Are the Nativity Narratives really historical or allegorical

[polonius]

Since it is approaching Christmas, perhaps it would be a good time to review Matthew’s and Luke’s Nativity Narratives which comprise the first few chapters of their gospels.

We understand that the earliest stratas of Matthew, used by the very early Palestinian Ebionite Christians, who remained obedient to Mosaic Law, did not seem to include such a nativity narrative suggesting that it was added later (perhaps to both Matthew and Luke).

Each narrative describes the birth of Jesus but involves serious contradictions. Let’s begin with the date of Jesus’ birth as given by each.

[polonius]

Matthew 2:2 “In the time of King Herod, after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea, wise men[a] from the East came to Jerusalem…�

Luke 2:2 “ In those days a decree went out from Emperor Augustus that all the world should be registered. 2 This was the first registration and was taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria. 3 All went to their own towns to be registered. 4 Joseph also went from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to the city of David called Bethlehem, because he was descended from the house and family of David. 5 He went to be registered with Mary, to whom he was engaged and who was expecting a child. 6 While they were there, the time came for her to deliver her child. 7 And she gave birth to her firstborn son and wrapped him in bands of cloth, and laid him in a manger, because there was no place for them in the inn.

Notes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herod_the_Great Herod (/ˈhɛrəd/; Hebrew: הוֹרְדוֹס, Hordos, Greek: Ἡ�ῴδης, Hēr�dēs; 74/73 BCE – 4 BCE)


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Census_of_Quirinius
In 6 CE Publius Sulpicius Quirinius (51 BCE-21 CE), a distinguished soldier and former Consul, was appointed Imperial Legate (governor) of the province of Roman Syria. In the same year Judea was declared a Roman province, and Quirinius was tasked to carry out a census of the new territory for tax purposes. The new territory was one of the three portions into which the kingdom of Herod the Great had been divided on his death in 4 BCE; his son Herod Archelaus was given Judea but complaints of misrule prompted his removal and Judea and Samaria were placed under direct Roman rule, although Galilee and other areas remained autonomous.

http://www.usccb.org/bible/luke/2
Footnote to Luke 2.2 from the New American Bible Revised Edition
“ [2:1–2] 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.

SUMMARY: So Jesus was born before King Herod’s death in 4 BC or during the census of Syria conducted under governor Quirinius in 6 A.D. There is no record of any Roman census under Emperor August in 6 A.D. (outside of Luke’s Gospel).Both Matthew and Luke claim that Jesus was born in Bethlehem. There is no claim in Matthew's Gospel that Jesus was born in a stable's manger.

[polonius]

http://www.usccb.org/bible/isaiah/7

NABRE Footnote to Isaiah 7

[7:1–8:18] These verses (often termed Isaiah’s “Memoirs�) contain a series of oracles and narratives (some in first person), all closely related to the Syro-Ephraimite war of 735–732 B.C. Several passages feature three children whose symbolic names refer to the Lord’s purposes: Shear-jashub (7:3), Emmanuel (7:10–17; 8:8–10), and Maher-shalal-hash-baz (8:1–4). Judah and its Davidic dynasty should trust God’s promises and not fear the combined armies of Israel and Syria; within a very short time these two enemy states will be destroyed, and David’s dynasty will continue.

Isaiah 7:14
“Again the LORD spoke to Ahaz: 11 Ask for a sign from the LORD, your God; let it be deep as Sheol, or high as the sky!*12 But Ahaz answered, “I will not ask! I will not tempt the LORD!�*13 Then he said: Listen, house of David! Is it not enough that you weary human beings? Must you also weary my God? 14 Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign;* the young woman, * pregnant and about to bear a son, shall name him Emmanuel. 15 Curds and honey* he will eat so that he may learn to reject evil and choose good; 16 for before the child learns to reject evil and choose good, the land of those two kings whom you dread shall be deserted.
17

NABRE Footnote:
The young woman * : Hebrew ‘almah' designates a young woman of marriageable age without specific reference to virginity. The Septuagint translated the Hebrew term as parthenos, which normally does mean virgin, and this translation underlies Mt 1:23.

