Rev. Michael Piazza in Liberating Word says about Luke 2:1-7 “And, so, we come to one of the most familiar passages in all of scripture. It is read each year at Christmas. Luke begins the story of the birth of Jesus by dating it. This birth occurred during the taxation census of the Roman Emperor Augustus, while Quirinius was governor of Syria. This double dating is typical in an age where there was not a common calendar. Unfortunately, being educated does not ensure that you are correct. Matthew dates the birth of Jesus to the time of Herod and describes Herod’s massacre of the children in Bethlehem. The trouble is one of these accounts is incorrect. If Herod was reigning in Judea, Quirinius would not have been the one collecting taxes because that was under Herod’s authority. New Testament scholar Raymond E. Brown notes that most historians believe that Luke is mistaken and doubts that a universal census ever actually occurred. Professor Brown is a brave man. He is challenging a story that has become a cultural cornerstone. The image of a very pregnant Mary making the journey to Bethlehem with Joseph, only to find a sold-out inn forcing her to give birth in a stable, is seared into our belief system as if written by fire from heaven. The magi and Herod have an only slightly lesser place. Yet now we are told that both cannot be true. Or perhaps more to the point, both cannot be factually accurate. So, how do we decide which account is true? It is at this very point that courageous seekers of truth must no longer regard the Bible as a historical record and embrace it anew as a repository of truth. Which is more important factual accuracy or transformative truth? Honesty requires us to say that Luke was recording this story at least 60 years after the events. There were no photographers or biographers to record the events of Jesus birth. Now he is left to reconstruct the stories from legends, and what seems important is to retain the truth even if he doesn’t know the facts.”
Rev. Michael Piazza in Liberating Word says about Luke 2:1-7 “And, so, we come to one of the most familiar passages in all of scripture. It is read each year at Christmas. Luke begins the story of the birth of Jesus by dating it. This birth occurred during the taxation census of the Roman Emperor Augustus, while Quirinius was governor of Syria. This double dating is typical in an age where there was not a common calendar.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, being educated does not ensure that you are correct. Matthew dates the birth of Jesus to the time of Herod and describes Herod’s massacre of the children in Bethlehem. The trouble is one of these accounts is incorrect. If Herod was reigning in Judea, Quirinius would not have been the one collecting taxes because that was under Herod’s authority.
New Testament scholar Raymond E. Brown notes that most historians believe that Luke is mistaken and doubts that a universal census ever actually occurred. Professor Brown is a brave man. He is challenging a story that has become a cultural cornerstone. The image of a very pregnant Mary making the journey to Bethlehem with Joseph, only to find a sold-out inn forcing her to give birth in a stable, is seared into our belief system as if written by fire from heaven. The magi and Herod have an only slightly lesser place. Yet now we are told that both cannot be true. Or perhaps more to the point, both cannot be factually accurate.
So, how do we decide which account is true? It is at this very point that courageous seekers of truth must no longer regard the Bible as a historical record and embrace it anew as a repository of truth. Which is more important factual accuracy or transformative truth? Honesty requires us to say that Luke was recording this story at least 60 years after the events. There were no photographers or biographers to record the events of Jesus birth. Now he is left to reconstruct the stories from legends, and what seems important is to retain the truth even if he doesn’t know the facts.”