GodlessHaven.com

Did Jesus Really Exist? - Examining the Evidence:

Written by Taylor Carr - August 16, 2024

When questioned on their beliefs, many religious believers will dodge the demand for evidence by criticizing your questions themselves. Why would Jesus let himself be crucified for a lie? If Jesus was just a teacher, why did he call himself the son of God? The problem, though, is that few Christians seem to start at the beginning. With a character like Jesus, who is suggested to be both the savior of humanity and God in-the-flesh, it is of the utmost importance that we determine whether or not this person existed, before we consider any notions of what his actions or teachings were like.

Historians and scholars have debated this topic for decades, because the evidence is slim and very questionable in many cases. Christians will proclaim that scholarly consensus is that Jesus did exist, but typically the scholars they will cite are heavily biased and religious. If evidence arose for a man named Jesus who lived during the 1st century AD, it would require a lot of study, and even then the more supernatural claims about him may not be verifiable. Nonetheless, let's look at some of the "evidence" presented by Christian apologists for the existence of Jesus of Nazareth.

I. Use of the Bible

The bible is our most comprehensive source for information on Jesus, and yet it simultaneously makes very extraordinary claims about him, claims which require a great deal of supporting evidence. For this reason, the bible cannot be treated as if it paints an accurate historical picture of Christ, because it could very well be exaggerating events or characters as an allegory would. If archaeology or history happen to turn up findings that validate the biblical view of Jesus, then the bible can be called historical in that sense. But until then it must be treated with healthy skepticism and suspicion. There are a multitude of good reasons not to trust the bible as a historical text, but that is an issue for another article.

Now, the bible could be used as a guide for where to search or how to understand what evidence for Christ might look like, but it may not be a useful tool after all. For example, Frank Zindler has argued that the city of Nazareth did not exist at all in Jesus' day (1), based on the following points:

No "ancient historians or geographers mention [Nazareth] before the beginning of the fourth century [AD]."

Nazareth is not mentioned in the Old Testament, the Talmud, nor in the Apocrypha and it does not appear in any early rabbinic literature.

Nazareth was not included in the list of settlements of the tribes of Zebulun (Joshua 19:10-16) which mentions twelve towns and six villages

Nazareth is not included among the 45 cities of Galilee that were mentioned by Josephus (37AD-100AD).

Nazareth is also missing from the 63 towns of Galilee mentioned in the Talmud.

It has also been suggested that when the New Testament refers to Jesus as a "Nazarene", it is actually a mistranslation of the word "Nazarite", which is a person who has taken a vow of holiness, as Samson is described in Judges 13:5. From this issue alone, hopefully it is evident enough that the bible may not be the most reliable means for determining factual evidence about the character of Jesus Christ, and so sources outside of the bible are needed, for credibility's sake.

II. Josephus

The extra-biblical source most commonly cited by Christians as evidence of Jesus' existence is in the writings of the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus. The writings are found in Josephus' work The Antiquities of the Jews, written around 93 AD. It is important to note that Josephus never witnessed any of the gospel events himself, as he was not born until 37 AD. Historians generally believe that if the bible events are true, Christ would've died sometime between 26-36 AD, as that was the period during which Pontius Pilate governed the Judean province. The passage on Jesus is as follows:

"Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day." (2)

There are several things about this passage that lead many to doubt its authenticity. No other historian or religious apologist mentions this portion of Josephus' writings before the 4th century. Tertullian, Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, the church father Origen (who quoted Josephus quite often in his writings), and others do not seem aware of the passage. The first time it is brought into an author's defense of Christianity is with Eusebius, writing around 324. (3)

This raises the possibility that this is an interpolation, which was added at a later date and is not contained in the original work. Further evidence of this would be the surrounding context, which begins by describing conflict between Pontius Pilate and the Jews, and resumes discussing "terrible misfortune" of the Jews after the passage on Jesus. Josephus was an orthodox Jew who had no reason to talk of Christ so favorably. In his other writings, he discusses John the Baptist, other self-proclaimed messiahs such as Judas of Galilee, the Samaritan prophet, Theudas, etc - and yet his talk of Jesus is so flattering that one can't help but wonder why he didn't convert.

III. Tacitus

Writing in approximately 116 AD, the Roman historian Tacitus has the following in his work Annals:

"Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired." (4)

The tone of this passage seems polar opposite to Josephus' praise, but consider how much information it really gives us about a historical Jesus. Again, no early Christian writers or historians refer to this writing until it appears nearly verbatim in the Chronica of Sulpicius Severus around the 5th century. Tacitus was born in 55 AD, so he could not have witnessed the gospel events, and his writing in Annals comes almost 80 years after the alleged death of Jesus Christ.

Even if we are to believe that Tacitus is indeed the author of this passage, all we could gain from it is the knowledge that a group of Christians were persecuted and blamed for the fire of Rome, and legend has that their leader was Christus, a man who endured suffering at the hands of Pontius Pilate. As was mentioned before, "Christ" is a title, not a surname, and so this individual and his followers who are described could be almost any messiah cult of the 1st century. In short, a lot more information would be needed to conclude that Tacitus is talking about the character of Jesus Christ depicted in the Christian bible.

IV. Suetonius

The Roman historian Suetonius is another source that Christians trumpet as evidence for Christ's existence, and yet in the third case we've seen now, Suetonius was also born too late (circa 69 AD) to have witnessed the gospel events himself. Nevertheless, he wrote this extremely brief description of a person who believers identify as Jesus:

"As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he (Claudius) expelled them from Rome." (5)

This seems to be a perfect example of the lengths that the religious believer will go to in order to reaffirm his faith. As I've already noted twice, "Christ" is a title, not a surname, so it could've been used for several different messiahs of the time. However, Suetonius' passage doesn't even say "Christ", it says "Chrestus", which is not only dissimilar, but it is actually a Latin word meaning "good" or "useful", and was a common name among slaves. (6)

The Jewish Encyclopedia gives us a more accurate interpretation of Suetonius:

"The emperor Claudius was not unfavorably disposed toward the Roman Jews in the beginning of his reign, but in 49-50, in consequence of dissensions among them regarding the advent of the Messiah, they were forbidden to hold religious services. The leaders in the controversy, and many others of the Jewish citizens, left the city." (7)

So it is very probable that Suetonius was writing about the popularity of messiah cults and the trouble which arose from disagreements, leading up to the "expulsion" of many Jewish sects. With Jesus Christ allegedly being crucified around 30 AD, it is unlikely that Suetonius is referring to him 20 years later. It could be referring to the Christian sect, but there appears to be no concrete way of knowing, with as little information as the passage provides.

V. Pliny the Younger

Pliny the Younger was a provincial governor in the Roman Empire who supposedly corresponded with the emperor Trajan through several letters about the Christian sects. Here is an excerpt from the correspondence in question:

"Those who denied that they were or had been Christians, when they invoked the gods in words dictated by me, offered prayer with incense and wine to your image, which I had ordered to be brought for this purpose together with statues of the gods, and moreover cursed Christ � none of which those who are really Christians, it is said, can be forced to do � these I thought should be discharged. Others named by the informer declared that they were Christians, but then denied it, asserting that they had been but had ceased to be, some three years before, others many years, some as much as twenty-five years. They all worshipped your image and the statues of the gods, and cursed Christ."

A little background history may be helpful here. From the context, it seems Pliny contacted the emperor not because the Christians were practicing beliefs that he did not like, but because he suspected them of political alliances that might've threatened the Roman Empire. Furthermore, it is apparent that Pliny was not even sure of who Christians were or what they believed:

"...the method I have observed towards those who have been brought before me as Christians is this: I asked them whether they were Christians; if they admitted it, I repeated the question twice, and threatened them with punishment; if they persisted, I ordered them to be at once punished, for I was persuaded, whatever the nature of their opinions might be, a contumacious and inflexible obstinacy certainly deserved correction." (8)

From his descriptions, it looks as though many of the people he questioned did not even know what a Christian was. Some professed to have been former Christians, others claimed to believe until they were punished, etc - but many ultimately pledged their dedication to Rome and the emperor. Bear in mind that a Christian, in its literal meaning, is simply someone who follows "the anointed one". There is no reference to Jesus or a man from Nazareth, Bethlehem, etc. Were these Christians as we know them today, or members of the various messiah cults of the time? Did they even know what they were confessing to at all?

Pliny's first 9 books of letters are thought to have been written between 99 and 109 AD, yet book 10, which contains his correspodence with the emperor, was not intended for publication, though it was eventually released after his death. And as with the previous 3 historians we've covered, Pliny the Younger could not have witnessed the gospel events, since he was not born until sometime around 62 AD.

VI. Evidence?

If you were expecting this article to be of unimagineable length, you were mistaken. These historians are the main examples Christians give for the historical existence of Jesus Christ, and there is not that much evidence offered beyond them. Most, if not all, of the writings cited provide little information on anything other than the Christian sect itself. What is missing is not just discussion of the character of Jesus, but discussion of the miraculous events surrounding Jesus' life and death. Why don't these historians mention such phenomenal local events like the 500 witnesses to the resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:6) or the graves bursting open and dead people waltzing into the city (Matthew 27:52-53)? Even some corroboration with the New Testament miracles could be sufficient to make us doubting Thomases think twice about the bible's historical presentation of Jesus.

Do not think that the crux of this article has been about denying the existence of Jesus though. I might be willing to give Christians the benefit of a doubt and agree that some individual named Jesus could've existed in 1st century Palestine. Yet until we have good reason to assume that person was actually anymore than a footnote in history, it is an exercise in blind faith to conclude he was the son of god, the messiah to the world, or anything else. Could Jesus really have existed? Anything is possible, but even if you establish Christ's existence, you're still left with the daunting task of establishing the biblical version of Christ as the real deal.

Sources:

1. "Where Jesus Never Walked", Frank Zindler (1996-97)
2. The Antiquities of the Jews, xviii 3.3 (93 AD)
3. The Church History, Book I, Chapter XI (~324 AD)
4. Annals, Book 15, Chapter 44 (~116 AD)
5. Lives of the Twelve Caesars, Suetonius (121 AD)
6. The Evidence for Jesus, R. T. France (2006)
7. "Expelled Under Tiberius" - jewishencyclopedia.com
8. "The Letters of Pliny the Younger: Letter 96" - gutenberg.org