Mathew 1:23 * k “Behold, the virgin shall be with child and bear a son, and they shall name him Emmanuel, �which means “God is with us.�

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 1 by polonius.advice]

Well they are part of the bible canon, and not presented as allegorical in nature (real people Mary, Jesus, Joseph, Herod) real location (Bethlehem, Jerusalem) believable situations (shepherds tending their flocks, national census, a pregnant woman giving birth) and none of the narratives give the slightest suggestion they were recounting anything but historical facts, so there is in my opinion absolutely no reason to believe they were allegorical in nature.

JW

[JehovahsWitness]

Jesus was born before King Herod’s death in 4 BC or during the census of Syria conducted under governor Quirinius in 6 A.D. There is no record of any Roman census under Emperor August in 6 A.D. (outside of Luke’s Gospel).

Since the account is in the bible canon, we are to accept Luke's account as being authoritive over and above any other source. That said, there is no valid reason therefore to doubt the accuracy of Luke's placing of events; in short, if we have one historian (Luke) placing the events as he did, then that is enough for it to be taken as true.

Luke's placing the event in a clear historical context* indicates it was not being presented as allegory.

JW




[*] For historical evidence related to Luke's narrative please see post #6 Below

[JehovahsWitness]

DID LUKE CORRECTLY DATE QUIRINIUS' CENSUS?


"In the year 1764 an inscription known as the Lapis Tiburtinus was found in Rome, which, though not giving the name, contains information that most scholars acknowledge could apply only to Quirinius. (Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, edited by H. Dessau, Berlin, 1887, Vol. 14, p. 397, No. 3613) [The Inscription] contains the statement that on going to Syria he became governor (or, legate) for ‘the second time.’ On the basis of inscriptions found in Antioch containing Quirinius’ name, many historians acknowledge that Quirinius was also governor of Syria in the B.C.E. period.

The Lapis Tiburtinus


Many scholars, in view of the evidence of an earlier governorship by Quirinius, suggest the years 3-2 B.C.E. for his governorship. While these dates would harmonize satisfactorily with the Biblical record, the basis on which these scholars select them is in error. That is, they list Quirinius as governor during those years because they place his rule after that of Varus and hence after the death of Herod the Great, for which they use the popular but erroneous date of 4 B.C.E. (See CHRONOLOGY; HEROD No. 1 [Date of His Death].) (For the same reason, that is, their use of the unproved date 4 B.C.E. for Herod’s death, they give Varus’ governorship as from 6 to 4 B.C.E.; the length of his rule, however, is conjectural, for Josephus does not specify the date of its beginning or of its end.) The best evidence points to 2 B.C.E. for the birth of Jesus. Hence Quirinius’ governorship must have included this year or part thereof."

Source & Further reading: [a href="http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200003607#h=6"]Insight on the Scriptures Vol II p. 721[/a]

“The scholarly researches of Zumpt (Commentat. epigraph., II, 86-104; De Syria romana provincia, 97-98 ) and of Mommsen (Res gestae divi Augusti) place beyond doubt that Quirinius was twice governor of Syria.� -- The Dictionnaire du Nouveau Testament in Crampon’s French Bible (1939 ed., p. 360

CONCLUSION: We do not know which period Luke's reference to “This first registration" refers to, but available evidence indicates it may well reference a governship EARLIER than 6 CE especially as it seems Quirinius could have served as the emperor’s legate in Syria during TWO distinct periods.

Are biblical hereditary rights based on biology?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 98#p781898

Who was Heli?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 30#p867330

When does Luke indicate Jesus was born?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 63#p831863


RELATED POSTS

VIRGIN Does the writer of Matthew "mistranslate" or "misapply" Isaiah 7:14?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 18#p763618

Did Mary lie about her pregnancy to avoid being stoned?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 01#p898401

Are biblical hereditary rights based on biology?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 98#p781898

When does Luke indicate Jesus was born?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 63#p831863

Was Jesus a wicked baby?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 17#p980517

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

JESUS CHRIST, APPEARANCE, and ...CONCEPTION & BIRTH

[JehovahsWitness]

Both Matthew and Luke claim that Jesus was born in Bethlehem. There is no claim in Matthew's Gospel that Jesus was born in a stable's manger.

So?

What, is the point you are making. Clarification needed.

You may chose to see fit to phrase your reply along the lines of "The fact that Matthew fails to mention the stable birth this proves that .... [and then finish the sentence with the actual point you wish to make]."

