Re: [XTalk] Re: The census of Quirinius: Carlson's rendering of Lk. 2.2
- The date of Quirinius' famous census is not the only problem with identifying it as the census mentioned in Luke. There's also the problem that that particular census was *not* just a *per capita* census, but involved a registration of property. One certainly would not expect the Romans to have its subjects migrate to their ancestral homes if registration of property were involved. That would make it easy for everyone to cheat on their taxes.
John C. Poirier
----- Original Message -----
From: Stephen C. Carlson
Sent: Monday, September 04, 2006 12:57 AM
Subject: Re: [XTalk] Re: The census of Quirinius: Carlson's rendering of Lk. 2.2
At 04:43 PM 9/3/2006 +0000, David C. Hindley wrote:
>However, I am not sure that making Joseph respond to a supposed
>original decree of Augustus issued around 8 BCE (as distinct from the
>most famous one that took place in Judea in 6 CE) really solves the
Thanks for your comments, David. I ended up backing off of such a
claim in my third post in the series, as follows:
|What other historical implications can be made from this understanding of
|Luke 2:1-7? Unfortunately, it tells us very little about what happened at
|the turn of the era other than that the author believed that some census was
|conducted in the Roman sphere of influence that required Joseph to travel
|from Galilee to Bethlehem. It is unclear, however, whether the author's
|knowledge or sources were any more specific than that.
Stephen C. Carlson mailto:scarlson@...
Author of: The Gospel Hoax, http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1932792481
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]