The Historical Jesus
Estimated reading time: 11 minutes
Why Does the Historical Jesus Matter?
The claims of Christianity are not about a god that exists beyond the world. We believe that God became human. Not abstractly human, but a specific human being. Because of this claim, we need to take seriously the historical existence of Jesus. There is evidence to support the claim that Jesus was a real human being. This evidence includes non-Christian sources as well as Christian ones.
Every serious scholar of late antiquity accepts the historical existence of Jesus. They may disagree over who he was, what he did, and whether he was God or not. But they all agree that he existed. The existence of Jesus of Nazareth is historical fact. But people, especially people who like YouTube but not actually studying, question this fact. This has been called the ‘Christ Myth’.
Non-Christian evidence for the existence of Jesus is really important. It is easy to dismiss Christian claims for Jesus as based in faith rather than fact. When the author is not a Christian, or is anti-Christian, that evidence carries more weight. Faith in Jesus does not depend on this extra-Biblical evidence. However, it is helpful to be able to point towards it. You can find a similar post about the three wise men here.
There will always be some people who will still reject the historical existence of Jesus. But do they accept that Alexander the Great was real? What about Ramses II? The historical evidence for their lives often comes hundreds of years after their death. There is more contemporary documentary evidence for the existence of Jesus than for the existence of the founder of Islam (See here for more information on this). Christians can be confident in saying that Jesus was a real and historical person.
Biblical Evidence for the Historical Jesus
The criterion of embarrassment means that the early disciples would not a saviour or divine figure who was crucified. It would make no sense to anyone in the ancient world. Paul called it insanity and offensive. You can read more about why I think the crucifixion is important in the historical debate here.
It is generally understood that the Pauline letters are the earliest written sources of Christianity. The Gospels were written later and drew from oral traditions and eye witness accounts. Including the testimony of the authors of Mark, Matthew, and John, depending on dating for those Gospels. Textual and archaeological evidence broadly supports the historical details from the Gospels.
There is generally a lack of historical recording from the first century. This is to the degree that there are no eyewitness accounts about Pilate, or Josephus. Their historicity is not questioned. Many figures have no eyewitness accounts of their existence. Yet, their existence is widely accepted. Another example is that Dio Cassius, the Roman historian, does not mention Bar Kochba, a leader of a Jewish revolt, even though he is writing about that revolt.
Non-Christian Evidence for the Historical Jesus
The non-Christian writers during the 1st and second centuries did not question the existence of Jesus. Nor did the authors who criticized Christianity. That is an important point to remember. Another key point is that the Greco-Roman world did not really understand Judaism. It was a strange and alien in classical culture. So in the emergence of Christianity, they often mistook the two communities for the same thing.
Greco-Roman writers did not understand the significance of Christ as a title. Many of them thought that Christ was a proper name for Jesus and used it as such.
Josephus
Josephus was a Jewish noble who wrote in the 1st century AD. He was a commander during the Jewish revolt, then changed sides after it was clear that the Jews were going to lose. Josephus worked for the Romans and wrote books about the events that happened during the Jewish wars. He also wrote more generally about Jewish history. Josephus spent a lot of time in Galilee. He knew the places and culture in which Jesus lived. He would have heard the stories of Jesus still told locally.
His book on Jewish history, commonly called The Antiquities, includes evidence for Jesus. In an earlier text Josephus writes about Jesus directly. Then in a later section of the text Josephus writes about James, the brother of Jesus.
The Testimonum Flavium, book 18 in The Antiquities, says:
Around this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who did surprising deeds, and a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Messiah. When Pilate, upon hearing him accused by men of the highest standing among us, had condemned him to be crucified, those who in the first place came to love him did not give up their affection for him, for on the third day, he appeared to them restored to life. The prophets of God had prophesied this and countless other marvelous things about him. And the tribe of Christians, so called after him, have still to this day not died out.
The bold sections of this text indicate where Christians made later additions and edits to the original text. The plain italic sections are original to Josephus. Even without the altered sentences, it is clear that Josephus regarded Jesus as a real person. He makes note that Jesus was executed under Pilate, and that this did not dissuade his followers.
The brother of Jesus
In Book 20 of The Antiquities, Josephus details the execution of James by High Priest Ananus. James was the brother of Jesus and leader of the Church in Jerusalem. Josephus wrote:
Being therefore this kind of person [i.e., a heartless Sadducee], Ananus, thinking that he had a favorable opportunity because Festus had died and Albinus was still on his way, called a meeting [literally, “sanhedrin”] of judges and brought into it the brother of Jesus-who-is-called-Messiah … James by name, and some others. He made the accusation that they had transgressed the law, and he handed them over to be stoned.
