(5) The Census of Quirinius (A. V. says Cy renius). St. Luke fixes time of the birth of Jesus by an enrollment ordered by the Emperor Augus tus, and effected by the governor or legate Qui rinius. This governor did take a census soon after A. D. 6, when lie was sent as governor after Archelaus was deposed at that date; but he cer tainly could not have taken a census in B. C. 4 or 5, since the governors arc known from the year B. C. 9 onward. They were Marcus Titius, Caius Sentius Saturninus, and Publius Quintil ius Varus. The death of Herod occurred in the time of Quintilius Varus. If Quintilius had taken a census, it might be said that Luke or a copyist had written Quirinius for Quintilius. But no en rollment is known of in his time. If there were any, it was made for Herod for his own pur poses; but in that case it would have been men tioned by Josephus. The census of Quirinius, when he took it, raised a revolt. He was twice governor of Syria under Augustus, but no cen sus can be found, save the one of later date. The Greek statement (Luke ii :2) is aVry draypcuPft rpw'rn irrep,ovdovros ri;s. ZvpLas Kvpnviov. Ac cording to Greek ways, this must mean, "This was taken as the first census [of several] while Quirinius ruled Syria." Adam Clarke wants to translate rp(Irn as if it were a preposition mean ing before, as if he were saying, "This census oc curred before Quirinius was governor;" this he does not defend as a classical Greek usage, but finds similar instances in John i:3o• V POT OS nov, "he was before me," and John xv:18, rpilr'rop Acialcrvev, "it hated me before it hated you," and in the LXX, 2 Sam. xix:43, Xfryos tiov rpiro-ros . . .roa lotion, "our word before Judah's." But in none of these places does trparos necessarily mean time; in the first and in the last of them it de notes priority in rank, not in time; and in John xv :i8 it means more than, the idea of superior ity. Michaelis and others think that Luke wrote, "trp6 which a copyist made into trpoirn; this would relieve all difficulty, as it would say, "This enrollment occurred before that of Quirinius." But no MSS. has such text.
The result of the investigation is that we must say that Luke used the wrong name when he wrote Quirinius; and this gospel gives no aid in determining the time of the Nativity. Tertul lian brings real help. He was a Roman lawyer of vast erudition, and is in this case an independent witness. In his controversy with Marcion he mentions a census taken in Judwa by Sentius Saturninus as one that would contain an account of the family to which Jesus belonged. Now Sat urninus was succeeded B. C. 6 by Varus; and as the census was a completed work when Varns took the office, the birth of Jesus is to be set as early as B. C. 6, probably in B. C. 7. This date will not disagree with Matthew, and is the final conclusion from the data.
(6) The Genealogies of Jesus in Matthew and Luke are, as was shown above, of no use in set tling questions of time. Every genealogist and every historian is familiar with the fact that a man may be traced from an ancestor by different lines with a different number of steps in the two or more lines. For example, Henry IV of France,
Bourbon, was the eleventh descendant from St. Louis in the French line, but the thirteenth through the house of Navarre. Genealogies can give but an approximate date at best, when there is no question of the links of the chain. The chronologer can do nothing with the fact that by one genealogy thirty names lie between David and Jesus, and forty-one by the other.
(7) The Baptism of Jesus was in effect the beginning of his ministry, the duration of which is an important question. After the forty days in the wilderness of temptation, "from that time Jesus began to preach" (Matt. iv :17; Luke iv : 14, 15). Luke says, arras cipxottevos awl rpidtcorra, "Jesus himself began to be about 3o years of age," as the A. V. has it. This is sus ceptible of two interpretations: the common un derstanding of the words is that this was the be ginning of his thirtieth year. positively; but dpx1ntevos may refer to the beginning of his preaching, as in Luke xxiii :5 ; Acts i :22; and Acts x:37. The rest of the phrase is elastic; a man of 28 or one of 32 would be about 3o years of age. Taking the shortest time, from birth in B. C. 6 we are brought to A. D. 22. if we reckon him 28 years of age, the earliest limit.
John is said to have begun to baptize in the fif teenth year of Tiberius. If this be reckoned from the time when Tiberius became co-regent with Augustus, A. D. 12, John began his career in A. D. 27; if from the death of Augustus, in A. D. 29. We must date the baptism of Jesus between A. D. 22 and A. D. 2g.
In John ii :13 we are told that Jesus went to Jerusalem to the Passover, apparently but a few weeks after he began to speak in the synagogues of Galilee. At Jerusalem the Jews said to him, "Forty and six years was this temple in build ing." Herod began it B. C. ig; the forty-sixth year brings us to A. D. 27, agreeing with the cal culation from the regency of Tiberius. and fixing the baptism at A. D. 26 or 27, and thus the begin ning of the ministry of Jesus, with the first Pass over of John ii :13 in A. D. 27.
(8) Duration of the Ministry. The only mode of determining this from the gospels is by finding how many Passovers Jesus attended— two or three? John speaks of three (ii:i3; vi :4, and xii :55) ; and Farrar (Encyc. Brit. s. v. Jesus) says, "On other grounds it is probable that there was one Passover during the ministry which our Lord did not attend." The three Passovers may also be inferred obscurely from passages in Mark. There was then a ministry of more than two years, the silence of Matthew and Luke availing nothing to the contrary ; and while the Valentinians limited the ministry to one year, (how wonderful that such a powerful influence should be thrown into the world in a single year !) the prevalent opinion soon was that the ministry lasted three years. Nevertheless the evidence is scanty, and the ques tion intricate, so that there are plausible reasons for the short term.