Luke census @ Jesus birth

The Augustus Quirinius Census's

Augustus was known to use several different names for himself. Even borrowing the names of others.

 it's not possible Luke was mistaken. Besides stating that he made careful research, he was carried along by the Spirit in the writing and God is not mistaken nor does he get his facts wrong. 

There are other, non-biblical sources referring to a major census under Quirinius.

The census under Quirinius absolutely happened. It's a big event in history. The problem is it happened about 10 years after Jesus was born, therefore Luke must be referring to an earlier census of which there isnt a record, because it doesnt seem to have been historically significant. But just because we dont have an outside source, doesn't mean it didnt happen. 

Historical Reliability of the New Testament book, 

pgs 60-61 addresses this. (*not typing out the whole thing nor the footnotes).  

"Quirinius is known from reliable extrabiblical sources to have been governor from AD 6-9 but not at a time early enought to have been in power when Jesus was born (Josephus, Ant. 18.1), and there is an uninterrupted record of governors during the relevant time period."

"I am now more inclined to to suggest a straightforward alternative translation: "this census took place before Quirinius was governing Syria" (NIV mg). Although 'protos' elswhere in Luke always means "first," the second most common meaning of the word is "before," (26) and the entire Greek clause is notoriously ambiguous because Luke did not use any articles to help make his meaning more precise. The most literal translation that is still intellibible in English is, "This census was first/before Quirinius governing Syria" 

"The census in AD 6 under Quirinius was particularly infamous because it provoked the failed rebellion by Judas the Galilean. So it would be natural for a biographer or historian to refer to an earlier census with reference to the later, much better-remembered one.(28)"

Quirinius, Caesar, and the Census

Quirinius’ census has been a point of controversy among biblical scholars and skeptics for centuries. History tells us that Caesar Augustus reigned over the Roman Empire from 27 BC to AD 14 and ordered a census to be conducted during his tenure. Herod the Great reigned in Judea until 4 BC, so Jesus had to be born sometime in or before 4 BC. Luke gives us a few historical details to set the stage for the birth of Christ: “In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world. (This was the first census that took place while Quirinius was governor of Syria)” (Luke 2:1–2).

Luke’s mention of Quirinius (Cyrenius) as governor of Syria during the time of Caesar’s census appears to cause a problem as history records that Quirinius held that governorship between AD 6 and 7, at least ten years after the birth of Jesus. 

BUT Quirinius actually ruled Syria on two separate occasions, and there were actually two censuses taken. The “first census” mentioned in Luke 2:2 occurred during Quirinius’ first term as governor, and another during his second term. The second census is mentioned in Acts 5:37 and probably took place between AD 6 and 7 (Josephus links this census to an uprising led by Judas of Galilee). Luke was the author of both the Gospel of Luke and the book of Acts, and his goal was to write “an orderly account” (Luke 1:3). 

It seems that Luke did write a careful, orderly account: he mentions two censuses, and it was during the first one that Jesus was born. It would be unlikely for such a meticulous historian to make a blatant mistake in his timeline of events.

The available evidence points to this as the best perspective on Quirinius and the census. The Bible is true history, and its details are more trustworthy than the historical writings of the Romans and Josephus. 

Scoffers are always lying and accusing the Scripture of being untrue.

When Luke wrote this (~late 50s early 60s), the people who knew of this were alive and would have disputed it if he was wrong (!).

These scoffers are the same people who said that there were no Hittites, and that Pontius Pilate did not exist, only for the archaeology to catch up with the Scriptures and confirm their truthfulness.

Future archeologists may find more things that prove Luke right, but until then, we can trust Luke & Scripture.

The Christian doctrine of the inerrancy of the Word of God (2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:20–21) has always held true, and since God wrote the Scriptures, it is trustworthy & fact. 

Quirinius, Caesar, and the Census