(More Bible Studies Available @ www.marktabata.com)
It is written:
Luke 2:1-5-And it came to pass in those days that a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered. 2 This census first took place while Quirinius was governing Syria. 3 So all went to be registered, everyone to his own city. 4 Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, 5 to be registered with Mary, his betrothed wife, who was with child.
The Bible teaches us about a journey that Joseph and Mary undertook when Jesus was soon to be born. This passage teaches us some very important lessons that we need to consider.
This Passage Teaches Us About The Accuracy Of The Bible
Throughout the years, skeptics of the Bible have objected to this statement by Luke, claiming that a regular census such as this was not a common occurrence among the Roman Empire. However, the facts show a much different story! Archaeology has brought considerable evidence forth which authenticates this statement by Luke.
“Archæological research has recently thrown much light upon the census of Quirinius mentioned in Luke 2: 1-5. The evidence has come in part from ancient records on papyri which have been dug up in Egypt, some of which are herewith translated. The following extract from a large papyrus establishes the fact that a census or an assessment-list was made in the Roman empire every fourteen years. 1. Papyrus Showing Enrolment Every Fourteen Years.[ 607] After the death of my wife Aphrodite, or, as she was called by some, Aphroditoute, having departed from the district of Herakles and Sabinos, I enrolled the other children who dwell with Mysthes who is called Ninnos, who was 33 years old, and after the others, the wife of my son Mysthes who is called Ninnos, viz.:—Zozime, freed-woman of Ptolemaios Ammoniarios, daughter of Marion Geomytha, and was 22 years old, (who was living with her mistress, in the enrolment of the 9th year; at the time of the enrolment she [Zozime] was living in the Greek quarter, but has now moved into the neighboring quarter of Apolloneios Hierax) and the children of these two, Ammonios, aged 5, and Didymos, aged 4, and Aut …….., were not otherwise enrolled in the enrolment in the first year of the Emperor Cæsar Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Augustus and the Emperor Cæsar Lucius Aurelius Verus Augustus, on the thirtieth of Payni [i. e., June 24, 161 A. D.]. To Potomon, governor of the Arsinoite district of Herakles, and Asclepiades, the royal census-taker, and Agathos Daimon and Dioskoros, census-takers of the metropolis, on behalf of Mysthes who is called Ninnos, Mysthes, son of Philo, whose mother is Herais, daughter of Ammoniosone, of the citizens of the metropolis, who are enrolled from the quarter of Apolloneios Hierax: there belongs to me in the district of Ammonios 1⁄12 part of the place called Nekpherotios, in which I enroll myself and my household for the current enrolment of the 14th year according to the household enrolment, as also I enrolled myself according to the household enrolment in the 23rd year of Antoninus (i. e., 160-161 A. D.); I am also Mysthes who is also called Ninnos; the one enrolled is 59 years old, and his wife, Zozime, the freed-woman of Ammoniarios, daughter of Marion, who was enrolled in the household enrolment of the 23rd year in the same quarter, is 38 years old, and the children of those two, …….. not enrolled in the enrolments, 11 years old, and likewise Dioskoros 10 (?) years old, and likewise …….., 9 years old, and a daughter, Isidora, 8 years old: thus I make my deposition. 15th year of the Emperor Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Cæsar, the lord. Intercalary Mesore: (i. e., the end of August, 175 A. D.). This papyrus, dated in the year 175 A. D., is very important as it proves that the census came every fourteen years. The enrolment mentioned at the end of it was made in connection with the census of 174-175 A. D., since the document is dated in August of the year 175. The enrolment mentioned about the middle of the document was the enrolment of 160-161 A. D. That was dated in the summer of 161. The one mentioned near the beginning of the quotation as having been made in the 9th year must refer to the census of the year 146-147, and the 9th year of Antoninus Pius, which was the year 147. The proof that the census was taken every fourteen years[ 608] is of the greatest importance to our subject, as will appear below. This enrolment was made by one Mysthes Ninnos on behalf of his son, who was also called Mysthes Ninnos, the wife of the son who was a freed-woman, called Zozime, and their children, who were the grandchildren of the man making the enrolment. Mysthes Ninnos, the grandfather, had been married twice. His first wife was named Aphrodite; after her death he married Herais, the mother of the son, Mysthes Ninnos. 