Is there any reason why people went to "their own city" (luke 2:1-3) for this particular census? Would the Romans require this or was it Jewish custom?
Are there any extra-biblical or historical documents that explain why people would be required to travel such distances for a census, rather than stay in their abodes so that Romans could tax people where they work and live? THe purpose of Roman census was for taxation and determining where heavier populations lived and worked in order to assess road developments, etc.....
Why would people go to their place of birth to be taxed for this census?
I understand it fulfilled prophecy, but was there any other reason?
The Census at the time of Christ's birth
-
_periwinkler
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 5:40 pm
- Location: near Beautiful Pacific Ocean
The Census at the time of Christ's birth
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
-
_Benjamin Ho
- Posts: 137
- Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 8:16 am
- Location: Singapore
I am going to make an educated guess here.
I am supposing that 2000 years ago the government did not have social security numbers or driving licences to identify people. In order to ensure a single count (i.e. to prevent people from being taxed twice!) the government would require a database of existing persons. If you think about it, the most available database would be the genealogical or family records. These records would most likely be kept at the family's hometown. Thus the necessity to make the trip back to their ancesteral town or city. I am assuming that they didn't have computer networks to aid in collecting this information in those days.
I am supposing that 2000 years ago the government did not have social security numbers or driving licences to identify people. In order to ensure a single count (i.e. to prevent people from being taxed twice!) the government would require a database of existing persons. If you think about it, the most available database would be the genealogical or family records. These records would most likely be kept at the family's hometown. Thus the necessity to make the trip back to their ancesteral town or city. I am assuming that they didn't have computer networks to aid in collecting this information in those days.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
Grace and peace,
Benjamin Ho
Benjamin Ho
-
_Benjamin Ho
- Posts: 137
- Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 8:16 am
- Location: Singapore
A quick search through my Logos Bible Software reveals:
1.
Critics used to question the fact that every man had to go to his own city to be enrolled; but here is an actual government edict from Egypt:
“Gaius Vibius Maximus, Prefect of Egypt orders: ‘Seeing that the time has come for the house-to-house census, it is necessary to compel all those who for any cause whatsoever are residing outside their districts to return to their own homes, that they may both carry out the regular order of the census, and may also diligently attend to the cultivation of their allotments.’”
If that was the case in Egypt, it may well be that in Judaea, where the old tribal ancestries still held good, men had to go to the headquarters of their tribe. Here is an instance where further knowledge has shown the accuracy of the New Testament.
The Gospel of Luke, ( ed. William Barclay, lecturer in the University of Glasgow;, The Daily study Bible series, Rev. ed. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 2000, c1975), Lk 2:8.
2.
A number of papyri in Egypt have the heading enrolment by household. Here again Luke is vindicated. Each man went to the town where his family register was kept.
A.T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, (Vol.V c1932, Vol.VI c1933 by Sunday School Board of the Southern Baptist Convention.; Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, 1997), Lk 2:3.
3.
Although Egyptian census records show that people had to return to their homes for a tax census, the home to which they returned was where they owned property, not simply where they were born (censuses registered persons according to property). Joseph thus must have still held property in Bethlehem; if the tax census of a.d. 6 is any indication, he might not have had to register for any property in Galilee.
Craig S. Keener and InterVarsity Press, The IVP Bible Background Commentary New Testament, ( Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1993), Lk 2:3.
4.
Joseph’s Davidic lineage, and thus Jesus’ Davidic (and messianic) lineage, is pointed out. The redundancy “house and line” probably is a result of Luke’s fondness for doublets (see comments on 2:25) and does not imply that Joseph owned a house in Bethlehem. If the latter were true, then his search for a room in an inn (2:7) makes no sense.
Robert H. Stein, vol. 24, Luke [Computer File, (electronic ed.;, Logos Library System; The New American Commentary Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2001, c1992), 106.
5.
Because it is difficult to suppose that every Jew (women as well as men) was obliged to repair to the city of which their ancestors were, and there be enrolled, now, at a time when they kept not to the bounds of their tribes, as formerly, it may be offered as a conjecture that this great exactness was used only with the family of David, concerning which, it is probable, the emperor gave particular orders, it having been the royal family, and still talked of as designed to be so, that he might know its number and strength.
Matthew Henry, Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible Complete and Unabridged in One Volume, ( Peabody: Hendrickson, 1996, c1991), Lk 2:1.
6.
In Judea each man went back to the city of his ancestors, where his family records were kept.
Charles F. Pfeiffer and Everett Falconer Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary New Testament, ( Chicago: Moody Press, 1962), Lk 2:3.
7.
Before and after the days of the Republic, it was customary for the Romans to have “enrollments by households,” where persons and property would be taxed by families. The censors would query each family head regarding the name, age, financial and legal status of each member of his household (cf. Cic. Laws iii.3; Livy xliii.14).
The Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia, ( ed. Charles F. Pfeiffer et al.; Chicago: Moody Press, 1975).
1.
Critics used to question the fact that every man had to go to his own city to be enrolled; but here is an actual government edict from Egypt:
“Gaius Vibius Maximus, Prefect of Egypt orders: ‘Seeing that the time has come for the house-to-house census, it is necessary to compel all those who for any cause whatsoever are residing outside their districts to return to their own homes, that they may both carry out the regular order of the census, and may also diligently attend to the cultivation of their allotments.’”
