Defending the Christian Worldview, Creationism, and Intelligent Design
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.
Defending the Christian Worldview, Creationism, and Intelligent Design

This is my personal virtual library, where i collect information, which leads in my view to the Christian faith, creationism, and Intelligent Design as the best explanation of the origin of the physical Universe, life, and biodiversity

You are not connected. Please login or register

Defending the Christian Worldview, Creationism, and Intelligent Design » Bible / Christian faith / Apologetics » Evidence of the historical Jesus

Evidence of the historical Jesus

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

1Evidence of the historical Jesus Empty Evidence of the historical Jesus Sun Apr 13, 2014 6:15 pm



Evidence of the historical Jesus

Fullfilled prophecies in the Bible

The shroud of Turin EXTRAORDINARY evidence of Christ's resurrection

Ancient Evidence for Jesus from Non-Christian Sources Michael Gleghorn

43 sources/11 secular (Thallus, Pliny, Suetonius, Tacitus, Josephus, etc.) mention Jesus, just as many secular sources as a famous Roman contemporary leader in Jesus's day, Tiberius Caesar is an incredible storehouse of evidence of mentions of Jesus. Even agnostic Bart Ehrman claims there is much evidence for a historical Jesus. In fact, the brief information given by the secular sources taken together shows a remarkable picture consistent with the NT information of the claims of Jesus. However, even without them the New Testament documents (27) would be enough, since the NT documents have gaps far shorter from the original events to the writings and writings to the copies than all other ancient historical documents/persons, showing authentic document reliability, a passing of the bibliographical test, which is a mark for historical authenticity. Thus, one could not object to Jesus based upon historical grounds, only philosophical and religious grounds.

Bart D. Ehrman Did Jesus Exist? The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth  2012
Ehrman, using historical-critical methodology, wrote: "Whatever else you may think about Jesus, he certainly did exist."

The ‘James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus’ ossuary
James the brother of Jesus was martyred in AD 62. A mid-first century AD chalk ossuary discovered in 2002 bears this inscription: “James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus”. Two eminent paleographers confirmed it authentic in 2012. New Testament scholar Ben Witherington states: “If, as seems probable, the ossuary found in the vicinity of Jerusalem and dated to about AD 63 is indeed the burial box of James, the brother of Jesus, this inscription is the most important extra-biblical evidence of its kind.

The Case of the Ossuary of Shimon bar Jonah
In Jerusalem, Franciscan priests admitted that the bones of Simon Bar Jona (St. Peter) were found in Jerusalem, on the Franciscan monastery site called, “Dominus Flevit” (where Jesus was supposed to have wept over Jerusalem), on the Mount of Olives.

Did Jesus Exist? Bart Ehrman at the FFRF Conference.
“There is a lot of evidence. There is so much evidence… I know in the crowds you hang around with, it’s commonly thought that Jesus did not exist. Let me tell you, once you get outside of your conclave, there’s nobody. This is not even an issue for scholars of antiquity. There is no scholar in any college or university in the Western world, who teaches classics, ancient history, New Testament, early Christianity, any related field, who doubts that Jesus existed…
“The reason people think Jesus existed is because he is abundantly attested in early sources… Early and independent sources indicated certainly that Jesus existed… I think atheists have done themselves a disservice by jumping on the bandwagon of mythicism because it makes you look foolish to the outside world.”

Tomb exploration reveals first archaeological evidence of Christianity from the time of Jesus
The archaeological examination by the robotic camera of an intact first-century tomb in Jerusalem has revealed a set of limestone Jewish ossuaries or "bone boxes" that are engraved with a rare Greek inscription and a unique iconographic image that the scholars involved identify as distinctly Christian.

Ancient 'Bone Box' Called Oldest Christian Artifact April 20, 2012

Evidence of the historical Jesus Kt3vmzLinHWF3ufFtWgX6X-320-80

Long-unrecognized lettering confirms that first-century artifacts found within an ancient Jerusalem tomb are the earliest representations of Christianity ever found, researchers say.
Two Hebrew scholars who examined photographs showing the inside of the tomb agree that markings on an ossuary — a box made to hold human remains — are stylized letters that spell out the name of Jonah, the researchers said Thursday (April 19). Jonah was the Old Testament prophet whose story of being swallowed by a great fish was embraced by the early followers of Jesus.
The tomb, located 6.5 feet (2 meters) below an apartment building in the East Talpiot neighborhood of Jerusalem, was discovered in 1981 but resealed after Orthodox Jewish groups opposed its excavation. Two decades later, the group got license to enter the tomb, which has been dated to before A.D. 70.

If they fully understand these drawings, the researchers said, then they have found the oldest Christian artifacts, the earliest Christian art and the first evidence of faith in Jesus' resurrection. Similar depictions of Jonah were used by later Christian groups and became an important expression of the faith in later centuries.

The Case of the Ossuary of Shimon bar Jonah
In Jerusalem I spoke to many Franciscan priests who all read, finally, though reluctantly, that the bones of Simon Bar Jona (St. Peter) were found in Jerusalem, on the Franciscan monastery site called, “Dominus Flevit” (where Jesus was supposed to have wept over Jerusalem), on the Mount of Olives. The pictures show the story. The first show an excavation where the names of Christian Biblical characters were found on the ossuaries (bone boxes). The names of Mary and Martha were found on one box and right next to it was one with the name of Lazarus, their brother. Other names of early Christians were found on other boxes. Of greatest interest, however, was that which was found within twelve feet from the place where the remains of Mary, Martha and Lazarus were found—the remains of St. Peter. They were found in an ossuary, on the outside of which was clearly and beautifully written in Aramaic, “Simon Bar Jona”.

Evidence of the historical Jesus Ossuar10
Evidence of the historical Jesus Df-pho10

Atheists on the Jesus of history.
No atheist, as far as I know, really believes that Jesus rose from the dead as an act of God. If they did, they wouldn’t be atheists. But many atheist historians have noted the good evidence we have for Jesus for certain aspects of his life. Most surprisingly the atheist historian Gerd Ludemann would write:

“It may be taken as historically certain that Peter and the disciples had experiences after Jesus’s death in which Jesus appeared to them as the risen Christ”.

Jeffery Lowder, a writer at Secular Web, believes that we have sufficient reason to believe that “…the burial of Jesus by Joseph of Arimathea has a high final probability” . This is important for the case for the resurrection as it affirms that Jesus’ body was really in the tomb in the first place. This would then require the historian to have a sufficient historical explanation for how the tomb became empty apart from the unanimous testimony of a resurrection.

Generally speaking of Jesus’ ministry Neil Carter writes that “While highly colored by religious bias, the amount of information we have about Jesus is still impressive in comparison to any other non-official person of his time, even when pared down the most essential details” .

The ‘James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus’ ossuary
James the brother of Jesus was martyred in AD 62. A mid first century AD chalk ossuary discovered in 2002 bears this inscription: “James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus” (“Ya’akov bar Yosef akhui di Yeshua”)

The ossuary has provoked controversy as the inscription was originally suspected of being a forgery. However, two eminent paleogrophers confirmed it authentic in 2012. New Testament scholar Ben Witherington states: “If, as seems probable, the ossuary found in the vicinity of Jerusalem and dated to about AD 63 is indeed the burial box of James, the brother of Jesus, this inscription is the most important extra-biblical evidence of its kind.”

