JoeWallack

JW:
Well at least something worthwhile came out of this Thread. Great link. Thanks (and you do know how to put me off track).

JW:
Ookay. I'll stop asking (I want to watch more of those clips anyway).



Joseph

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page

Chris Weimer

I read the blogpost, and I missed the connection. Do I have the right post? Perhaps I missed something?

JoeWallack

Who Ya Gonna Call To?


JW:
Note that at each Key point in "Luke's" report he appears to provide a relevant Time Marker for Judea involving the Leader of Judea (just like a Historian would do).

The Birth Of John

1.5

"There was in the days of Herod, king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abijah: and he had a wife of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth."

Herod was King of Judea.


The Birth Of Jesus

2:1-2

"Now it came to pass in those days, there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be enrolled.
This was the first enrolment made when Quirinius was governor of Syria."

Quirinius was Governor (Judea was under control of the Syrian Province).


The Baptism of Jesus

3:1

"Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judaea, and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene,"

Pilate was Governor of Judea.

Note that all three characters, Herod, Quirinius and Pilate are Foremost rulers of Judea in Josephus. So as Time Markers for "Luke's" report of the most Significant events they fit very well. Stephen?



Joseph

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page

JoeWallack

JW:
Okay Stephen, since you refuse to provide your interlinear here, here comes the pain:

Normal Interlinear 2:2

αὕτη--ἀπογραφὴ---πρώτη----------ἐγένετο--ἡγεμονεύοντος--τῆς ---Συρίας----Κυρηνίου

This--registration--was first---(taken)-while-----is ruling----the---of Syria----Quirinius


As I've already indicated the offending word, πρώτη, has a normal meaning of "first". If anyone still doubts this (even though "first" is used by every Bible translation I'm aware of) Raymond Brown, on page 395 of The Birth Of The Messiah, specifically discusses the word meaning in connection with attempts to defend against Lukan Dating error and says, "The last two translations, which are further attempts to preserve Lucan accuracy, involve translating protes, which normally means "first," as equivalent to the comparative proteros, "earlier than," or to proteron or pro, "before". (For objections to this, see Ogg, "Quirinius," 233.)"

Everybody loves Raymond. Thus without any Textual Markers indicating Context or with ambiguous Textual Markers, the Default translation is "First".

Looking at the above Interlinear we do have a Textual Marker present for "πρώτη", which is:

ἐγένετο---------ἡγεμονεύοντος--τῆς ---Συρίας----Κυρηνίου

(taken)-while-----is ruling--------the---of Syria---Quirinius


This Marker Identifies a Time, when Quirinius was Governor of Syria, and is therefore a Chronological Marker indicating that "πρώτη" here has Chronological usage.

At Stephen's Blog he attempts to parallel the structure of 2:2 with Ephesians 6:2:

Hypotyposeis

"I would suggest that Eph. 6:2

"τίμα τὸν πατέρα σου καὶ τὴν μητέρα" ἥτις ἐστὶν ἐντολὴ πρώτη ἐν ἐπαγγελίᾳ

is a very helpful syntactic and semantic analogy for Luke 2:2. In particular, we have a pronoun + noun + πρώτη + adv., a very similar sentence structure to Luke 2:2, withthe chief difference is the location and root of the verb, ἐστὶν vs ἐγένετο.

Eph. 6:2 is usually translated as:

"Honor your father and mother," which is the first commandment with a promise." (NRSV)

But Danker in the 4th edition of the New Testament Greek lexicon disagrees with rendering πρώτη as "first" here because it "loses sight of the fact that Ex 20:4-6=Dt 5:8-10 has an implied promise of the same kind as the one one in Ex 20:12=Dt5:16." Danker concludes that πρώτη "here is best taken in the same sense as in Mk 12:29 above."