2. Translation Referring to an Enrolment in the Reign of Nero.[ 609] Copy of an enrolment of Ammonios and …… ios, the gymnasiarch and librarian of the public library in the city of Arsinoe, in the presence of Pa …… xineos …… Paesios, son of Myo, priest of those who are from Karanis of the district of Heracles. According to the commands through the most excellent governor, Lucius Julius Vestinus, I have enrolled today my goods which are free from debt and mortgage and lien; in the neighboring village, a third part of my father’s house and courtyard, and places cleared of abodes, two lots of a half acre each, which were bought from Mesoereus, son of Nekpherōs, in the fifth year of Nero Claudius Cæsar Augustus Germanicus, Emperor, and a house in the village, which was bought from Onnophreus, son of Peteoræpeus, in the sixth year of Nero Claudius Cæsar Augustus Germanicus, Emperor. Whatever I make from these or buy in addition I will first report as it shall occur. The date of this document, which is only a copy, is not given, but as it refers to two transactions in real estate, which were dated respectively in the 5th and 6th years of Nero, and as that monarch’s reign began in October of the year 54 A. D., it is probable that this is a copy of an enrolment made in connection with the census of 62-63 A. D. This proves that the system of taking the census once in fourteen years was in operation as early as the reign of Nero. 3. Fragment from the Reign of Tiberius.[ 610] To Eutychides and Theon, local census-takers and village census-takers, from Horion and Petosiris, priest of Isis, the most great goddess, of the temple called the Two Brothers in the city of Oxyrhynchus on the street Myrobalanos, near the Serapeum. Those who live in the house which belongs to me and my wife Tasis and to Taurius, son of Harbichis, and to Papontos, son of Nechthesorios, and to Thæchemere, in the house which is near the aforesaid temple of the Two Brothers are as follows: The papyrus at this point becomes too mutilated for further translation. The importance of this document is revealed by an examination of the names of the officers, Eutychides and Theon. Another papyrus from the same place, which contains a notice of a removal, is dated in the 6th year of the Emperor Tiberius.[ 611] As these officers were still in office when this census was taken, this must be the census of the year 20-21 A. D. 4. Enrolments Probably Inaugurated by Augustus. Another papyrus contains a list of people who were exempt from poll-tax in the 41st year of the reign of Augustus.[ 612] As the poll-tax was intimately connected with the census, it is altogether probable that the census was inaugurated by Augustus. As he became emperor in 27 B. C. and at once proceeded to organize his empire, the census may have begun early in his reign. If there was one in 20 A. D. there would be one in 6 A. D., 9-8 B. C., and possibly in 23-22 B. C. If there was not one in 23-22, that in 9-8 B. C. would be the first. This is the one to which reference is made in Luke 2: 2. If the birth of Jesus occurred at the time of this census, it must have been earlier than we usually suppose. Ramsay thinks that the taking of the census in Judah may have been delayed till 7 or 6 B. C., on account of Jewish prejudices. 5. Document Showing that People Went to Their Own Towns for Enrolment. In connection with the census of Quirinius it is stated in Luke 2: 3: “All went to enroll themselves, every one to his own city.” This has been felt by many scholars to be an improbable statement, and has been cited as an evidence of the unhistorical character of the whole story of the census in Luke. In this connection part of a papyrus discovered in Egypt, which is dated in the 7th year of the Emperor Trajan, 103-104 A. D., is of great interest. This document contains three letters. The third of the letters is the one which relates to our subject. It is as follows:[ 613] Gaius Vibius, chief prefect of Egypt. Because of the approaching census it is necessary that all those residing for any cause away from their own homes, should at once prepare to return to their own governments, in order that they may complete the family administration of the enrolment, and that the tilled lands may retain those belonging to them. Knowing that your city