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 3 by polonius.advice]

Again, in this post [#3] I fail to see what your actual point is. As interesting as a scriptural commentary is, it is impossible to do anything but acknowledge you have used your computer unless you formulate in words what point your commentary is trying to make.

One suggested way of doing this is using a sentence along the lines of "So I propose given the above that [----> here is where you would insert the point you are making XXXX < -------]

Just a suggestion,

JW

[polonius]

DID LUKE CORRECTLY DATE QUIRINIUS' CENSUS?


"In the year 1764 an inscription known as the Lapis Tiburtinus was found in Rome, which, though not giving the name, contains information that most scholars acknowledge could apply only to Quirinius. (Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, edited by H. Dessau, Berlin, 1887, Vol. 14, p. 397, No. 3613) [The Inscription] contains the statement that on going to Syria he became governor (or, legate) for ‘the second time.’ On the basis of inscriptions found in Antioch containing Quirinius’ name, many historians acknowledge that Quirinius was also governor of Syria in the B.C.E. period.

The Lapis Tiburtinus


Many scholars, in view of the evidence of an earlier governorship by Quirinius, suggest the years 3-2 B.C.E. for his governorship. While these dates would harmonize satisfactorily with the Biblical record, the basis on which these scholars select them is in error. That is, they list Quirinius as governor during those years because they place his rule after that of Varus and hence after the death of Herod the Great, for which they use the popular but erroneous date of 4 B.C.E. (See CHRONOLOGY; HEROD No. 1 [Date of His Death].) (For the same reason, that is, their use of the unproved date 4 B.C.E. for Herod’s death, they give Varus’ governorship as from 6 to 4 B.C.E.; the length of his rule, however, is conjectural, for Josephus does not specify the date of its beginning or of its end.) The best evidence points to 2 B.C.E. for the birth of Jesus. Hence Quirinius’ governorship must have included this year or part thereof."

Source & Further reading: [a href="http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200003607#h=6"]Insight on the Scriptures Vol II p. 721[/a]

“The scholarly researches of Zumpt (Commentat. epigraph., II, 86-104; De Syria romana provincia, 97-98 ) and of Mommsen (Res gestae divi Augusti) place beyond doubt that Quirinius was twice governor of Syria.� -- The Dictionnaire du Nouveau Testament in Crampon’s French Bible (1939 ed., p. 360

CONCLUSION: We do not know which period Luke's reference to “This first registration" refers to, but available evidence indicates it may well reference a governship EARLIER than 6 CE especially as it seems Quirinius could have served as the emperor’s legate in Syria during TWO distinct periods.

RESPONSE: I'm afraid not.

This is a very old attempt by some historians who don’t want to admit that census of Judea was conducted under the command of Quirinius, the Roman governor of Syria in 6 AD because Luke is reports that Jesus was born during this period. Acts of the Apostles makes reference to the Zaelot revolt related to this 6 AD taxation.
http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/firstcensus.htm

Excerpt from: Kenneh F. Doig, New Testament Chronology, (Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press, 1990).
“This was the first census taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria." (Luke 2:1-2) Added note: The word "first" in this context is from "protos" (������defined in Strong's Greek Dictionary as: contracted superlative of ��� - pro 4253; foremost (in time, place, order or importance):--before, beginning, best, chief(-est), first (of all), former. If the early translators of the New Testament had been aware of the historical conflict posed by "first" we would long have read "This was the census before the one taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria." Then there would have been no perceived difference between history and scripture.

The claim of “evidence is an unnamed engraving of a roman soldier on the “Lapis Tiburtinus� which we are told “could apply only� to Quinarius, is a nice theory, but not supported by the facts, as shown by the references I provide.
However, “Some consider that Lucius Calpurnius Piso "the Pontifex" was here the governor of Syria. This is based on an inscription called the Lapis Tiburtinus.