The greatest fact of history is the resurrection of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. The resurrection of Christ was witnessed by His disciples, as well as many others. The disciples were afraid after Jesus died and went into hiding. It’s only because they witnessed Jesus having rose from the dead that they had the courage to preach the Christian Gospel at the risk of being put to death.
Christianity would not have succeeded if Christ had not risen from the dead. The disciples wouldn’t have had the courage to preach that Christ is Lord and Savior and that salvation is only through His name if they really believed Christ was still dead.
The unique message of the Christian Gospel that men cannot save themselves, as the other religions taught, and that only through Christ’s atoning work on the Cross can men be saved was an unwelcome message and could not have been invented or originated from men. The early Christians were threatened with torture and death for preaching such a message.
The Apostles performed signs and wonders as evidence of their authority. We could not have even gotten the Christian Scriptures and the spread of the Christian faith without the Apostles providing objective (scientific) evidence that they spoke for God. All of this constitutes forensic science supporting the Christian Scriptures to be the Word of God. Therefore, we can trust that the Bible we now have is of divine and supernatural origin and that the men who wrote the original Scriptures were, indeed, guided by God so that it was error free.
There are numerous scientific truths in the Bible giving evidence that the writers of Scripture were, indeed, guided by God. For example, the Bible tells us in Isaiah 40:22 that the Earth is a sphere: “He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in” (KJV). The word “circle” in the passage comes from the original Hebrew word meaning “sphere.”
In Job 26:7 we read that the Earth is suspended in space: “He spreads out the northern skies over empty space; he suspends the earth over nothing” (NIV).
In Isaiah 55:10 we read about the evaporation and condensation cycle: “As the rain and the snow come down from heaven, and do not return to it without watering the earth and making it bud and flourish, so that it yields seed for the sower and bread for the eater” (NIV).
In Psalm 8:8, the Bible states that there are ocean currents in the depths of the sea, something only discovered in modern times. There are many more examples that can be cited.
It is from science we know that the Bible is God's Word and, therefore, it is totally scientific to judge the scientific theories of men by Scripture. We need not prove scientifically everything in the Bible to know that it's true. That's not necessary because, as mentioned, once it has been shown from science that the Bible must be of divine origin then it stands to reason that whatever Scripture teaches on any subject must be true. No further external or scientific evidence is necessary.

The Authenticity of the Ossuary of James
August 30, 2015
Golan was dragged through 7 years of trial and 12,000 pages of testimony, during which time no evidence of wrong doing was produced. Not one single authority could be produced who would professionally deny the authenticity of the ossuary and its inscription, thus relieving Goled of any charges of fraud. Does this remind you of any Gospel story where the Jews tried in vain to find a witness against Jesus?

On the contrary, Andre Lemaire, an internationally renowned paleographer at the Sorbonne, and Ada Yardeni of Hebrew University in Israel, both confirmed the inscription’s authenticity.

43 sources/11 secular (Thallus, Pliny, Suetonius, Tacitus, Josephus, etc.) mentioning something about Jesus, just as many secular sources as a famous Roman contemporary leader in Jesus's day, Tiberius Caesar is an incredible storehouse of evidence of mentions of Jesus. Even agnostic Bart Ehrman claims there is much evidence for a historical Jesus. In fact, the brief information given by the secular sources taken together shows a remarkable picture consistent with the NT information of the claims of Jesus. However, even without them the New Testament documents (27) would be enough, since the NT documents have gaps far shorter from the original events to the writings and writings to the copies than all other ancient historical documents/persons, showing authentic document reliability, a passing of the bibliographical test, which is a mark for historical authenticity. Thus, one could not object to Jesus based upon historical grounds, only philosophical and religious grounds.

Hostile Non-Biblical Pagan Witnesses

There are a number of ancient classical accounts of Jesus from pagan Greek sources. These accounts are generally hostile to Christianity and try to explain away the miraculous nature of Jesus and the events that surrounded his life. Let’s look at these hostile accounts and see what they tell us about Jesus:

   Thallus (52AD)
   Thallus is perhaps the earliest secular writer to mention Jesus and he is so ancient that his writings don’t even exist anymore. But Julius Africanus, writing around 221AD does quote Thallus who had previously tried to explain away the darkness that occurred at the point of Jesus’ crucifixion:

   “On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and 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.” (Julius Africanus, Chronography, 18:1)

   If only more of Thallus’ record could be found, we would see that every aspect of Jesus’ life could be verified with a non-biblical source. But there are some things we can conclude from this account: Jesus lived, he was crucified, and there was an earthquake and darkness at the point of his crucifixion.

   Pliny the Younger (61-113AD)
   Early Christians are also described in secular history. Pliny the Younger, in a letter to the Roman emperor Trajan, describes the lifestyles of early Christians:

   “They (the Christians) were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food—but food of an ordinary and innocent kind.”

   This EARLY description of the first Christians documents several facts: the first Christians believed that Jesus was GOD, the first Christians upheld a high moral code, and these early followers et regularly to worship Jesus.

   Suetonius (69-140AD)
   Suetonius was a Roman historian and annalist of the Imperial House under the Emperor Hadrian. His writings about Christians describe their treatment under the Emperor Claudius (41-54AD):

   “Because the Jews at Rome caused constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus (Christ), he (Claudius) expelled them from the city (Rome).” (Life of Claudius, 25:4)

   This expulsion took place in 49AD, and in another work, Suetonius wrote about the fire which destroyed Rome in 64 A.D. under the reign of Nero. Nero blamed the Christians for this fire and he punished Christians severely as a result:

   “Nero inflicted punishment on the Christians, a sect given to a new and mischievous religious belief.”
(Lives of the Caesars, 26.2)

   There is much we can learn from Suetonius as it is related to the life of early Christians. From this very EARLY account, we know that Jesus had an immediate impact on his followers. They believed that Jesus was God enough to withstand the torment and punishment of the Roman Empire. Jesus had a curious and immediate impact on his followers, empowering them to die courageously for what they knew to be true.

   Tacitus (56-120AD)
   Cornelius Tacitus was known for his analysis and examination of historical documents and is among the most trusted of ancient historians. He was a senator under Emperor Vespasian and was also proconsul of Asia. In his “Annals’ of 116AD, he describes Emperor Nero’s response to the great fire in Rome and Nero’s claim that the Christians were to blame:

   “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 Judea, 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.”

   In this account, Tacitus confirms for us that Jesus lived in Judea, was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and had followers who were persecuted for their faith in Christ.

   Mara Bar-Serapion (70AD)
   Sometime after 70AD, a Syrian philosopher named Mara Bar-Serapion, writing to encourage his son, compared the life and persecution of Jesus with that of other philosophers who were persecuted for their ideas. The fact that Jesus is known to be a real person with this kind of influence is important. As a matter of fact, Mara Bar-Serapion refers to Jesus as the “Wise King”:

   “What benefit did the Athenians obtain by putting Socrates to death? Famine and plague came upon them as judgment for their crime. Or, the people of Samos for burning Pythagoras? In one moment their country was covered with sand. Or the Jews by murdering their wise king?…After that their kingdom was abolished. God rightly avenged these men…The wise king…Lived on in the teachings he enacted.”

   From this account, we can add to our understanding of Jesus. We can conclude that Jesus was a wise and influential man who died for his beliefs. We can also conclude that his followers adopted these beliefs and lived lives that reflected them to the world in which they lived.

   Phlegon (80-140AD)
   In a manner similar to Thallus, Julius Africanus also mentions a historian named Phlegon who wrote a chronicle of history around 140AD. In this history, Phlegon also mentions the darkness surrounding the crucifixion in an effort to explain it:

   “Phlegon records that, in the time of Tiberius Caesar, at full moon, there was a full eclipse of the sun from the sixth to the ninth hour.” (Africanus, Chronography, 18:1)

   Phlegon is also mentioned by Origen (an early church theologian and scholar, born in Alexandria):

   “Now Phlegon, in the thirteenth or fourteenth book, I think, of his Chronicles, not only ascribed to Jesus a knowledge of future events . . . but also testified that the result corresponded to His predictions.” (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 14)

   “And with regard to the eclipse in the time of Tiberius Caesar, in whose reign Jesus appears to have been crucified, and the great earthquakes which then took place … ” (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 33)

   “Jesus, while alive, was of no assistance to himself, but that he arose after death, and exhibited the marks of his punishment, and showed how his hands had been pierced by nails.” (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 59)

   From these accounts, we can add something to our understand of Jesus and conclude that Jesus had the ability to accurately predict the future, was crucified under the reign of Tiberius Caesar and demonstrated his wounds after he was resurrected!

   Lucian of Samosata: (115-200 A.D.)
   Lucian was a Greek satirist who spoke sarcastically of Christ and Christians, but in the process, he did affirm that they were real people and never referred to them as fictional characters:

   “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.” (Lucian, The Death of Peregrine. 11-13)

   From this account we can add to our description and conclude that Jesus taught about repentance and about the family of God. These teachings were quickly adopted by Jesus’ followers and exhibited to the world around them.