has need of provisions from the country, I wish ………. (At this point the papyrus becomes too fragmentary for connected translation.) It is perfectly clear that in Egypt the enrolment was done on the basis of kinship. The word rendered “family” above [συνήθη] means “kindred” in the larger sense. The phrase rendered “belonging to” [them, i. e., the tilled lands] also means “kindred.” It appears, then, that in Egypt the enrolment of each district was intended to include all the kinsmen belonging to that district, and that, lest those residing elsewhere should forget to return home for the census, proclamations were issued directing them to do so. It is well known that in many respects the customs of administration in Syria and Egypt were similar. Luke’s statement, that Joseph went up from Nazareth to Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, to enroll himself with Mary (Luke 2: 4, 5), turns out to be in exact accord with the governmental regulations as we now know them from the papyri. 6. Inscription Supposed to Refer to Quirinius. A fragmentary inscription found at Rome in 1828 is thought by Mommsen and others to prove that Quirinius was governor of Syria twice, and that the governorship to which Josephus refers (Antiquities, XVII, i, 1), which was coincident with the deposition of Archelaus in 6 A. D., was his second appointment. The inscription as filled out by Mommsen and others reads:[ 614] [P. Sulpicius Quirinius, consul ……….; as proconsul obtained Crete and Cyrene as a province ……….; as legate of the divine Augustus, obtaining Syria and Phœnicia he waged war with the tribe of Homonadenses who had killed Amyntas the k] ing; when he returned into the domi[ nion of the Emperor Cæsar] Augustus and the Roman people, the senate [decreed] thanksgivings [to the immortal gods] on account of the two success[ ful accomplishments] and triumphal ornaments to him; as proconsul he ob[ tained] Asia as a province; as the legate of the divine Augustus he [obtained] again Syria and Phœnicia. If this inscription were intact its evidence would be decisive, but unfortunately it is only a fragment, and the name of Quirinius is just that which has to be supplied from other inscriptions. That so eminent a scholar as Mommsen thought that this name was the one which once began the inscription is of weight, but it does not compensate for the loss of the name. 7. Inscription from Asia Minor Referring to Quirinius.[ 615] The following inscription, discovered by Prof. Ramsay and Mr. J. G. C. Anderson, of Oxford, is believed by Ramsay to prove that Quirinius was governor of Syria between 10 and 7 B. C. To Gaius Caristanius (son of Gaius of the Sergian tribe) Fronto Caesianus Juli[ us], Chief of engineers, pontifex, priest, prefect of P. Sulpicius Quirinius duumvir, prefect of M. Servilius. To him first of all men at public expense by decree of the decuriones, a statue was erected. This inscription was found at Antioch, a fortified colony in southeastern Phrygia or southern Galatia, in the year 1912. The name Caristanius connects its erection with the time of the Hamonadian war, 10-7 B. C. That Quirinius received the honor of an election to the office of honorary duumvir of the colony at this time, is held by Ramsay to prove that he had been sent to Syria as governor, and had been military commander in the war against the Hamonades. It was the benefits which accrued to the little colony of Antioch from his victories in this war, which led to the election and the erection of this statue. Ramsay, accordingly, holds that this inscription proves Quirinius to have been governor of Syria about 11-7 B. C., and this confirms the statement of Luke 2: 2, that the census at the time when Jesus was born was the first enrolment, when Quirinius was governor of Syria. One objection to this theory is that from other sources (Josephus, Antiquities, XVI, x, 8; xi, 3), it appears that Sentius Saturninus was governor of Syria at this time, i. e., from 9-7 B. C., just at the time when, according to the papyri, the census should occur. This is supported by a statement of Tertullian, that Jesus was born when Saturninus was governor of Syria. To meet this objection, Ramsay supposes either that the authority of Quirinius and of Saturninus overlapped, the former being military commander and the latter civil governor, or that Quirinius ruled until about July 1st of the year 8, the census year, and Saturninus then took office. These are, however, mere possibilities. We have not yet clear information concerning these points. Later, in 6 A. D., Quirinius was sent out to Syria again (see Tacitus, Annales, III, 48), and took over as governor of Syria the kingdom of Judah on the deposition of Archelaus, and conducted the census there of 6-7 A. D. (See Josephus, Antiquities, XVIII, i.) Many scholars have held that Luke confused this governorship with earlier events and was accordingly in error as to his chronology by at least ten years, but the archæological facts here collected tend to corroborate Luke’s accuracy on this point. It should be added that Luke knew that Quirinius had charge of the census in Palestine in 6 A. D., as Josephus states, for he says: “This was the first enrolment made when Quirinius was governor of Syria.” 