1) There have been many in history that have expressed the idea that Jesus did
not actually exist.
2) They try to make Him a myth, and therefore, make all of Christianity a myth.
3) It seems odd that this would be the case. Yet, in my experience, I have had
many a conversation with those who express this idea.
4) The only way to examine this subject is to go to the ones whole lived at that
time. There is evidence for His existence. It is in the writings of that time.
II) Secular Evidence (Documentary)
1) Cornelius Tactitus (55-120)
A) He was a 1st and 2nd century Roman historian who lived through the
reigns of over half a dozen Roman emperors. Considered one of the
greatest historians of ancient Rome, Tactitus verifies the Biblical
account of Jesus’ execution at the hands of Pontius Pilot who governed
Judea from 26-36 AD during the reign of Tiberius.
B) In his Annals XV, 44 he writes the following:
“Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilot,
procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius. But the pernicious
superstition, repressed for a time, broke out again, not only through Judea
where the mischief originated, but through the city of Rome also.”
2) What this passage reveals
A) Jesus did exist
B) Jesus was the founder of Christianity
C) Jesus was put to death by Pilate
D) Christianity originated in Judea (with Jesus)
E) Christianity later spread to Rome
3) Skeptic Interjections
A) Could Tactitus have taken his information from Christian sources?
1) No
2) Because of his position as a professional historian and not as a
commentator, it is more likely Tactitus referenced government records
over Christian testimony.
3) It is also possible that he received some of his info from his friend
and fellow historian, Pliny the Younger.
4) However, even if Tactitus referenced some of Pliny’s sources, it
would be out of his character to have done so without critical
investigation. An example of such in AnnalsXV, 55
5) Tactitus distinguishes between confirmed and hearsay accounts
almost 70 times in his History. If he felt this account of Jesus
was only a rumor, he would have issued his usual disclaimer that this
account was unverified.
B) Could this passage have been a Christian interpolation?
1) No
2) Judging by the critical undertones of the passage, this is highly unlikely.
3) Tactitus refers to Christianity as a superstition and insuppressible
mischief.
4) Furthermore, there is not a surviving copy of Annals that does not
contain this passage.
5) There is no verifiable evidence of tampering of any kind in this passage
C) Does the incorrect use of title procurator instead of perfect negate his reliability
1) No
2) Evidence is provided in both secular and Christian works which refer to
Pilot as a procurator
a) Antiquities XVIII, 3:1; “But now Pilate, the procurator of
Judea...”
b) The Jewish Wars, Book II 9:2; “Now Pilot, who was sent as
procurator into Judea by Tiberius...”
c) First apology XII; “Pontius Pilot, procurator of Judea, in the
time of Tiberius Caesar...”
3) It has been suggested by both Christian and secular scholars that
Tactitu was either using and anachronism for the sake of clarity or
since Judea was a relatively new and insignificant Roman province,
Pilate might have held both positions.
4) Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus (69-130 AD)
A) He was a prominent Roman historian who recorded the lives of the Roman
Caesars and the historical events surrounding their reigns.
B) He served as a court official under Hadrian and as an annalist for the
Imperial House.
C) He records the expulsion of the Christian Jews from Rome and confirms the
Christian faith being founded by Christ.
D) In life of Claudius 25:4; he writes:
“As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of
Chrestus. Claudius expelled them from Rome.”
5) Skeptical interjections
A) Because he misspells Christus as Chrestus, is it possible he was referring to
someone else?
1) Because Chestus was an actual Greek name, critics speculate he may
have been referring to a specific civil agitator.
