Luke 2 commentary

LUKE 2 COMMENTARY
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
The Birth of Jesus
1 In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree
that a census should be taken of the entire
Roman world.
BARNES, "In those days - About the time of the birth of John and of Christ.
A decree - A law commanding a thing to be done.
Caesar Augustus - This was the Roman emperor. His first name was Octavianus.
He was the nephew of Julius Caesar, and obtained the empire after his death. He
took the name “Augustus - i. e., august,” or honorable - as a compliment to his own
greatness; and from him the month “August,” which was before called “Sextilis,”
received its name.
That all the world - There has been much difficulty respecting this passage,
from the fact that no such taxing of “all the world” is mentioned by ancient writers. It
should have been rendered “the whole land” - that is, the whole land of Palestine. The
“whole land” is mentioned to show that it was not “Judea” only, but that it included
also “Galilee,” the place where Joseph and Mary dwelt. That the passage refers only
to the land of Palestine, and not to the whole world, or to all the Roman empire, is
clear from the following considerations:
1. The fact that no such taxing is mentioned as pertaining to any other country.
2. The account of Luke demands only that it should be understood of Palestine, or
the country where the Saviour was born.
3. The words “world” and “whole world” are not unfrequently used in this limited
sense as confined to a single country.
See Mat_4:8, where Satan is said to have shown to Christ all the kingdoms of “the
world,” that is, of the land of Judea. See also Jos_2:3; Luk_4:25 (Greek); Luk_21:26;
Act_11:28.
Should be taxed - Our word “tax” means to levy and raise money for the use of
the government. This is not the meaning of the original word here. It means rather to
“enroll,” or take a “list” of the citizens, with their employments, the amount of their
property, etc., equivalent to what was meant by census. Judea was at that time
tributary to Rome. It paid taxes to the Roman emperor; and, though Herod was
“king,” yet he held his appointment under the Roman emperor, and was subject in
most matters to him. Farther, as this “enrollment” was merely to ascertain the
numbers and property of the Jews, it is probable that they were very willing to be
enrolled in this manner; and hence we hear that they went willingly, without tumult -
1

contrary to the common way when they were “to be taxed.”
CLARKE, "Caesar Augustus - This was Caius Caesar Octavianus Augustus,
who was proclaimed emperor of Rome in the 29th year before our Lord, and died a.d.
14.
That all the world should be taxed - Πασαν την οικουµενην, the whole of that
empire. It is agreed, on all hands, that this cannot mean the whole world, as in the
common translation; for this very sufficient reason, that the Romans had not the
dominion of the whole earth, and therefore could have no right to raise levies or taxes
in those places to which their dominion did not extend. Οικουµενη signifies properly
the inhabited part of the earth, from οικεω, to dwell, or inhabit. Polybius makes use
of the very words in this text to point out the extent of the Roman government, lib. vi.
c. 48; and Plutarch uses the word in exactly the same sense, Pomp. p. 635. See the
passages in Wetstein. Therefore the whole that could be meant here, can be no more
than that a general Census of the inhabitants and their effects had been made in the
reign of Augustus, through all the Roman dominions.
But as there is no general census mentioned in any historian as having taken place
at this time, the meaning of οικουµενη must be farther restrained, and applied solely
to the land of Judea. This signification it certainly has in this same evangelist, Luk_
21:26. Men’s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are
coming on the earth, τᇽ οικουµενᇽ this land. The whole discourse relates to the
calamities that were coming, not upon the whole world, nor the whole of the Roman
empire, but on the land of Judea, see Luk_21:21. Then let them that are in Judea flee
to the mountains. Out of Judea, therefore, there would be safety; and only those who
should be with child, or giving suck, in those days, are considered as peculiarly
unhappy, because they could not flee away from that land on which the scourge was
to fall: for the wrath, or punishment, shall be, says our Lord, εν τሩ λαሩ τουτሩ, On This
Very People, viz. the Jews, Luk_21:23. It appears that St. Luke used this word in this
sense in conformity to the Septuagint, who have applied it in precisely the same way,
Isa_13:11; Isa_14:26; Isa_24:1. And from this we may learn, that the word οικουµενη
had been long used as a term by which the land of Judea was commonly expressed.
ᅯ γη, which signifies the earth, or world in general, is frequently restrained to this
sense, being often used by the evangelists and others for all the country of Judea. See
Luk_4:25; Jos_2:3.
It is probable that the reason why this enrolment, or census, is said to have been
throughout the whole Jewish nation, was to distinguish it from that partial one,
made ten years after, mentioned Act_5:37, which does not appear to have extended
beyond the estates of Archelaus, and which gave birth to the insurrection excited by
Judas of Galilee. See Josephus, Ant. book xx. c. 3.
GILL, "And it came to pass in those days,.... When John the Baptist was born,
and Christ was conceived, and his mother pregnant with him, and the time of his
birth drew on. The Ethiopic version reads, "in that day"; as if it was the same day in
which John was circumcised, and Zacharias delivered the above song of praise: that
there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus; second emperor of Rome; the name
2

Caesar was common to all the emperors, as Pharaoh to the Egyptians, and afterwards
Ptolemy. His name Augustus, was not his original surname, but Thurinus; and was
given him, after he became Caesar, to express his grandeur, majesty, and reverence;
and that by the advice of Munatius Plancus, when others would have had him called
Romulus, as if he was the founder of the city of Rome (z): by him a decree was made
and published,
that all the world should be taxed; or "registered", or "enrolled"; for this was
not levying a tax, or imposing tribute upon them, but a taking an account of the
names of persons, and of their estates; and which might be, in order to lay a tax upon
them, as afterwards was: for the payment of a tax, there was no need of the
appearance of women and children; and so the Arabic version renders it, "that the
names the whole habitable world might be described, or written down": such an
enrolment had been determined on by Augustus, when at Tarracon in Spain, twenty
seven years before; but he was diverted from it by some disturbances in the empire,
so that it was deferred to this time, in which there was a remarkable interposition of
divine providence; for had this enrolment been made then, in all likelihood it had not
been done now, and Joseph and Mary would not have had occasion to have come to
Bethlehem: but so it must be; and thus were things ordered by an infinite, and all
wise providence to effect it: nor did this enrolment reach to all the parts of the known
world, but only to the Roman empire; which, because it was so very large as it was,
and in the boasting language of the Romans was so called, as, Ptolemy Evergetes (a)
calls his kingdom, κοσµος, "the world". Though some think only the land of Judea is
meant, which is called the earth, in Luk_21:26 and "all the world", in Act_11:28 but
the other sense seems more agreeable; and so the Syriac version renders it, "that all
the people of his empire might be enrolled": and the Persic version, "that they should
enrol all the subjects of his kingdom"; and is justified by the use of the phrase for the
Roman empire, in several passages of Scripture, Rom_1:8. Now at the time of this
enrolment, and under this august emperor, and when the whole world was in a
profound peace, was the Messiah born, the King of kings, and the only potentate; the
Shiloh, the peaceable and prosperous, the Prince of Peace, and Lord of life and glory;
and that, in order to redeem men from that worse subjection and bondage they were
in to sin, Satan, the law, and death, than they were to the Roman emperor. The Jews
say (b), the son of David shall not come, until the kingdom (of Edom, or Rome, as
some copies read, in others it is erased) shall be extended over all Israel, nine
months, according to Mic_5:3. The gloss on it is, that is, "all the world", in which the
Israelites are scattered,
HENRY, “The fulness of time was now come, when God would send forth his Son,
made of a woman, and made under the law; and it was foretold that he should be
born at Bethlehem. Now here we have an account of the time, place, and manner of
it.
I. The time when our Lord Jesus was born. Several things may be gathered out of
these verses which intimate to us that it was the proper time.
1. He was born at the time when the fourth monarchy was in its height, just when
it was become, more than any of the three before it, a universal monarchy. He was
born in the days of Augustus Caesar, when the Roman empire extended itself further
than ever before or since, including Parthia one way, and Britain another way; so that
it was then called Terraram orbis imperium - The empire of the whole earth; and
here that empire is called all the world (Luk_2:1), for there was scarcely any part of
the civilized world, but what was dependent on it. Now this was the time when the
Messiah was to be born, according to Daniel's prophecy (Dan_2:44): In the days of
3

these kings, the kings of the fourth monarchy, shall the God of heaven set up a
kingdom which shall never be destroyed.
JAMISON, "Luk_2:1-7. Birth of Christ.
Caesar Augustus — the first of the Roman emperors.
all the world — so the vast Roman Empire was termed.
taxed — enrolled, or register themselves.
CALVIN, "Luke relates how it happened, that Christ was born in the city of
Bethlehem, as his mother was living at a distance from her home, when she was
approaching to her confinement. And first he sets aside the idea of human
contrivance, (123) by saying, that Joseph and Mary had left home, and came to
that place to make the return according to their family and tribe. If intentionally
and on purpose (124) they had changed their residence that Mary might bring
forth her child in Bethlehem, we would have looked only at the human beings
concerned. But as they have no other design than to obey the edict of Augustus,
we readily acknowledge, that they were led like blind persons, by the hand of
God, to the place where Christ must be born. This may appear to be accidental,
as everything else, which does not proceed from a direct human intention, is
ascribed by irreligious men to Fortune. But we must not attend merely to the
events themselves. We must remember also the prediction which was uttered by
the prophet many centuries before. A comparison will clearly show it to have
been accomplished by the wonderful Providence of God, that a registration was
then enacted by Augustus Caesar, and that Joseph and Mary set out from home,
so as to arrive in Bethlehem at the very point of time.
Thus we see that the holy servants of God, even though they wander from their
design, unconscious where they are going, still keep the right path, because God
directs their steps. Nor is the Providence of God less wonderful in employing the
mandate of a tyrant to draw Mary from home, that the prophecy may be
fulfilled. God had marked out by his prophet — as we shall afterwards see — the
place where he determined that his Son should be born. If Mary had not been
constrained to do otherwise, she would have chosen to bring forth her child at
home. Augustus orders a registration to take place in Judea, and each person to
give his name, that they may afterwards pay an annual tax, which they were
formerly accustomed to pay to God. Thus an ungodly man takes forcible
possession of that which God was accustomed to demand from his people. It was,
in effect, reducing the Jews to entire subjection, and forbidding them to be
thenceforth reckoned as the people of God.
Matters have been brought, in this way, to the last extremity, and the Jews
appear to be cut off and alienated for ever from the covenant of God. At that
very time does God suddenly, and contrary to universal expectation, afford a
remedy. What is more, he employs that wicked tyranny for the redemption of his
people. For the governor, (or whoever was employed by Caesar for the purpose,)
while he executes the commission entrusted to him, is, unknown to himself,
God’s herald, to call Mary to the place which God had appointed. And certainly
Luke’s whole narrative may well lead believers to acknowledge, that Christ was
4

