Euphen

I came across this passage from Tertullian’s “Against Marcion” while reading Carrier’s article “Luke vs. Matthew on the Year of Christ’s Birth,” and was wondering if someone more knowledgeable than me could shed some light on it:

“But there is historical proof that at this very time a census had been taken in Judea by Sentius Saturninus, which might have satisfied their inquiry respecting the family and descent of Christ.”

I am especially interested to hear what mythicists think of this. I have read some of the arguments on this forum that have interested me the historicity of Jesus, which before I took for granted.

Would census records in this time be detailed enough to show what Tertuallian claims, that Jesus had brothers, and would Tertullian have had access to such records? If so, unless Tertullian misunderstood something, or is simply lying, this would seem to be evidence for the historicity of Jesus.

Ben C Smith

I am very doubtful about the several patristic claims to lost official sources for the life of Jesus. There are claims of acts written by Pilate, letters written to Tiberius, and census records from Quirinius and (in this case) Saturninus.

Please note, however, that the fathers appeal to these official records without exception as evidence of this or that particular aspect of the life or career of Jesus; the fathers entertained no doubts as to his basic existence, nor do their pagan interlocutors and opponents seem to have given them any reason to doubt it.

In cases such as this one with Tertullian, I think the writer knows the usual procedures (governors wrote acts and letters, census-takers kept records) and assumes that, if one wished to look them up, he or she would find the facts that the writer is assuming to be true.

I would be happy to be proven wrong on this score.

Ben.

Euphen

I hadn't considered that. Letters and the like would obviously be forgeries, but census records seem like an odd thing to forge, especially since, as you say, no one at the time seems to have doubted Jesus' physical existence, and unlike the census of Quirinius, which is part of Luke's birth narrative, this census would seem to have no other significance. Though I suppose that it could have been forged specifically to use against Marcion. Does Josephus mention the census of Saturninus?

In what other instances are official documents such as census records used by Christian apologists?

rlogan

None of Paul Bunyan's contemporaries doubted his existence.




The passage in Tertullian needs to be taken in context. It concerns Jesus "questioning" who his mother and bretheren are. Picking up Tertullian:

Against Marcion 4.19 here:

http://www.tertullian.org/anf/anf03/...#P5992_1802834

It is in this respect that if Jesus or anyone else were concerned with who his genetic mother and bretheren actually were, then they could (rhetorically) "look it up in the census":

Tertullian is not saying he looked at a census. He is saying that question is not even the point of the discussion. Jesus' family are the Christians around him.


Speaks to all the desperate attempts to make "brother of the Lord" mean genetic brother as opposed to fellow traveler.

Ben C Smith

I do not think Tertullian or anybody else forged census records. What I am saying is that they referred to them without necessarily having checked that they contained what they presumed they contained.

I do not think so.

Here are some, though the meaning of each is disputed (for example, there are some who suppose that when Justin refers to acts written up under Pilate he means the gospels themselves).

Justin, Apology 1.35.8-9:

Και μετα το σταυρωσαι αυτον εβαλον κληρον επι τον ιματισμον αυτου, και εμερισαντο εαυτοις οι σταυρωσαντες αυτον. και ταυτα οτι γεγονε δυνασθε μαθειν εκ των επι �*οντιου �*ιλατου γενομενων ακτων.

And after he was crucified they cast lots for his clothing, and those who had crucified him divided them. And that these things came to pass you can learn from the Acts made in the time of Pontius Pilate.

Justin, Apology 1.48.1-3:

Οτι δε και θεραπευσειν πασας νοσους και νεκρους ανεγερειν ο ημετερος Χριστος προεφητευθη, ακουσατε των λελεγμενων· εστι δε ταυτα· Τη παρουσια αυτου αλειται χωλος ως ελαφος, και τρανη εσται γλωσσα μογιλαλων· τυφλοι αναβλεψουσι και λεπροι καθαρισθησονται και νεκροι αναστησονται και περιπατησουσιν. οτι δε ταυτα εποιησεν εκ των επι �*οντιου �*ιλατου γενομενων ακτων μαθειν δυνασθε.

But, that it was also prophesied that our Christ would heal all diseases and raise dead people, listen to the things that have been said. These things are: At his advent a lame man shall leap like a deer, and the tongue of the stammerer shall be clear; blind men shall see and lepers shall be cleansed and dead men shall resurrect and walk around. And that he did these things you can learn from the Acts made in the time of Pontius Pilate.