2) This cannot be the case for the following:
a) In the original Latin, the passage looks like this:
“Iudaeos (The Jews) impulsore (the instigation) Chresto
(Chrestus) assidue (upon) tumultuantis (making a disturbance)
Roma (Rome) expulit (were expelled).”
b) He seems to imply the word Chrestus as a title-not as a
reference to a particular rebel. Critics sometimes site this
passage as “a certain/one Chrestus”. We can see that this is
incorrect by the lack of the word quodam in the original.
c) He uses the word instigation and not instigator
d) It was common for both pagan and Christian authors to spell the
name using an e or an I. Of course we know to whom Christian
authors were referring to.
e) Tertullian criticizes pagan disdain for Christianity and points
out the fact they can’t even spell the name correctly. He implies
the common misspelling of Chrestus by their use of the term
Chrestians: “Most people so blindly knock their heads against
the hatred of the Christian name...It is wrongly pronounced by
you as “Chrestians” (for you do not even know accurately the
name you hate)...But the special ground of dislike to the sect is,
that it bears the name of its founder.” Apology, chapter III.
f) We also see Justin Martyr using the incorrect spelling
B) How could this passage refer to Jesus. He was never said to have traveled
to Rome.
1) If Chrestus does refer to a title and not a specific person, there is no
need for Him to be in Rome.
2) A leader can still be an instigator for a cause without being in the
vicinity.
3) There are many causes that have survived long after the lives of those
who initiated the movements.
6) Thallus (-52 AD)
A) His works now only exist in fragments.
B) Yet we know of his thoughts because Julius Africanus takes issue with him
over his explanation of the midday darkness which occurred during the
Passover of Jesus crucifixion.
C) Thallus tries to dismiss the darkness as a natural occurrence (solar eclipse)
but Africanus argues (and any astronomer can confirm) a solar eclipse cannot
physically occur during a full moon due to the alignment of the planets.
D) He also states that the event occurred during the time of Tiberius Caesar.
E) In Chronography XVIII, 47;
“On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness. The rocks
were rent by an earthquake and many places in Judea and other districts
were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his history,
calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun. For the
Hebrews celebrate the Passover on the 14th day according to the moon, and
the passion of our Savior falls on the day before the Passover. But an
eclipse of the sun takes place only when the moon comes under the sun.
And it cannot happen at any other time...Phlegon records that, in the time
of Tiberius Caesar, at full moon, there was a full eclipse of the sun from
the sixth hour to the ninth-manifestly that one of which we speak.
F) Skeptic interjection
1) Why doesn’t Pliny the Elder or Seneca mention this event?
a) Pliny focused his writings on natural events that had
scientific explanations. It is doubtful he would have
mentioned an event of supernatural origin.
b) There is no evidence that he was in or around Judea at
that time so it is doubtful he would have mentioned it if
he had not witnessed it for himself.
c) Seneca focused his writings on dramas, dialogue, and tragedies
but also wrote a meteorological essay. Natural Questions which
is composed of theories pertaining to ancient cosmology. However this was by no means complete record, it is a literary work
G) Because Thallus works exist only in fragments, can his testimony be reliable?1) That is the problem with ancient texts.
2) We do know, however, that Africanus was an honest, qualified author
who did not alter the quotes to serve his purpose.
3) His methods were highly respected by his peers and was often quoted
by other authors.
4) It must also be noted that Thallus did not deny that this eclipse did not
happen. He was trying to actually come up with a scientific explanation for the eclipse.
7) Pliny the Younger (63-113 AD)
A) In his letter to Emperor Trajan, Pliny admits to torturing and executing
Christians who refused to deny Christ.
B) Those who denied charges were spared and ordered to exalt Roman gods
and curse the name of Christ.
C) Pliny addresses his concerns to the Emperor that too many citizens were
being killed for their refusal to deny their faith.
D) Here is the letter
Pliny to Emperor Trajan
It is customary for me, sir, to refer to you in all matters wherein I have a doubt. Who truly is better able to rule my hesitancy, or to instruct my ignorance? I was never present at examinations of Christians, therefore I do not know what is customarily punished, nor to what extent, nor how far to take the investigation. I was quite undecided; should there be any consideration given to age; are those who are however delicate no different from the stronger? Should penitence obtain pardon; or, as has been the case particularly with Christians, to desist makes no difference? Should the name itself be punished (even if crimes are absent), or the crimes that go with the name?
Meanwhile, this is the method I have followed with those who were brought before me as Christians. I asked them directly if they were Christians. The ones who answered affirmatively I questioned again with a warning, and yet a third time: those who persisted I ordered led [away]. For I have no doubt, whatever else they confessed to, certainly [this] pertinacity and inflexible obstinacy ought to be punished. There were others alike of madness, whom I noted down to be sent to the City, because they were Roman citizens. Soon in consequence of this policy itself, as it was made standard, many kinds of criminal charges occurred and spread themselves abroad. A pamphlet was published anonymously, containing the names of many.
Those who denied that they were or ever had been Christians, when they swore before me, called on the gods and offered incense and wine to your image (which I had ordered brought in for this [purpose], along with images of the gods), and also cursed Christ (which, it is said, it is impossible to force those who are real Christians to do) I thought worthy to be acquitted. Others named by an informer, said they had been Christians, but now denied [it]; certainly they had been, but had lapsed, some three years ago, some more; and more than one [lit. not nobody] over twenty years ago. These all worshiped both your image and the images of the gods and cursed Christ.
They stated that the sum of their guilt or error amounted to this, that they used to gather on a stated day before dawn and sing to Christ as if he were a god, and that they took an oath not to involve themselves in villainy, but rather to commit no theft, no fraud, no adultery; not to break faith, nor to deny money placed with them in trust. Once these things were done, it was their custom to part and return later to eat a meal together, innocently, although they stopped this after my edict, in which I, following your mandate, forbade all secret societies.
All the more I believed it necessary to find out what was the truth from two servant maids, which were called deaconesses, by means of torture. Nothing more did I find than a disgusting, fanatical superstition.
Therefore I stopped the examination, and hastened to consult you. For it appears to me a proper matter for counsel, most greatly on account of the number of people endangered. For many of all ages, all classes, and both sexes already are brought into danger, and shall be [in future]. And not only the cities; the contagion of this superstition is spread throughout the villages and the countryside; but it appears to me possible to stop it and put it right. Certainly the temples which were once deserted are beginning to be crowded, and the long interrupted sacred rites are being revived, while food from the sacrifices is selling, for which up to now a buyer was hardly to be found. From which it may easily be supposed, that what disturbs men can be mended, if a place is allowed for repentance.
E) Skeptical interjection
1) How does dying for one’s belief verify the actual existence of Jesus?
The sincerity of a belief does not necessarily make the belief true.
How does this letter specifically confirm a historical Jesus and not
just the existence of Christians in Rome?
a) Pliny states the Christians worshiped Christ as if he were a god.
This indicates one who would not normally be considered a
god, such as a human who was exalted to divine status.
b) The early Christians would have been in the position to know
if Jesus was a historical figure or not.
c) There would have been a lot more evidence available to them
then we have today.
d) According to early historians, Jesus’ great-nephews and other
relatives were still alive as well as the associates of the apostles.
Such individuals could easily verify His existence.
e) Documents which have been lost to us were still in existence
and were even referenced by early authors who wrote about
Jesus.
2) Pliny also states some recanted their testimony. Perhaps they did so
because they knew Jesus was a myth?
a) He readily admits to torturing some of the accused.
b) The accused knew if they did not recant they would be put to
death. Fallible human reasoning, confess and go home and
work it out later.
c) The correspondence implies many of the accused were being
turned in falsely by their enemies. Some were never Christians
to begin with while some had already left the faith.
d) Just because some who may have recanted out of fear or poor
judgement does not dismiss the deaths of the others who were
certain of Jesus’ existence and died because of their knowledge.
8) Celsus (-178 AD)
A) He was a second century Roman author and avid opponent of Christianity.
He went to great lengths to disprove the divinity of Jesus yet never denied
His actual existence. There are two important facts regarding Celsus which
make him one of the most important witnesses in the discussion.
1) Though most secular passages are accused of being Christian
interpolations, we can accept with certainty that this is not the case
with Celsus. The sheer volumes of his writings coupled with the
hostile accusations presented in his work dismiss this chance.
2) The idea of Celsus getting his info entirely from Christian sources
is wholly absurd. Though he is obviously aware of his opponents’
beliefs, he wrote his exposition in the form of a dialogue between
a “Jewish Critic” and himself. This gives us cause to believe he
used non-Christian sources.
B) Some excerpts from his writings
1) On Jesus' Miracles: "Jesus, on account of his poverty, was hired out to go to Egypt.
While there he acquired certain [magical] powers... He returned home highly elated at
possessing these powers, and on the strength of them gave himself out to be a god... It was
by means of sorcery that He was able to accomplish the wonders which He performed... Let us believe that these cures, or the resurrection, or the feeding of a multitude with a
few loaves... These are nothing more than the tricks of jugglers... It is by the names of
certain demons, and by the use of incantations, that the Christians appear to be possessed of [miraculous] power..."
a) Not only does Celsus confirm His existence, he also tries to
debate the source of the miracles.
b) Celsus tries to dismiss the miracles as demonic possession and
cheap parlor tricks
2)On the Virgin Birth: "Jesus had come from a village in Judea, and was the son of a poor
Jewess who gained her living by the work of her hands. His mother had been turned out
by her husband, who was a carpenter by trade, on being convicted of adultery [with a Roman soldier named Panthera]. Being thus driven away by her husband,
and wandering about in disgrace, she gave birth to Jesus, a bastard."
a) Celsus acknowledges the birth and existence of Jesus but does
not accept the concept of the virgin birth.
b) He tries to dismiss Mary’s premarital pregnancy as the result
of an affair with a Roman soldier.
3)On the Apostles: "Jesus gathered around him ten or eleven persons of notorious
character... tax-collectors, sailors, and fishermen... [He was] deserted and delivered up by
those who had been his associates, who had him for their teacher, and who believed he
was the savior and son of the greatest God... Those who were his associates while alive, who listened to his voice, and enjoyed his instructions as their teacher, on seeing him
subjected to punishment and death, neither died with nor for him... but denied that they
were even his disciples, lest they die along with Him."
a) Celsus’ intentions were to argue that if the disciples really
believed Jesus, they would not have forsaken Him.
b) Instead, he only confirms the Biblical accounts
c) The Bible tells us that they did forsake Him, yet after His
resurrection, they understood the spiritual nature of His
teachings and bodily went and preached the Gospel.
4)On the Crucifixion: "Jesus accordingly exhibited after His death only the appearance of
wounds received on the cross, and was not in reality so wounded as He is described to have been."
a) In this statement, Celsus confirms Jesus’ death by crucifixion
although he claims the only wounds He received were those
inflicted by the crucifixion.
C) Skeptical interjection
1)Celsus also states, "It is clear to me that the writings of the Christians are a lie and that your fables are not well enough constructed to conceal this
monstrous fiction." How do we know Celsus is referring to a historical Jesus and not just debating myth?
a) Celsus says of Jesus that He was only a man-not a myth.b) Instead of denying the events, he offers alternative theories to
the early Christian claims.
c) If he were discussing a mythical person, he would never have
gone to such great lengths to discredit the events in His life.
d) It would have been much easier to just say He was a myth and
leave it at that.
e) The fables he refers to is his belief that the claims such as the
virgin birth were myths created by the early Christians, not that
Jesus was a myth. He was debating the claim of divinity and
not His actual existence.
9) Lucian of Samosata (120-180 AD)
A) A noted satirist of the second century, spoke scornfully of Christ and the Christians. Samosata referred to Jesus as a man who was crucified in Palestine because He introduced a new cult into the world, forcing his adherents to deny the Greek gods and worship Himself, once He was killed.
B)“The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day, the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account...You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws. All this they take quite on faith, with the result that they despise all worldly goods, alike, regarding them merely as common property." (The Passing Peregrinus)
C) This passage confirms the following
1) Jesus did exist
2) Jesus was the founder of Christianity
3) Jesus was worshiped by His followers
4) Jesus suffered death by crucifixion
D) Skeptical interjection
1) Can we consider this testimony reliable?
a) His commentary revolved around historical events.
b) In his work “The Way to Write History”, he openly
criticizes others who distort history to latter their
masters or those who fill in the historical gaps with personal
conjecture
"The historian's one task is to tell the thing as it happened... He may nurse
some private dislikes, but he will attach far more importance to the public
good, and set the truth high above his hate... For history, I say again, has this and only this for its own. If a man will start upon it, he must sacrifice to no God but Truth. He must neglect all else."
