I found this a fascinating read! One thing I have heard taught is that verse numbers and headings in Scripture are works of interpretation, as the original/early Greek manuscripts were (often? always?) devoid of them. Thus, something like this is not far-fetched. Asking the question, “To what does ‘those days’ refer?” is something that we can do.
As he points out, the interpretation of ‘those days’ linking the census to Jesus’ birth has ancient roots, thus, the ‘great weight of tradition’ (and, thus, popular imagination) is on the side of the ‘usual’ reading.
Nevertheless, I found his alternative timeline formulation to be interesting:
This sequence of events depicted by Luke could then be as follows:
- Towards the end of the reign of Herod the Great, Mary – who is from Nazareth – encounters an angel who foretells Jesus’ birth.
- Mary visits Elizabeth in the Judean hill country, then returns home.
- Although already found to be pregnant whilst betrothed, Mary marries Joseph – a man from Bethlehem – who initially takes Mary to his family home.
- Jesus is born in Bethlehem; because of space restrictions in their quarters, Mary and Joseph place the baby in a feeding trough in the main living area.
- The family subsequently relocate to Nazareth, establishing there a home of their own.
- Several years later, when Quirinius is governing Syria, an enrollment is announced, so Joseph and Mary travel to Bethlehem, because this remains the location of Joseph’s family home, and he needs to register in connection with property there.
I also like that he made the case for narrative flash-forwards by pointing out that Luke used them in other places in his writings (Luke-Acts). This is not a convention that I had consciously noticed in my reading of either book!
I also appreciated that, if understood in this way, it links Luke and Matthew in purpose of establishing Jesus’ Davidic roots – Matthew via genealogy and Luke by way of a (later) census that solidifies Joseph’s family in Bethlehem.
Lastly, I appreciated how open-handedly he holds his case:
Certainly, the syntax does not demand the reading offered here; it may nonetheless permit it. Indeed, the primary concern of this paper has been to set out an alternative interpretative possibilitywithout necessarily asserting that this option has a higher probability than others.
Now I’m keen to re-read the birth narratives with that lens and see if other things make more or less sense!