays to get orthodox biblical exegesis, as so many liberal Catholic ones have abandoned truth in favor of their own conceits.

RESPONSE:

Nice try.However, as admitted by the New American Bible, “Although universal registrations of Roman citizens are attested in **28 B.C., 8 B.C., and A.D. 14 and **enrollments in individual provinces of those who are not Roman citizens are also attested, such a universal census of the Roman world under Caesar Augustus is unknown outside the New Testament.

Note exactly what is written:

Luke 2:2 “This was the first enrollment, when Quirinius was governor of Syria…

Confirmed by

Josephus, Antiquities 17.342-344, 355
In the tenth year of Archelaus’ rule the leading men among the Jews and Samaritans, finding his cruelty and tyranny intolerable, brought charges against him before Caesar the moment they learned that Archelaus had disobeyed his instructions to show moderation in dealingwith them. Accordingly, when Caesar heard the charges, he became angry, and summoning the man who looked after Archelaus’ affairs at Rome. . ., he said to him, “Go, sail at once andbring him here to us without delay.” . . . And when Archelaus arrived, Caesar gave a hearingto some of his accusers, and also let him speak, and then sent him into exile. . .

Josephus, Antiquities 18.1-4
Quirinius, a Roman senator who had proceeded through all the magistracies to the
consulship and a man who was extremely distinguished in other respects, arrived in Syria,dispatched by Caesar to be governor of the nation and to make an assessment of theirproperty.

Archelaus, one of the sons of King Herod the Great, became the ruler of Judea in 4 BC upon King Herod’s death and ruled until exiled in 6 AD.

At this time, Judea (but not Nazareth in Galilee) came under direct Roman control. Thus the need for a census for tax purposes. This is the census which Luke has involving Joseph and Mary and during which Jesus was said to have been born. It was conducted in 6 AD and almost resulted in a riot among the Jews.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

RESPONSE:

Nice try.

At this time, Judea (but not Nazareth in Galilee) came under direct Roman control. Thus the need for a census for tax purposes.

You are still misinterpreting the Sacred Scriptures. Did you read the link I posted? That addresses all of your quibbles.

 

[iamanea]

I understand this, as it is well shown in the resurrection narratives. However, the Bible records historical events as well as spiritual ones, and the escape into Egypt is a historical event. Either it did happen or it didn’t. There must be an answer.

Think for a moment how your neighbor and you might write quite different accounts of Pres. Obama’s campaign and subsequent time in office. Most likely you would select some similar events like the Democratic convention and inaugaration but would pick different ones for others and you would most likely describe the same events differently according to the overall purpose and theme of your narrative.

A possible solution lies in the different purpose of Matthew and Luke’s stories. Matthew was written for a Jewish audience and thus emphasizes how Jesus fulfills the Jewish prophets and Law. Luke is written for a Gentile audience thus the inticracies of Jewish law that fill Matthews Gospel and not stressed as much in Luke. Matthew describe the sojourn in Egypt because he highlights the various prophecies that predicted the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem, flee to Egypt and eventually return to Nazareth. Luke doen’t share these concerns. He is more interested in showing the universality of Jesus, his message, and the salvation He offers.

It is also important, albeit frustrating for us, to remember that none of the Gospels are told from our modern day standpoint of an historical biography. Luke is an artfully crafted historical narrative but in the classical Greek sense not from our modern standpoint. Thus the Gospels lack the kind of historical “facts” that would fill a modern day history. Yet each Gospel has its own style and method of describing what, in their view, and for their purpose was unique and important about Jesus and His message. They do reflect the essential truths of Jesus and His life, that He was born in Bethlemhem lived on earth for a time, founded a Church, made provisions for that Church to carry on after He returned to the Father, that He did and rose from the dead that he taught his followers and gave them authority to govern His Church and to interpret the Scriptures. The particular details of where such and such happened or what story was told is not particularly important, i.e. it is not critical to the truths of Salvation history, the central themes and message of the Gospel that these details, stories, etc happened exactly as described in the Gospels.

Any reasonable scholarly commentary should help you sort out these important details ande help resolve some of the glaring contrtdictions between the four versions of the same story. It should also help you see how the individual author used various literary techniques to tell his story.

One follow word of advice - remember to read Scripture in union with the mind of the Church. This means that one must always submit their own insights to the teaching authority of the Church. One way to do this is to read some ancient commentaries on the Gospel. Look and see if you find your insight in the ancient commentaries of the Fathers, - Augustine, Jerome, Chrysostom, etc. Good luck and keep reading - it is well worth the effort.