III) Common Skeptical Questions
1) WHY IS THERE NO PHYSICAL EVIDENCE OR PERSONAL WRITINGS TO VERIFY JESUS' HISTORICITY?
The Bible has been accused on several occasions of committing historical errors but has later
been proven accurate through archaeological finds. For instance, the Old Testament mentions a
tribe of people known as the Hittites. Skeptics pointed out there was no such civilization in
history yet in the 19th century records of the Hittites were discovered within Assyrian ruins.
Today we know a lot about the Hittites such as their language, craftsmanship, geography, and empire chronology. The New Testament mentions the pool of Bethesda as a place
where Jesus healed a paralytic. No such location was known to exist until it was discovered in
Jerusalem as a place where the sick would gather to seek healing. Just because an artifact has not
yet been recovered does not mean none exist. Lastly, though the discovery of an artifact may be
interesting, it would never be enough for the devout skeptic. Even a non-biased archaeologist would have a hard time proving a relic's authenticity.
In regards to personal writings, Socrates, for example, exists only in the writings of his students.
There is not a single document still in existence that contains his original works. If we apply the
same logic with Socrates skeptics use to determine Jesus' historicity, we must assume Socrates
was a figment of the imagination of his students. But if we are to accept Socrates as a historical
figure based on four secondary accounts, we must also accept Jesus as a historical figure whose
life was documented by His disciples, historians, and those who rejected His divine claims. When skeptics claim there is a difference between a man such as Socrates and Jesus, they
would be absolutely correct- Jesus had more accounts written about Him.
AREN'T THE WRITINGS THAT REFER TO JESUS JUST HEARSAY ACCOUNTS?
Critics claim because some accounts were recorded after Jesus' life they cannot be considered
historically reliable. But this skepticism comes from a misunderstanding of antiquity. We need to
place ourselves in a time where 95% of the population was illiterate. If I really wanted to get this
research across to the typical English speaking American, I would not post this website in Latin!
Likewise, documenting the Gospels preserved the accounts for future generations but oral
evangelism was the practical method in making the Gospel available to the current population. Whether the accounts were written the day after Jesus' ascension or 30 years later, the
fact is they were still penned by either the original witnesses or during the lives of the original
witnesses who could confront heretical accounts.
Jesus also concentrated His ministry in various provinces of Judea- not secular hubs of the
ancient world like Rome or Alexandria. Christianity spread into the surrounding areas after the
life of Jesus. I would be far more suspicious of a Roman historian writing an excerpt about Jesus
in 30 A.D. rather approximately 95 A.D. when Christianity had reached Rome. When critics
argue the only first hand accounts of Jesus' life are found in the Bible, it makes me wonder where
else they think should be. Jesus' ministry only lasted three years and was limited to Judea (considered the ghetto of the Roman Empire). There would have been no reason given the short
time frame and limited area of Jesus' ministry to have been exhaustively recorded in Roman
literature without the accusation of forgery.
WHAT ABOUT THE LACK OF EVIDENCE PERTAINING TO EVENTS WHICH OCCURRED DURING HIS LIFE?
Critics mention two important events that appear not to be recorded in secular history: the
darkness that occurred after Jesus' crucifixion and the slaughter of the innocents by Herod the
Great. As stated previously in this discussion, the midday darkness which occurred after Jesus'
death is mentioned by the secular historian Thallus and Phlegon (though they try to dismiss the
event as a solar eclipse). The event is also mentioned by Christian apologists Origen and Philopon but I only focused on the secular accounts due to their critical origins.
The shocking nature of the slaughter of the innocents would make one think all historians would
have recorded such an event. Even Josephus records atrocities committed by Herod against those
he believed had ambitions of attaining his throne. Herod even murdered his two sons of
Maccabean heritage for fear they would overthrow him. History shows Herod was a very
paranoid ruler who was willing to do what was needed to maintain his position. If he had ordered the slaughter of all males under two years of age, it would have been well within his
character. We must also realize that Bethlehem was a small village- not a raging metropolis. If
the village only had a few hundred residents, as is ascertained, statistically this would make the
number of males under the age of two around twenty in number.
