Only two of the four canonical gospels—Matthew and Luke—describe events surrounding the birth of Jesus. These narratives have shaped the traditional Christmas story.
According to Luke, Joseph and Mary traveled from Nazareth to Bethlehem to participate in a census. Luke presents this as a Roman administrative requirement, implying that individuals had to register in their ancestral towns. Matthew, meanwhile, presents a different set of circumstances surrounding the birth, including Herod’s involvement and the visit of the Magi.
Because Christianity traditionally regards the Bible as divinely inspired, possible historical contradictions in the infancy narratives raise important questions about their reliability.
THE QUIRINIUS CENSUS: 4 BC OR 6 AD?
Matthew places Jesus’ birth during the reign of Herod the Great, who died in 4 BC.
Luke, however, links Jesus’ birth to a census conducted while Quirinius was governor of Syria. Josephus—writing in Antiquities—describes a census carried out by Quirinius in 6 AD, about a decade after Herod’s death. This creates an apparent chronological tension between the two gospels.
Most historians agree that Quirinius did not govern Syria before 6 AD. Some apologists have appealed to inscriptions or coins to argue for an earlier term, but these interpretations are debated, and the evidence is not considered conclusive by mainstream scholarship.
Because of this, various attempts have been made to reconcile Luke with Matthew:
1. Alternative translation theory
Some propose that Luke 2:2 could mean “This census took place before the census of Quirinius.”
However, this translation is linguistically disputed and not widely adopted. The straightforward reading links the census directly to Quirinius’s governorship.
2. “Long census” theory
Another suggestion is that Roman census preparations may have begun under an earlier governor and only concluded under Quirinius.
However, Josephus treats the 6 AD census as a significant administrative event tied specifically to Judea’s shift to direct Roman rule, and he does not indicate an earlier, ongoing process.
3. Josephus being mistaken
Some argue that Josephus could be wrong about the date of the census.
While possible, Josephus had access to administrative records and is generally considered a reliable source for this period. The burden of proof is therefore high for those who challenge his chronology.
4. Confusion with earlier governors
It has been proposed that Luke may have intended to refer to a census under another official, such as Saturninus.
However, there is no clear evidence of a census in Judea under Saturninus, nor does Luke mention him.
5. Multiple Quiriniuses
Another theory suggests two different officials with the same name.
There is no strong historical evidence for this, and neither Josephus nor Luke distinguishes between two such figures.
Given the limited sources, scholars continue to debate these issues, but no reconciliation enjoys consensus.
OTHER CHRONOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS IN LUKE
Luke situates the beginning of John the Baptist’s ministry in the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar, generally understood as 27–29 AD. He also states that Jesus was “about thirty” when he began his own ministry. If one accepts Luke’s dating of the census to 6 AD, this would place Jesus’ ministry in the mid-30s AD and his death later than the dates commonly proposed from other New Testament sources. This illustrates further chronological tensions between Gospel accounts.
QUESTIONS ABOUT AUGUSTUS’S “WORLDWIDE” CENSUS
Luke describes the census as affecting “all the world” (i.e., the Roman Empire). There is no surviving Roman record of an empire-wide census ordered by Augustus at the time Luke implies. While Rome conducted numerous regional censuses at different times, evidence for a single universal decree of registration is lacking. This absence of evidence does not prove Luke invented the claim, but it does make his statement difficult to corroborate historically.
THE LAPIS VENETUS INSCRIPTION AND OTHER ARTIFACT CLAIMS
An inscription found in the 17th century (sometimes called the Lapis Venetus) has been cited to support a broader role for Quirinius, but its authenticity and relevance are debated, and it cannot resolve the 4 BC / 6 AD issue with certainty. Similarly, claims about coins indicating multiple Quiriniuses are based on unclear or disputed interpretations.
CONFLICT BETWEEN MATTHEW AND LUKE
Taken together, Matthew and Luke present different chronological frameworks:
Matthew requires Jesus’ birth before 4 BC, during Herod’s reign.
Luke associates Jesus’ birth with a census that, according to Josephus, occurred in 6 AD.
These timelines do not naturally align. While harmonizing theories exist, none has been conclusively demonstrated.
CONCLUSION
The infancy narratives in Matthew and Luke contain chronological difficulties—especially regarding the census and the timing of Jesus’ birth—that are challenging to reconcile with each other or with external historical sources. These issues have significant implications for historical assessments of the gospel accounts.
BOOKS CONSULTED
ALLEGED DISCREPANCIES OF THE BIBLE, John W Haley, Whitaker House, Pennsylvania, undated
BIBLICAL EXEGESIS AND CHURCH DOCTRINE, Raymond E Brown, Paulist Press, New York, 1985
CHRIST AND PROTEST, Harry Tennant, Christadelphian Publishing Office, Birmingham, undated
CHRISTIANITY FOR THE TOUGH-MINDED, Editor John Warwick Montgomery, Bethany Fellowship, Minnesota, 1973
IN DEFENCE OF THE FAITH, Dave Hunt, Harvest House, Eugene, Oregon, 1996
JESUS AND THE FOUR GOSPELS, John Drane, Lion Books, Herts, 1984
JESUS HYPOTHESES, V Messori, St Paul Publications, Slough, 1977
NEW AGE BIBLE VERSIONS, GA Riplinger, Bible & Literature Foundation, Tennessee, 1993
THE BIBLE UNEARTHED, Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman, Touchstone Books, New York, 2002
THE CASE FOR CHRIST, Lee Strobel, HarperCollins and Zondervan, Michigan, 1998
THE HOLY BIBLE NEW AMERICAN VERSION, Confraternity of Christian Doctrine, Washington DC, 1970
THE JESUS EVENT, Martin R Tripole SJ, Alba House, New York, 1980
THEOLOGICAL DICTIONARY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. Kittel Gerhard and Friedrich Gerhard, Eerdman’s Publishing Co, Grand Rapids, MI, 1976
THE PASSOVER PLOT, Hugh Schonfield, Element Books, Dorset, 1996
THE UNAUTHORISED VERSION. Robin Lane Fox, Penguin, Middlesex, 1992
THE VIRGINAL CONCEPTION AND BODILY RESURRECTION OF JESUS, Raymond E Brown, Paulist Press, New York, 1973