JW:
My Interlinear for 6:2:

τίμα----τὸν--πατέρα--σου----καὶ---τὴν--μητέρα--ἥτις----ἐστὶν--ἐντολὴ--- ------πρώτη---------------ἐν--ἐπαγγελίᾳ

Honor--the--father---of you--and--the--mother--which---is----commandment---first/foremost--with--a promise


JW:
The Structure of 6:2 is noticeably different from 2:2. Whereas the offending word of 2:2 is followed by a verb:

πρώτη----------ἐγένετο--ἡγεμονεύοντος--τῆς ---Συρίας----Κυρηνίου

was first---(taken)-while-----is ruling----the---of Syria----Quirinius


This word is not followed by a verb in 6:2:

ἐντολὴ--- ------πρώτη---------------ἐν--ἐπαγγελίᾳ

commandment---first/foremost--with--a promise


JW:
Stephen writes:

"is a very helpful syntactic and semantic analogy for Luke 2:2. In particular, we have a pronoun + noun + πρώτη + adv., a very similar sentence structure to Luke 2:2, withthe chief difference is the location and root of the verb, ἐστὶν vs ἐγένετο."

Here's the Interlinear for "pronoun + noun + πρώτη + adv":

ἥτις----ἐστὶν--ἐντολὴ--- ------πρώτη---------------ἐν--ἐπαγγελίᾳ

which---is----commandment---first/foremost--with--a promise


JW:
Note that "ἐν" (with) is not an adverb, it's a preposition. Be that as it may not, the Textual Marker for "πρώτη" here is "with promise". This establishes the Context as Conceptual (rather than the normal context of "first" which is Chronological).

Thus the Example hand chosen by Stephen to support his translation of 2:2 not only does not support it but actually supports the normal translation of 2:2 "first" because Ephesians 6:2 has a Textual Marker of Conceptual as opposed to 2:2 which has a Textual Marker of Chronological.

Stephen?



Joseph

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page

jgibson000

In evaluating the validity of your "interlinear", it's important to note not only that EGENETO does not mean "while" and does not imply "taken, but also (and more importantly), that your "interlinear" (translation) takes the feminine adjective PROTH as an adverb, indicating when the registration occured.

But, to my knowledge, while the feminine and masculine forms of PROTOS can be and were used adverbally (e.g. to indicate "before"), they never bear the particular adverbal sense you claimy PROTH has in Lk. 2:2. For it to mean what you think it means and to function the way you think it functions in Lk. 2:2 (i.e., as a modifier of the verb EGENETO), it would have to be in the neuter.

So Greek syntax and grammar stand soundly against your claim. But then, you knew that, didn't you?

Jeffrey Gibson

JoeWallack

JW:
I thought you were boycotting me. Before I ask if you want this to be your one intelligence-challenged question for the day let's wait for Stephen to respond.



Joseph

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page

Ben C Smith

Hi, Stephen.

What do you think are the implications of what Justin Martyr says in Apology 1.34.2?

Κωμη δε τις εστιν εν τη χωρα Ιουδαιων απεχουσα σταδιους τριακοντα πεντε Ιεροσολυμων, εν η εγεννηθη Ιησους Χριστος, ως και μαθειν δυνασθε εκ των απογραφων των γενομενων επι Κυρηνιου, του υμετερου εν Ιουδαια πρωτου γενομενου επιτροπου.

And there is a certain village in the country of the Jews, at a distance of thirty-five stades from Jerusalem, in which was born Jesus Christ, as you can even learn from the registrations which were made in the time of Cyrenius, who was your first [foremost? ] procurator in Judea.

If we assume that Justin has the gospel of Luke in mind here, he seems to take the registration which caused Jesus to be born in Bethlehem as the same one which Quirinius himself carried out.

Such an interpretation appears to be reflected also in pseudo-Matthew 13:

And it came to pass some little time after that an enrollment was made according to the edict of Caesar Augustus, that all the world was to be enrolled, each man in his native place. This enrollment was made by Cyrinus, the governor of Syria; it was necessary, therefore, that Joseph should enroll with the blessed Mary in Bethlehem.