If that was the case in Egypt, it may well be that in Judaea, where the old tribal ancestries still held good, men had to go to the headquarters of their tribe. Here is an instance where further knowledge has shown the accuracy of the New Testament.
The Gospel of Luke, ( ed. William Barclay, lecturer in the University of Glasgow;, The Daily study Bible series, Rev. ed. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 2000, c1975), Lk 2:8.
2.
A number of papyri in Egypt have the heading enrolment by household. Here again Luke is vindicated. Each man went to the town where his family register was kept.
A.T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, (Vol.V c1932, Vol.VI c1933 by Sunday School Board of the Southern Baptist Convention.; Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, 1997), Lk 2:3.
3.
Although Egyptian census records show that people had to return to their homes for a tax census, the home to which they returned was where they owned property, not simply where they were born (censuses registered persons according to property). Joseph thus must have still held property in Bethlehem; if the tax census of a.d. 6 is any indication, he might not have had to register for any property in Galilee.
Craig S. Keener and InterVarsity Press, The IVP Bible Background Commentary New Testament, ( Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1993), Lk 2:3.
4.
Joseph’s Davidic lineage, and thus Jesus’ Davidic (and messianic) lineage, is pointed out. The redundancy “house and line” probably is a result of Luke’s fondness for doublets (see comments on 2:25) and does not imply that Joseph owned a house in Bethlehem. If the latter were true, then his search for a room in an inn (2:7) makes no sense.
Robert H. Stein, vol. 24, Luke [Computer File, (electronic ed.;, Logos Library System; The New American Commentary Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2001, c1992), 106.
5.
Because it is difficult to suppose that every Jew (women as well as men) was obliged to repair to the city of which their ancestors were, and there be enrolled, now, at a time when they kept not to the bounds of their tribes, as formerly, it may be offered as a conjecture that this great exactness was used only with the family of David, concerning which, it is probable, the emperor gave particular orders, it having been the royal family, and still talked of as designed to be so, that he might know its number and strength.
Matthew Henry, Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible Complete and Unabridged in One Volume, ( Peabody: Hendrickson, 1996, c1991), Lk 2:1.
6.
In Judea each man went back to the city of his ancestors, where his family records were kept.
Charles F. Pfeiffer and Everett Falconer Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary New Testament, ( Chicago: Moody Press, 1962), Lk 2:3.
7.
Before and after the days of the Republic, it was customary for the Romans to have “enrollments by households,” where persons and property would be taxed by families. The censors would query each family head regarding the name, age, financial and legal status of each member of his household (cf. Cic. Laws iii.3; Livy xliii.14).
The Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia, ( ed. Charles F. Pfeiffer et al.; Chicago: Moody Press, 1975).
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
-
_periwinkler
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 5:40 pm
- Location: near Beautiful Pacific Ocean
Benjamin,
Thank you very much. The Logos Bible Software looks like a must-have!
I did find the Gaius Vibius Maximus' papyrus found in Egypt in 1905 after I posted my query.
Again, thank you very much. Now I can answer my friend with much more information.
Periwinkler
Thank you very much. The Logos Bible Software looks like a must-have!
I did find the Gaius Vibius Maximus' papyrus found in Egypt in 1905 after I posted my query.
Again, thank you very much. Now I can answer my friend with much more information.
Periwinkler
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
Thanks, Benjamin, for the thorough answer to the above question! You saved me much time, which, at the moment, is in short supply. Blessings to you.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
In Jesus,
Steve
Steve
-
_Priestly1
- Posts: 68
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 2:47 pm
- Location: McMinnville, Oregon USA
This may help answer those who feel Luke was in error as to the time of the Imperial Census.
"Now in the days when a decree went forth from Augustus Caesar it happened that the whole Empire was counted in a census; this census took place before (protee) Quirinus was Praefect of Syria."
Most translators have "first" for protee, but it can just as well mean before. The syntax and usage in this passage does not necessitate it mean "first". Quirinus did not become Praefect of Syria until after the death of Herod the Great I believe......so my translation would confirm this and do no harm to the text, message or faith. It would solve a vexing historic problem for those dependent on the translation of protee as "first". I believe this both accurately translates the Koine Greek text of Luke and is supported by archeological and historical data. It may bother traditionalists in most camps, but Truth is not the captive of denominations, sects and movements.
In Messaih,
+Ken Huffman
P.S.
Merry Christ's Mass & have a Happy New Year!
"Now in the days when a decree went forth from Augustus Caesar it happened that the whole Empire was counted in a census; this census took place before (protee) Quirinus was Praefect of Syria."
Most translators have "first" for protee, but it can just as well mean before. The syntax and usage in this passage does not necessitate it mean "first". Quirinus did not become Praefect of Syria until after the death of Herod the Great I believe......so my translation would confirm this and do no harm to the text, message or faith. It would solve a vexing historic problem for those dependent on the translation of protee as "first". I believe this both accurately translates the Koine Greek text of Luke and is supported by archeological and historical data. It may bother traditionalists in most camps, but Truth is not the captive of denominations, sects and movements.
In Messaih,
+Ken Huffman
P.S.
Merry Christ's Mass & have a Happy New Year!
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason: