Was the purported Roman Census that brought Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem invented history?

No

No

TexasScientist said:

---

Was the purported Roman Census that brought Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem invented history?

---

let me cast this article before you.

It is certainly not "empirical" evidence. Perhaps it shouldn't be empirical evidence you seek though.

https://crossexamined.org/really-census-time-caesar-augustus/

The trouble with the Romans is that they don't have a word for census.

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Was the purported Roman Census that brought Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem invented history?

---

let me cast this article before you.

It is certainly not "empirical" evidence. Perhaps it shouldn't be empirical evidence you seek though.

https://crossexamined.org/really-census-time-caesar-augustus/

---

From the article: a Roman census was taken in Egypt, and therefore perhaps also throughout the empire regularly, every fourteen years...

The next paragraph then tries to make it look like Luke just referenced the wrong one of two census'. Unfortunately, if you do the math he does--it doesn't add up to 14 years--so it isn't a matter of referencing the wrong one.

The counter argument:
https://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/ngier/census.htm

Nonsense.

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Was the purported Roman Census that brought Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem invented history?

---

let me cast this article before you.

It is certainly not "empirical" evidence. Perhaps it shouldn't be empirical evidence you seek though.

https://crossexamined.org/really-census-time-caesar-augustus/

---

Seems to me they are grasping at straws in this explanation.

I'm trying to imagine the incredible social and economic chaos that would result if the government issued an edict for everybody to return by foot to their ancestral home (whatever that means) to be counted in a census. Surely the Romans weren't that stupid.

El Oso said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Was the purported Roman Census that brought Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem invented history?

---

let me cast this article before you.

It is certainly not "empirical" evidence. Perhaps it shouldn't be empirical evidence you seek though.

https://crossexamined.org/really-census-time-caesar-augustus/

---

From the article: a Roman census was taken in Egypt, and therefore perhaps also throughout the empire regularly, every fourteen years...

The next paragraph then tries to make it look like Luke just referenced the wrong one of two census'. Unfortunately, if you do the math he does--it doesn't add up to 14 years--so it isn't a matter of referencing the wrong one.

The counter argument:
https://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/ngier/census.htm

---

Not to mention the uprooting and mass transit of people across the empire to get them to their ancestral homes for one day, it surely would have been reocorded somewhere.

"In the days of Hadrian and his successors down through the Severans (ad i 17-235) Roman emperors pursued a grand strategy based on preclusive security - the establishment of a linear barrier of perimeter defence around the Empire. The legions were stationed in great fortresses… https://t.co/PLgvw6uBml pic.twitter.com/4mg2BGi2Kv

— LiorLefineder (@lefineder) December 15, 2025

TexasScientist said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Was the purported Roman Census that brought Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem invented history?

---

let me cast this article before you.

It is certainly not "empirical" evidence. Perhaps it shouldn't be empirical evidence you seek though.

https://crossexamined.org/really-census-time-caesar-augustus/

---

Seems to me they are grasping at straws in this explanation.

---

Seems to me you are constantly grasping at straws to justify your atheistic beliefs.

Johnny Bear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Was the purported Roman Census that brought Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem invented history?

---

let me cast this article before you.

It is certainly not "empirical" evidence. Perhaps it shouldn't be empirical evidence you seek though.

https://crossexamined.org/really-census-time-caesar-augustus/

---

Seems to me they are grasping at straws in this explanation.

---

Seems to me you are constantly grasping at straws to justify your atheistic beliefs.

---

The question is not whether there were ever Roman censuses, but rather was there one during the times of Jesus's conflicting birth naratives, much less was there ever one that required the residents of the Roman Empire to travel and register at the locality of their ancestral homes (1,000 years prior)? Of course the answer is there was none - nada nunca. The story clearly is a literary device to serve theoligical purposes.

TexasScientist said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Was the purported Roman Census that brought Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem invented history?

---

let me cast this article before you.

It is certainly not "empirical" evidence. Perhaps it shouldn't be empirical evidence you seek though.

https://crossexamined.org/really-census-time-caesar-augustus/

---

Seems to me they are grasping at straws in this explanation.

---

Seems to me you are constantly grasping at straws to justify your atheistic beliefs.

---

The question is not whether there were ever Roman censuses, but rather was there one during the times of Jesus's conflicting birth naratives, much less was there ever one that required the residents of the Roman Empire to travel and register at the locality of their ancestral homes (1,000 years prior)? Of course the answer is there was none - nada nunca.

---

Luke was a smart guy and would have understood that. So would his audience. There's no reason to infer such a mass uprooting from the text. More likely Joseph simply owned property in Bethlehem. Nor do we even know that the registration mentioned in the gospel was a census. There were other types of registration, e.g. loyalty oaths, that were required of Roman subjects from time to time.

Johnny Bear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Was the purported Roman Census that brought Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem invented history?

---

let me cast this article before you.

It is certainly not "empirical" evidence. Perhaps it shouldn't be empirical evidence you seek though.

https://crossexamined.org/really-census-time-caesar-augustus/

---

Seems to me they are grasping at straws in this explanation.

---

Seems to me you are constantly grasping at straws to justify your atheistic beliefs.

---

The dude things the Earth is flat and birds are not real, so give him a break.

The stupidest thing is people acting like Joseph and Mary were illegal immigrants - morons do not realize Palestine and Egypt bother were Roman provinces.

TexasScientist said:

---

Was the purported Roman Census that brought Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem invented history?

---

read through all of Wes Huff's comments

Today’s #manuscirptmonday includes a number of manuscripts from Luke and Matthew that span from the 2nd to the 5th centuries. Including copies of Josephus from the Middle Ages into the modern era. Today’s post looks at some of the questions surrounding the historical validity and… pic.twitter.com/IUVg0DdnbZ

— Wes Huff (@WesleyLHuff) December 23, 2024

The only surviving mystery religion of the Roman Empire https://t.co/63wPtB9Ckk pic.twitter.com/EkQSVMZwQh

— Edward Badgette (@acrimonyand) December 25, 2024

Tfw you think you’re eating enough protein but you learn that you’re falling short of a Roman legionnaire’s intake https://t.co/07xwnVYH1W

— Lee (Greater) (@shortmagsmle) January 12, 2026

Imagine roman engineers at the time discussing this in latin, proceeding to just use it without even leaving any written document. pic.twitter.com/I1UxDLtST2

— VIKARE (@vikare06) January 20, 2026

Last stand of the retired veterans at the Temple of Claudius
- Boudica's sack of Camulodunum AD 60 pic.twitter.com/JJoPHF507s

— Herald of Rome (@HeraldOfRome) January 22, 2026

1st-century coverage of Germany and of Germans.

"violent rain and wind came up that separated them still further, while the ground, that had become slippery around the roots and logs, made walking very treacherous for them, and the tops of the trees kept breaking off and falling… https://t.co/cpX5INuub0

— LiorLefineder (@lefineder) January 23, 2026

Location of every city founded by the Roman Empire, outside of Italy. pic.twitter.com/BTdKO5wnCB

— Vintage Maps (@vintagemapstore) January 28, 2026

By the end of the 4th century AD, the Romans were already aware they were living in the ruins of a lost world. This was written by the Roman writer Vegetius: pic.twitter.com/3MKENgMvjX

— Roman Helmet Guy (@romanhelmetguy) February 8, 2026

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Was the purported Roman Census that brought Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem invented history?

---

let me cast this article before you.

It is certainly not "empirical" evidence. Perhaps it shouldn't be empirical evidence you seek though.

https://crossexamined.org/really-census-time-caesar-augustus/

---

Seems to me they are grasping at straws in this explanation.

---

Seems to me you are constantly grasping at straws to justify your atheistic beliefs.

---

The question is not whether there were ever Roman censuses, but rather was there one during the times of Jesus's conflicting birth naratives, much less was there ever one that required the residents of the Roman Empire to travel and register at the locality of their ancestral homes (1,000 years prior)? Of course the answer is there was none - nada nunca.

---

Luke was a smart guy and would have understood that. So would his audience. There's no reason to infer such a mass uprooting from the text. More likely Joseph simply owned property in Bethlehem. Nor do we even know that the registration mentioned in the gospel was a census. There were other types of registration, e.g. loyalty oaths, that were required of Roman subjects from time to time.

---

Luke 2:1-3 records that Caesar Augustus ordered a census (or enrollment) of the Roman world. Luke 2 1 In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world. 2 (This was the first census that took place while[a] Quirinius was governor of Syria.) 3 And everyone went to their own town to register.

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Was the purported Roman Census that brought Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem invented history?

---

let me cast this article before you.

It is certainly not "empirical" evidence. Perhaps it shouldn't be empirical evidence you seek though.

https://crossexamined.org/really-census-time-caesar-augustus/

---

Seems to me they are grasping at straws in this explanation.

---

Seems to me you are constantly grasping at straws to justify your atheistic beliefs.

---

The question is not whether there were ever Roman censuses, but rather was there one during the times of Jesus's conflicting birth naratives, much less was there ever one that required the residents of the Roman Empire to travel and register at the locality of their ancestral homes (1,000 years prior)? Of course the answer is there was none - nada nunca.