(I lack the original of this passage as yet, so there may be nuances of which I am unaware.)

Is there any ancient testimony for your preferred reading, which (as far as I understand it) distinguishes the Quirinian census from that which brought Joseph to Bethlehem?

Ben.

S.C.Carlson

It looks likes Justin is assuming that there are two censuses under Quirinius but applies the word "first", not to any census, but to an enumeration of procurators over Judea. Neither detail is supported by the text of Luke and the shifting of the referent of "first" suggests that what we're really dealing with is Justin's (poor) memory of Luke 2:1ff. It is not the kind of statement that would be made with the text sitting right in front of him.

This is the kind of thing that requires the original language. There's no telling to what extent the received interpretation of Luke 2:2 has influenced the translation.

Arguably, Tertullian, Adv. Marc. 4.19.10, did so implicitly, by ascribing the Bethlehem census, not to Q, but to Sentius Saturninus:

Also it is well known that a census had just been taken in Judaea by Sentius Saturninus, and they might have inquired of his ancestry in those records. (tr. Evans)

Stephen

JoeWallack

JW:
Ben, the first, sorry, straight-forward meaning of this excerpt by itself is that Justin understood 2:2 to be "First", no tricks. I suppose if this is all there was from Justin an Apologist could argue that Justin was not referring to the 2:2 census because Jesus hadn't been born yet and therefore Justin proves that there was a second Quirinius census which had a record of Jesus. I've haven't seen this argument from Apologists because generally they, like Stephen (and if you don't think Stephen is an Apologist here I have some beach front property in Gerasa I'd like to sell you), avoid the Early Witness testimony because it all supports "First". You can tell though from Justin's second quote, which I previously provided here that he clearly understood Jesus' birth to historically be when Quirinius was Governor of Syria:

1.46

"CHAPTER XLVI -- THE WORD IN THE WORLD BEFORE CHRIST.
But lest some should, without reason, and for the perversion of what we teach, maintain that we say that Christ was born one hundred and fifty years ago under Cyrenius"

JW:
Justin Explicitly says that Jesus was born under Quirinius and if you work out the years this confirms Josephus' dating of the Census. Thanks Justin.

As I'll show shortly, Early Christian understanding was always that Jesus was born during the Quirinius' census. This was a Major supposed event in Christian History, Jesus' birth = Quirinius census or "The Census".

Justin's wording sounds just like what we would expect from someone using 2:2 as a source but not simply quoting from it. "Registrations" (plural) would be a normal description of a registration supposedly involving mass people.

JW:
PM is exactly in line with Early Christian understanding, Jesus birth = Quirinius' census. One wonders what translation change could effect the meaning but I suppose for someone who can get "Foremost" out of "First" "All things are possible".

An ever better example of Early Christian understanding is the DIATESSARON. Tatian, the prodigy of Justin, had to face Pagan shredding of the Gospels due to Contradictions. So to try and eliminate the problem at the Source he created one Harmonizing Gospel (emphasis mine saith the Lord):

http://www.earlychristianwritings.co...atessaron.html

"9 And in those days there went forth a decree from Augustus Caesar that all the people of his dominion should be enrolled. This first enrolment was while Quirinius was governor of Syria. And every man went to be enrolled in his city. And Joseph went up also from Nazareth, a city of Galilee, to Judaea, to the city of David which is called Bethlehem (for he was of the house of David and of his tribe), with Arabic. Mary his betrothed, she being with child, to be enrolled there. And while she was there the days for her being delivered were accomplished. And she brought forth her firstborn son; and she wrapped him in swaddling cloths and laid him in a manger, because there was no place for them where they were staying.

16 And there were in that region shepherds abiding, keeping their flock in the watch of the night. And behold, the angel of God came unto them, and the glory of the Lord shone upon them; and they were greatly terrified. And the angel said unto them, Be not terrified; for I bring you tidings of great joy which shall be to the whole world; there is born to you this day a Saviour, which is the Lord the Mes- siah, in the city of David. And this is a sign for you: ye shall find a babe wrapped in swaddling cloths and laid in a manger. And there appeared with the angels suddenly many heavenly forces praising God and saying, Praise be to God in the highest, And on the earth peace, and good hope to men.