led by the hand of God “ from his mother’s belly,” (Psalms 22:10.) Nor is it of
small consequence (125) to the certainty of faith to know, that Mary was drawn
suddenly, and contrary to her own intention, to Bethlehem, that “out of it might
come forth” (Micah 5:2) the Redeemer, as he had been formerly promised.
1.The whole world This figure of speech (126) (by which the whole is taken for a
part, or a part for the whole) was in constant use among the Roman authors, and
ought not to be reckoned harsh. That this registration might be more tolerable
and less odious, it was extended equally, I have no doubt, to all the provinces;
though the rate of taxation may have been different. I consider this first
registration to mean, that the Jews, being completely subdued, were then loaded
with a new and unwonted yoke. Others read it, that this registration was first
made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria; (127) but there is no probability in
that view. The tax was, indeed, annual; but the registration did not take place
every year. The meaning is, that the Jews were far more heavily oppressed than
they had formerly been.
There is a diversity as to the name of the Proconsul. Some call him Cyrenius,
( Κυρήνιος,) and others, Quirinus or Quirinius But there is nothing strange in
this;for we know that the Greeks, when they translate Latin names, almost
always make some change in the pronunciation. But a far greater difficulty
springs up in another direction. Josephus says that, while Archelaus was a
prisoner at Vienna, (Ant. 17:13. 2,) Quirinus came as Proconsul, with
instructions to annex Judea to the province of Syria, (xviii. 1.1.) Now, historians
are agreed, that Archelaus reigned nine years after the death of his father Herod.
It would therefore appear, that there was an interval of about thirteen years
between the birth of Christ and this registration; for almost all assent to the
account given by Epiphanius, that Christ was born in the thirty-third year of
Herod: that is, four years before his death.
Another circumstance not a little perplexing is, that the same Josephus speaks of
this registration as having happened in the thirty-seventh year after the victory
at Actium, (128) (Ant. 18:2. 1.) If this be true, Augustus lived, at the utmost, not
more than seven years after this event; which makes a deduction of eight or nine
years from his age: for it is plain from the third chapter of Luke’s Gospel, that
he was at that time only in his fifteenth year. But, as the age of Christ is too well
known to be called in question, it is highly probable that, in this and many other
passages of Josephus’s History, his recollection had failed him. Historians are
agreed that Quirinus was Consul nineteen years, or thereby, before the victory
over Antony, which gave Augustus the entire command of the empire: and so he
must have been sent into the province at a very advanced age. Besides, the same
Josephus enumerates four governors of Judea within eight years; while he
acknowledges that the fifth was governor for fifteen years. That was Valerius
Gratus, who was succeeded by Pontius Pilate.
Another solution may be offered. It might be found impracticable to effect the
registration immediately after the edict had been issued: for Josephus relates,
that Coponius was sent with an army to reduce the Jews to subjection, (Ant.
18:2.2) from which it may easily be inferred, that the registration was prevented,
5

for a time, by popular tumult. The words of Luke bear this sense, that, about the
time of our Lord’s birth, an edict came out to have the people registered, but that
the registration could not take place till after a change of the kingdom, when
Judea had been annexed to another province. This clause is accordingly added
by way of correction. This first registration was made when Cyrenius was
governor of Syria That is, it was then first carried into effect. (129)
But the whole question is not yet answered: for, while Herod was king of Judea,
what purpose did it serve to register a people who paid no tribute to the Roman
Empire? I reply: there is no absurdity in supposing that Augustus, by way of
accustoming the Jews to the yoke, (for their obstinacy was abundantly well-
known,) chose to have them registered, even under the reign of Herod. (130) Nor
did Herod’s peculiar authority as king make it inconsistent that the Jews should
pay to the Roman Empire a stipulated sum for each man under the name of a
tax: for we know that Herod, though he was called a king, held nothing more
than a borrowed power, and was little better than a slave. On what authority
Eusebius states that this registration took place by an order of the Roman
Senate, I know not.
LIGHTFOOT, "[From Caesar Augustus.] The New Testament mentions nothing
of the Roman government, but as now reduced under a monarchical form. When
that head, which had been mortally wounded in the expulsion of the Tarquins,
was healed and restored again in the Caesars, "all the world wondered," saith
St. John, Revelation 13:3; and well they might, to see monarchy, that had for so
many hundred years been antiquated and quite dead, should now flourish again
more vigorously and splendidly than ever.
But whence the epoch or beginning of this government should take its date is
something difficult to determine. The foundations of it, as they were laid by
Julius Caesar, so did they seem overturned and erased again in the death he met
with in the senate-house. It was again restored, and indeed perfected by
Augustus; but to what year of Augustus should we reckon it? I would lay it in his
one-and-thirtieth, the very year wherein our Saviour was born. Of this year Dion
Cassius, lib. lv, speaks thus:
"The third decennium [or term of ten years] having now run out, and a fourth
beginning, he, being forced to it, undertook the government." Observe the force
of the word forced to it: then was Augustus constrained or compelled to take the
empire upon him. The senate, the people, and (as it should seem) the whole
republic, with one consent, submitting themselves entirely to a monarchical form
of government, did even constrain the emperor Augustus, (who for some time
stiffly refused it,) to take the reins into his hands.
I am not ignorant that the computation of Augustus' reign might reasonably
enough commence from his battle and victory at Actium; nor do the Gemarists
count amiss, when they tell us that "the Roman empire took its beginning in the
days of Cleopatra." And you may, if you please, call that a monarchical
government, in opposition to the triumvirate, which at that battle breathed its
last. But that, certainly, was the pure and absolute monarchy, which the senate
6

and the commonwealth did agree and consent together to set up.
[Should be taxed.] The Vulgar and other Latin copies read, should be described;
which, according to the letter, might be understood of the setting out the whole
bounds of the empire, according to its various and distinct provinces. Only that
Aethicus tells us, this had been done before; whose words, since they concern so
great and noble a monument of antiquity, may not prove tedious to the reader to
be transcribed in this place:
"Julius Caesar, the first inventor of the Bissextile account, a man singularly
instructed in all divine and human affairs, in the time of his consulship, by a
decree of the senate, procured, that the whole Roman jurisdiction should be
measured out by men of greatest skill, and most seen in all the attainments of
philosophy. So that Julius Caesar and M. Antony being consuls, the world began
to be measured.
"That is, from the consulship of Caesar above mentioned to the consulship of
Augustus the third time, and Crassus, the space of one-and-twenty years, five
months, and eight days, all the East was surveyed by Zenodoxus.
"From the consulship likewise of Julius Caesar and M. Antony to the consulship
of Saturninus and Cinna, the space of two-and-thirty years, one month, and ten
days, the South was measured out by Polyclitus; so that in two-and-thirty years'
time, the whole world was surveyed, and a report of it given in unto the senate."
Thus he: though something obscurely in the accounts of consuls, as also in his
silence about the West; which things I must not stand to inquire into at this time.
This only we may observe, that Julius Caesar was consul with Antony, AUC 710;
and that the survey of the Roman empire, being two-and-thirty years in
finishing, ended AUC 742; that is, twelve years before the nativity of our
Saviour.
Let us in the meantime guess what course was taken in this survey: I. It is very
probable they drew out some geographical tables, wherein all the countries were
delineated, and laid down before them in one view. II. That these tables or maps
were illustrated by commentaries, in which were set down the description of the
countries, the names of places, the account of distances, and whatever might be
necessary to a complete knowledge of the whole bounds of that empire. That
some such thing was done by Augustus' own hand, so far as concerned Italy,
seems hinted by a passage in Pliny; In which thing, we must tell beforehand, that
we intend to follow Augustus, and the description he made of all Italy, dividing it
unto eleven countries.
And now, after this survey of lands and regions, what could be wanting to the
full knowledge of the empire, but a strict account of the people, their patrimony,
and estates? and this was Augustus' care to do.
"He took upon him the government both of their manners and laws, and both
perpetual: by which right, though without the title of censor, he laid a tax upon
7

the people three times; the first and third with his colleague, the second alone."
The first with his colleague, M. Agrippa; the third, with his colleague Tiberius;
the second, by himself alone; and this was the tax our evangelist makes mention
of in this place.
BARCLAY, "JOURNEY TO BETHLEHEM (Luke 2:1-7)
2:1-7 In these days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that a census should
be taken of all the world. The census first took place when Quirinius was
governor of Syria; and everyone went to enroll himself, each man to his own
town. So Joseph went up from Galilee, from the town of Nazareth, to Judaea, to
David's town, which is called Bethlehem, because he belonged to the house and
the line of David, to enrol himself with Mary who was betrothed to him and she
was with child. When they arrived there her time to bear the child was
completed; and she bore her first-born son and wrapped him in swaddling
clothes and laid him in a manger because there was no room for them in the
place where they had meant to lodge.
In the Roman Empire periodical censuses were taken with the double object of
assessing taxation and of discovering those who were liable for compulsory
military service. The Jews were exempt from military service, and, therefore, in
Palestine a census would be predominantly for taxation purposes. Regarding
these censuses, we have definite information as to what happened in Egypt; and
almost certainly what happened in Egypt happened in Syria, too, and Judaea
was part of the province of Syria. The information we have comes from actual
census documents written on papyrus and then discovered in the dust-heaps of
Egyptian towns and villages and in the sands of the desert.
Such censuses were taken every fourteen years. And from A.D. 20 until about
A.D. 270 we possess actual documents from every census taken. If the fourteen-
year cycle held good in Syria this census must have been in 8 B.C. and that was
the year in which Jesus was born. It may be that Luke has made one slight
mistake. Quirinius did not actually become governor of Syria until A.D. 6; but he
held an official post previously in those regions from 10 B.C. until 7 B.C. and it
was during that first period that this census must have been taken.
Critics used to question the fact that every man had to go to his own city to be
enrolled; but here is an actual government edict from Egypt:
"Gaius Vibius Maximus, Prefect of Egypt orders: 'Seeing that the
time has come for the house-to-house census, it is necessary to
compel all those who for any cause whatsoever are residing
outside their districts to return to their own homes, that they
may both carry out the regular order of the census, and may also
diligently attend to the cultivation of their allotments.'"
8

