Jesus Remembered: Christianity in the Making, vol. 1

THE MISSION OF JESUS §11.1
credibility. 25 If, instead, we attribute such detail to the symbolical imagination of
the story-teller, how much of the story remains as a viable historical account?
Likewise, the heavy typologizing particularly in regard to 2.13-18 (Herod as
Pharaoh, Jesus as Israel in Egypt) leaves it very uncertain whether we can discern
any historical events underlying the present story. 26 The 'slaughter of the innocents'
is hardly out of character for Herod, but it is also unlikely to have escaped
the notice of Josephus. And the whole Egyptian episode, including Joseph and
Mary's return to settle in Nazareth, does seem somewhat contrived. 27
More disturbing for those who have looked to the birth narratives for historical
facts has been the probability that Luke got his facts wrong in the reason
he gives for Jesus being born in Bethlehem of Judea. 28 The census under
Quirinius took place in 6 CE, when Rome took direct control over Judea following
the deposition of Herod's son Archelaus. That census would not have applied
to Galilee, which was Antipas's territory. We know nothing of a universal
census throughout the Roman Empire, then or earlier. And the idea of a census
requiring individuals to move to the native town of long dead ancestors is hard
to credit. It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that Luke was mistaken in dating
the census so early (Luke 2.1-2), as he also was in his reference to Theudas in
Acts 5.36-37. 29
Most disturbing for Christian pilgrim piety is the outcome that Jesus' birth
in Bethlehem has to be left in question. 30 Was the story to that effect contrived
simply because of the Micah prophecy: 'And you Bethlehem,.. . from you shall
come forth a ruler, who will shepherd my people Israel' (Mic. 5.2, cited by Matt.
25. The star 'went before (proegen) them until it came and stopped (elthon estathe) over
the place where the child was' (Matt. 2.9). On attempts to link the star to a known comet or
planetary conjunction see Brown, Birth 171-73, 610-13 — 'evidence of verisimilitude, not of
history' (190).
26. Brown, Birth 214-16, 616; Davies and Allison have 'little doubt as to the origin of
Matthew's infancy material. The haggadic legends surrounding the birth and early life of Moses
(9 parallels are adduced) have determined the content of Matthew's source' (Matthew
1.192-93, 194).
27. 'A very artificial addition' (Davies and Allison, Matthew 1.190, referring to 2.22-
23); see further Meier, Marginal Jew 1.211-13.
28. There was also a Bethlehem in Galilee (Josh. 19.15; Judg. 12.8, 10), usually identified
with Beit Lahm, some seven miles from Nazareth (H. Cazalles, 'Bethlehem', ABD 1.714).
Chilton confidently takes it to be the site of Jesus' birth (Rabbi Jesus 8-9, 294), though both
Matthew and Luke have no doubt that the Davidic Bethlehem was in view (Matt. 2.1-6; Luke
2.4); note also the exchange in John 7.41-42.
29. See the full discussion in Schürer, History 1.399-427; Brown, Birth 547-56, 666-68;
and Fitzmyer, Luke 1.400-405.
30. Brown, Birth 513-16; Meier, Marginal Jew 1.214-16; E. D. Freed, The Stories of Jesus'
Birth: A Critical Introduction (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 2001) 75-86.
344