23 And when the angels departed from them to heaven, the shepherds spake to one another and said, We will go to Bethlehem and see this word which hath been, as the Lord made known unto us. And they came with haste, and found Mary and Joseph, and the babe laid in a manger. And when they saw, they reported the word which was spoken to them about the child. And all that heard wondered at the description which the shepherds described to them. But Mary kept these sayings and discriminated them in her heart. And those shepherds returned, magnifying and praising God for all that they had seen and heard, according as it was described unto them.

29 Arabic. And when eight days were fulfilled that the child should be circumcised, his name was called Jesus, being that by which he was called by the angel before his conception in the womb.

30 And when the days of their purification according to the law of Moses were completed, they took him up to Jerusalem to present him before the Lord (as it is written in the law of the Lord, Every male opening the womb shall be called the holy thing of the Lord), and to give a sacrificial victim as it is said in the law of 33 the Lord, A pair of doves or two young pigeons. And there was in Jerusalem a man whose name was Simeon; and this man was upright and pious, and expecting the consolation of Israel; and the Holy Spirit was upon him. And it had been said unto him by the Holy Spirit, that he should not see death till he had seen with his eyes the Messiah of the Lord. And this man came by the Spirit to the temple; and at the time when his parents brought in the child Jesus, that they might present for him a sacrifice, as it is written in the law, he bare him in his arms and praised God and said, Now loosest thou the bonds of thy servant, O Lord, in peace, According to thy saying; For mine eye hath witnessed thy mercy, Which thou hast made ready because of the whole world; A light for the unveiling of the nations, And a glory to thy people Israel.

41 And Joseph and his mother were marvelling at the things which were being said concerning him. And Simeon blessed them and said to Mary his mother, Behold, he is set for the overthrow and rising of many in Israel; and for a sign of contention; and a spear shall pierce through thine own soul; that the thoughts of the hearts of many may be revealed. And Anna the prophetess, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Asher, was also advanced in years (and she dwelt with her husband seven years from her virginity, and she remained a widow about eighty-four years); and she left not the temple, and served night and day with 46 fasting and prayer. And she also rose in that hour and thanked the Lord, and she spake of him with every one who was expecting the deliverance of Jerusalem. And when they had accomplished everything according to what is in the law of the Lord, they returned to Galilee, to Nazareth their city.

SECTION III.

3 2 And after that, the Magi came from the east to Jerusalem, and said, Where is the King of the Jews which was born? We have seen his star in the east, and have 3 come to worship him. And Herod the king heard, and he was troubled, and all 4 Jerusalem with him. And he gathered all the chief priests and the scribes of the 5 people, and asked them in what place the Messiah should be born. They said, In Bethlehem of Judaea: thus it is written in the prophet, 6 Thou also, Bethlehem of Judah, Art not contemptible among the kings of Judah: From thee shall go forth a king, And he shall be a shepherd to my people Israel.

7 Then Herod called the Magi secretly, and inquired of them the time at which 8 the star appeared to them. And he sent them to Bethlehem, and said unto them, Go and search about the child diligently; and when ye have found him, come and 9 make known to me, that I also may go and worship him. And they, when they Arabic, heard the king, departed; and lo, the star which they had seen in the east went before them, until it came and stood above the place where the child 10, was. And when they beheld the star, they rejoiced with very great joy. And they entered the house and beheld the child with Mary his mother, and fell down worshipping him, and opened their saddle-bags and offered to him offerings, gold and myrrh and frankincense. And they saw in a dream a that they should not return to Herod, and they travelled by another way in going to their country.