---

Luke was a smart guy and would have understood that. So would his audience. There's no reason to infer such a mass uprooting from the text. More likely Joseph simply owned property in Bethlehem. Nor do we even know that the registration mentioned in the gospel was a census. There were other types of registration, e.g. loyalty oaths, that were required of Roman subjects from time to time.

---

Luke 2:1-3 records that Caesar Augustus ordered a census (or enrollment) of the Roman world. Luke 2 1 In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world. 2 (This was the first census that took place while[a] Quirinius was governor of Syria.) 3 And everyone went to their own town to register.

---

It was some kind of registration. There's no indication that everyone returned to their ancestral homes of 1,000 years before. Luke's audience would have found that idea as absurd as you do.

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Was the purported Roman Census that brought Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem invented history?

---

let me cast this article before you.

It is certainly not "empirical" evidence. Perhaps it shouldn't be empirical evidence you seek though.

https://crossexamined.org/really-census-time-caesar-augustus/

---

Seems to me they are grasping at straws in this explanation.

---

Seems to me you are constantly grasping at straws to justify your atheistic beliefs.

---

The question is not whether there were ever Roman censuses, but rather was there one during the times of Jesus's conflicting birth naratives, much less was there ever one that required the residents of the Roman Empire to travel and register at the locality of their ancestral homes (1,000 years prior)? Of course the answer is there was none - nada nunca.

---

Luke was a smart guy and would have understood that. So would his audience. There's no reason to infer such a mass uprooting from the text. More likely Joseph simply owned property in Bethlehem. Nor do we even know that the registration mentioned in the gospel was a census. There were other types of registration, e.g. loyalty oaths, that were required of Roman subjects from time to time.

---

Luke 2:1-3 records that Caesar Augustus ordered a census (or enrollment) of the Roman world. Luke 2 1 In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world. 2 (This was the first census that took place while[a] Quirinius was governor of Syria.) 3 And everyone went to their own town to register.

---

It was some kind of registration..

---

Bingo


[If this is a tax census, then it could be the prolonged tax census of Augustus in 5 BC. The Encyclopedia Britannica states the following, "Every five years, the Romans enumerated citizens and their property to determine their liabilities. This practice was extended to include the entire Roman empire in 5 BC."

Now, you might be thinking, well, how in the world would the enrollment that Luke speaks of be a census that was called for in 5 BC? That's way before the time period that Luke's dealing with, with Jesus' birth. Well, the key here, as my good friend and colleague Jimmy Aiken points out, these censuses were done in stages, taking place in different countries in different years, and the reason for such prolonged census taking was the size of the empire. Pretty reasonable.

This being the case, it's possible that the decree of 5 BC, which is affirmed by Encyclopedia Britannica, would not have been implemented in Palestine for a few years, putting the enrollment for Judea right about 1 BC, the time of the birth of Christ.

The idea of this enrollment being a census for tax purposes explains why Joseph would've gone to Bethlehem for the enrollment. That was his hometown, and it's likely that he would've had property there. So notice, this hypothesis has explanatory scope. It's not only explaining the empire-wide tax census, but it also explains why Joseph would go to Bethlehem.

Now, here's a second possible response to the objection. If this is not a tax census, then it could be what some have called the loyalty oath of Augustus in 2 to 3 BC. The enrollment here might not necessarily be a tax census, but more of a registration that would fit with the so-called loyalty oaths. Many think the enrollment was a tax census because of the translations, like the King James version. They translate the Greek word [foreign language 00:06:32] as taxed. The King James Version of Luke 2:1 reads this way, "There went out a decree from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be taxed." However, [foreign language 00:06:44] is better translated as registered.]

Rome had problems that are in some ways similar to those modern societies have now….

"Then the poor, deprived of their land, were no longer eager for military service and had few children, so that soon all Italy was bereft of freemen and filled with gangs of foreign slaves, through whom the rich cultivated their estates, having driven away the free citizens."… pic.twitter.com/aKyQcqwjti

— The Knowledge Archivist (@KnowledgeArchiv) February 18, 2026

Daily reminder that the Romans were completely justified in destroying Carthage. https://t.co/CCJDE9G4Ja

— The Golden One (@TheGloriousLion) February 21, 2026

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Was the purported Roman Census that brought Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem invented history?

---

let me cast this article before you.

It is certainly not "empirical" evidence. Perhaps it shouldn't be empirical evidence you seek though.

https://crossexamined.org/really-census-time-caesar-augustus/

---

Seems to me they are grasping at straws in this explanation.

---

Seems to me you are constantly grasping at straws to justify your atheistic beliefs.