   Celsus (175AD)
   This is the last hostile ‘pagan’ account we will examine (although there are many other later accounts in history). Celsus was quite hostile to the Gospels, but in his criticism, he unknowingly affirms and reinforces the authors and their content. His writing is extensive and he alludes to 80 different Biblical quotes, confirming their early appearance in history. In addition, he admits that the miracles of Jesus were generally believed in the early 2nd century! Here is a portion of his text:

   “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 own hands. His mother had been turned out of doors by her husband, who was a carpenter by trade, on being convicted of adultery [with a soldier named Panthéra (i.32)]. Being thus driven away by her husband, and wandering about in disgrace, she gave birth to Jesus, a bastard. Jesus, on account of his poverty, was hired out to go to Egypt. While there he acquired certain (magical) powers which Egyptians pride themselves on possessing. He returned home highly elated at possessing these powers, and on the strength of them gave himself out to be a god.”

   Celsus admits that Jesus was reportedly born of a virgin, but then argues that this could supernatural account could not be possible and offers the idea that he was a bastard son of a man named Panthera (an idea borrowed from Jews who opposed Jesus at the time). But in writing this account, Celsus does confirm that Jesus had an earthly father who was a carpenter, possessed unusual magical powers and claimed to be God.


Roman historian Cornelius Tacitus recorded information pertaining to Jesus, thus removing the only supporting source for His existence as being in the New Testament. In 115 A.D., Tactius wrote about the great fire in Rome, "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 Tiberious 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 Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their center 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. Nero offered his gardens for the spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus, while he mingled with the people in the dress of charioteer or stood aloft on a car. Hence, even for criminals who deserved extreme and exemplary punishment, there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but to glut one man's cruelty, that they were being destroyed."

It is believed by some scholars that Tactius gained his information about Christ from official records, perhaps actual reports written by Pilate. Tactius also wrote about the burning of the Jerusalem temple by the Romans in 70 A.D. The Christians are mentioned as a group that were connected with these events. "All we can gather from this reference is that Tactius was also aware of the existence of Christians other than in the context of their presence in Rome," states Habermas. Gaius Suetonius Tranquillas, chief secretary of Emperor Hadrian, wrote, "Because the Jews at Rome caused continuous disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from the City." Chrestus is a variant spelling of Christ. Suetonius refers to a wave of riots that broke out in a large Jewish community in Rome during the year 49 A.D. As a result, the Jews were banished from the city.

Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, a member of a priestly family and who became a Pharisee at the age of 19, became the court historian for Emperor Vespasian. In the Antiquities, he wrote about many persons and events of first century Palestine. He makes two references to Jesus. The first reference is believed associated with the Apostle James. "...he brother of Jesus, who was called Christ." He also wrote, "At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus. And his conduct was good and (he) was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. And those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that he was alive, accordingly, he was perhaps the messiah concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders." These historical writings predated the Old Testament. Josephus died in 97 A.D.

Before Tacitus, Suetonius or Josephus, Thallus wrote about the crucifixion of Jesus. His writing date to circa 52 A.D. and the passage on Jesus was contained in Thallus' work on the Eastern Mediterranean world from the Trojan War to 52 A.D. Thallus noted that darkness fell on the land at the time of the crucifixion. He wrote that such a phenomenon was caused by an eclipse. Though Christ was not proclaimed a deity until the fourth century, Pliny the Younger, a Roman author and administrator who served as the governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor, wrote in 112 A.D., two hundred years before the "deity" proclamation, that Christians in Bithynia worshipped Christ.

Two references have been made to a report by Pontius Pilate. The references include Justin Martyr (150 A..D.) and Tetullian (200 A.D.). Both references correspond with the fact that there was an official document in Rome from Pilate. The Pilate report detailed the crucifixion but also reported acts of miracles. Emperor Tiberius acted on Pilate's report, according to Tertullian, to the Roman Senate. "Tiberius accordingly, in whose days the Christian name made its entry into the world, having himself received intelligence from Palestine of events which had clearly shown the truth of Christ's divinity, brought the matter before the senate, with his own decision in favor of Christ. The senate, because it had not given the approval itself, rejected his proposal. Caesar held to his opinion, threatening wrath against all accusers of the Christians."


The Talmud, which consists of Jewish traditions handed down orally from generation to generation, was organized by Rabbi Akiba before his death in 135 A.D. The writings in the Talmud embrace the legal, ritual and exegetical commentaries that have developed right down to contemporary times. In Sanhedrin 43a, reference to Jesus is found. "On the eve of the Passover, Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, 'He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy. Any one who can say anything in his favor, let him come forward and plead on his behalf. But since nothing was brought forward in his favor, he was hanged on the eve of the Passover."If Jesus had been stoned, his death would have been at the hands of the Jews. The fact he was crucified shows that the Romans intervened. The Talmud also speaks of five of Jesus' disciples and recounts their standing before judges who made individual decisions about each one, deciding that they should be executed. No deaths are recorded.

Other Talmud references to Jesus indicated that Jesus was "treated differently from others who led the people astray, for he was connected with royalty." These Talmud accounts were written long before the New Testament was assembled. They provide clear evidence that Jesus did live. The Talmud does not embrace Christ as a deity and would have no reason to sanction his existence. The Talmud also states that Jesus was 33 or 34 years old when he died. The risen Christ is the foundation of Christianity. But Christ would have to have lived and died before His resurrection could become an historical factor.

Toledoth Jesu is also part of Jewish writing, as well. The disputed text states that the disciples of Jesus had planned to steal the fallen body of Christ. However, a gardener named Juda discovered their plans and dug a new grave in his garden. Then he removed Jesus' body from Joseph's tomb and placed it in his own newly dug grave. The disciples came to the original tomb, found Jesus' body gone and proclaimed him risen. The Jewish leaders also proceeded to Joseph's tomb and found it empty. Juda then took them to his grave and dug up the body of Jesus. The Jewish leaders were greatly relieved and wanted to take the body. Juda replied that he would sell them the body of Jesus and did so for thirty pieces of silver. The Jewish priests then dragged Jesus' body through the streets of Jerusalem. Strangely enough, Juda and Judas are similar, in the Talmud Juda receives thirty pieces of silver and in the New Testament Judas receives thirty pieces of silver. Shortly after this time, the Emperor decreed that grave robbing in Palestine would be a capital offense.

These commentaries have been discredited by Jewish and Christian scholars. The anti-Christian commentary was created in the fifth century. The importance of this passage, historically correct or not, is to place Jesus in the tomb of Joseph after crucifixion and to record the consternation of the Jewish Priests. This places historic significance on the fact that Jesus did live and die in history. He was not a myth.

The New Testament speaks of a census at the time of Christ's birth. Historical records indicate that a census was ordered in Syria and Judea between 6 and 5 B.C. and 5 and 6 A.D. Returning to a person's home city was definitely the practice of the time. Luke refers to Quirinius being governor of Syria during the time of the census, again historically correct.

The second century Greek satirist Lucian, though speaking derisively of Jesus and the early Christians, does establish the worship of Christ within the first century of his death. "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 New Testament refers to the High Priest Caiaphas. Records of the Temple of Jerusalem where destroyed and history has not been able to verify that Caiaphas, like Christ, existed. If no evidence existed of Caiaphas when the New Testament was embraced by the Christians of the second century, then it would have been a fact lost to history. But now, 1,950 years after the crucifixion of Jesus, a public works project building a water park in November 1990 accidentally uncovered an ancient burial cave. The inscription in the burial chamber was that of the Caiaphas family. The Caiaphas name had only been mentioned in the New Testament and by Flavius Josephus, no Jewish records have been found with Caiaphas' name linked to being the high priest. The remains of a 60-year-old man were found in the burial cave that may have been the High Priest Caiaphas. The inscription on his craved ossuary, fit for a high priest, was the name Yehosef bar Qafa (Joseph, son of Caiaphas). Coins found in the cave were bronze minted in 42/43 (C.E.) during the reign of Herod Agrippa I. These are similar to images of coins found on the Shroud of Turin Ð believed by many scientists to be the burial shroud of Christ.

According to Ronny Reich in an article in Biblical Archaeology Review, "Very few of the hundreds of people who walk through the pages of the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament have been attested in archeological finds. Now, to that small list, we may add, in all probability, the high priest who presided at Jesus' trial, or at least a member of his family." It adds, "From the period between the second century B.C.E. and the second century C.E., there are only six such names, and perhaps you will exclude one or two of these because they are names of rulers or former rulers. Three of these names, however, are especially pertinent here because they, like Caiaphas, come from priestly families."

The New Testament only refers to the High Priest as Caiaphas, but Josephus refers to him as Joseph, who was called Caiaphas of the high priesthood. Joseph or Caiaphas was the high priest in Jerusalem between 18 and 36 C.E.