Justin, 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 learn from the census lists made in the time of Cyrenius, who was your first governor in Judea.

Tertullian, Apology 21.24a:

Ea omnia super Christo Pilatus, et ipse iam pro sua conscientia Christianus, Caesari tunc Tiberio nuntiavit.

All these things [ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension] concerning Christ did Pilate, even himself already a Christian in his own conscience, announce to Tiberius, who was then Caesar.

Ben.

JoeWallack

JW:
Tertullian was a little man by the Giant standards of this Holy Forum. He was merely a truth-challenged advocate for his version of Jesus and not a Historian like Josephus. Ehrman in The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture throws out a few claims by Tertullian (Mr. T) where he charges his Gnostic opponents with Textual Forgery yet the evidence now left to us by Mr. T's own brand of Christianity indicates that it was Orthodox Christianity that was guilty of Forgery for these controversial words! So finding errors by Mr. T is about as hard as teaching a Dog how to Bar(k).

Sentius Saturninus was governor of Syria 9-6 BCE. So if you try to say Jesus was first born 4 BCE to 6 CE and his siblings were born 9-6 BCE? Do the Matthew. Not exactly inspiring confidence in Mr. T.

If you want to argue that Mr. T is evidence of a census before Quirinius than you have the following problems for this time and place based on implications from superior Jewish and Roman writings:

1) There would not have been any type of Census.

2) A Roman census would be especially unlikely.

3) Censuses were usually tax related and therefore wouldn't need the names of children.

4) If there was a Census in Israel during Herod the Great's reign there would be no reason to limit it to Judea.

If you want to argue that Mr. T is evidence of a census after Quirinius than you have the following problems for this time and place based on implications from superior Jewish and Roman writings:

1) Censuses were usually tax related and therefore wouldn't need the names of children.

2) If there was a Census in Judea than it would not include people living in Galilee.



Joseph

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

Euphen

Ben C Smith: Thanks for the citations. Your explanation is convincing.

JoeWallack: This is a different Saturninus. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnaeus_Sentius_Saturninus

JoeWallack

JW:
No it's the same one. It's right from the Carrier article that is the basis of this Thread:

http://www.infidels.org/library/mode...quirinius.html

"Gaius Sentius Saturninus (who was governor of Syria from 9 to 6 B.C.)"

Go through AJ and you get confirmation:

http://www.earlyjewishwritings.com/t...hus/ant17.html

"2. Now Quintilius Varus was at this time at Jerusalem, being sent to succeed Saturninus as president of Syria, and was come as an assessor to Herod, who had desired his advice in his present affairs;"



Joseph

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

Euphen

From the same article:

"But this is all moot. For in fact Tertullian does not link Sentius Saturninus with the census in Luke 2:1, as is commonly supposed by those who ignore the context of this passage. Rather, he says censuses (plural, not singular) prove that Jesus had brothers, in defense of Luke 8:19-21. Since Tertullian believed Jesus was the first born, just as Luke says he was, there could not be any record of his brothers in the census of the nativity. Therefore, Tertullian could not possibly have been thinking of the census during which Jesus was born. So he may well mean another Sentius Saturninus (an ancestor of the other), who was governor of Syria in A.D. 19-21 (Tacitus, Annals 2.76-81), a plausible time before which Jesus' siblings would have been born. For the sentence sed et census constat actos sub Augusto nunc in Iudaea per Sentium Saturninum, apud quos genus eius inquirere potuissent, can be translated "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."[15.3] But even if Tertullian meant brothers by a previous marriage, and thus had in mind the previous Sentius Saturninus, this still would not be the census during which Jesus was born, since Jesus had to be born later to a subsequent wife of Joseph. And Tertullian in that case would simply be bluffing, since no census under the first Saturninus would have counted the inhabitants of Judaea (as shown above and below)."

JoeWallack

JW:
I see the communication problem we have. My posts were primarily dealing with the Apologist attempt to use Tertullian here as evidence of a Judean census prior to Quirinius. This is the reason for the footnote in Carrier's article and I indicated that this was the main area my posts related to:

"If you want to argue that Mr. T is evidence of a census before Quirinius than you have the following problems for this time and place based on implications from superior Jewish and Roman writings:"

Your inquiry is not so limited so the later Saturninus is on the right side of Jesus.



Joseph

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