If that was the case in Egypt, it may well be that in Judaea, where the old tribal
ancestries still held good, men had to go to the headquarters of their tribe. Here
is an instance where further knowledge has shown the accuracy of the New
Testament.
The journey from Nazareth to Bethlehem was 80 miles. The accommodation for
travellers was most primitive. The eastern khan was like a series of stalls opening
off a common courtyard. Travellers brought their own food; all that the
innkeeper provided was fodder for the animals and a fire to cook. The town was
crowded and there was no room for Joseph and Mary. So it was in the common
courtyard that Mary's child was born. Swaddling clothes consisted of a square of
cloth with a long bandage-like strip coming diagonally off from one corner. The
child was first wrapped in the square of cloth and then the long strip was wound
round and round about him. The word translated "manger" means a place
where animals feed; and therefore it can be either the stable or the manger
which is meant.
That there was no room in the inn was symbolic of what was to happen to Jesus.
The only place where there was room for him was on a cross. He sought an entry
to the over-crowded hearts of men; he could not find it; and still his search--and
his rejection--go on.
COFFMAN, "This chapter details the birth of Christ (Luke 2:1-7), the
annunciation to the shepherds (Luke 2:8-20), ceremonies of the law of Moses
observed on behalf of Jesus (Luke 2:21-24), the prophecy of Simeon (Luke
2:25-35), the thanksgiving of Anna (Luke 2:36-39), episode when Jesus was
twelve years old (Luke 2:40-51), and a one-sentence summary of some eighteen
years of Jesus' life (Luke 2:52).
Now it came to pass in those days, there went out a decree from Caesar
Augustus, that all the world should be enrolled. (Luke 2:1)
Augustus ... "This is the title given by the Roman Senate on January 17,27 B.C.,
to Gaius Julius Caesar Octavianus (63 B.C.-14 A.D.)."[1]
All the world ... was "a technical term used freely to refer to the Roman
Empire,"[2] which was indeed, at that time, the whole civilized world.
Should be enrolled ... Critical allegations denying that such enrollments were
made have been proved false. As Barclay said:
Such censuses were taken every fourteen years; and from 20 A.D. to 270 A.D., we
possess actual documents from every census taken ... Here is an instance where
further knowledge has shown the accuracy of the New Testament.[3]
[1] Encyclopedia Britannica, 1961, Vol. 2, p. 686.
[2] Ray Summers, Commentary on Luke (Waco, Texas: Word Books, Publisher,
1974), p. 36.
9

[3] William Barclay, The Gospel of Luke (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press,
1953), p. 15. 47
COKE, "Luke 2:1. And it came to pass, &c.— At that time an edict was
published by Caesar Augustus, that all the provinces of the Roman empire
should be registered or enrolled,—as in the margin of our English version.
Heylin. This was the enrolment of the census, first practised by Servius Tullus,
the sixth king of Rome, who ordained, that the Roman people, at certain seasons,
should upon oath give an account of their names, qualities, employments, wives,
children, servants, estates, and places of abode. By this institution, Servius
designed to put those who had the administration of public affairs in a condition
to understand the strength of every particular part of the community; that is,
what men and money might be raised from it; and, according to those
assessments or estimates, men and money were levied afterwards, as occasion
required.
Our version extends this enrolment to all the world; that is, agreeable to Dr.
Heylin's explanation, to all the province's of the Roman empire; but it seems
most probable, according to Dr. Lardner's ingenious observations, that the word
' Οικουμενη is to be taken in a more limited sense,—as it is plainly, chap. Luke
21:26 and in other places,—for the land of Israel only. The Evangelist observes,
that the emperor's edict extended to the whole land, to shew that Galilee,
Joseph's country, was comprehended in it. That this was an enrolment of the
inhabitants of Palestine only is probable, because no historian whatever says that
Augustus made a general enrolment of the empire: whereas, if any such had
happened, they would scarcely have failed to gratify their readers with an
account of the numbers of the persons, &c. that being a particular which every
one must have been curious to know. But their silence concerning a particular
enrolment of the land of Israel only, is not surprising, as there must have
beensurveys of provinces, which the Greek and Roman historians now extant
had no occasion to notice. There is frequent mention of the census at our Lord's
nativity, in the most early apologies of the fathers; and as some of these apologies
were addressed to the Roman emperors themselves, such appeals to a public fact
imply that it was a thing well known; and would be, if need were, a sufficient
confirmation of this fact. At this time Augustus was much incensed against
Herod, and probably ordered this census as a token of his displeasure, and as an
intimation that he intended soon to lay the Jews under a tax: Herod, perhaps,
regaining the emperor's favour, prevailed with him to suspend his intention; and
this possibly, together with the disgracefulness of the thing, may have been one
reason why the census was passed over in silence by Nicholas of Damascus, one
of Herod's servants and flatterers, in the history that he wroteof his affairs. It
might likewise be the reason why Josephus, who copied from Nicholas, omitted
the mention of it, or at best represented it simply by the taking of an oath, rather
than by the offensive name of a census, (see Antiq. lib. 17. 100: 2 sect. 6.)
supposing it to have been at this enrolment that the oath which Josephus speaks
of was imposed, which the whole Jewish nation, except six thousand Pharisees,
took, to be faithful to Caesar and the interests of the king. Now, that this oath
was imposed at the time of the enrolment, appears probable, because the events
10

which followed it are the same which happened aftertheenrolment.The Pharisees
who refused to swear, from the imagination that the law, Deuteronomy 17:15
forbad them, were fined; but the wife of Pheroras paid the fine for them; and
they in return predicted that God had determined to put an end to Herod's
government, and that the kingdom should be transferred to her family;
proceeding farther to characterize the new king by the expression, that "all
things should be in his power," a characteristic of the Messiah. The disturbances
which happened in Jerusalem after this, and the slaughter made in Herod's
family, were all on account of the birth of this new king. The persons who
predicted the birth of this king were the Pharisees, according to Josephus: in the
Gospel they are called the chief priests and scribes, who, from the ancient
prophesies, informed Herod that his rival king was to be born in Bethlehem.
Indeed the whole affair is but slightly handled by Josephus; but it must be
remembered, that Josephus, being a Jew, would consult the reputation of his
country; and being also an enemy to Christianity, it cannot be supposed that he
would relate at large such particulars as had any strong tendency to support it.
The reader desirous of entering more fully into this subject, will meet with ample
satisfaction in B. 2. 100: 1 of Lardner's Credibility; where the point is discussed
with equal learning and accuracy. It maybe proper just to add, that this affair of
the taxing is mentioned by St. Luke, not so much to mark the time of Christ's
birth, as to prove two things; first, that he was born in Bethlehem; secondly, that
his parents were at that time known to be branches of the royal family of David.
The importance of ascertaining these points arose hence, that they were fixed by
the prophets as express characters of the Messiah; Hath not the scripture said
that Christ cometh of the seed of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem, where
David was? John 7:42. By the particular destination of Providence, therefore,
while Joseph and Mary were attending the enrolment at Bethlehem, Mary
brought forth her Son.
BENSON, "Luke 2:1. And it came to pass in those days — That is, about the
time in which John the Baptist was born, and Christ conceived, in the manner
related in the preceding chapter; there went out a decree from Cesar Augustus,
the Roman emperor, that all the world should be taxed — the word οικουμενη,
here rendered world, “means strictly the inhabited part of the earth, and
therefore, πασα η οικουμενη, all the world, in the common acceptation of the
phrase. But it is well known that this expression was, in ancient times, frequently
employed to denote the Roman empire. It was probably a title first assumed
through arrogance, afterward given by others through flattery, and at last
appropriated by general use to this signification. That it has a more extensive
meaning in this place is not pretended by any. But there are some who, on the
contrary, would confine it still further, making it denote no more than Judea and
its appendages. Of this opinion are several of the learned; Beausobre, Doddridge,
Lardner, Pearce, and others. In support of it they have produced some passages
in which this phrase, or expressions equivalent, appear to have no larger
signification. But, admitting their explanation of the passages they produce, they
are not parallel to the example in hand. Such hyperboles are indeed current, not
only in the language of the evangelists, but in every language. In those cases,
however, wherein they are introduced, there rarely fails to be something, either
in what is spoken or in the occasion of speaking, which serves to explain the
11

trope. For example: the term, a country, in English, denotes properly a region, or
tract of land, inhabited by a people living under the same government. By this,
which is the common acceptation, we should say that England is a country. Yet
the term is often used without any ambiguity in a more limited sense. Thus an
inhabitant of a country town or parish says to one of his neighbours, speaking of
two persons of their acquaintance, ‘All the country says they are soon to be
married;’ yet so far is he from meaning by the phrase, all the country, all the
people of England, that he is sensible not a thousandth part of them know that
such persons exist. He means no more than all the neighbourhood. Nor is he in
the smallest danger, by speaking thus, of being misunderstood by any hearer.
But if he should say, ‘The parliament has laid a tax on saddle-horses, throughout
all the country,’ nobody could imagine that less than England was intended by
the term country, in this application. Here the term must be considered as it
stands related to parliament; in other words, it must be that which, in the style of
the legislature, would be named the country. In like manner, though it might not
be extraordinary that a Jew, addressing himself to Jews, and speaking of their
own people only, should employ such an hyperbole as, all the world, for all
Judea; it would be exceedingly unnatural in him to use the same terms, applied
in the same manner, in relating the resolves and decrees of the Roman emperor,
to whom all Judea would be very far from appearing all the world, or even a
considerable part of it. Add to this, that the Syriac interpreter (as also all the
other ancient interpreters) understood the words in the same manner: all the
people in his (the emperor’s) dominions.” — Campbell. The chief, if not the only
objection to this sense of the expression is, the silence of historians. But what
Grotius observes, greatly lessens the force of that objection; “I do not so
understand the evangelist,” says he, “as if a census were made through the whole
Roman world, at one and the same time; but when Augustus wished thoroughly
to know the whole power of the Roman empire, he appointed a census to be
made through all the kingdoms and provinces subject to it, at one time in one
part, and at another in another. Thus Dion, επεμψεν αλλους αλλη, τα τε των
ιδιωτων και τα των πολεων απογραψομενους, he sent some persons one way and
some another, who might take an account of the property, as well of private
persons as of cities. Of the census made through Gaul by order of Augustus,
Claudius, in an oration which is preserved at Ancyra, the abbreviator of Livy,
and Dio, have made mention.”
Should be taxed — Greek, απογραφεσθαι, enrolled: that is, that all the
inhabitants, male and female, of every town in the Roman empire, with their
families and estates, should be registered. Many of the modern translations,
particularly those into Italian, French, and English, have rendered the word
taxed: and as registers were commonly made with a view to taxing, it may, no
doubt, in many cases, be so rendered with sufficient propriety: but, “as in this
place there is some difficulty, it is better to adhere strictly to the import of the
words. For though it was commonly for the purpose of taxing that a register was
made, it was not always, or necessarily so; and in the present case we have
ground to believe that there was no immediate view to taxation, at least with
respect to Judea. Herod, called the Great, was then alive, and king of the
country, and though in subordination to the Romans, of whom he may justly be
said to have held his crown, yet, as they allowed him all the honours of royalty,
12

