On Dateline NBC’s The Birth of Jesus episode, Dr. John Dominic Crossan, cofounder of the once popular Jesus Seminar, called into question the historical veracity of Holy Scripture: “Luke tells us the story that at the time Jesus was born, Augustus had decreed a census of the whole earth. Now, every scholar will tell you there was no such census ever.”
Is Crossan correct? Is the canon corrupt? Did Dr. Luke make a colossal historical blunder that effectively discredits sacred Scripture? In an age when the historical reliability of the Bible is being questioned, it is crucial that Christians are equipped to demonstrate that Scripture is the infallible repository of redemptive revelation. So how do we respond to critics like Crossan? Is his pontification a defensible argument or merely a dogmatic assertion?
First, while Crossan made his statement with typical bravado, it turns out to be patently false. Caesar Augustus was famous for census taking. So famous, in fact, that this issue is no longer even debated among credible historians. The Jewish historian Josephus referred to a Roman taxation in AD 6, and considering the scope of the taxation, it is logical to assume that it took a long time to complete. Undoubtedly it began with Caesar Augustus around 5 BC and was likely completed a decade later.
Furthermore, Luke—ever the meticulous historian—noted that the census took place when Quirinius served as governor of Syria (Luke 2:1–3). As Paul Maier, an esteemed professor of ancient history at Western Michigan University, noted on a Bible Answer Man broadcast, the Romans took forty years to get a census done in Gaul, so for a province 1,500 miles away from Rome to take a decade is eminently reasonable. Moreover, since the census came in under the administration of Quirinius, it would correctly be labeled as such. Not only so, but given Luke’s impeccable credentials as a historian, it would have been far more circumspect for Crossan to temper his dogmatism.
Finally, one need only remember the experience of the brilliant archaeologist Sir William Ramsey, who—like Crossan—was bent on undermining Luke’s historical reliability. Throughout his painstaking Mediterranean archaeological adventures, he discovered that, one after the other, the historical allusions that Luke provided are accurate. If, as Ramsey points out, Luke did not err in referencing a plethora of countries, cities, islands, and all the details surrounding them, then there’s no reason to doubt him concerning the census.
In the end, it is a Crossan corruption, not a canonical corruption, that is in play.
In part adapted from Has God Spoken?
***Note the preceding text is adapted from The Complete Bible Answer Book: Collector’s Edition: Revised and Expanded (2024). To receive for your partnering gift please click here. ***