The debate over the divinity of Christ may never end, but historical evidence has become more supportive of the fact that Jesus can be proved historically to have lived, to have been a dominant figure during his lifetime and of a major concern to the establishment of the Temple and of Rome. What his exact words were, may have been lost in history. Robin Lane Fox writes in The Unauthorized Version, Truth and Fiction in the Bible, "Recognition does not require historical truth...In the Bible we recognize a human awareness in what scores of anonymous authors have written. This level of recognition is not at all the same as reverence for the Bible as a handbook for life, a role for which its detail is not well suited. The Gospels are not often specific on detailed points of conduct, and as a handbook they would be very patchy indeed. Those who want such details have to look back to the Hebrew books of law...As for the four Gospels, the idea that they usually give us Jesus' exact words in their exact context is a popular mirage; there are too many disagreements.' She adds, "In the Bible, therefore, we recognize human truth even when the stories themselves are untrue."


Though the New Testament has many historical errors, the fact is that many of its points have been proven historically correct. Roman historians, Jewish historians, the finding of the Gnostic materials at Nag Hammadi and now the finding of Caiaphas' burial cave, establishes an historic fact that Jesus lived and died in a time and a place described in the New Testament. Some of the evidence supporting these writings surfaced nearly 2000 years later, adding a strong rule of evidence toward their historic accuracy. Many books were omitted from the compilation of the New Testament, the writings of John and of Mary, for instance, were never included in the scriptures. But the same is true with the Old Testament. It was the early church father, in the case of the New Testament, that made the decisions on the composition of the New Testament.

there are numerous archaeological findings that confirm at least a few key facts of New Testament history:

   Temple Mount platform. As is well known, the present-day “wailing wall” in Jersualem is a remnant of the second temple. Also, recent archeological evidence confirms that the Jerusalem temple mount platform was expanded by Herod the Great. The temple mount was mentioned several times in the New Testament, for example in Matt. 21:12-14, when Jesus overturned tables of money-changers [Cline2009, pg. 83].
   Inscription mentioning Pontius Pilate. One of the most important finds is a Latin inscription, dating to 30 CE, which explicitly mentions Pontius Pilate, the governor of Palestine who sentenced Jesus to death. This was found in the theater at Caesarea during excavations by an Italian-led expedition in 1961. It reads, “Pontius Pilate, the Prefect of Judaea, has dedicated to the people of Caesarea a temple in honor of Tiberius.” [Cline2009, pg. 100].
   Capernaum. Several archaeological investigations have uncovered the remains of cities near the Sea of Galilee, where Jesus was raised, including Sepphoris, Capernaum and Nazareth. These excavations have confirmed that not only were these areas inhabited during the first century CE, but they were largely Jewish rather than Greek or Roman. For example, excavations in Capernaum, where Jesus settled and preached before leaving for Jerusalem, have uncovered a Jewish synagogue and other indications of a prosperous Jewish community [Cline2009, pg. 105].
   Nazareth. In 2009 a house was discovered on the hills at Nazareth that contains pottery shards dated to between 100 BCE and 100 CE. The analysis concludes that “the dwelling and older discoveries of nearby tombs in burial caves suggest that Nazareth was an out-of-the-way hamlet of around 50 houses on a patch of about four acres … populated by Jews of modest means.” While no one fancies that this structure was Jesus’ actual home, it does counter the claims of those who have argued that Nazareth was uninhabited at the time of Jesus’ childhood, and that the mention of Nazareth in the New Testament was a mythic creation of later writers and editors [Ehrman2012, pg. 216].
   Ossuary of Caiaphas. John 11:49-53; 18:14 mentions Caiaphas, the Jewish high priest who presided over the trial of Jesus. In 1990 archaeologists discovered a stone ossuary with the inscription “Yehosef bar Qafa” (Aramaic for Joseph, son of Caiaphas). According to Josephus, Caiaphas’ full name was Joseph Caiaphas [Cline2009, pg. 112].
   Christians in Suetonius. The Roman historian Suetonius briefly mentions the early Christians in his book The Lives of the Twelve Caesars. In his recounting of the reign of Emperor Claudius, who reigned 41 to 54 CE, Suetonius refers to the expulsion of Christian Jews by Claudius: “Since the Jews constantly made disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he [Claudius] expelled them from Rome.” Since it is highly unlikely that a later Christian scribe or anyone else partial to Christianity would have called Jesus “Chrestus” or mistakenly described him as living in Rome in 49 CE, or called him a troublemaker, most historians agree that the passage is genuine [Suetonius2014].

Bart Ehrman Evidence that Jesus Existed -
"In yesterday’s post I began to show how Jesus is the BEST ATTESTED PALESTINIAN JEW OF THE FIRST CENTURY, IF WE LOOK ONLY AT EXTERNAL EVIDENCE (Josephus is better attested because we have his own writings) (and in response to several questions/comments, I’m not including Paul because I’m talking only about Jews from Palestine; he was from the Diaspora). We have four narrative accounts of Jesus’ life and death, written by different people at different times and in different places, based on numerous sources that no longer survive. Jesus WAS NOT INVENTED by Mark. He was also known to Matthew, Luke, and John, and to the sources which they used (Q, M, L, and the various sources of John). All of this within the first century.
This is not to mention sources from outside the New Testament THAT KNOW THAT JESUS WAS A HISTORICAL FIGURE – for example 1 Clement and the documents that make up the Didache. Or — need I say it? – every other author of the New Testament (there are sixteen NT authors altogether, so twelve who did not write Gospels), none of whom knew any of the Gospels (except for the author of 1, 2, and 3 John who may have known the fourth Gospel). By my count that’s something like twenty-five authors, not counting the authors of the sources (another six or seven) on which the Gospels were based (and the sources on which the book of Acts was based, which were different again)." (all emphasis added)
Other Statements from Ehrman -
"I think the evidence is just so overwhelming that Jesus existed, that it's silly to talk about him not existing. I don't know anyone who is a responsible historian, who is actually trained in the historical method, or anybody who is a biblical scholar who does this for a living, who gives any credence at all to any of this."
"Jesus existed, and those vocal persons who deny it do so not because they have considered the evidence with the dispassionate eye of the historian, but because they have some other agenda that this denial serves."

Professor Bart Ehrman - Disbelieving In Jesus' Existence Makes You Look Foolish

Evidence of the historical Jesus Jesus_15

Evidence of the historical Jesus 25659710

Evidence of the historical Jesus 83643210

Even hostile witnesses attest to the truth of the crucifixion event:

Secular Non Biblical Sources For The Existence Of The Lord Jesus Christ in History - video (5 mins - hostile ancient witnesses to Jesus life & crucifixion)

Last edited by Otangelo on Thu Jan 13, 2022 6:39 am; edited 29 times in total

2Evidence of the historical Jesus Empty Re: Evidence of the historical Jesus Sun Aug 24, 2014 8:01 am



Historians and archaeologists continue to uncover evidence that confirms the veracity of the Bible today, 2,000 years later. One of the latest findings has come through the acquisition by Tyndale House of a copy of the Munich Talmud.

The Jewish Talmud, also known as the Shas, is a collection of rabbinic writings dating back from 200-500AD. Written in Hebrew and Aramaic, the Talmud covers a broad range of topics, including Jewish history and commentaries and opinions on the Law.

This recent discovery provides further historical proof of the crucifixion of The Christ. The portion below contains what scholars believe to be another record of the Sanhedrin's indictment of Jesus Christ, disparagingly called Yeshu here rather than by His true name, Yeshua:

It says:

On the Eve of Passover they hung Jeshu the Nazarine. And the herald went out before him for 40 days [saying]: “Jeshu the Nazarine will go out to be stoned for sorcery and misleading and enticing Israel. Any who knows [anything] in his defence must come and declare concerning him.” But no-one came to his defence so they hung him on the Eve of Passover.

Scholars note that the penalty of death dealt here indicates that the Sanhedrin recognized the miracles Yeshua did as real rather than simply illusion, although they saw its source to be evil. The section then goes on to discuss the names of Jesus' disciples.

Once again, rather than finding support for the conspiracy theories put forward by popular fiction writers, we have instead unearthed further proof of the reliability and authenticity of the Bible.