there is no ground to think that, either in his lifetime, or before the banishment
of his son Archelaus, the Romans levied any toll or tribute from the people of
Judea. Nay, we have the testimony of Josephus, that they did not till after the
expulsion of Archelaus, when the country was annexed to Syria, and so became
part of a Roman province.” — Campbell. The reader will observe, such a census,
or account, as that here spoken of, “used to be taken of the citizens of Rome
every fifth year, and they had officers on purpose appointed for it, called
censors. Their business was to take an account, and make a register, of all the
Roman citizens, their wives and children, with the age, qualities, trades, offices,
and estates of them all. Augustus first extended this to the provinces. He was
then at work on the composure of such a book, containing such a survey and
description of the whole Roman empire, as that which our Doomsday-book doth
of England. In order whereto, his decree for this survey was made to extend to
the depending kingdoms, as well as the provinces of the empire: — however,
taxes were only paid by the people of the provinces to the Romans; and those of
the dependant kingdoms to their own proper princes, who paid their tributes to
the Roman emperors. Three times during his reign he caused the like description
to be made. The second is that which St. Luke refers to. The decree concerning it
was issued out three years before that in which Christ was born. So long had the
taking of this survey been carrying on through Syria, Cœlo-Syria, Phœnicia, and
Judea, before it came to Bethlehem. No payment of any tax was made (on this
survey) till the twelfth year after. Till then Herod, and after him Archelaus his
son, reigned in Judea. But when Archelaus was deposed, and Judea put under
the command of a Roman procurator, then first were taxes paid to the Romans
for that country.” — Prideaux.
BI, "A decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed
There is no grand reason, you see, given why Mary and Joseph should go to Judaea.
The angel who is said to have announced the coming birth does not appear again to
tell them that they must travel, since otherwise the Son of David will not be
connected with His ancestral dwelling-place. They go because every one else is going.
A decree of the Caesar obliges the man to register himself in the village, whatever it
is, to which he belongs. It may be an awkward contrivance, as a modern writer says it
is, to make the conception of royalty fit with the facts. Assuredly the critic, or any
ingenious man in this day, could have invented a better tale. And if forgers of that
day had, as he supposes, an unlimited command of supernatural incidents, these
poor peasants might have been transported by any kind of celestial machinery to the
spot in which they were required to be. Nor can we doubt that a Frenchman now, or
an Oriental then, would have introduced such an event with becoming pomp. If it
was part of the scheme that the birth should be humble, he would have taken pains
that we should observe that part of it. There would have been starts of surprise,
exclamations at the stooping of the Highest of all to the lowest place. Here is nothing
of the kind. Events, the belief of which has affected all the art and speculation of the
most civilized nations in the modem world, are recorded in fewer words, with less
effort, than an ordinary historian, or the writer of a newspaper, would deem suitable
to the account of the most trivial transaction. Such marvellous associations have
clung for centuries to these verses, that it is hard to realize how absolutely naked they
are of all ornament. We are obliged to read them again and again to assure ourselves
that they really do set forth what we call the great miracle of the world. If, on the
other hand, the mind of the evangelist was possessed by the conviction that he was
not recording a miracle which had interrupted the course of history, but was telling
13

of a Divine act which explained the course of history and restored the order of
human life, one can very well account for his calmness; if that conviction was a true
one, we might account for the impression which his brief sentences have made on
later ages. That the poll-tax of the first emperors should be the instrument of
bringing forth the King before whom the Caesars were to bow, would then seem one
of those incidents in the drama of the universe which discover a God who is not
suddenly interfering to untie knots that are too difficult for human hands, but who is
directing all the course of the action, from the beginning to the catastrophe; not
crushing the wills of the persons in the drama, but leading them on, by methods
which we cannot see or conjecture, to fill their places in it. And the birth in the
manger would be felt, not as an embellishment of the narrative, but as a part of the
revelation. The King, who proves His title and His Divinity by stooping to the lowest
condition of His subjects, is brought into direct contrast with him who had risen by
intrigues, proscriptions, and the overthrow of an ancient order, to be hailed as the
Deliverer and highest God of the earth. (F. D. Maurice, M. A.)
The child and the emperor
Was that infant at Bethlehem no more than a subject of the Roman emperor? Was
Christianity the mere product of these outward favouring circumstances? Not so. It is
true that from these circumstances the fulness of time took its shape and colour.
Without that shelter it would not have been, humanly speaking, what now it is. But
the spark of life itself was independent of any local or national state. The very
characteristic of the life of Christ is that which soared above any such local limit.
Therefore it is that He was born, apart from all the stir and turmoil of the world, in a
humble stall, in a dark cavern, in a narrow street of an obscure mountain village.
Therefore it is that He lived for thirty years in the secluded basin of the unknown,
unconsecrated Nazareth; that He passed away without attracting a single word of
notice from any contemporary poet or philosopher of that great court, which has
made the reign of Caesar Augustus proverbial to all time as the “Augustan age.” Born
under the empire, there was in Jesus Christ nothing imperial, except the greatness of
His birth. Born under the Roman sway, there was nothing in Him Roman except the
world-wide dominion of His Spirit. From Caesar Augustus comes out a decree that all
the world should be taxed, subdued, civilized, united. All honour to him for it! All
vigilance, all exertion, all prudence, be ours to watch and seize all the opportunities
that are given to us. But it is from God that there come these flashes of life and light,
of goodness and of genius, which belong to no age, but which find their likeness in
that Divine Child, which was born, not of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man,
but of God. This, then, is the double principle of which the birth of Christ is the most
striking example; external circumstances are something, but they are not everything
The inward life is the essential thing; but for its successful growth it needs external
circumstance. There are a thousand ways in which this double lesson is forced upon
us, but the most striking illustration is still to be found in the contrast of the same
double relation to the circumstances of world, century, country, or Church in which
we live. And, on the other hand, there is our own separate existence and character
with its own work to do—its own special nourishment from God. (Dean Stanley.)
A political era associated with high religious experiences
It was remarkable that the birth of Christ should take place in connection with the
process of a great political engagement. Whilst men were moving from all quarters,
in response to the decree of Caesar Augustus, the angels of heaven were gathering
14

around the world’s greatest event. We need historical landmarks to help our memory
of the best things. Blessed is that nation whose political eras are associated with the
highest religious experiences. (J. Parker, D. D.)
Historical difficulties of the census
Great as are the historic difficulties in which this census is involved, there seem to be
good independent grounds for believing that it may have been originally ordered by
Sextius Saturinus, that it was begun by Publeius Sulpicius Quirinus, when he was for
the first time legate of Syria; and that it was completed during his second term of
office. In deference to Jewish prejudices, any infringement of which was the certain
signal for violent tumults and insurrections, it was not carried out in the ordinary
Roman manner, at each person’s place of residence, but, according to Jewish custom,
at the town to which their family originally belonged. The Jews still clung to their
genealogies and to the memory of long-extinct tribal relations; and though the
journey was a weary and distasteful one, the mind of Joseph may well have been
consoled by the remembrance of that heroic descent which would now be
authoritatively recognized, and by the glow of those Messianic hopes to which the
marvellous circumstances of which he was almost the sole depositary would give a
tenfold intensity. (Archdeacon Farrar.)
The empire of Rome and the stable at Bethlehem
I. 1. Consider the decree that went forth from the emperor. How important it must
have appeared to the Roman authorities!
2. Consider also the scene that night at Bethlehem. Little knew the people who
were filling that inn whom they were turning out!
II. 1. Learn that God is working in all the events of life, great or small; bringing out of
them issues very different from the issues intended by the actors in those events.
Emperors are but officials in God’s Temple, and their decrees are but means by
which He carries out His.
2. Learn that God’s work does not appeal to the outward senses. It is born at
lowly Bethlehem rather than in powerful Rome or in self-righteous Jerusalem.
Yet it lasts to eternity.
3. Learn also how the work of Christ in us is like His work in the world. He has to
be born in each one of us. (Canon Vernon Hutton, M. A.)
God overrules
Augustus, while sending forth his edicts to the utmost limits of the East, little knew
that on his part he was obeying the decrees of the King of kings. God had foretold
that the Saviour should be born in Bethlehem. In order that this might be
accomplished He made use of Augustus, and through this prince the order was given
for the census of the whole people. At the sight of those wars and revolutions that
upset the world you feel inclined to imagine that God no longer governs the world or
those in it. You are mistaken, God permits that these awful catastrophes should take
place, just for the salvation and perfection of this or that person whom the world
knows not. (De Boylesve.)
15