13 And when they had departed, the angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph, and said unto him, Rise, take the child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and be thou there until I speak to thee; for Herod is determined to seek the child to slay him. And Joseph arose and took the child and his mother in the night, and fled into Egypt, and remained in it until the time of the death of Herod: that that might be fulfilled which was said by the Lord in the prophet, which said, From Egypt did I call my son. And Herod then, when he saw that he was mocked of the Magi, was very angry, and sent and killed all the male children which were in Bethlehem and all its borders, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had inquired from the Magi.Then was fulfilled the saying in Jeremiah the prophet, which said, A voice was heard in Ramah, Weeping and much lamentation; Rachel weeping for her children, And not willing to be consoled for their loss.

19 But when Herod the king died, the angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph in Egypt, and said unto him, Rise and take the child and his mother, and Arabic. go into the land of Israel; for they have died who sought the child's life. And Joseph rose and took the child and his mother, and came to the land of lsrael. But when he heard that Archelaus had become king over Judaea instead of Herod his father, he feared to go thither; and he saw in a dream that he should go into the land of Galilee, and that he should abide in a city called Nazareth: that the saying in the prophet might be fulfilled, that he should be called a Nazarene."


JW:
Here we have mainly a straight-forward chronological presentation without much digression. Tatian gives the impression, like everyone else, that his Jesus was born during the Quirinius' census.

JW:
I can see that this translation says "census" but according to Richard Carrier the manuscript evidence is "censuses", plural:

"sed et census constat actos sub Augusto nunc in Iudaea per Sentium Saturninum, apud quos genus eius inquirere potuissent,"

"But it is also well known that censuses were conducted under the Augustus in that time in Judaea by Sentius Saturninus, consulting which they can investigate his family."

The context of 4:19 is primarily whether Jesus had brothers (emphasis mine):

"We now come to the most strenuously-plied argument of all those who call in question the Lord's nativity. They say that He testifies Himself to His not having been born, when He asks, "Who is my mother, and who are my brethren? "714 In this manner heretics either wrest plain and simple words to any sense they choose by their conjectures, or else they violently resolve by a literal interpretation words which imply a conditional sense and are incapable of a simple solution,715 as in this passage. [7] We, for our part, say in reply, first, that it could not possibly have been told Him that His mother and His brethren stood without, desiring to see Him, if He had had no mother and no brethren. They must have been known to him who announced them, either some time previously, or then at that very time, when they desired to see Him, or sent Him their message. To this our first position this answer is usually given by the other side. But suppose they sent Him the message for the purpose of tempting Him? Well, but the Scripture does not say so; and inasmuch as it is usual for it to indicate what is done in the way of temptation ("Behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted Him; "716 again, when inquiring about tribute, the Pharisees came to Him, tempting Him717 ), so, when it makes no mention of temptation, it does not admit the interpretation of temptation. [8] However, although I do not allow this sense, I may as well ask, by way of a superfluous refutation, for the reasons of the alleged temptation, To what purpose could they have tempted Him by naming His mother and His brethren? If it was to ascertain whether He had been born or not----when was a question raised on this point, which they must resolve by tempting Him in this way? [9] Who could doubt His having been born, when they718 saw Him before them a veritable man?----whom they had heard call Himself "Son of man? "----of whom they doubted whether He were God or Son of God, from seeing Him, as they did, in the perfect garb of human quality?----supposing Him rather to be a prophet, a great one indeed,719 but still one who had been born as man? Even if it had been necessary that He should thus be tried in the investigation of His birth, surely any other proof would have better answered the trial than that to be obtained from mentioning those relatives which it was quite possible for Him, in spite of His true nativity, not at that moment to have had. [10] For tell me now, does a mother live on contemporaneously720 with her sons in every case? Have all sons brothers born for them?721 May a man rather not have fathers and sisters (living), or even no relatives at all? But there is historical proof722 that at this very time723 a census had been taken in Judaea by Sentius Saturninus,724 which might have satisfied their inquiry respecting the family and descent of Christ. Such a method of testing the point had therefore no consistency whatever in it and they "who were standing without" were really "His mother and His brethren." It remains for us to examine His meaning when He resorts to non-literal725 words, saying "Who is my mother or my brethren? "It seems as if His language amounted to a denial of His family and His birth; but it arose actually from the absolute nature of the case, and the conditional sense in which His words were to be explained.726 [11] He was justly indignant, that persons so very near to Him" stood without," while strangers were within hanging on His words, especially as they wanted to call Him away from the solemn work He had in hand. He did not so much deny as disavow727 them. And therefore, when to the previous question, "Who is my mother, and who are my brethren?728 He added the answer "None but they who hear my words and do them," He transferred the names of blood-relationship to others, whom He judged to be more closely related to Him by reason of their faith. [12] Now no one transfers a thing except from him who possesses that which is transferred. If, therefore, He made them "His mother and His brethren" who were not so, how could He deny them these relationships who really had them? Surely only on the condition of their deserts, and not by any disavowal of His near relatives; teaching them by His own actual example,729 that "whosoever preferred father or mother or brethren to the Word of God, was not a disciple worthy of Him."730 Besides,731 His admission of His mother and His brethren was the more express, from the fact of His unwillingness to acknowledge them. [13] That He adopted others only confirmed those in their relationship to Him whom He refused because of their offence, and for whom He substituted the others, not as being truer relatives, but worthier ones. Finally, it was no great matter if He did prefer to kindred (that) faith which it732 did not possess.733"


