Nepaug Bible Church - http://www.nepaugchurch.org - Pastor's Sermon Notes - http://www.nepaugchurch.org/Sermons/zz20091213.htm

CHRISTMAS SPECIAL: GOD'S GOOD NEWS OF GREAT JOY
Part II: God's Joyful Good News Regarding Our FAITH'S Welfare
(Luke 2:2 et al.)
    Introduction: (To show the need . . . )

    Our sermons on "God's Good News Of Great Joy" from Luke 2 are effective for us providing we KNOW that Luke 2:1-20 is TRUE!

    However, Liberal Theology critics have long charged that Luke 2:2 and its context badly errs! Harold Hoehner's work, Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ, 1979, p. 14, lists their charges as follows:

    In particular, the critics claim that "(1) nothing is known in history of a general census in the time of Augustus; (2) in a Roman census Joseph would not have had to travel to Bethlehem, but would have registered in the principal town of his residence, and Mary would not have had to register at all; (3) no Roman census would have been made in Palestine during Herod's reign; (4) [first century A. D. secular Jewish historian] Josephus records nothing of a Roman census in Palestine in the time of Herod -- rather the census of A. D. 6-7 was something new among the Jews; and (5) a census held under Quirinius could not have occurred during Herod's reign for Quirinius was not governor until after Herod's death." (brackets ours)

    Consequently, as late as this fall, Jared M. Compton, a doctoral student in New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, reported in his Detroit Baptist Theological Journal article, "Once More: Quirinius's Census," p. 45-54, that "Luke's brief attempt to situate Jesus' birth chronologically continues to be problematic" with critics who conclude that "'Luke has thoroughly confused the facts'" or "'the evangelist [Luke] based his statement [of Luke 2:2] on uncertain historical information'" or even "'attempts to reconcile [this text] with the facts of ancient history are hopelessly contrived.'" (Ibid., Compton, www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2009/11/01 . . . , brackets ours)

    Such criticism is a serious challenge to our faith: the Apostle Paul cited Luke's writing of Luke 10:7 in 1 Timothy 5:18b, calling it Scripture on par with Deuteronomy 25:4! Then, Peter called Paul's epistles Scripture in 2 Peter 3:15-16, and Jesus in turn condoned the validity of Peter's words in His prayer at John 17:20! Thus, if Luke erred at Luke 2:2, then Paul along with Peter and Jesus in a "domino effect" all likewise erred in their claims, leaving Jesus not fully honest, but thus sinning! That would make His death not able to atone for our sin, and our whole Christian faith discredited as being not from God!

    Thus, we must answer the question, "How do we answer the Liberal Theology charge that Luke 2:2 in its context errs?!"

    Need: "How can we answer critics who charge Luke 2 badly errs?!"