God’s time arrives
I. DIVINE POWER IN THE INCARNATION. II. WISDOM
(1) in the time;
(2) place;
(3) circumstances.
III. FAITHFULNESS.
IV. HOLINESS. Hiding His wonders from unbelievers.
V. Love (Joh_3:16). (Van Doren.)
1. Caesar Augustus. Son of Octavius and Aria; licentious and treacherous.
Superstitious—oft borne to the temple before day, for prayer. Generous, vain,
ambitious, warlike, another Louis XIV. Cruel—three hundred senators and two
hundred knights murdered with his consent. Defeated at sea, he dragged
Neptune’s statue into the sea. His daughter Julia, by her infamy, embittered his
last days. Reigned 44 years, died aged 76. A long and splendid reign. In Augustus,
see man’s nothingness, amid earthly splendour. In Mary, see highest destiny,
amid earthly meanness. (Van Doren.)
The birth of Jesus Christ
There is a fine propriety in celebrating once a year the nativity. Our ignorance of the
date is no valid objection. We do not hesitate to date our letters and documents Anno
Domini 1887, although in doing so we commit an error of at least four years, and
perhaps six. The all-important thing here is not the time of the nativity, but the fact
of the nativity. And, if one day in every week the Church of Immanuel celebrates the
resurrection of her Lord, is it unbecoming that she should one day in every year
celebrate that nativity without which there had never been either resurrection or
redemption, or even the Church herself? And now let us attend to the story of the
birth of Immanuel. More than seven centuries before the birth of Jesus Christ, the
prophet Micah gave utterance to the following remarkable prophecy:
Thou, Beth-lehem Ephratah,
Which art little to be among the thousands of Judah,
Out of thee shall One come forth unto me
Who is to be ruler in Israel;
Whose goings forth are from of old,
From everlasting.
That same Almighty God who, through the restlessness of a Persian monarch, had
rescued from annihilation the national stock from which His Anointed was to spring,
prepared a birthplace for His Anointed through the edict of a Roman emperor. For,
when the fulness of the time had come, and the Christ was to be born, Caesar
Augustus issued a decree that all the world should be enrolled. And thus a minute
prophecy, a thousand times imperilled in the course of seven centuries, was at last
minutely accomplished. Oh, who does not feel that a God is here? Who can resist the
16

conviction that this God has had from the beginning His purposes, and actually
controls every movement of every human will? Yet there is no reason for supposing
that Augustus Caesar, in issuing his decree for a universal census, was conscious that
in so doing he was preparing the way for the accomplishment of an ancient
prediction. A Roman, he cared nothing for the Hebrews. A pagan, he knew nothing of
Messianic prophecies. His issuing a decree of enrolment was nothing unnatural or
extraordinary; it was one of the commonest acts of a political ruler, and he himself
was one of the most methodical of men. Yet who can doubt that Caesar Augustus, in
issuing this decree, was accomplishing a predetermined purpose of the Ancient of
Days? Nevertheless, nothing is clearer than this: Caesar Augustus, in publishing this
edict, and Joseph and Mary, in visiting Bethlehem in accordance with its
requirements, acted as perfectly free, voluntary beings. Now, I have not alluded to
this matter for the purpose of attempting to solve a frequently propounded
problem—namely, the reconciliation of Divine sovereignty and human freedom.
Considered practically in its matter-of-fact aspect, this subject presents no difficulty.
It is only when we pry into that domain of infinite problems which God has not
opened to us that we become bewildered and lost. Duty, not metaphysics, is our rule
for life. Let me conclude with three reflections.
I. THE BIRTH AT BETHLEHEM CONSECRATED AND GLORIFIED ALL
INFANCY. AS Athena was fabled to have sprung full-grown and panoplied from the
cloven brow of Zeus, so the Christ and Son of God might have descended into
humanity an unborn, adult Adam; for the distance between babe and man is
infinitely less than the distance between man and God. But, no; He descended into
humanity through the avenue of birth and babyhood, coming, like any other infant,
under the law of growth, and so consecrating all life from cradle to grave, hallowing
birth as well as death. The birth at Bethlehem made babyhood a sacred thing. And so
the very infancy of Jesus is a gospel.
II. THE TREATMENT OF THE HOLY FAMILY AT BETHLEHEM’S INN WAS A
PROPHECY OF THE WORLD’S TREATMENT OF JESUS CHRIST EVER SINCE. It
is, I repeat, a picture of the world’s treatment of Jesus Christ ever since. It does not
repulse Him; it simply has no room for Him. The world seizes the inn; Christianity
must put up with a stable. (G. D Boardman.)
2 (This was the first census that took place
while[a] Quirinius was governor of Syria.)
BARNES, "And this taxing was first made ... - This verse has given as much
perplexity, perhaps, as any one in the New Testament. The difficulty consists in the
fact that “Cyrenius,” or “Quirinius,” was not governor of Syria until 12 or 15 years
after the birth of Jesus. Jesus was born during the reign of Herod. At that time
“Varus” was president of Syria. Herod was succeeded by “Archelaus,” who reigned
17

eight or nine years; and after he was removed, Judea was annexed to the province of
Syria, and Cyrenius was sent as the governor (Josephus, “Ant.,” b. xvii. 5). The
difficulty has been to reconcile this account with that in Luke. Various attempts have
been made to do this. The one that seems most satisfactory is that proposed by Dr.
Lardner. According to his view, the passage here means, “This was the “first” census
of Cyrenius, governor of Syria.” It is called the “first” to distinguish it from one
“afterward” taken by Cyrenius, Act_5:37. It is said to be the census taken by
“Cyrenius; governor of Syria; “not that he was “then” governor, but that it was taken
by him who was afterward familiarly known as governor. “Cyrenius, governor of
Syria,” was the name by which the man was known when Luke wrote his gospel, and
it was not improper to say that the taxing was made by Cyrenius, the governor of
Syria,” though he might not have been actually governor for many years afterward.
Thus, Herodian says that to Marcus “the emperor” were born several daughters and
two sons,” though several of those children were born to him “before” he was
emperor. Thus, it is not improper to say that General Washington saved Braddock’s
army, or was engaged in the old French war, though he was not actually made
“general” until many years afterward. According to this Augustus sent Cyrenius, an
active, enterprising man, to take the census. At that time he was a Roman senator.
Afterward, he was made governor of the same country, and received the title which
Luke gives him.
Syria - The region of country north of Palestine, and lying between the
Mediterranean and the Euphrates. “Syria,” called in the Hebrew “Aram,” from a son
of Shem Gen_10:22, in its largest acceptation extended from the Mediterranean and
the river Cydnus to the Euphrates, and from Mount Taurus on the north to Arabia
and the border of Egypt on the south. It was divided into “Syria Palestina,” including
Canaan and Phoenicia; “Coele-Syria,” the tract of country lying between two ridges of
Mount Lebanon and Upper Syria. The last was known as “Syria” in the restricted
sense, or as the term was commonly used.
The leading features in the physical aspect of Syria consist of the great
mountainous chains of Lebanon, or Libanus and Anti-Libanus, extending from north
to south, and the great desert lying on the southeast and east. The valleys are of great
fertility, and yield abundance of grain, vines, mulberries, tobacco, olives, excellent
fruits, as oranges, figs, pistachios, etc. The climate in the inhabited parts is
exceedingly fine. Syria is inhabited by various descriptions of people, but Turks and
Greeks form the basis of the population in the cities. The only tribes that can be
considered as unique to Syria are the tenants of the heights of Lebanon. The most
remarkable of these are the Druses and Maronites. The general language is Arabic;
the soldiers and officers of government speak Turkish. Of the old Syriac language no
traces now exist.
CLARKE, "This taxing was first made when Cyrenius, etc. - The next
difficulty in this text is found in this verse, which may be translated, Now this first
enrolment was made when Quirinus was governor of Syria.
It is easily proved, and has been proved often, that Caius Sulpicius Quirinus, the
person mentioned in the text, was not governor of Syria, till ten or twelve years after
the birth of our Lord.
St. Matthew says that our Lord was born in the reign of Herod, Luk_2:1, at which
time Quintilius Varus was president of Syria, (Joseph. Ant. book xvii. c. 5, sect. 2),
who was preceded in that office by Sentius Saturninus. Cyrenius, or Quirinus, was
not sent into Syria till Archelaus was removed from the government of Judea; and
Archelaus had reigned there between nine and ten years after the death of Herod; so
18

that it is impossible that the census mentioned by the evangelist could have been
made in the presidency of Quirinus.
Several learned men have produced solutions of this difficulty; and, indeed, there
are various ways of solving it, which may be seen at length in Lardner, vol. i. p.
248-329. One or other of the two following appears to me to be the true meaning of
the text.
1. When Augustus published this decree, it is supposed that Quirinus, who was a
very active man, and a person in whom the emperor confided, was sent into
Syria and Judea with extraordinary powers, to make the census here
mentioned; though, at that time, he was not governor of Syria, for Quintilius
Varus was then president; and that when he came, ten or twelve years after,
into the presidency of Syria, there was another census made, to both of which
St. Luke alludes, when he says, This was the first assessment of Cyrenius,
governor of Syria; for so Dr. Lardner translates the words. The passage, thus
translated, does not say that this assessment was made when Cyrenius was
governor of Syria, which would not have been the truth, but that this was the
first assessment which Cyrenius, who was (i.e. afterwards) governor of Syria,
made; for after he became governor, he made a second. Lardner defends this
opinion in a very satisfactory and masterly manner. See vol. i. p. 317. etc.
2. The second way of solving this difficulty is by translating the words thus: This
enrolment was made Before Cyrenius was governor of Syria; or, before that of
Cyrenius. This sense the word πρωτος appears to have, Joh_1:30 : ᆇτι πρωτος
µου ην, for he was Before me. Joh_15:18 : The world hated me Before (πρωτον)
it hated you. See also 2Sa_19:43. Instead of πρωτη, some critics read προ της,
This enrolment was made Before That of Cyrenius. Michaelis; and some other
eminent and learned men, have been of this opinion: but their conjecture is not
supported by any MS. yet discovered; nor, indeed, is there any occasion for it.
As the words in the evangelist are very ambiguous, the second solution appears
to me to be the best.
GILL, "And this taxing was first made,.... Or "this was the first enrolment, or
taxing" in the Jewish nation; for there was another afterwards, when Judas the
Galilean arose, and drew many after him, Act_5:38.
When Cyrenius was governor of Syria; or "of Cyrenius" "governor of Syria";
that is, it was the first that he was, concerned in; who not now, but afterwards was
governor of Syria; and because he had been so before Luke wrote this history, and
this being a title of honour, and what might distinguish him from others of that
name, it is given him; for as Tertullian says (c), Sentius Saturninus was now governor
of Syria, when Cyrenius was sent into Judea, to make this register, or taxing; and
which is manifestly distinguished from that, which was made during his being
governor of Syria, when Archelaus was banished from Judea, ten or eleven years
after Herod's death; which Josephus (d) gives an account of, and Luke refers to, in
Act_5:37. Moreover, the words will bear to be rendered thus, "and this tax, or
enrolment, was made before Cyrenius was governor of Syria"; πρωτη, being used for
προτερα, as in Joh_1:15. This Cyrenius is the same whom the Romans call Quirinius,
and Quirinus; a governor of Syria had great power in Judea, to which it was annexed,
when Cyrenius was governor there. It is reported of R. Gamaliel, that he went to take
19