It is just as the Lord Jesus said,

"Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will never pass away." Matthew 24:35

3Evidence of the historical Jesus Empty Re: Evidence of the historical Jesus Mon Jan 05, 2015 3:43 pm



Have scholars found firm evidence of the existence of Jesus Christ, His earthly father and one of His half brothers? An intriguing find bears their names.

First it was the name of the Roman governor Pontius Pilate found in a monument in Caesarea, Israel, in 1961.

Then came the discovery in 1990 in Jerusalem of an ossuary, a burial box for bones, bearing the name of Caiaphas, the high priest who condemned Jesus. Just recently it appears the most spectacular of all archaeological finds relating to Jesus has surfaced.

Another ossuary has come to light, this one bearing the names of Jesus, James and Joseph, three of the most prominent people in the New Testament. The ancient Aramaic words inscribed on the limestone box state that it belonged to "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus."

In late October Andre' Lemaire, a specialist in ancient inscriptions and professor at the Sorbonne in Paris, announced the discovery of the stone container with the extraordinary script. An Israeli collector, Oded Golan, had purchased the box from an Arab antiquities dealer more than a decade ago. Mr. Golan had not thought the artifact important until Professor Lemaire examined it. In fact, although Mr. Golan had read the inscription, he hadn't connected it with the biblical Jesus.

The dealer told Mr. Golan that the box had come from a burial site in southern Jerusalem where a bulldozer had accidentally uncovered a site containing tombs and bone boxes dating to the time of Jesus and James.

Much to the disappointment of archaeologists and scholars, the box was not excavated by a trained archaeologist from the spot where it had rested for the last 2,000 years. Instead it was surreptitiously removed and sold on the antiquities market (as is the case with a high percentage of archaeological finds in the Holy Land). Regrettably, this prevents the examination of the box in its proper archaeological context and the elimination of any possibility of fraud.
Strong evidence for authenticity

Yet fraud seems rather unlikely. Before the announcement of the discovery, the limestone box was subjected to rigorous scientific tests to rule out the possibility. A team of experts from the Geological Survey of Israel examined the box and the inscription under a microscope and found no evidence of modern tools or tampering. Like the rest of the box, the inscription, though wiped clean in parts, has a thin sheen of particulate matter formed on it called a patina. This particular patina shows that it developed in a cave environment and that it is consistent with an age of 2,000 years.

By its very nature the artifact can be dated to within a few decades. Such bone boxes were in use from about 20 B.C. to A.D. 70, when according to Jewish custom the dead were first sealed in caves or rock-cut tombs, then their bones later transferred to a limestone bone box after the body had decayed.

Professor Lemaire further narrowed the dating by verifying that the inscription was in a cursive style used only in the few decades before A.D. 70, when Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans. Thus the inscription fits the style used around A.D. 62, when James, Jesus' half brother, died.

Hershel Shanks, editor of Biblical Archaeology Review , which announced the discovery, explained that the inscription was reviewed by Joseph Fitzmyer, one of the world's foremost experts on first-century Aramaic and a preeminent Dead Sea Scrolls editor. Professor Fitzmyer was at first troubled by the spelling of the word for brother, because it was a plural form used centuries later. But further research yielded the same form in one of the Dead Sea Scrolls and on another first-century ossuary. "I stand corrected," Professor Fitzmyer said.

A putative forger would have to know Aramaic better than Professor Fitzmyer, which seems rather unlikely. "To my mind," wrote Mr. Shanks, "this is one of the strongest arguments for the authenticity of the James inscription" ( Biblical Archaeology Review , November-December 2002, p. 33).
Many factors pointing in one direction

"It seems very probable," Professor Lemaire concludes, "that this is the ossuary of the James in the New Testament" (ibid.).

What makes the case that this is indeed the ossuary of Jesus' half brother so convincing is the combination of factors that point in the same direction. Dr. Lemaire notes that Joseph (Hebrew Yosef ) and Jesus ( Yeshua , or Joshua) were common names in the A.D. 60s and James (Ya'akov or Jacob) less so, but a brother would not ordinarily be named in an inscription unless he were prominent.

Dr. Lemaire says the likelihood of more than one person named James with a father named Joseph and a prominent brother named Jesus in that precise time period is minuscule.

"It is one thing to have scattered probabilities," explains John Meier, professor of New Testament at The Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C., and an authority on first-century Palestinian Judaism; "it's another thing to have lines of probabilities all converging at one point" (UPI report, Oct. 25).

Mr. Shanks stated that the "clincher" for him was the naming of the brother of the deceased. Of some 800 bone boxes discovered, 233 have inscriptions on the outside. Of these, few are inscribed with the name of a brother—only one other in Aramaic. Mr. Shanks said if one accepts the theory that the deceased was a prominent person associated with him—rather than simply associated because the brother presided over the secondary interment—the probability that the inscription refers to Jesus of Nazareth seems overwhelming.
The life of James

Who was James? Let's consider the intriguing story of this half brother of Jesus.

We first read of James in the New Testament as one of Jesus' half brothers (Jesus was born of Mary, miraculously begotten of God the Father through the Holy Spirit while Mary was a betrothed virgin, as explained in Matthew:1:18-25

). Yet Mary and her husband, Joseph, later had other children. In Matthew:13:55-56

we see that some residents of Nazareth asked: "Is this not the carpenter's son? Is not His mother called Mary? And His brothers James , Joses, Simon, and Judas? And His sisters, are they not all with us?" (emphasis added throughout).

During Jesus' life, the Bible candidly reveals that His half brothers did not believe in Him as Savior and Messiah (John:7:5). Yet, after His resurrection, Jesus appeared to His half brother James (1 Corinthians:15:7), who then became a prominent believer. In Acts:1:14 James is pictured, along with his other brothers and his mother,Mary, as original members of the Church. This was the same group that received God's Spirit on the day of Pentecost (Acts:2:1-4


James later became an apostle and leader of the Jerusalem congregation. He played a prominent role in the conference of Acts 15 (see verses 13-21). Paul later visited James in Jerusalem where he oversaw the elders there (Acts:21:18). In Galatians:2:9 Paul refers to James as a "pillar" of the Church, and in 1 Corinthians:9:5 he mentions that "the brothers of the Lord" were married, which apparently included James. (More of James' life is detailed in "James: Half Brother of Jesus," beginning on page 22.)

James also wrote the New Testament epistle that bears his name (James:1:1). Another brother, Judas or Judah (Matthew:13:55), wrote the short epistle of Jude (Jude 1).
The death of James

The death of James, the Lord's brother—not to be confused with the two original apostles named James (see Matthew:10:2-3

)—is not mentioned in the New Testament. But Josephus, the first-century Jewish historian, does record it.

He writes: "Festus [the Roman procurator] was now dead, and Albinus [his successor] was but upon the road; so he [Ananas II, the high priest] assembled the Sanhedrin of the judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned" ( Antiquities of the Jews , Book 20, chap. 9, sec. 1).

Eusebius, a fourth-century church historian, records even more of the details of James' death: "Conducting him [James] into a public place, they demanded that he should renounce the faith of Christ before all the people; but contrary to the sentiments of all, with a firm voice, and much beyond their expectation, he declared himself fully before the whole multitude, and confessed that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, our Savior and Lord.

"Unable to bear any longer the testimony of the man, who, on account of his elevated virtue and piety was deemed the most just of men, they . . . slew him . . . But, as to the manner of James's death, it has been already stated in the words of Clement, that he was thrown from a wing of the temple, [to be stoned] and beaten to death with a club" ( Ecclesiastical History , 1995, pp. 75-76).
Names of other biblical figures found

Although the evidence so far points to the listing of Jesus, James and Joseph on the newfound ossuary as being the same persons mentioned in the New Testament, it cannot be proven with absolute certainty. Perhaps testing methods yet to be developed will be carried out that can further confirm the find.

In the meantime, the find nevertheless appears to be powerful evidence for the accuracy of the Gospel accounts and the literal existence of Jesus of Nazareth, the Son of God, and His earthly family.

And by no means is this find unique; the existence of many biblical figures has been proven by archaeological finds. So far biblical names that have been positively confirmed include Herod the Great, Herod Agrippa, Pontius Pilate, Caiaphas, David, many of the kings of Judah and Israel, and even Jeremiah's scribe, Baruch. Many of these finds have been discussed in our 24-part series "The Bible and Archaeology."