The list of the Roman governors of Syria during this period is:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_R ... _135_AD.29
23 – 13 BC Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa

13/12 – 10/9 BC Marcus Titius

9 – 7/6 BC Gaius Sentius Saturninus

7/6 – 4 BC Publius Quinctilius Varus

4 – 1 BC Unknown[1]

1 BC – 4 AD Gaius Julius Caesar Vipsanianus

4 – 5 Lucius Volusius Saturninus

6 – 12 Publius Sulpicius Quirinius

12 – 17 Quintus Caecilius Metellus Creticus Silanus

17 – 19 Gnaeus Calpurnius Piso

19 – 21 Gnaeus Sentius Saturninus



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quirinius#Life
Quirinius’ accomplishments:
From 12 – 1 BC, he led a campaign against the Homonadenses, a tribe based in the mountainous region of Galatia and Cilicia, around 5 – 3 BC, probably as legate of Galatia. He won the campaign by reducing their strongholds and starving out the defenders.[3] For this victory, he was awarded a triumph and elected duumvir by the colony of Pisidian Antioch.[4]
After the banishment of the ethnarch Herod Archelaus in 6 AD, Iudaea (the conglomeration of Samaria, Judea and Idumea) came under direct Roman administration with Coponius appointed as prefect. At the same time, Quirinius was appointed Legate of Syria, with instructions to assess Iudea Province for taxation purposes.[8] One of his first duties was to carry out a census as part of this order.
Reference: Erich S. Gruen, "The Expansion of the Empire under Augustus" in The Cambridge Ancient History, Volume X: The Augustan Empire, 43 BC – AD 69, (Cambridge University Press, 1996) pages 157

http://www.usccb.org/bible/luke/2
The Birth of Jesus.
“In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus* that the whole world should be enrolled.2 This was the first enrollment, when Quirinius was governor of Syria.�
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Census_of_Quirinius
The Census of Quirinius was a census of Judaea taken by Publius Sulpicius Quirinius, Roman governor of Syria, upon the imposition of direct Roman rule in 6 CE.[1] The Jewish historian Josephus portrays the annexation and census as the cause of an uprising which later became identified with the Zealot movement.
The author of the Gospel of Luke uses it as the narrative means by which Jesus was born in Bethlehem (Luke 2:1-5),[2]and places the census within the reign of Herod the Great, who actually died 10 years earlier in 4 BCE.[3] It is argued that no satisfactory explanation has been put forward so far to resolve the contradiction,[4] and Raymond E Brown considered that "most critical scholars think that the author of the gospel made a mistake"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zealots_(Judea)#History
Josephus' Jewish Antiquities[3] states that there were three main Jewish sects at this time, the Pharisees, the Sadducees, and the Essenes. The Zealots were a "fourth sect", founded by Judas of Galilee (also called Judas of Gamala) in the year 6 against Quirinius' tax reform, shortly after the Roman Empire declared what had most recently been the tetrarchy of Herod Archelaus to be a Roman province, and that they "agree in all other things with the Pharisaic notions; but they have an inviolable attachment to liber
ty, and say that God is to be their only Ruler and Lord." (18.1.6)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judas_of_Galilee
Judas of Galilee, or Judas of Gamala, was a Jewish leader who led resistance to the census imposed for Roman tax purposes by Quirinius in Iudaea Province around 6 AD.[1] He encouraged Jews not to register and those that did had their houses burnt and their cattle stolen by his followers. [2]'He began the fourth Philosophy of the Jews which Josephus blames for the disastrous war with the Romans in 66 AD. These events are discussed by Josephus in The Jewish War and in Antiquities of the Jewsand mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles.

Smith's Bible Dictionary
Judas of Galilee
(T)he leader of a popular revolt "in the days of the taxing" (i.e. the census, under the prefecture of P. Sulp. Quirinus, A.D. 6, A.U.C. 759), referred to by Gamaliel in his speech before the Sanhedrin. (Acts 5:37) According to Josephus, Judas was a Gaulonite of the city of Gamala, probably taking his name of Galilean from his insurrection having had its rise in Galilee. The Gaulonites, as his followers were called, may be regarded as the doctrinal ancestors of the Zealots and Sicarii of later days.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judea_(Roman_province)
Quiriniusbecame Legate (Governor) of Syria and conducted the first Roman tax census of Syria and Iudaea, which was opposed by the Zealots.[6]

[JehovahsWitness]

This is a very old attempt by some historians who don’t want to admit that census of Judea was conducted under the command of Quirinius, the Roman governor of Syria in 6 AD because Luke is reports that Jesus was born during this period. Acts of the Apostles makes reference to the Zaelot revolt related to this 6 AD taxation.
http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/firstcensus.htm

Repeating an argument isn't a valid counterargument, neither is pointing out the age of a argument a valid counterargument, a valid counterargument is a valid counterargument. I see none here.