The Difficulty
Luke sets Jesus’ birth during a census ordered by Caesar Augustus “when Quirinius was governor of Syria” (2:1–2), and during the reign of Herod the Great (1:5). But the well-documented census under Publius Sulpicius Quirinius — the one that sparked the revolt of Judas the Galilean (Acts 5:37; Josephus, Antiquities 18.1) — took place in AD 6, about ten years after Herod died (4 BC). On the face of it, Luke has misdated the nativity by a decade and attached it to the wrong official.
Responses
A Translation Crux: “Before Quirinius”
Tradition: Conservative / Grammatical Summary: Luke 2:2 can be rendered “this registration was before Quirinius was governor of Syria,” distinguishing it from the famous later census.
The Greek prōtē can function comparatively (“before”) rather than as a simple ordinal (“first”). On this reading Luke is precisely contrasting the birth-census with the notorious AD 6 census he knows about (and references in Acts 5:37) — placing Jesus’ birth earlier, under Herod, exactly as Luke 1 requires. Luke, a careful historian, is not confused but disambiguating.
Strengths
- Resolves the chronology while crediting Luke’s known precision
- Coheres with Luke’s awareness of the AD 6 census in Acts
Weaknesses
- The comparative use of prōtē with a genitive is debated
- Reads as a clever fix to some
Further Reading
- Nigel Turner, Grammatical Insights into the New Testament (T&T Clark, 1965)
- Darrell Bock, Luke 1:1–9:50 (BECNT, 1994)
An Earlier or Dual Role for Quirinius
Tradition: Historical / Apologetic Summary: Quirinius may have held a command in Syria earlier, or an earlier registration began under Herod and was completed under his later governorship.
Inscriptions attest Quirinius’s military activity in the region (the campaign against the Homonadenses), and some propose an earlier administrative role. A registration could have been initiated in Herod’s final years and associated with the man who later completed/conducted the better-known census. Roman provincial record-keeping was often protracted.
Strengths
- Draws on real epigraphic evidence for Quirinius’s eastern activity
- Allows Luke and the Herodian dating to stand together
Weaknesses
- No direct evidence places Quirinius as Syrian governor under Herod
- Relies on reconstruction more than documentation
Further Reading
- William Ramsay, The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament (1915)
- Ben Witherington III, “Birth of Jesus,” in Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels (IVP, 1992)
A Theological Dating, Loosely Historical
Tradition: Academic / Critical Summary: Luke may have conflated or telescoped events to frame Jesus’ birth against Roman imperial power, prioritizing theology over precise chronology.
On this reading Luke deliberately stages the nativity under Augustus’s census — the empire counting its subjects while the true Lord is born — and the historical details are subordinate to that contrast. Ancient historiography often arranged events for meaning. The “error” is a category mistake by readers expecting modern exactitude from an ancient theologian-historian.
Strengths
- Takes seriously Luke’s evident theological agenda (Augustus vs. Christ)
- Fits known conventions of ancient historical writing
Weaknesses
- Concedes a factual imprecision conservatives resist
- Hard to prove Luke intended loose dating rather than exactness
Further Reading
- Raymond Brown, The Birth of the Messiah (Doubleday, rev. 1993)
- Joseph Fitzmyer, The Gospel According to Luke I–IX (Anchor Bible, 1981)