Jesus once said, "If these should keep silent, the stones would immediately cry out" (Luke:19:40). He spoke of His disciples'testimony, but it is interesting that, through the discoveries of archaeology, there are stones that are now figuratively crying out as witnesses to the authenticity of the biblical account. GN

4Evidence of the historical Jesus Empty Re: Evidence of the historical Jesus Mon Jan 05, 2015 4:02 pm



Did Jesus Exist? Searching for Evidence Beyond the Bible

Lawrence Mykytiuk’s feature article from the January/February 2015 issue of BAR with voluminous endnotes

Lawrence Mykytiuk • 12/08/2014


THE MAN CHRIST JESUS. Did Jesus of Nazareth exist as a real human being? Outside of the New Testament, what is the evidence for his existence? In this article, author Lawrence Mykytiuk examines the extra-Biblical textual and archaeological evidence associated with the man who would become the central figure in Christianity. Here Jesus is depicted in a vibrant sixth-century C.E. mosaic from the Basilica of Sant’Apollinare Nuovo in Ravenna, Italy. Photo: Sant’Apollinare Nuovo Ravenna, Italy/Bridgeman Images.
After two decades toiling in the quiet groves of academe, I published an article in BAR titled “Archaeology Confirms 50 Real People in the Bible.”a The enormous interest this article generated was a complete surprise to me. Nearly 40 websites in six languages, reflecting a wide spectrum of secular and religious orientations, linked to BAR’s supplementary web page.b Some even posted translations.

I thought about following up with a similar article on people in the New Testament, but I soon realized that this would be so dominated by the question of Jesus’ existence that I needed to consider this question separately. This is that article:1

Did Jesus of Nazareth, who was called Christ, exist as a real human being, “the man Christ Jesus” according to 1 Timothy 2:5?

The sources normally discussed fall into three main categories: (1) classical (that is, Greco-Roman), (2) Jewish and (3) Christian. But when people ask whether it is possible to prove that Jesus of Nazareth actually existed, as John P. Meier pointed out decades ago, “The implication is that the Biblical evidence for Jesus is biased because it is encased in a theological text written by committed believers.2 What they really want to know is: Is there extra-Biblical evidence … for Jesus’ existence?”c

Therefore, this article will cover classical and Jewish writings almost exclusively.3
Interested in learning about the birth of Jesus? Learn more about the history of Christmas and the date of Jesus’ birth in the free eBook The First Christmas: The Story of Jesus’ Birth in History and Tradition.

Tacitus—or more formally, Caius/Gaius (or Publius) Cornelius Tacitus (55/56–c. 118 C.E.)—was a Roman senator, orator and ethnographer, and arguably the best of Roman historians. His name is based on the Latin word tacitus, “silent,” from which we get the English word tacit. Interestingly, his compact prose uses silence and implications in a masterful way. One argument for the authenticity of the quotation below is that it is written in true Tacitean Latin.4 But first a short introduction.


Roman historian Tacitus. Photo: Bibliotheque nationale, Paris, France / Giraudon / Bridgeman Images.

Tacitus’s last major work, titled Annals, written c. 116–117 C.E., includes a biography of Nero. In 64 C.E., during a fire in Rome, Nero was suspected of secretly ordering the burning of a part of town where he wanted to carry out a building project, so he tried to shift the blame to Christians. This was the occasion for Tacitus to mention Christians, whom he despised. This is what he wrote—the following excerpt is translated from Latin by Robert Van Voorst:


TACIT CONFIRMATION. Roman historian Tacitus’s last major work, Annals, mentions a “Christus” who was executed by Pontius Pilate and from whom the Christians derived their name. Tacitus’s brief reference corroborates historical details of Jesus’ death from the New Testament. The pictured volume of Tacitus’s works is from the turn of the 17th century. The volume’s title page features Plantin Press’s printing mark depicting angels, a compass and the motto Labore et Constantia (“By Labor and Constancy”). Photo: Tacitus, Opera Quae Exstant, trans. by Justus Lipsius (Antwerp, Belgium: Ex officina Plantiniana, apud Joannem Moretum, 1600). Courtesy of the Philadelphia Rare Books & Manuscripts Co. (PRB&M).

[N]either 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.5

Tacitus’s terse statement about “Christus” clearly corroborates the New Testament on certain historical details of Jesus’ death. Tacitus presents four pieces of accurate knowledge about Jesus: (1) Christus, used by Tacitus to refer to Jesus, was one distinctive way by which some referred to him, even though Tacitus mistakenly took it for a personal name rather than an epithet or title; (2) this Christus was associated with the beginning of the movement of Christians, whose name originated from his; (3) he was executed by the Roman governor of Judea; and (4) the time of his death was during Pontius Pilate’s governorship of Judea, during the reign of Tiberius. (Many New Testament scholars date Jesus’ death to c. 29 C.E.; Pilate governed Judea in 26–36 C.E., while Tiberius was emperor 14–37 C.E.6)

Tacitus, like classical authors in general, does not reveal the source(s) he used. But this should not detract from our confidence in Tacitus’s assertions. Scholars generally disagree about what his sources were. Tacitus was certainly among Rome’s best historians—arguably the best of all—at the top of his game as a historian and never given to careless writing.

Earlier in his career, when Tacitus was Proconsul of Asia,7 he likely supervised trials, questioned people accused of being Christians and judged and punished those whom he found guilty, as his friend Pliny the Younger had done when he too was a provincial governor. Thus Tacitus stood a very good chance of becoming aware of information that he characteristically would have wanted to verify before accepting it as true.8

CHRESTIANS OF CHRIST. Book XV of Tacitus’s Annals is preserved in the 11th–12th-century Codex Mediceus II, a collection of medieval manuscripts now housed in the Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana in Florence, Italy, along with other manuscripts and books that belonged to the Medici family. Highlighted above is the Latin text reading “… whom the crowd called ‘Chrestians.’ The founder of this name, Christ, had been executed in the reign of Tiberius by the procurator Pontius Pilate …” Photo: Codex Mediceus 68 II, fol. 38r, the Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana, Florence, Italy.

The other strong evidence that speaks directly about Jesus as a real person comes from Josephus, a Jewish priest who grew up as an aristocrat in first-century Palestine and ended up living in Rome, supported by the patronage of three successive emperors. In the early days of the first Jewish Revolt against Rome (66–70 C.E.), Josephus was a commander in Galilee but soon surrendered and became a prisoner of war. He then prophesied that his conqueror, the Roman commander Vespasian, would become emperor, and when this actually happened, Vespasian freed him. “From then on Josephus lived in Rome under the protection of the Flavians and there composed his historical and apologetic writings” (Gerd Theissen and Annette Merz).9 He even took the name Flavius, after the family name of his patron, the emperor Vespasian, and set it before his birth name, becoming, in true Roman style, Flavius Josephus. Most Jews viewed him as a despicable traitor. It was by command of Vespasian’s son Titus that a Roman army in 70 C.E. destroyed Jerusalem and burned the Temple, stealing its contents as spoils of war, which are partly portrayed in the imagery of their gloating triumph on the Arch of Titus in Rome.10 After Titus succeeded his father as emperor, Josephus accepted the son’s imperial patronage, as he did of Titus’s brother and successor, Domitian.

Yet in his own mind, Josephus remained a Jew both in his outlook and in his writings that extol Judaism. At the same time, by aligning himself with Roman emperors who were at that time the worst enemies of the Jewish people, he chose to ignore Jewish popular opinion.

Josephus stood in a unique position as a Jew who was secure in Roman imperial patronage and protection, eager to express pride in his Jewish heritage and yet personally independent of the Jewish community at large. Thus, in introducing Romans to Judaism, he felt free to write historical views for Roman consumption that were strongly at variance with rabbinic views.


Jewish historian Josephus is pictured in the ninth-century medieval manuscript Burgerbibliothek Bern Codex under the Greek caption “Josippos Historiographer.” Photo: Burgerbibliothek Bern Cod. 50, f.2r.
In his two great works, The Jewish War and Jewish Antiquities, both written in Greek for educated people, Josephus tried to appeal to aristocrats in the Roman world, presenting Judaism as a religion to be admired for its moral and philosophical depth. The Jewish War doesn’t mention Jesus except in some versions in likely later additions by others, but Jewish Antiquities does mention Jesus—twice.