  1. We can readily answer the first four charges in our introduction:
    1. To the charge that there is no evidence Augustus ordered a general census, he was the first to order the whole empire be taxed though it occurred at different times in various provinces, Ibid., Hoehner, p. 15.
    2. To the charge that a Roman census would not require Joseph and Mary to go to Bethlehem, a 104 A. D. papyrus records a prefect ordering Egyptians to return to their homes for a census, Ibid. The Jews' property was that of their fathers' estates, so the Romans in Herod's reign would comply with Jewish custom in claiming their family estates for tax assessments, Ibid. Hoehner claims all Jews had to appear for this, so Mary had to go to Bethlehem with Joseph, Ibid.
    3. To the charge that a Roman census would not be made in Israel in Herod's rule, several records show the Romans took censuses in vassal kingdoms, Ibid., p. 16-17. Herod fell out of favor with Augustus in 8/7 B. C., so his autonomy would have been removed, and his failing health and the vying of his sons for his throne would easily motivate Caesar to run the census himself to keep the peace, Ibid., p. 17.
    4. To the charge that Josephus does not refer to a Roman census in Israel in Herod's time, but only to the A. D. 6-7 census as something new to the Jews, Josephus' silence on the Luke 2 census does not mean it did not occur! If it was peaceful, he had no need to report it, Ibid. In contrast, the A. D. 6-7 census had an armed tax revolt led by Judas of Galilee due to a lack of stable leadership and resistance to more direct Roman rule that was less sensitive to Jewish customs. (Ibid., p. 18)
  2. The FIFTH and "formidable" (Ibid.) charge that Quirinius' census did not occur in Herod's era as Quirinius did not rule Syria until Herod died can nevertheless be adequately answered (as follows):
    1. Luke knew Jesus was born before Quirinius' 6-7 A. D. census: in Luke 1:5 he noted John and Jesus were born before Herod died in 4 B. C. (Ibid., p. 13), and in Acts 5:37 he referred to the revolt by Judas of Galilee in Quirinius' 6-7 A. D. census as he ruled Syria, Ibid., p. 19!
    2. Thus, Luke could not have blundered in Luke 2 as Liberal Theology critics assert, so our ONLY problem is understanding Luke 2:2!
    3. Thus, we view Luke 2:2 in the Greek Testament to see what it means:
      1. As noted by recent key translations, the two most likely ways to interpret Luke 2:2 from the Greek Testament are as follows:
        1. First, the NIV and ESV [approximately] render it: "This was the first census when Quirinius was governor of Syria" where the word, prote is taken adjectively ("first") to modify "enrolling".
        2. Second, as the ESV footnote approximates, it may read: "This was the census before Quirinius was governor of Syria", where prote is taken adverbially ("before") to govern the participial phrase, "Quirinius was governor of Syria," Ibid., p. 18-22.
      2. The first view is weakened by the fact that its holder must assume Quirinius ruled Syria before A. D. 6-7, a rule not yet documented by secular records, while also having to assume yet undocumented events in Quirinius' life before A. D. 6-7, Ibid., p. 19-20!
      3. The second view admittedly strains the syntax (how words are seen to interrelate in a sentence; Ibid., Compton), but this view and its strained syntax can be explained: (a) It would explain why Mary and Joseph left Galilee for Bethlehem, for the Luke 2:2 census fit Jewish customs that headed them to Bethlehem versus Quirinius' later Roman census that would have kept them home, Ibid., p. 18. (b) Luke had to explain this trip as it forced Messiah into a manger (Lk. 2:3-7), what no Jew would want (A. Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jes. the Mes., 1972, i, p. 186)! (d) Luke 2:2-7 thus yields a story line no Jew would falsify, so it is tru e! (e) Then, the strain of the Luke 2:2 syntax can be explained as the author's intentional effort to distance the Luke 2 credible events from Quirinius' A. D. 6-7 census, for many Jews in that census became disillusioned over their leaders' false claims that God sanctioned their ideas, Jos., Ant., XVIII. 1; Acts 5:37-39. We explain this, and answer concerns on the syntax: ((1)) "Quirinius" is unusually placed several words away from "before", but since it is the last word in the sentence, it bears the second greatest emphasis behind the first word, "This". ((2)) Then, the unusual way egeneto ("became") comes between "before" and the genitive absolute and participial phrase, "Quirinius was governor of Syria" accents egeneto, and stresses Quirinius' RISE to rule in Syria. ((3)) Luke 2:2, with the syntax emphases, would then read: "THIS was the census before QURINIUS became governor of Syria." ((4)) So, Luke would thus have intentionally strained the syntax to assert the CREDIBLE Luke 2 events occurred BEFORE Quirinius EVER ROSE to POWER in SYRIA, LET ALONE BEFORE his ensuing A. D. 6-7 CENSUS and its DISILLUSIONING events!
Lesson Application: Luke 2:2 ACCURATELY asserts the Luke 2 census came BEFORE Quirinius' A. D. 6-7 census. Luke's Gospel is then true versus his critics' claims, and so is our Christian faith!

Conclusion: (To illustrate the message . . . )

 The historical accuracy of Luke, author of the Gospel of Luke and of the Book of Acts, has been strongly attested by Sir William Ramsay, "one of the greatest archaeologists ever to have lived" according to Josh McDowell, A Ready Defense, 1990, p. 108.

McDowell reported that Sir William Ramsay "was a student of the German historical school of the mid-nineteenth century. As a result, he believed that the book of Acts was a product of the mid-second century A. D. [the Liberal Theology stance]. He was firmly convinced of this belief. In his research to make a topographical study of Asia Minor he was compelled to consider the writings of Luke. As a result he was forced to do a complete reversal of his beliefs due to the overwhelming evidence uncovered in his research. He spoke of this when he said:

' . . . I found myself brought into contact with the Book of Acts as an authority for the topography, antiquities and society of Asia Minor. It was gradually borne upon me that in various details the narrative showed marvelous truth. In fact, beginning with a fixed idea that the work was essentially a second century composition, and never relying on its evidence as trustworthy for first century conditions, I gradually came to find it a useful ally in some obscure and difficult investigations.'" Ibid., McDowell, p. 109 in citing E. M. Blaiklock, Layman's Answer: An Examination of the New Theology, 1968, p. 36 (brackets ours).

After 30 years of study, Sir William Ramsay wrote that "'Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy . . . this author should be placed along with the very greatest of historians .'" (Ibid., McDowell, in citing Ramsay, The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament, 1953, p. 222)



Luke is accurate at Luke 2:1-20, our Christian faith is fully credible, so the angel's message of God's "good news of great joy" that brings "glory to God in the highest, and on earth, peace to men of His favor" is TRUE and applicable with great BLESSING!

May we trust that message, and believe in Christ, resting in Him TRULY to enjoy PEACE on this EARTH to the glory of God!