---

The question is not whether there were ever Roman censuses, but rather was there one during the times of Jesus's conflicting birth naratives, much less was there ever one that required the residents of the Roman Empire to travel and register at the locality of their ancestral homes (1,000 years prior)? Of course the answer is there was none - nada nunca.

---

Luke was a smart guy and would have understood that. So would his audience. There's no reason to infer such a mass uprooting from the text. More likely Joseph simply owned property in Bethlehem. Nor do we even know that the registration mentioned in the gospel was a census. There were other types of registration, e.g. loyalty oaths, that were required of Roman subjects from time to time.

---

Luke 2:1-3 records that Caesar Augustus ordered a census (or enrollment) of the Roman world. Luke 2 1 In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world. 2 (This was the first census that took place while[a] Quirinius was governor of Syria.) 3 And everyone went to their own town to register.

---

It was some kind of registration. There's no indication that everyone returned to their ancestral homes of 1,000 years before. Luke's audience would have found that idea as absurd as you do.

---

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. 5 He went there to register with Mary, who was pledged to be married to him and was expecting a child.

I agree, Luke 1:4 is absurd. Roman censuses generally didn't require uprooting families to travel around to the town of family origin. They registered with a Roman Censor where they lived. There is no record of any census during this time in Herod's reign. There is no historical evidence to support Luke's claim. It's clear Luke's message is a theological message for the purpose of getting Jesus out of Nazareth into Bethlehem in order to fit Luke's prophetical narrative about a Messiah.

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Was the purported Roman Census that brought Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem invented history?

---

let me cast this article before you.

It is certainly not "empirical" evidence. Perhaps it shouldn't be empirical evidence you seek though.

https://crossexamined.org/really-census-time-caesar-augustus/

---

Seems to me they are grasping at straws in this explanation.

---

Seems to me you are constantly grasping at straws to justify your atheistic beliefs.

---

The question is not whether there were ever Roman censuses, but rather was there one during the times of Jesus's conflicting birth naratives, much less was there ever one that required the residents of the Roman Empire to travel and register at the locality of their ancestral homes (1,000 years prior)? Of course the answer is there was none - nada nunca.

---

Luke was a smart guy and would have understood that. So would his audience. There's no reason to infer such a mass uprooting from the text. More likely Joseph simply owned property in Bethlehem. Nor do we even know that the registration mentioned in the gospel was a census. There were other types of registration, e.g. loyalty oaths, that were required of Roman subjects from time to time.

---

Luke 2:1-3 records that Caesar Augustus ordered a census (or enrollment) of the Roman world. Luke 2 1 In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world. 2 (This was the first census that took place while[a] Quirinius was governor of Syria.) 3 And everyone went to their own town to register.

---

It was some kind of registration. There's no indication that everyone returned to their ancestral homes of 1,000 years before. Luke's audience would have found that idea as absurd as you do.

---

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. 5 He went there to register with Mary, who was pledged to be married to him and was expecting a child.

I agree, Luke 1:4 is absurd. Roman censuses generally didn't require uprooting families to travel around to the town of family origin. They registered with a Roman Censor where they lived. There is no record of any census during this time in Herod's reign. There is no historical evidence to support Luke's claim. It's clear Luke's message is a theological message for the purpose of getting Jesus out of Nazareth into Bethlehem in order to fit Luke's prophetical narrative about a Messiah.

---

You're assuming it was a census. You're also assuming a census would have been completed in all parts of the empire in a single year. Neither is necessarily true. The mention of the house of David is of course there for theological reasons, to emphasize that Joseph was of that lineage. It doesn't mean he went back to a place he'd never lived just because of his ancestry. Property and ancestry were closely intertwined in his culture. He most likely went to register in Bethlehem because his main holdings were there (which was because he belonged to the house and lineage of David).

Jewish estates were most often not owned by one family member. They were jointly owned due to inheritance practices. Joseph's family could easily have owned property in the area as Sam said. The property could have been a plot of land or some other such place that had nothing usable as a shelter. Something like grazing land.

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Was the purported Roman Census that brought Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem invented history?

---

let me cast this article before you.

It is certainly not "empirical" evidence. Perhaps it shouldn't be empirical evidence you seek though.

https://crossexamined.org/really-census-time-caesar-augustus/

---

Seems to me they are grasping at straws in this explanation.

---

Seems to me you are constantly grasping at straws to justify your atheistic beliefs.

---

The question is not whether there were ever Roman censuses, but rather was there one during the times of Jesus's conflicting birth naratives, much less was there ever one that required the residents of the Roman Empire to travel and register at the locality of their ancestral homes (1,000 years prior)? Of course the answer is there was none - nada nunca.