a licence, ‫בסוריא‬ ‫,מהגמון‬ "from a governor of Syria" (e); i.e. to intercalate the year: and
Syria was in many things like to the land of Judea, particularly as to tithes, and the
keeping of the seventh year (f),
HENRY , “2. He was born when Judea was become a province of the empire, and
tributary to it; as appears evidently by this, that when all the Roman empire was
taxed, the Jews were taxed among the rest. Jerusalem was taken by Pompey the
Roman general, about sixty years before this, who granted the government of the
church to Hyrcanus, but not the government of the state; by degrees it was more and
more reduced, till now at length it was quite subdued; for Judea was ruled by
Cyrenius the Roman governor of Syria (Luk_2:2): the Roman writers call him
Sulpitius Quirinus. Now just at this juncture, the Messiah was to be born, for so was
dying Jacob's prophecy, that Shiloh should come when the sceptre was departed
from Judah, and the lawgiver from between his feet, Gen_49:10. This was the first
taxing that was made in Judea, the first badge of their servitude; therefore now
Shiloh must come, to set up his kingdom.
3. There is another circumstance, as to the time, implied in this general enrolment
of all the subjects of the empire, which is, that there was now universal peace in the
empire. The temple of Janus was now shut, which it never used to be if any wars were
on foot; and now it was fit for the Prince of peace to be born, in whose days swords
should be beaten into plough-shares.
II. The place where our Lord Jesus was born is very observable. He was born at
Bethlehem; so it was foretold (Mic_5:2), the scribes so understood it (Mat_2:5, Mat_
2:6), so did the common people, Joh_7:42. The name of the place was significant.
Bethlehem signifies the house of bread; a proper place for him to be born in who is
the Bread of life, the Bread that came down from heaven. But that was not all;
Bethlehem was the city of David, where he was born, and therefore there he must be
born who was the Son of David. Zion was also called the city of David (2Sa_5:7), yet
Christ was not born there; for Bethlehem was that city of David where he was born in
meanness, to be a shepherd; and this our Saviour, when he humbled himself, chose
for the place of his birth; not Zion, where he ruled in power and prosperity, that was
to be a type of the church of Christ, that mount Zion. Now when the virgin Mary was
with child, and near her time, Providence so ordered it that, by order from the
emperor, all the subjects of the Roman empire were to be taxed; that is, they were to
give in their names to the proper officers, and they were to be registered and
enrolled, according to their families, which is the proper signification of the word
here used; their being taxed was but secondary. It is supposed that they made
profession of subjection to the Roman empire, either by some set form of words, or
at least by payment of some small tribute, a penny suppose, in token of their
allegiance, like a man's atturning tenant. Thus are they vassals upon record, and may
thank themselves.
JAMISON, "first ... when Cyrenius, etc. — a very perplexing verse, inasmuch
as Cyrenius, or Quirinus, appears not to have been governor of Syria for about ten
years after the birth of Christ, and the “taxing” under his administration was what led
to the insurrection mentioned in Act_5:37. That there was a taxing, however, of the
whole Roman Empire under Augustus, is now admitted by all; and candid critics,
even of skeptical tendency, are ready to allow that there is not likely to be any real
inaccuracy in the statement of our Evangelist. Many superior scholars would render
the words thus, “This registration was previous to Cyrenius being governor of
20

Syria” - as the word “first” is rendered in Joh_1:15; Joh_15:18. In this case, of course,
the difficulty vanishes. But it is perhaps better to suppose, with others, that the
registration may have been ordered with a view to the taxation, about the time of our
Lord’s birth, though the taxing itself - an obnoxious measure in Palestine - was not
carried out till the time of Quirinus.
LIGHTFOOT, "[This taxing was first made, &c.] Not the first taxing under
Augustus, but the first that was made under Cyrenius: for there was another
taxing under him, upon the occasion of which the sedition was raised by Judas
the Gaulonite. Of this tax of ours, Dion Cassius seems to make mention, the times
agreeing well enough, though the agreement in other things is more hardly
reducible:--
"He began a tax upon those that dwelt in Italy, and were worth two hundred
sesterces; sparing the poorer sort, and those that lived beyond the countries of
Italy, to avoid tumults."
If those that lived out of Italy were not taxed, how does this agree with the tax
which our evangelist speaks of? unless you will distinguish, that in one sense they
were not taxed, that is, as to their estates they were not to pay any thing: but in
another sense they were, that is, as to taking account of their names, that they
might swear their allegiance and subjection to the Roman empire. As to this, let
the more learned judge.
COFFMAN, "The second census under Quirinius was in 6 A.D. (Acts 5:37); and
the words "the first" in this passage refer to the census fourteen years earlier in
8 B.C., but which was delayed in Palestine until the time coinciding with the
birth of Christ in 6 B.C. Quirinius was twice governor and presided over both.
Robertson said:
Luke is now shown to be wholly correct in his statement that Quirinius was twice
governor, and that the first census took place during the first period. A series of
inscriptions in Asia Minor show that Quirinius was governor of Syria in 10-7
B.C., and again in 6 A.D.[4]
Regarding some of the inscriptions mentioned by Robertson, these included
those which were found in the autobiography of Augustus Caesar inscribed on
the inner walls of the ruined temple of Augustus at Ankara. These were
published in the New York Times in 1929; and these refer to the two censuses,
even giving the numbers of those enrolled and naming Quirinius in both as
governor of Syria. Luke is therefore quite accurate in his record.
ENDNOTE:
[4] A. T. Robertson, A Harmony of the Gospels (New York: Harper and
Brothers, 1922), p. 266.
COKE, "Luke 2:2. And this taxing, &c.— Dr. Lardner translates this verse, This
21

was the first enrolment of Cyrenius, governor of Syria; which is also favoured by
the Vulgate. Dr. Lardner supposes, that Cyrenius came, in the latter end of
Herod's reign, to tax Judea by order of Augustus; and that it is called Cyrenius's
first enrolment to distinguish it from that which he made after Archelaus was
banished; and on the supposition of two enrolments made by Cyrenius, the
distinction was proper, the latter being the most remarkable, as it gave rise to the
sedition of Judas the Galilean. Dr. Lardner supposes further, that St. Luke gives
Cyrenius the title of an office which he did not bear till afterwards—the
governor of Syria; as we say Cato the censor, to distinguish him from others of
the same name,—even in a period of his life before he obtained that office. The
interpretation which Valerius, Prideaux, Bishop Chandler, and others have
espoused, deserves likewise to be mentioned. It is as follows: Now this enrolment
was first performed, or took effect, when Cyrenius was governor of Syria: so the
word εγενετο is used in various passages. See ch. Luke 1:20. Matthew 5:18. The
enrolment was made in Herod's time, but the taxation according to the
enrolment not till Cyrenius was governor of Syria. Perizonius, Bos, Heylin, and
others render the passage. This taxation was made before Cyrenius was governor
of Syria. They suppose that πρωτη is used by St. Paul for προτερα; which sense
it has sometimes. See ch. Luke 17:25. John 1:15; John 15:18. Some one or other
of these interpretations must be espoused; the first appears to be most natural
and judicious; for, as St. Luke affirms that Jesus was conceived in the days of
Herod king of Judea, ch. Luke 1:5; Luke 1:26 by consequence, according to St.
Luke himself, the enrolment under which he was born must have happened in
Herod's reign, or soon after; whereas the taxation under Cyrenius did not
happen till after Archelaus was banished: but Archelaus, according to Josephus,
reigned ten years; it is evident therefore that St. Luke cannot be supposed to
connect Cyrenius's government of Syria with the birth of Jesus, which he has
fixed to the end of Herod's reign.
BENSON, "Luke 2:2. And this taxing (rather this enrolling) was first made when
Cyrenius was governor of Syria — According to the Jewish historian, Josephus,
Cyrenius was not governor of Syria till ten or twelve years after our Saviour’s
birth, after Archelaus was deposed, and the country brought under a Roman
procurator; yet, according to our translation of Luke here, he was governor
before the death of Herod, the father and predecessor of Archelaus, and in the
same year when Christ was born. Now as, on the one hand, it cannot be supposed
that a writer so accurate as Luke (were he considered only as a common
historian) should make so gross a mistake as to confound the enrolment in the
reign of Herod with that taxation under Cyrenius, which happened many years
after; so, on the other hand, it is hard to conceive that Josephus should be
mistaken in an affair of so public a nature, so important, and so recent when he
wrote his history. To remove this difficulty, 1st, Some have supposed a
corruption of the original text in Luke; and that, instead of Cyrenius, it ought to
be read Saturninus, who, according to Josephus, was prefect of Syria within a
year or two before Herod’s death. 2d, Others have thought it probable, that the
original name in Luke was Quintilius; since Quintilius Varus succeeded
Saturninus, and was in the province of Syria when Herod died. But all the Greek
manuscripts remonstrate against both these solutions. Therefore, 3d, Mr.
Whiston and Dr. Prideaux suppose, that the words of the preceding verse, In
22

those days there went out a decree, &c., refer to the time of making the census;
and the subsequent words, This enrolment was first made, &c., to the time of
levying the tax. “When Judea,” says the latter, “was put under a Roman
procurator, then taxes were first paid to the Romans — and Publius Sulpicius
Quirinius, who is in Greek called Cyrenius, was governor of Syria: so that there
were two distinct particular actions in this matter, done at two distinct and
different times: the first was making the survey, and the second the levying the
tax thereupon. And the first verse here is to be understood of the former, and the
second only of the latter. And this reconciles that evangelist with Josephus; for it
is manifest from that author, that Cyrenius was not governor of Syria, or any tax
levied on Judea, till Archelaus was deposed. And therefore the making of the
description cannot be that which was done while Cyrenius was governor of
Syria; — but the levying the tax thereon certainly was.” In accordance with this
interpretation of the passage, Dr. Campbell reads the verse, This first register
took effect when Cyrenius was president of Syria, observing that, by this
translation of the words, divers objections are obviated. “The register,” says he,
“whatever was the intention of it, was made in Herod’s time, but had then little
or no consequences. When, after the banishment of Archelaus, Judea was
annexed to Syria, and converted into a province, the register of the inhabitants
formerly taken served as a directory for laying on the census, to which the
country was then subjected. Not but that there must have happened considerable
changes on the people during that period. But the errors which these changes
might occasion, could, with proper attention, be easily rectified. And thus it
might be justly said, that an enrolment which had been made several years
before, did not take effect, or produce consequences worthy of notice, till then.”
Dr. Hammond and Dr. Lardner, however, give what many think a still easier
solution of this difficulty, rendering the words thus: This was the first enrolment
of Cyrenius, governor of Syria, supposing that Cyrenius (afterward governor of
Syria, and at the time Luke wrote well known by that title) was employed in
making the first enrolment of the inhabitants of Judea in the reign of Herod; to
which purpose Dr. Hammond quotes Suidas as relating, on the authority of an
ancient author, that “Cesar Augustus, desiring to know the strength and state of
his dominions, sent twenty chosen men, one into one part, another into another,
to take this account; and that Publius Sulpicius Quirinius had Syria for his
province.” The reader will of course adopt the interpretation which he judges
most probable.
3 And everyone went to their own town to
register.
BARNES, "And all went to be taxed, every one into his own city - The
Roman census was an institution of Servius Tullius, sixth king of Rome. From the
account which Dionysius of Halicarnassus gives of it; we may at once see its nature.
23