This text lacks the later edits by Christians. It specifies that there was a Jesus called the Messiah. It also says that Jesus had a brother. The other historical details included in this section makes it clear that Josephus is not talking about a made up person. It would have been possible to check his history with those still alive.
Josephus gives us evidence for the existence of Jesus from a source without any vested interest. He did not benefit from the existence of Jesus. Josephus writing about the existence of Jesus, within one generation of Jesus, gives significant documentary evidence for his existence.
Tacitus
Tacitus was a Roman historian and biographer who was born around 55 AD and who wrote his history book The Annals in roughly 117 AD. This book told the story of the early days of the Roman Emperor, focusing on the lives of the Emperors.
Tacitus wrote a biography of the Emperor Nero in The Annals. Nero is potentially one of the targets that the book of Revelation was written about. During the reign of Nero Rome burned down. Many Romans at the time blamed Nero, saying he wanted to clear the ground for his own building projects. Including a massive gold statue of himself and a brand new palace. To avoid the blame, Nero blamed the Christians. Tacitus wrote:
Neither human effort nor the emperor’s generosity nor the placating of the gods ended the scandalous belief that the fire had been ordered [by Nero]. Therefore, to put down the rumor, Nero substituted as culprits and punished in the most unusual ways those hated for their shameful acts … whom the crowd called “Chrestians.” The founder of this name, Christ [Christus in Latin], had been executed in the reign of Tiberius by the procurator Pontius Pilate … Suppressed for a time, the deadly superstition erupted again not only in Judea, the origin of this evil, but also in the city [Rome], where all things horrible and shameful from everywhere come together and become popular.
Tacitus hated Christians. Early in his career, Tacitus had been proconsul of Asia. He would have known the stories of Christianity, and had to deal with the troublesome Christians. He has nothing to gain by making things up about Christians or about Christ. His life was not improved by Christ existing. His writing supports the historical elements within the gospels, and gives broader context. He explains how Christianity had been supressed for a time (which would accord with what we read in Acts) before erupting again.
Tacitus provides further documentary evidence for the existence of Jesus from a source that has nothing to gain from Jesus existing. He has not reason to make anything up. He accepts that Jesus existed, and seems to know enough to be able to confirm that Jesus had been executed. This agrees with what Josephus wrote.
Lucian of Samosota
Lucian was a Greek satirist writing in the middle of the second century. He wrote The Passing of Peregrinus about a former Christian who a famous Cynic and revolutionary. He refers contemptuously to Christ in the middle of his satire:
It was then that he learned the marvelous wisdom of the Christians, by associating with their priests and scribes in Palestine. And—what else?—in short order he made them look like children, for he was a prophet, cult leader, head of the congregation and everything, all by himself. He interpreted and explained some of their books, and wrote many himself. They revered him as a god, used him as a lawgiver, and set him down as a protector—to be sure, after that other whom they still worship, the man who was crucified in Palestine because he introduced this new cult into the world,
For having convinced themselves that they are going to be immortal and live forever, the poor wretches despise death and most even willingly give themselves up. Furthermore, their first lawgiver persuaded them that they are all brothers of one another after they have transgressed once for all by denying the Greek gods and by worshiping that crucified sophist himself and living according to his laws.
Sophist was a term of ridicule and contempt for teachers or cheats who taught only for money. Lucian hated Christians and ridiculed them worshiping someone who was crucified. He would have nothing to gain by making things up about Jesus existing. In fact, the opposite is true. Lucian could have denied that Jesus ever existed. Instead, he used the historical reality of Christ’s death to mock Christians for worshipping a crucified man.
The Talmud
There are several passages in the Babylonian Talmud believed to refer to Jesus. Although the text uses the name Yeshu to refer to Jesus. There are multiple texts that include that name. Some texts seem to be parallels of parable stories from the New Testament. Others say that Yeshu was a magician, or that he was a charlatan. There is some suggestion that the texts were written much later as a response to Christianity. This is especially evident in passages that suggest the Virgin Mary was an adulterer. An example text is:
On the eve of Passover, Jesus the Nazarene was hanged and a herald went forth before him forty days heralding, “Jesus the Nazarene is going forth to be stoned because he practiced sorcery and instigated and seduced Israel to idolatry. Whoever knows anything in defense may come and state it.” But since they did not find anything in his defense they hanged him on the eve of Passover.
Ulla said: “Do you suppose that Jesus the Nazarene was one for whom a defense could be made? He was a mesit (someone who instigated Israel to idolatry), concerning whom the Merciful [God] says: Show him no compassion and do not shield him (Deut. 13:9). With Jesus the Nazarene it was different. For he was close to the government.”