The shorter of these two references to Jesus (in Book 20)11 is incidental to identifying Jesus’ brother James,12 the leader of the church in Jerusalem. In the temporary absence of a Roman governor between Festus’s death and governor Albinus’s arrival in 62 C.E., the high priest Ananus instigated James’s execution. Josephus described it:

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.13

James is otherwise a barely noticed, minor figure in Josephus’s lengthy tome. The sole reason for referring to James at all was that his death resulted in Ananus losing his position as high priest. James (Jacob) was a common Jewish name at this time. Many men named James are mentioned in Josephus’s works, so Josephus needed to specify which one he meant. The common custom of simply giving the father’s name (James, son of Joseph) would not work here, because James’s father’s name was also very common. Therefore Josephus identified this James by reference to his famous brother Jesus. But James’s brother Jesus (Yehoshua) also had a very common name. Josephus mentions at least 12 other men named Jesus.14 Therefore Josephus specified which Jesus he was referring to by adding the phrase “who is called Messiah,” or, since he was writing in Greek, Christos.15 This phrase was necessary to identify clearly first Jesus and, via Jesus, James, the subject of the discussion. This extraneous reference to Jesus would have made no sense if Jesus had not been a real person.

Visit the historical Jesus study page in Bible History Daily to read more free articles on Jesus.

5Evidence of the historical Jesus Empty Re: Evidence of the historical Jesus Mon Jan 05, 2015 4:02 pm




JAMES, BROTHER OF JESUS. In Jewish Antiquities, parts of which are included in this mid-17th-century book of translations, Josephus refers to a James, who is described as “the brother of Jesus-who-is-called-Messiah.” Josephus’s mention of Jesus to specify which James was being executed by the high priest Ananus in 62 C.E. affirms the existence of the historical Jesus. Photo: Josephus, Famovs and Memorable Works of Josephvs, trans. by Thomas Lodge (London: J. L. for Andrew Hebb, 1640).
Few scholars have ever doubted the authenticity of this short account. On the contrary, the huge majority accepts it as genuine.16 The phrase intended to specify which Jesus, translated “who is called Christ,” signifies either that he was mentioned earlier in the book or that readers knew him well enough to grasp the reference to him in identifying James. The latter is unlikely. First-century Romans generally had little or no idea who Christus was. It is much more likely that he was mentioned earlier in Jewish Antiquities. Also, the fact that the term “Messiah”/“Christ” is not defined here suggests that an earlier passage in Jewish Antiquities has already mentioned something of its significance.17 This phrase is also appropriate for a Jewish historian like Josephus because the reference to Jesus is a noncommittal, neutral statement about what some people called Jesus and not a confession of faith that actually asserts that he was Christ.

This phrase—“who is called Christ”—is very unlikely to have been added by a Christian for two reasons. First, in the New Testament and in the early Church Fathers of the first two centuries C.E., Christians consistently refer to James as “the brother of the Lord” or “of the Savior” and similar terms, not “the brother of Jesus,” presumably because the name Jesus was very common and did not necessarily refer to their Lord. Second, Josephus’s description in Jewish Antiquities of how and when James was executed disagrees with Christian tradition, likewise implying a non-Christian author.18

This short identification of James by the title that some people used in order to specify his brother gains credibility as an affirmation of Jesus’ existence because the passage is not about Jesus. Rather, his name appears in a functional phrase that is called for by the sense of the passage. It can only be useful for the identification of James if it is a reference to a real person, namely, “Jesus who is called Christ.”

This clear reference to Jesus is sometimes overlooked in debates about Josephus’s other, longer reference to Jesus (to be treated next). Quite a few people are aware of the questions and doubts regarding the longer mention of Jesus, but often this other clear, simple reference and its strength as evidence for Jesus’ existence does not receive due attention.

The longer passage in Josephus’s Jewish Antiquities (Book 18)19 that refers to Jesus is known as the Testimonium Flavianum.

If it has any value in relation to the question of Jesus’ existence, it counts as additional evidence for Jesus’ existence. The Testimonium Flavianum reads as follows; the parts that are especially suspicious because they sound Christian are in italics:20

Around this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man.21 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.22

All surviving manuscripts of the Testimonium Flavianum that are in Greek, like the original, contain the same version of this passage, with no significant differences.

The main question is: Did Flavius Josephus write this entire report about Jesus and his followers, or did a forger or forgers alter it or possibly insert the whole report?23 There are three ways to answer this question:24
Alternative 1: The whole passage is authentic, written by Josephus.

Alternative 2: The whole passage is a forgery, inserted into Jewish Antiquities.

Alternative 3: It is only partly authentic, containing some material from Josephus, but also
some later additions by another hand(s).

Regarding Alternative 1, today almost no scholar accepts the authenticity of the entire standard Greek Testimonium Flavianum. In contrast to the obviously Christian statement “He was the Messiah” in the Testimonium, Josephus elsewhere “writes as a passionate advocate of Judaism,” says Josephus expert Steve Mason. “Everywhere Josephus praises the excellent constitution of the Jews, codified by Moses, and declares its peerless, comprehensive qualities … Josephus rejoices over converts to Judaism. In all this, there is not the slightest hint of any belief in Jesus”25 as seems to be reflected in the Testimonium.

The bold affirmation of Jesus as Messiah reads as a resounding Christian confession that echoes St. Peter himself!26 It cannot be Josephus. Alternative 1 is clearly out.

Regarding Alternative 2—the whole Testimonium Flavianum is a forgery—this is very unlikely. What is said, and the expressions in Greek that are used to say it, despite a few words that don’t seem characteristic of Josephus, generally fit much better with Josephus’s writings than with Christian writings.27 It is hypothetically possible that a forger could have learned to imitate Josephus’s style or that a reviser adjusted the passage to that style, but such a deep level of attention, based on an extensive, detailed reading of Josephus’s works and such a meticulous adoption of his vocabulary and style, goes far beyond what a forger or a reviser would need to do.

Even more important, the short passage (treated above) that mentions Jesus in order to identify James appears in a later section of the book (Book 20) and implies that Jesus was mentioned previously.

The BAS DVD Uncovering Early Christianity offers four exclusive full-length lectures by Bart Ehrman on topics ranging from forgeries and counter-forgeries in the New Testament to how and when Jesus became divine. Learn more >>


THE TESTIMONY OF JOSEPHUS. This 15th-century manuscript, now in the Bibliothèque Nationale de France, contains the portion of Josephus’s Testimonium Flavianum that refers to Jesus (highlighted in blue). The first sentence of the manuscript, highlighted in green, reads, from the Greek, “Around this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man.” The majority of scholars believe this passage of the Testimonium is based on the original writings of Josephus but contains later additions, likely made by Christian scribes. Photo: Codex Parisinus gr. 2075, 45v. Courtesy Bibliothèque Nationale de France.
The best-informed among the Romans understood Christus to be nothing more than a man’s personal name, on the level of Publius and Marcus. First-century Romans generally had no idea that calling someone “Christus” was an exalted reference, implying belief that he was the chosen one, God’s anointed. The Testimonium, in Book 18, appropriately found in the section that deals with Pilate’s time as governor of Judea,28 is apparently one of Josephus’s characteristic digressions, this time occasioned by mention of Pilate. It provides background for Josephus’s only other written mention of Jesus (in Book 20), and it connects the name Jesus with his Christian followers. The short reference to Jesus in the later book depends on the longer one in the earlier (Book 18). If the longer one is not genuine, this passage lacks its essential background. Alternative 2 should be rejected.

Alternative 3—that the Testimonium Flavianum is based on an original report by Josephus29 that has been modified by others, probably Christian scribes, seems most likely. After extracting what appear to be Christian additions, the remaining text appears to be pure Josephus. As a Romanized Jew, Josephus would not have presented these beliefs as his own. Interestingly, in three openly Christian, non-Greek versions of the Testimonium Flavianum analyzed by Steve Mason, variations indicate changes were made by others besides Josephus.30 The Latin version says Jesus “was believed to be the Messiah.” The Syriac version is best translated, “He was thought to be the Messiah.” And the Arabic version with open coyness suggests, “He was perhaps the Messiah concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders.” Alternative 3 has the support of the overwhelming majority of scholars.