“He ordered all the citizens of Rome to register their estates according to their
value in money, taking an oath, in a form he prescribed, to deliver a faithful account
according to the best of their knowledge, specifying the names of their parents, their
own age, the names of their wives and children, adding also what quarter of the city,
or what town in the country, they lived in.” Ant. Rom. l. iv. c. 15. p. 212. Edit. Huds.
A Roman census appears to have consisted of these two parts:
1. The account which the people were obliged to give in of their names, quality,
employments, wives, children, servants, and estates; and
2. The value set upon the estates by the censors, and the proportion in which they
adjudged them to contribute to the defense and support of the state, either in
men or money, or both: and this seems to have been the design of the census or
enrolment in the text.
This census was probably similar to that made in England in the reign of William
the Conqueror, which is contained in what is termed Domesday Book, now in the
Chapter House, Westminster, and dated 1086.
GILL, "And all went to be taxed,.... Throughout Judea, Galilee, and Syria; men,
women, and children,
every one into his own city; where he was born, and had any estate, and to which
he belonged.
COFFMAN, "Here again we must take notice of the carping allegations that
Luke erred in supposing that the enrollments were taken in the native cities of
the citizens. Barclay called attention to the existence of a document of the Roman
government with instructions pertaining to this great periodical census and with
the edict.
It is necessary to compel all those, who for any cause whatsoever are residing
outside their own districts to return to their own homes, that they may both
carry out the regular order of the census, and may also diligently attend the
cultivation of their allotments.[5]
In the light of such documentation, Gilmour's imaginative comment that "It is
improbable that any Roman census would require a man to report to the home
of his ancestors"[6] appears contrary to established fact. Whether or not
documented proof is available in every instance, Luke has been repeatedly
proved to be far more dependable than any writer from the non-Christian
community of that period.
[5] William Barclay, op. cit., p. 15.
[6] S. MacLean Gilmour, The Interpreter's Bible (New York: Abingdon Press,
1952, Vol. VIII, p. 50.
COKE, "Luke 2:3. And all went to be taxed— When the census was made in any
country under the dominion of the Romans, the inhabitants were obligedto
attend in the cities to which they belonged. See Livy, lib. 42. 100: 10. The reason
was, that without a precaution of this kind, the census would have been
24

excessively tedious, and people who were abroad might have been omitted, or set
down among the inhabitants of other cities, where they would not have been
found afterwards; or they might have been enrolled twice, which would have
bred confusion in the registers. Herod, who, it is probable, executed the census in
his own dominions by the appointment of Augustus, seems to have made a small
alteration in the mode of it; for instead of ordering the people to appear, as
usual, in the cities where they resided, or to whose jurisdictions the places of
their abode belonged, he ordered them to appear according to their families;
perhaps, because it was the ordinary way of classing the Jewish people, or
because he desired to know the number and strength of the dependants of the
great families in his dominions. But on whatever account the alteration was
made, it appears to have been owing to a providential interposition; for
otherwise Christ might not have been born at Bethlehem, his mother and
reputed father having long resided at Nazareth, and having no other cause for
changing their situation when Mary was so near her time, unless on some such
necessity. We may just observe further, that this obedience of the Jews to the
decree of Caesar, is a plain proof that they were now dependant on the Romans,
and that the sceptre was departing from Judah. See Lightfoot's Harmony, and
compare Genesis 49:10 and Numbers 24.
BENSON, "Luke 2:3. And all went to be taxed, (enrolled,) every one to his
city — “When the census was made in any country, the inhabitants were obliged
to attend in the cities to which they belonged, Livy, 50. 42. c. 10. The reason was,
without a precaution of this kind, the census would have been excessively
tedious, and people who were abroad might have been omitted, or registered
among the inhabitants of other cities, where they would not have been found
afterward, or they might have been enrolled twice, which would have produced
confusion in the registers.” In the dominions of Herod, however, probably by his
order, a small alteration seems to have been made in the method of executing the
census. For instead of the people being directed to appear, as usual, in the cities
where they resided, or to whose jurisdiction the places of their abode belonged,
they were ordered to appeal according to their families; every one in his native
city, or the place where his paternal inheritance lay, to be there enrolled; a
circumstance wisely ordered by Providence to verify the truth of ancient
prophecies; for thus the parents of Christ were providentiatly brought to
Bethlehem, the place where the Messiah was to be born, without leaving any
room to suspect them of artifice and design. And thus, also, by their coming to be
registered among the subjects of the Roman empire, the subjection of the Jews to
the Romans was very remarkably manifested.
BURKITT, "The conclusion of the former chapter acquainted us with the birth
of John the Baptist; the beginning of ths chapter relates the birth of our Saviour
Jesus Christ, and the remarkable circumstances which did attend it.
And here we have observable, 1. The place where he was born, not at Nazareth,
but at Bethlehem, according to the prediction of the prophet Micah, Micah 5:2.
"And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, art not the least among the princes
of Judah, for out of thee shall come a Governor that shall rule my people Israel."
25

We may suppose, that the blessed virgin little thought of changing her place, but
to have been delivered of her holy burden at Nazareth, where it was conceived.
Her house at Nazareth was honoured by the presence of the angel; yea, by the
overshadowing of the Holy Ghost: that house therefore, we may suppose, was
most satisfactory to the virgin's desire. But he that made choice of the womb
where his son should be conceived, it was fit he should also choose the place
where his son should be born. And this place, many hundred years before the
nativity, was foretold should be Bethlehem.
Observe, 2. How remarkable the providence of God was in bringing the virgin
up from Nazareth the Bethlehem, that Christ, as it was prophesied of him, might
be born there. Augustus, the Roman emperor, to whom the nation of the Jews
was now become tributary, puts forth a decree, that all the Roman empire should
have their names and families enrolled, in order to their being taxed. This edict
required, that every family should repair to that city to which they did belong, to
be enrolled and taxed there.
Accordingly, Joseph and Mary, being of the house and lineage of David, have
recourse to Bethlehem, the city of David, where, according to the prophecy, the
Messias was to be born.
Here note, how the wisdom of God overrules the actions of men, for higher or
nobler ends than what they aimed at. The emperor's aim was by this edict to fill
his coffers. God's end was to fulfil his prophecies.
Observe, 3. How readily Joseph and Mary yielded obedience to the edict and
decree of this heathen emperor. It was no less than four days journey from
Nazareth to Bethlehem: how just an excuse might the virgin have pleaded for her
absence! What woman ever undertook so hazardous a journey, that was so near
her delivery? And Joseph, no doubt, was sufficiently unwilling to draw her forth
into so manifest a hazard.
But as the emperor's command was peremptory, so their obedience was
exemplary. We must not plead difficulty for withdrawing our obedience to
supreme commands. How did our blessed Saviour, even in the womb of his
mother, yield homage to civil rulers and governors!
The first lesson which Christ's example taught the world, was loyalty and
obedience to the supreme magistrate.
Observe, 4. After many weary steps, the holy virgin comes to Bethlehem, where
every house is taken up by reason of the great confluence of people that came to
be taxed; and there is no room for Christ but in a stable: the stable is our Lord's
palace, the manger is his cradle.
Oh, how can we be abased low enough for him that thus neglected himself for us!
What an early indication was this, that our Lord's kingdom was not of this
world!
26

Yet some observe a mystery in all this: an inn is domus publici juris, not a
private house, but open and free for all passengers, and a stable is the
commonest place in the inn; to mind us, that he who was born there, would be a
common Saviour to high and low, noble and base, rich and poor, Jew and
Gentile; called therefore so often the Son of man; the design of his birth being
the benefit of mankind.
4 So Joseph also went up from the town of
Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to Bethlehem the
town of David, because he belonged to the house
and line of David.
BARNES, "The city of David - Bethlehem, called the city of David because it
was the place of his birth. See the notes at Mat_2:1.
Because he was of the house - Of the family.
And lineage - The “lineage” denotes that he was descended from David as his
father or ancestor. In taking a Jewish census, families were kept distinct; hence, all
went to the “place” where their family had resided. Joseph was of the “family” of
David, and hence he went up to the city of David. It is not improbable that he might
also have had a small paternal estate in Bethlehem that rendered his presence there
more desirable.
GILL, "And Joseph also went up from Galilee,.... Where he now lived, and
worked at the trade of a carpenter; having for some reasons, and by one providence
or another, removed hither from his native place:
out of the city of Nazareth; which was in Galilee, where he and Mary lived; and
where he had espoused her, and she had conceived of the Holy Ghost:
into Judea; which lay higher than Galilee, and therefore he is said to go up to it:
unto the city of David; not what was built by him, but where he was born and
lived; see 1Sa_17:12.
which is called Bethlehem: the place where, according to Mic_5:2 the Messiah
was to be born, and was born; and which signifies "the house of bread": a very fit
place for Christ, the bread which came down from heaven, and gives life to the world,
to appear first in. This place was, as a Jewish chronologer says (g), a "parsa" and half,
or six miles from Jerusalem; though another of their writers, an historian and
traveller (h), says, it was two "parsas", or eight miles; but Justin Martyr (i) says, it
was but thirty five furlongs distant from it, which is not five miles; hither Joseph
came from Galilee,
because he was of the house and lineage of David; he was of his family, and
27