The Talmud does not deny the historical existence of Jesus. Although it is a text that is chronologically much further away from the evets of Jesus, it provides additional non-Christian evidence. It ridicules Jesus and Jesus’s family. It includes historical details such as the date of Jesus’s execution. But crucially does not provide the details of the crucifixion but rather makes an assumption about what that execution would have been. This indicates that the Talmud is not directly drawing from the Christian tradition for its claims.
Mara bar Serapion
Mara bar Serapion was a Stoic philosopher from the Roman province of Syria. He wrote a letter to his son, dated around 73 AD. This is obviously very close to the death of Jesus which would have happened no later than 36 AD.
The letter refers to the unjust treatment of three wise men: Socrates, Pythagoras, and the King of the Jews. Mara explained that the wrongdoing in each case would result in the future punishment of the wrong doers by God. When the wise are oppressed, their wisdom will triumph in the end. Mara wrote:
What else can we say, when the wise are forcibly dragged off by tyrants, their wisdom is captured by insults, and their minds are oppressed and without defense? What advantage did the Athenians gain from murdering Socrates? Famine and plague came upon them as a punishment for their crime. What advantage did the men of Samos gain from burning Pythagoras? In a moment their land was covered with sand. What advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise king? It was just after that their kingdom was abolished. God justly avenged these three wise men: the Athenians died of hunger; the Samians were overwhelmed by the sea and the Jews, desolate and driven from their own kingdom, live in complete dispersion. But Socrates is not dead, because of Plato; neither is Pythagoras, because of the statue of Juno; nor is the wise king, because of the “new law” he laid down.
Mara was not a Christian, and does not include Christian themes in his letter. He says the wisdom will last beyond the teacher through their teachings. He did not express any belief in the resurrection of Jesus. The use of ‘king of the Jews’, a non-Christian title, but one reported at the time, also indicates a non-Christian author. The early date, the non-Christian author, and the indication of the crucifixion, all give evidence of the historical existence of Jesus.
Suetonius
Suetonius was a Roman historian and biographer who lived at roughly the same time as Tacitus. His history is regarded as somewhat more excitable than Tacitus’s work, but still provides historical detail. Suetonius talks about Christians twice in his biographical work The Twelve Caesars.
The first comes from the life of Claudius. Suetonius says that during the time of Claudius there was unrest in Rome caused by Christians and followers of ‘Chrestus’ and so the Jews were expelled. This is a mistaken translation of Christus, the Latin form of Christ. We remember that the Romans thought Christ was a proper name, not a title, and that they struggled to tell the difference between Christians and Jews. This event happened somewhere between AD 41 and AD 54. It might link to the expulsion of Jews mentioned in Acts 18:2
Suetonius also mentions Christians in the life of Nero. Unlike Tacitus, he does not link Christians to the Great Fire. He does say that Nero punished Christians for their excessive religiosity and superstitions.
While this does not link directly to the person of Jesus, it demonstrates that there were Christians in Rome within two decades of Jesus dying. Further, that the Romans knew there was a person called Christ that these people followed.
Conclusion – Jesus was a Historical Person
Jesus was a real person.
There is a significant weight of evidence that the person Jesus of Nazareth is a historically verifiable figure. Claims that he wasn’t do not take into account or must dismiss the historical evidence that he did exist. New Testament scholar Bart Ehrman in his 2012 book Did Jesus Exist? Wrote:
Nearly all critical scholars agree at least on those points about the historical Jesus. But there is obviously a lot more to say, and that is where scholarly disagreements loom large – disagreements not over whether Jesus existed but over what kind of Jewish teacher and preacher he was.
If you want to look further at the evidence, especially archaeological evidence, try this link:
Jesus/Historical Jesus Archives – Biblical Archaeology Society
Why the Historical Jesus Matters
Proof for the historical existence of Jesus does not prove that he was God, but it does provide proof that the person Jesus of Nazareth existed. It also gives evidence that many of the details in the Gospel narratives can be backed up from other sources. This includes that Jesus lived and worked in Galilee, that he was killed by the Romans during the time when Pilate was governor, and that his followers continued to believe in his after his death.
Evidence for the historical Jesus gives a deeper foundation for the claims of Christianity. It makes it easier to persuade people about who Jesus was. The truth of the historical Jesus does not make or break Christianity, but it is definitely good to be able to prove that Jesus was real.
If you want to keep up to date, sign up to My Theology Corner Newsletter for a weekly lite-bite theology hit. Get short-form reflections from topics on the main blog and or on other interesting topics from that week.
Leave a Reply