8. Conclusions. It should in all candor be noted just what archæology has proved concerning this matter, and what points are still, from the archæological side, outstanding. It has proved that the census was a periodic occurrence once in fourteen years, that this system was in operation as early as 20 A. D., and that it was customary for people to go to their ancestral abodes for enrolment. It has made it probable that the census system was established by Augustus, and that Quirinius was governor of Syria twice, though these last two points are not yet fully established by archaeological evidence. So far as the new material goes, however, it confirms the narrative of Luke.” (George A. Barton, Archaeology and the Bible, 360-365 (Kindle Edition); Good Press)
When I think of skeptics who claim that archaeology disproves the Bible, I am reminded of these words by Metaxas:
“It may be stated categorically that no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a biblical reference.—Rabbi Dr. Nelson Glueck The man who delivered the above statement was among the most respected of his century. He was close to many Israeli statesmen, including David Ben-Gurion, Golda Meir, and Abba Eban, and for twenty-four years he was president of Hebrew Union College. In 1961 he delivered the benediction at President John F. Kennedy’s inauguration, and in 1963 he was featured on the cover of Time. But Rabbi Glueck was most famous for his pioneering work in the field of biblical archaeology. When one considers that he was more on the theologically liberal end of the spectrum, his statement is the more remarkable. It continued: “Scores of archaeological findings have been made which confirm in clear outline or in exact detail historical statements in the Bible.” When someone like Glueck says something as strong as “it may be stated categorically that no archaeological discovery”—ever—has pointed away from the veracity of the Bible, it’s hard not to take notice. It’s also hard not to wonder whether the book that some think of as a cobbled-together compendium of ancient folktales—most of which are half-remembered and get many details wrong, even if there is some fundamental truth to them—is in fact the inerrant Word of God. How else can we understand Glueck’s fantastic assertion that all of the archaeological discoveries confirm what the ancient scriptures say?… The track record of biblical archaeology baffled—and continues to baffle—those convinced that archaeology must eventually contradict the biblical accounts. One of these is James Agresti, an aerospace engineer who in his book Rational Conclusions describes being a twenty-five-year-old atheist determined to study the Bible to document its errors. But what he encountered surprised him, and by the time he was finished, he was instead persuaded of its truth. But one of the main reasons for his about-face was what he learned about the archaeological record. Echoing Rabbi Glueck, Agresti concluded: “I have yet to encounter archaeological evidence that shows any part of the Bible to be inaccurate.””(Eric Metaxas, Is Atheism Dead? 119-120 (Kindle Edition): Washington D.C.: Salem Books)
The Bible is true my friends.
This Passage Teaches Us About Obedience To Government
Notice also that we are taught here that God’s people are to be subservient to the laws of the land, at least in as much as those laws do not conflict with the laws of God. The New Testament is adamant about this fact.
Romans 13:1-7-Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. 4 For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil. 5 Therefore you must be subject, not only because of wrath but also for conscience’ sake. 6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for they are God’s ministers attending continually to this very thing. 7 Render therefore to all their due: taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor.