lineally descended from him, though he was so poor and mean; and this is the reason
of his coming to Bethlehem, David's city,
HENRY, "According to this decree, the Jews (who were now nice in
distinguishing their tribes and families) provided that in their enrolments particular
care should be had to preserve the memory of them. Thus foolishly are they solicitous
to save the shadow, when they had lost the substance.
That which Augustus designed was either to gratify his pride in knowing the
numbers of his people, and proclaiming it to the world, or he did it in policy, to
strengthen his interest, and make his government appear the more formidable; but
Providence had another reach in it. All the world shall be at the trouble of being
enrolled, only that Joseph and Mary may. This brought them up from Nazareth in
Galilee to Bethlehem in Judea, because they were of the stock and lineage of David
(Luk_2:4, Luk_2:5); and perhaps, being poor and low, they thought the royalty of
their extraction rather than a burden and expense to them than a matter of pride.
Because it is difficult to suppose that every Jew (women as well as men) was obliged
to repair to the city of which their ancestors were, and there be enrolled, now, at a
time when they kept not to the bounds of their tribes, as formerly, it may be offered
as a conjecture that this great exactness was used only with the family of David,
concerning which, it is probable, the emperor gave particular orders, it having been
the royal family, and still talked of as designed to be so, that he might know its
number and strength. Divers ends of Providence were served by this.
1. Hereby the virgin Mary was brought, great with child, to Bethlehem, to be
delivered there, according to the prediction; whereas she had designed to lie in at
Nazareth. See how man purposes and God disposes; and how Providence orders all
things for the fulfilling of the scripture, and makes use of the projects men have for
serving their own purposes, quite beyond their intention, to serve his.
2. Hereby it appeared that Jesus Christ was of the seed of David; for what brings
his mother to Bethlehem now, but because she was of the stock and lineage of
David? This was a material thing to be proved, and required such an authentic proof
as this. Justin Martyr and Tertullian, two of the earliest advocates for the Christian
religion, appeal to these rolls or records of the Roman empire, for the proof of
Christ's being born of the house of David.
3. Hereby it appeared that he was made under the law; for he became a subject of
the Roman empire as soon as he was born, a servant of rulers, Isa_49:7. Many
suppose that, being born during the time of the taxing, he was enrolled as well as his
father and mother, that it might appear how he made himself of no reputation, and
took upon him the form of a servant. Instead of having kings tributaries to him,
when he came into the world he was himself a tributary.
JAMISON, "Not only does Joseph, who was of the royal line, go to Bethlehem
(1Sa_16:1), but Mary too - not from choice surely in her condition, but, probably, for
personal enrollment, as herself an heiress.
LIGHTFOOT, "[Because he was of the house and lineage of David.] We read in
the evangelists of two families, that were of the stock and line of David; and the
Talmudic authors mention a third. The family of Jacob the father of Joseph, the
family of Eli the father of Mary, and the family of Hillel the president of the
Sanhedrim, "who was of the seed of David, of Shephatiah the son of Abital."
I do not say that all these met at this time in Bethlehem: [It is indeed remarked of
28

Joseph, that he was "of the house of David"; partly because he was to be
reputed, though he was not the real father of Christ; and partly also, that the
occasion might be related that brought Mary to Bethlehem, where the Messiah
was to be born.] But it may be considered whether Cyrenius, being now to take
an estimate of the people, might not, on purpose and out of policy, summon
together all that were of David's stock, from whence he might have heard the
Jews' Messiah was to spring, to judge whether some danger might not arise form
thence.
COFFMAN, "Luke's design in this chapter was to show how it came about that
Jesus was born in Bethlehem, despite the fact of Joseph and Mary's residence in
Nazareth, thus fulfilling the prophecy of Micah 5:2. The only reason cited by
Luke for this journey to Bethlehem was the decree of Caesar and the necessity
for Joseph's obedience to it. However, it does not appear to be certain that Mary
was required to make this journey. Clarke stated that "It was not necessary for
Mary to have gone to Bethlehem";[7] that is, it was not necessarily a requirement
of Caesar's decree that she should have gone. The priority of the decree as the
reason for the journey is plain, for it was the only reason Luke mentioned; but
there were doubtless other considerations also. Childers too believed that
"Neither Roman nor Jewish law required Mary to accompany Joseph for this
registration."[8] He assigned, as reasons why she did so, (1) the fact of their love
for each other, (2) Mary's desire that Joseph should be with her for her delivery,
and especially (3) the leading of the Holy Spirit; nor may we leave out of sight
the presumption that Mary knew of Micah's prophecy and, guided by God's
Spirit, moved toward fulfillment of it. Elizabeth had already identified Mary's
unborn Son as the Messiah (1:43). However, her faith might not have been
sufficiently strong to have caused her to go to Bethlehem without the occasion of
Caesar's decree.
There is a possibility, at least, that under the circumstances they had decided to
move to Bethlehem. Some elements of the sacred accounts, such as their
remaining in the area after Jesus' birth, "indicate that when Joseph and Mary
went to Bethlehem, they were considering it a permanent move."[9]
Harmonizing with this suggestion is the fact that after going to Egypt, they
intended to return to "the land of Israel"; but upon learning that another Herod
was on the throne, and in obedience to God's warning in a dream, they went
instead to Galilee (Matthew 2:21-23). Summers pointed out that "Bethlehem was
the historical headquarters of the stonemason's guild,"[10] an association that
included "tektons" of at least three classes of workers. These were carpenters,
stonemasons, and certain kinds of farmers. Luke omitted a number of events
related by Matthew, not only because they were already well known from the
"many" sources used by all the Gospels, but because they did not fit into the
particular design of his Gospel. Here, the big point is that the fulfillment of the
prophecy of Christ's birth in Bethlehem was accomplished by the pagan lord of
the empire, Augustus Caesar, whose census was the immediate cause of it.
Bethlehem ... means "place of bread," and it was appropriate that the Bread of
Life should have been born there, and that the Son of David should have been
born in the village so intimately associated with the history of David the
29

shepherd king of Israel.
[7] Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: Carlton and
Porter, 1829), Vol. V, p. 369.
[8] Charles L. Childers, Beacon Bible Commentary (Kansas City, Missouri:
Beacon Hill Press, 1964), p. 445.
[9] Ray Summers, op. cit., p. 37.
[10] Ibid.
COKE, "Luke 2:4-5. And Joseph also went up— Herod's order for the taxation
being, as we observed on the last verse, that every one should repair to the city of
his people to be enrolled, Joseph and Mary, the descendants of David, went from
Nazareth, the place of their abode, to Bethlehem, the city where David and his
ancestors were born: 1 Samuel 20:6; 1 Samuel 20:29. Accordingly Boaz, David's
great-grandfather, calls it the city of his people; Ruth 3:11. See on Matthew 2:1.
Joseph is said to be of the house and lineage of David, which Dr. Doddridge
renders, of the family and household of David; supposing with Grotius, that it
refers to the divisions of the tribes into families and households. Compare
Numbers 1:18; Numbers 1:54. In this sense of the words, after having told us
that Joseph was of the house of David, it would have been very unnecessary to
add, he was also of his family; but it was not improper to say, that he was of his
family and household. It may seem strange that Mary, in her condition, should
have undertaken so long a journey: perhaps the order of the census required
that the wife as well as the husband should be present; or, the persons to be
taxed being classed in the roll according to their lineage, Mary might judge it
proper on this occasion to claim her descent from David, in order to her being
publicly acknowledged as one of his posterity; and the rather as she knew herself
to be miraculously with child of the Messiah. However, all this was done by the
divine direction; for, questionless, whatever the emperor's commands were, such
a case as Mary's must have been admitted as a full excuse for her not complying
with it.
BENSON, "Luke 2:4. And Joseph also went up from Galilee — Being thus
obliged by the emperor’s decree; out of the city of Nazareth — Where he then
dwelt; into Judea — Properly so called; unto the city of David, called
Bethlehem — The town where his ancestors had formerly been settled; because
he was of the house, &c., of David — Notwithstanding, he was now reduced so
low as to follow the trade of a carpenter. To be enrolled with Mary — Who also
was a descendant of David: his espoused wife — The propriety of this expression
appears from Matthew 1:25, where we are told that Joseph knew not his wife till
she had brought forth her firstborn son. Being great with child — It may seem
strange that Mary, in this condition, should undertake so great a journey.
Perhaps the order for the census required that the wives, as well as their
husbands, should be present. Or, the persons to be registered being classed in the
roll, according to their lineage, Mary might judge it proper on this occasion to
claim her descent from David, in order to her being publicly acknowledged as
30

one of his posterity, and the rather as she knew herself to be miraculously with
child of the Messiah.
5 He went there to register with Mary, who was
pledged to be married to him and was expecting
a child.
CLARKE, "With Mary his espoused wife - There was no necessity for Mary
to have gone to Bethlehem, as Joseph’s presence could have answered the end
proposed in the census as well without Mary as with her; but God so ordered it, that
the prophecy of Micah should be thus fulfilled, and that Jesus should be born in the
city of David; Mic_5:2.
GILL, "To be taxed with Mary his espoused wife,.... Whom also he had
married, though he had not known her in a carnal way; she came along with him to
be taxed and enrolled also, because she was of the same family of David, and
belonged to the same city:
being great with child; very near her time, and yet, though in such circumstances,
was obliged by this edict, to come to Bethlehem; and the providence in it was, that
she might give birth there, and so the prophecy in Mic_5:2 have its accomplishment:
this was an instance, and an example, of obedience to civil magistrates.
JAMISON, "espoused wife — now, without doubt, taken home to him, as
related in Mat_1:18; Mat_25:6.
6 While they were there, the time came for the
baby to be born,
GILL, "And so it was, that while they were there,.... At Bethlehem, waiting to
be called and enrolled in their turn,
the days were accomplished that she should be delivered; her reckoning
was up, the nine months of her going with child were ended, and her full time to
bring forth was come.
HENRY, “while they were there, the days were accomplished that she
should be delivered — Mary had up to this time been living at the wrong place for
31

Luke 2 commentary

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (18)

Semelhante a Luke 2 commentary

Semelhante a Luke 2 commentary (20)

Mais de GLENN PEASE

Mais de GLENN PEASE (20)

Último

Último (20)

Luke 2 commentary