But Herod's character and the amount of victims is not proof of this event. Where is the actual
evidence that this event occurred? If we can consider the eye witness account of Matthew
reliable, we can accept his version of the events. But if we are looking for extra-Biblical sources, we can consider the following passage:
"When Augustus heard that Herod king of the Jews had ordered all the boys in Syria under the
age of two years to be put to death and that the king's son was among those killed, he said, 'I'd
rather be Herod's pig than Herod’s son.'" Macrobius
Unlike the account mentioned in the book of Matthew, Macrobius mentions the massacre taking
place in Syria and combines the event with the murder of Herod's sons. Because Palestine was
considered a Syrian province at the time, Macrobius could be referring to the vicinity of
Bethlehem. Due to the difference between Macrobius' and Matthew's account and knowing
Macrobius was a pagan, we can assume Macrobius used an independent source for his writings.
WHY IS THERE NO PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION OR DEPICTION OF JESUS ANYWHERE IN ANTIQUITY?
Critics cite the lack of a physical description of Jesus as evidence that He never existed. In fact,
the only reference to His human appearance is a prophecy found in Isaiah! Yet, the fact there is
no known physical depiction of Jesus doesn't mean He never existed. Even if a painting or
sculpture did exist it's authenticity would certainly be disputed. Furthermore, many other figures
of antiquity have no contemporary image depicting their appearance yet we can believe they existed.
Even if there were entire manuscripts dedicated to detailing Jesus' appearance or museums filled
with first century artwork depicting Jesus, it still would not prove He existed. There are paintings
and sculptures of mythological Greek and Egyptian deities, fairy tale creatures, and fictional ,
characters of literature. Aphrodite Paul Bunyan, Dorian Gray, Isis, and Peter Pan all have artwork
depicting their appearances yet they are imaginary figures. A physical depiction or lack of one neither proves nor disproves one's existence.
A very good reason there may be no images of Jesus is to prevent the sin of idolatry. Original
images of Jesus would certainly be considered holy relics by some people. Many believers would
turn their attention away from Jesus as the Son of God to the man-made images of an earthly Jesus.
WHY DON'T ANY AUTHORS SPECIFICALLY ATTEST TO JESUS' HISTORICITY?
If I was to write a biography of a historical figure, Adolph Hitler for example, I would find it
unnecessary to dedicate an entire chapter to quotes, photographs, and sources which confirm his
existence. To us, he is known to be a historical figure. I would have to anticipate 2,000 years
from now there would be those who would doubt he ever existed. We know that only 65 years after the Holocaust there are people who deny its scope (even when faced with mounds of
evidence that verify the tragedy)! The authors of antiquity were discussing a figure known to
exist. The burden of proof revolved around Jesus' divinity- not existence- as we can see in the
above testimony. The authors had no reason to even suspect His actual existence would one day be in question.
I would also like to mention there is no text from this period of antiquity that argues Jesus did not
exist. The easiest way to silence the early Christians would be to prove the focal point of their
beliefs was a lie- but this never happened! Even the secular authors listed on this page do not argue Jesus' existence.
WHAT ABOUT THE AUTHORS WHO DO NOT MENTION JESUS?
This argument leads to the false assumption that any author who was a contemporary of Jesus
would find it necessary to write about Him. We could dissect every single author of Jesus'
lifetime, but because others have already done so, I will simply give a brief synopsis. The three authors commonly mentioned are Pliny the Elder,
Seneca, and Philo Judeaus:
1. Pliny the Elder's area of expertise was natural phenomena. He dedicated his writings to the
historical sciences such as botany, geography, and zoology. In essence, he wrote scientific
almanacs- not religious history.
2. Philo Judeaus was a Jewish-Hellenistic philosopher- not a historian like many critics claim.
He was also an Egyptian-born Jew who served as an ambassador to Caligula for Jewish rights in Alexandria- not Judea.
3. Seneca was a Roman philosopher and rhetorician who concerned himself with philosophies,
tragedies, and methodologies. His works were more literary than historical.
No comments:
Post a Comment