JW:
Tertullian quotes the "Heretics" as Jesus saying to the effect, "Who are my brothers" as if the meaning is he has no physical brothers. This and the overall context indicates Tertullian is trying to refer to a census after Jesus was born since only a later census could refer to his physical brothers.

Gaius Sentius Saturninus was governor of Syria from 9-6 BCE. Tertullian does not link Sentius Saturninus with the census in Luke 2:1 and may have meant Sentius Saturninus (an ancestor of the other), who was governor of Syria in 19-21 CE (Tacitus, Annals 2.76-81).

I hope this has all been educational to you young Benjamin and I Am not primarily referring to the proper translation of 2:2.



Joseph

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page

JoeWallack

JW:
Let's look now at "Luke's" other reference to "The Census":

Acts 5:37

"After this man rose up Judas of Galilee in the days of the enrolment, and drew away [some of the] people after him: he also perished; and all, as many as obeyed him, were scattered abroad. (ASV)"

And the Greek:

http://www.zhubert.com/bible?book=Ac...ter=5&verse=37

"μετὰ τοῦτον ἀνέστη Ἰούδας ὁ Γαλιλαῖος ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις τῆς ἀπογραφῆς καὶ ἀπέστησεν λαὸν ὀπίσω αὐτοῦ κἀκεῖνος ἀπώλετο καὶ πάντες ὅσοι ἐπείθοντο αὐτῷ διεσκορπίσθησαν"

Note that "Luke's" specific reference is:

"τῆς ἀπογραφῆς" = the enrolment. "Luke" refers to "the enrolment" because previously he has only mentioned one enrolment, that of 2:2.

ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις τῆς ἀπογραφῆς = in the days of the enrolment, even uses specific/very similar wording from 2:1-2:

ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις = in the days.

αὕτη ἀπογραφὴ = this enrollment

So it would seem that "Luke" wanted to make it perfectly clear that the census referred to in Acts was the same referred to in 2:2.

A related question is why is Josephus and therefore "Luke" describing resistance to a Quirnius' census that was held long ago. The answer is Quirinius was the one who instituted the census System in Judea. "The Census" consisted of more than a one time inventory. Registering, inventoring, administration and collection all had to be set-up as a System. This may be hard to believe but not everyone voluntarily pays the tax they are assessed (an area that I Am something of an authority on). This is why "The Census" can be referred to as First created when Quirinius was Governor of Syria. Just as Josephus tells us.

Stephen?



Joseph

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page