---

Luke was a smart guy and would have understood that. So would his audience. There's no reason to infer such a mass uprooting from the text. More likely Joseph simply owned property in Bethlehem. Nor do we even know that the registration mentioned in the gospel was a census. There were other types of registration, e.g. loyalty oaths, that were required of Roman subjects from time to time.

---

Luke 2:1-3 records that Caesar Augustus ordered a census (or enrollment) of the Roman world. Luke 2 1 In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world. 2 (This was the first census that took place while[a] Quirinius was governor of Syria.) 3 And everyone went to their own town to register.

---

It was some kind of registration. There's no indication that everyone returned to their ancestral homes of 1,000 years before. Luke's audience would have found that idea as absurd as you do.

---

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. 5 He went there to register with Mary, who was pledged to be married to him and was expecting a child.

I agree, Luke 1:4 is absurd. Roman censuses generally didn't require uprooting families to travel around to the town of family origin. They registered with a Roman Censor where they lived. There is no record of any census during this time in Herod's reign. There is no historical evidence to support Luke's claim. It's clear Luke's message is a theological message for the purpose of getting Jesus out of Nazareth into Bethlehem in order to fit Luke's prophetical narrative about a Messiah.

---

Luke's account IS historical evidence of a census during the reign of Herod. The only reason people feel he got it wrong is because it conflicts with what the historian Josephus recorded. But there is plenty of evidence that it was Josephus who was in error, rather than Luke. Historians have noted that Josephus had made similar chronological errors before with other historical events.

And there isn't any historical evidence that families were NOT required to return to their hometown for a census during the reign of Herod in Judea at the time. So to argue that Roman censuses "generally" didn't require it therefore it didn't happen is arguing from silence. Roman law allowed each province to conduct affairs as they saw fit, and Herod could have conducted a census under Roman direction which required everyone to return to their homeland. In 104 AD, the prefect in Egypt, while under Roman rule, did exactly this - he ordered a census requiring everyone to return to their homeland. (Deissman, Adolf. "Light from the Ancient East. (Classic Reprint)." Forgotten Books, 2016. pp 270-272)

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Was the purported Roman Census that brought Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem invented history?

---

let me cast this article before you.

It is certainly not "empirical" evidence. Perhaps it shouldn't be empirical evidence you seek though.

https://crossexamined.org/really-census-time-caesar-augustus/

---

Seems to me they are grasping at straws in this explanation.

---

Seems to me you are constantly grasping at straws to justify your atheistic beliefs.

---

The question is not whether there were ever Roman censuses, but rather was there one during the times of Jesus's conflicting birth naratives, much less was there ever one that required the residents of the Roman Empire to travel and register at the locality of their ancestral homes (1,000 years prior)? Of course the answer is there was none - nada nunca.

---

Luke was a smart guy and would have understood that. So would his audience. There's no reason to infer such a mass uprooting from the text. More likely Joseph simply owned property in Bethlehem. Nor do we even know that the registration mentioned in the gospel was a census. There were other types of registration, e.g. loyalty oaths, that were required of Roman subjects from time to time.

---

Luke 2:1-3 records that Caesar Augustus ordered a census (or enrollment) of the Roman world. Luke 2 1 In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world. 2 (This was the first census that took place while[a] Quirinius was governor of Syria.) 3 And everyone went to their own town to register.

---

It was some kind of registration. There's no indication that everyone returned to their ancestral homes of 1,000 years before. Luke's audience would have found that idea as absurd as you do.

---

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. 5 He went there to register with Mary, who was pledged to be married to him and was expecting a child.

I agree, Luke 1:4 is absurd. Roman censuses generally didn't require uprooting families to travel around to the town of family origin. They registered with a Roman Censor where they lived. There is no record of any census during this time in Herod's reign. There is no historical evidence to support Luke's claim. It's clear Luke's message is a theological message for the purpose of getting Jesus out of Nazareth into Bethlehem in order to fit Luke's prophetical narrative about a Messiah.

---

You're assuming it was a census. You're also assuming a census would have been completed in all parts of the empire in a single year. Neither is necessarily true…

---

Yep, even a general Roman census took years to compete.

The empire after all stretched from the deserts of Egypt to the foggy mountains of lowland/borderland Scotland

I mean we are talking about the days of mere foot travel (horse if you were rich)

[A Roman census, or census civium, was formally conducted every five years (a lustrum) to register citizens and property for taxation and military service. While the core enumeration in Rome took a few weeks, the entire provincial registration process could span months or even several years to complete]