Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Let's use some Bible verses. Though the gospel of Luke strongly implies that Jesus was born in the time of Herod, it does not come right out and say it, though Mary was clearly engaged to Joseph at the time. At any rate an excuse was needed to get Joseph to Bethlehem, no matter how lame it was, so the Census of Quirinius was used as an excuse, even though censuses are based upon where people live and work and now where they are from. At any rate from Luke 2 we have:
"1At that time the Roman emperor, Augustus, decreed that a census should be taken throughout the Roman Empire. 2(This was the first census taken when Quirinius was governor of Syria.) 3All returned to their own ancestral towns to register for this census. 4And because Joseph was a descendant of King David, he had to go to Bethlehem in Judea, David’s ancient home. He traveled there from the village of Nazareth in Galilee. 5He took with him Mary, to whom he was engaged, who was now expecting a child."
The Census of Quirinius occurred at about 6 CE. Herod died about 4 BCE. Now as I said Luke strongly implies it, but does not come right out and say that Jesus was born during Herod's reign. Luckily there are two stories of the nativity and the gospel of Matthew does make it clear. From Matthew 2:
"2 Now hafter Jesus was born in iBethlehem of Judea jin the days of Herod the king,behold, wise menGreek magi; also verses 7, 16" style="color: rgb(114, 171, 191);">1 from kthe east came to Jerusalem, 2 saying, “Where is he who hasbeen born lking of the Jews? For we saw mhis star when it rose2 and have come tonworship him.” 3 When Herod the king heard this, he was troubled, and all Jerusalemwith him; 4 and assembling all the chief priests and scribes of the people, he inquired ofthem where othe Christ was to be born. 5 They told him, “In Bethlehem of Judea, for so itis written by the prophet:"
So between Luke and Matthew we have a ten year discrepancy in the birth date. Not only that but the reign of Herod and the Census of Quirinius were well recorded events. They did not occur simultaneously.
"1At that time the Roman emperor, Augustus, decreed that a census should be taken throughout the Roman Empire. 2(This was the first census taken when Quirinius was governor of Syria.) 3All returned to their own ancestral towns to register for this census. 4And because Joseph was a descendant of King David, he had to go to Bethlehem in Judea, David’s ancient home. He traveled there from the village of Nazareth in Galilee. 5He took with him Mary, to whom he was engaged, who was now expecting a child."
The Census of Quirinius occurred at about 6 CE. Herod died about 4 BCE. Now as I said Luke strongly implies it, but does not come right out and say that Jesus was born during Herod's reign. Luckily there are two stories of the nativity and the gospel of Matthew does make it clear. From Matthew 2:
"2 Now hafter Jesus was born in iBethlehem of Judea jin the days of Herod the king,behold, wise menGreek magi; also verses 7, 16" style="color: rgb(114, 171, 191);">1 from kthe east came to Jerusalem, 2 saying, “Where is he who hasbeen born lking of the Jews? For we saw mhis star when it rose2 and have come tonworship him.” 3 When Herod the king heard this, he was troubled, and all Jerusalemwith him; 4 and assembling all the chief priests and scribes of the people, he inquired ofthem where othe Christ was to be born. 5 They told him, “In Bethlehem of Judea, for so itis written by the prophet:"
So between Luke and Matthew we have a ten year discrepancy in the birth date. Not only that but the reign of Herod and the Census of Quirinius were well recorded events. They did not occur simultaneously.