Corry

 

[JP_Marat]

You are still misinterpreting the Sacred Scriptures. Did you read the link I posted? That addresses all of your quibbles.

RESPONCE:

No. I prefer the historical record, ie. Luke’s gospel and Josephus. Not an opinion.

Perhaps you will quote for us the parts of the opinion that contradict Luke and Josephus if you can find any.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

RESPONCE:

No. I prefer the historical record, ie. Luke’s gospel and Josephus. Not an opinion.

Perhaps you will quote for us the parts of the opinion that contradict Luke and Josephus if you can find any.

Ok, so you prefer your own opinion of historical records over the opinion of others on historical records. Everyone’s using the same historical records, it’s just the interpretation of those records that varies. Equating your opinion with historical records is false.

I am actually arguing FOR Luke’s historical version not against it. You are taking the text of Luke, and saying there was no Imperial enrollment decree, contrary to what Luke clearly states, because you misunderstand what Luke is saying about Quirinus.

 

[JP_Marat]

Ok, so you prefer your own opinion of historical records over the opinion of others on historical records. Everyone’s using the same historical records, it’s just the interpretation of those records that varies. Equating your opinion with historical records is false.

I am actually arguing FOR Luke’s historical version not against it. You are taking the text of Luke, and saying there was no Imperial enrollment decree, contrary to what Luke clearly states, because you misunderstand what Luke is saying about Quirinus.

RESPONSE:

I prefer the common sense interpretation particularly when there are multiple attestations. And it’s a question of the plain meaning of words. I do not prefer a forced opinion which must be made to support a preconceived belief system.

Nowhere else in history will you find an Roman imperial registration in the year that Luke claims. However, this is immaterial since Luke is describing a registration conducted when Judea came under direct Roman control after Herod’s son was exiled in 6 A.D.

Herod’s son ruled Judea from the time of Herod’s death in 4 BC until he was deposed in 6 AD and Judea came under the direct control of the Roman governor of Syria.

However, since residents of Galilee were unaffected by Quiinius’ census involving Judea, Joseph would not have had to register.

Also, Luke’s chronology is not compatible with later dating in the NT involving John the Baptist and Jesus.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

RESPONSE:

I prefer the common sense interpretation particularly when there are multiple attestations. And it’s a question of the plain meaning of words. I do not prefer a forced opinion which must be made to support a preconceived belief system.

Nowhere else in history will you find an Roman imperial registration in the year that Luke claims. However, this is immaterial since Luke is describing a registration conducted when Judea came under direct Roman control after Herod’s son was exiled in 6 A.D.

Herod’s son ruled Judea from the time of Herod’s death in 4 BC until he was deposed in 6 AD and Judea came under the direct control of the Roman governor of Syria.

However, since residents of Galilee were unaffected by Quiinius’ census involving Judea, Joseph would not have had to register.

Also, Luke’s chronology is not compatible with later dating in the NT involving John the Baptist and Jesus.

Imperial registration that is referred to in Luke takes place between 6-8BC not AD. Furthermore, Luke, of all the evangelists, is the most careful about historical accuracy. So when you see a difficulty 2000 years later, you try and discover your own chronological mistake, not assume Luke was in error.

 

[fireproofpoodle]

RESPONSE:

The point is that Matthew already has Joesph and Mary living in Bethlehem. Thus he describes no journey from Nazarath to Bethlehem, manger, choirs of angels, shepherds, etc., etc.

And according to Matthew’s account, Joseph and Mary would have been included in the census. As citizens of Nazarth in Galilee (not Judea), they would not have been included in Quirinius’ censes in 6 AD.

Information may be missing or added an not infringe on the possibility of literal historical truth. Unless Matthew actually specifically says that they lived in Bethlehem, there is no discrepancy. Anyway, I believe I even suggested that they may have lived there for a time?

 

[JP_Marat]

---

Information may be missing or added an not infringe on the possibility of literal historical truth. Unless Matthew actually specifically says that they lived in Bethlehem, there is no discrepancy. Anyway, I believe I even suggested that they may have lived there for a time?

**
RESPONSE:**

Matthew seems to:

Matt 2:1, 11 “When Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea, in the days of King Herod, behold, magi from the east arrived …and on entering the **house **they saw the child with Mary his mother. They prostrated themselves and did him homage.”