Again:
1 Peter 2:13-17-Therefore submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake, whether to the king as supreme, 14 or to governors, as to those who are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of those who do good. 15 For this is the will of God, that by doing good you may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men—16 as free, yet not using liberty as a cloak for vice, but as bondservants of God. 17 Honor all people. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the king.
There are examples in the Bible where we are called upon to reject the laws of man, if they are immoral and wicked. As Peter and John declared, we must obey God rather than men in those circumstances (Acts 5:29). Yet it it’s important to notice that Joseph and Mary were willing and obedient to the laws of the government.
This Passage Teaches Us About Marriage
The Bible here calls Mary Joseph’s “betrothed” wife. In our way of thinking as American citizens nearly two thousand years removed from that day and time, we might be tempted to think of this “betrothal” as a couple “being engaged” to be married. However, this is not a true comparison. In Jewish thinking, the betrothal was marriage! Indeed, the Jewish marriage had three phases: the Proposal, the Betrothal, and the Marriage Consummation.
The Proposal involved the man seeking the woman’s hand in marriage. During this period, the man would go (often with his father) to the young woman and her parents. They would discuss the possibility of marriage. If things went well, the young couple would share a cup of wine as a token of their mutual agreement.
“If the bride price was agreeable to the young woman’s father, the young man would pour a glass of wine for the young woman. If the young woman drank the wine, it would indicate her acceptance of the proposal. At this point, the young man and young woman would be betrothed. Betrothal was legally binding, just like a marriage. The only difference was that the marriage was not yet consummated. A typical betrothal period was 1-2 years. During this time the bride and bridegroom each would be preparing for the marriage and wouldn’t see each other.” (Tov Rose, Jesus in the Jewish Wedding: Messianic Fulfillment in the Bible and Tradition, 63 (Kindle Edition): www.TovRose.com)
Again:
“Here is a description of how most Jewish weddings developed. The process starts with the groom negotiating a price for the virgin bride with both the bride and her father. The price reflects how much the groom thinks his bride is worth versus the amount of loss the bride’s family will incur from losing her as a worker. If the groom offered a small amount, it was considered an insult. After agreeing on the price, the bride would then drink a cup of wine to accept the offer, and the groom (and or the groom’s family) paid the price for his bride. The couple was then “betrothed” or engaged in a recognized legal transaction, and they were technically married. If the man changed his mind, he was required to divorce her. After this betrothal, the groom would tell his bride that he was going to make a place or bridal chamber (chupah) for her and would return between one and two years later. The groom’s father was responsible for building the bridal chamber (house) on his property and stocking it with enough provisions to last the new couple one week. Neither the bridegroom nor bride knew the day or the hour when their new home would be complete–only the groom’s father knew. During this time of waiting, the bride would be watching with her lamp filled with oil and ready to be lit for her groom’s return.” (Earl Bristow, How and When the World Ends: An Ancient Jewish Idiom and Feast Reveals the Day, 38-39 (Kindle Edition): Earl Bristow Books)
Please notice that the once the proposal was accepted, the betrothal period began. This was the first phase of the marriage, and indeed, the couple was considered married at this point. This explains why Joseph was called the “husband” of Mary while they were betrothed, and she his “wife,” even before they had sexual relations (cf. Matthew 1:20, 24; Luke 2:5). It also explains why they were able to travel together to Bethlehem without scandal or reproach (Luke 2:1-5), and why he was minded to “divorce” her before their official marriage consummation when he was included to believe she had been guilty of adultery (Matthew 1:18-19). They were already married!
This passage teaches us several important lessons about marriage. First, marriage in the Bible is a covenant (mutual agreement) between man and woman to enter into this special relationship. Second, the women in the times of Jesus had a say in their marriage. Third, the sexual consummation of marriage was only one aspect of marriage, not the defining trait of said marriage.
So many powerful and relevant messages from God’s Word are found in the Journey To Bethlehem.
The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit, be with you all. Amen.