We can learn quite a bit about Jesus from Tacitus and Josephus, two famous historians who were not Christian. Almost all the following statements about Jesus, which are asserted in the New Testament, are corroborated or confirmed by the relevant passages in Tacitus and Josephus. These independent historical sources—one a non-Christian Roman and the other Jewish—confirm what we are told in the Gospels:31
1. He existed as a man. The historian Josephus grew up in a priestly family in first-century Palestine and wrote only decades after Jesus’ death. Jesus’ known associates, such as Jesus’ brother James, were his contemporaries. The historical and cultural context was second nature to Josephus. “If any Jewish writer were ever in a position to know about the non-existence of Jesus, it would have been Josephus. His implicit affirmation of the existence of Jesus has been, and still is, the most significant obstacle for those who argue that the extra-Biblical evidence is not probative on this point,” Robert Van Voorst observes.32 And Tacitus was careful enough not to report real executions of nonexistent people.

2. His personal name was Jesus, as Josephus informs us.

3. He was called Christos in Greek, which is a translation of the Hebrew word Messiah, both of which mean “anointed” or “(the) anointed one,” as Josephus states and Tacitus implies, unaware, by reporting, as Romans thought, that his name was Christus.

4. He had a brother named James (Jacob), as Josephus reports.

5. He won over both Jews and “Greeks” (i.e., Gentiles of Hellenistic culture), according to Josephus, although it is anachronistic to say that they were “many” at the end of his life. Large growth
in the number of Jesus’ actual followers came only after his death.

6. Jewish leaders of the day expressed unfavorable opinions about him, at least according to some versions of the Testimonium Flavianum.

7. Pilate rendered the decision that he should be executed, as both Tacitus and Josephus state.

8. His execution was specifically by crucifixion, according to Josephus.

9. He was executed during Pontius Pilate’s governorship over Judea (26–36 C.E.), as Josephus implies and Tacitus states, adding that it was during Tiberius’s reign.

Some of Jesus’ followers did not abandon their personal loyalty to him even after his crucifixion but submitted to his teaching. They believed that Jesus later appeared to them alive in accordance with prophecies, most likely those found in the Hebrew Bible. A well-attested link between Jesus and Christians is that Christ, as a term used to identify Jesus, became the basis of the term used to identify his followers: Christians. The Christian movement began in Judea, according to Tacitus. Josephus observes that it continued during the first century. Tacitus deplores the fact that during the second century it had spread as far as Rome.

As far as we know, no ancient person ever seriously argued that Jesus did not exist.33 Referring to the first several centuries C.E., even a scholar as cautious and thorough as Robert Van Voorst freely observes, “… [N]o pagans and Jews who opposed Christianity denied Jesus’ historicity or even questioned it.”34

Nondenial of Jesus’ existence is particularly notable in rabbinic writings of those first several centuries C.E.: “… [I]f anyone in the ancient world had a reason to dislike the Christian faith, it was the rabbis. To argue successfully that Jesus never existed but was a creation of early Christians would have been the most effective polemic against Christianity … [Yet] all Jewish sources treated Jesus as a fully historical person … [T]he rabbis … used the real events of Jesus’ life against him” (Van Voorst).35

Thus his birth, ministry and death occasioned claims that his birth was illegitimate and that he performed miracles by evil magic, encouraged apostasy and was justly executed for his own sins. But they do not deny his existence.36

Check out the web-exclusive supplement to Lawrence Mykytiuk’s “Archaeology Confirms 50 Real People in the Bible” feature from the March/April 2014 issue of BAR >>

Lucian of Samosata (c. 115–200 C.E.) was a Greek satirist who wrote The Passing of Peregrinus, about a former Christian who later became a famous Cynic and revolutionary and died in 165 C.E. In two sections of Peregrinus—here translated by Craig A. Evans—Lucian, while discussing Peregrinus’s career, without naming Jesus, clearly refers to him, albeit with contempt in the midst of 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.37

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.38

Although Lucian was aware of the Christians’ “books” (some of which might have been parts of the New Testament), his many bits of misinformation make it seem very likely that he did not read them. The compound term “priests and scribes,” for example, seems to have been borrowed from Judaism, and indeed, Christianity and Judaism were sometimes confused among classical authors.

Lucian seems to have gathered all of his information from sources independent of the New Testament and other Christian writings. For this reason, this writing of his is usually valued as independent evidence for the existence of Jesus.

This is true despite his ridicule and contempt for Christians and their “crucified sophist.” “Sophist” was a derisive term used for cheats or for teachers who only taught for money. Lucian despised Christians for worshiping someone thought to be a criminal worthy of death and especially despised “the man who was crucified.”

▸ Celsus, the Platonist philosopher, considered Jesus to be a magician who made exorbitant claims.39

▸ Pliny the Younger, a Roman governor and friend of Tacitus, wrote about early Christian worship of Christ “as to a god.”40

▸ Suetonius, a Roman writer, lawyer and historian, wrote of riots in 49 C.E. among Jews in Rome which might have been about Christus but which he thought were incited by “the instigator Chrestus,” whose identification with Jesus is not completely certain.41

▸ Mara bar Serapion, a prisoner of war held by the Romans, wrote a letter to his son that described “the wise Jewish king” in a way that seems to indicate Jesus but does not specify his identity.42

Other documentary sources are doubtful or irrelevant.43

One can label the evidence treated above as documentary (sometimes called literary) or as archaeological. Almost all sources covered above exist in the form of documents that have been copied and preserved over the course of many centuries, rather than excavated in archaeological digs. Therefore, although some writers call them archaeological evidence, I prefer to say that these truly ancient texts are ancient documentary sources, rather than archaeological discoveries.

Some ossuaries (bone boxes) have come to light that are inscribed simply with the name Jesus (Yeshu or Yeshua‘ in Hebrew), but no one suggests that this was Jesus of Nazareth. The name Jesus was very common at this time, as was Joseph. So as far as we know, these ordinary ossuaries have nothing to do with the New Testament Jesus. Even the ossuary from the East Talpiot district of Jerusalem, whose inscription is translated “Yeshua‘, son of Joseph,” does not refer to him.44

As for the famous James ossuary first published in 2002,d whose inscription is translated “Jacob, son of Joseph, brother of Yeshua‘,” more smoothly rendered, “James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus,” it is unprovenanced, and it will likely take decades to settle the matter of whether it is authentic. Following well established, sound methodology, I do not base conclusions on materials whose authenticity is uncertain, because they might be forged.45 Therefore the James ossuary, which is treated in many other publications, is not included here.46

As a final observation: In New Testament scholarship generally, a number of specialists consider the question of whether Jesus existed to have been finally and conclusively settled in the affirmative. A few vocal scholars, however, still deny that he ever lived.47

6Evidence of the historical Jesus Empty Re: Evidence of the historical Jesus Mon Jan 05, 2015 4:22 pm



Archaeologist William F. Albright observes:

   The excessive scepticism shown toward the Bible by important historical schools of the eighteenth-and-nineteenth centuries, certain phases of which still appear periodically, has been progressively discredited. Discovery after discovery has established the accuracy of innumerable details, and has brought increased recognition to the value of the Bible as a source of history.

Theologian Craig L. Blomberg notes how:

   archaeology can demonstrate that the places mentioned in the Gospels really existed and that customs, living conditions, topography, household and workplace furniture and tools, roads, coins, buildings and numerous other ‘stage props’ correspond to how the Gospels describe them. It can show that the names of certain characters in the Gospels are accurate, when we find inscriptional references to them elsewhere. Events and teachings ascribed to Jesus become intelligible and therefore plausible when read against everything we know about life in Palestine in the first third of the first century.



The Early Fathers and the Origin of Mark’s Gospel

What do the earliest church fathers claim about the Gospel of Mark?
Despite the fact that Matthew’s Gospel was the most frequently cited Gospel in the early Church, we actually have more information about the origin of Mark’s Gospel. This evidence goes all the way back to Papias, who was taught by the apostle John himself. Here’s what the earliest church fathers have to say:

And the elder [John] used to say this: “Mark, having become Peter’s interpreter, wrote down accurately everything he remembered, though not in order, of the things either said or done by Christ. For he neither heard the Lord nor followed him, but afterward, as I said, followed Peter, who adapted his teachings as needed but had no intention of giving an ordered account of the Lord’s sayings. Consequently, Mark did nothing wrong in writing down some things as he remembered them, for he made it his one concern not to omit anything that he heard or make any false statement in them.”
(Papias of Hierapolis)

After their [Peter and Paul’s] departure, Mark also, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, himself handed down to us in writing the things which were preached by Peter. (Irenaeus of Lyons) 

But a great light of godliness shone upon the minds of Peter’s listeners that they were not satisfied with a single hearing or with the oral teaching of the divine proclamation. So, with all kinds of exhortations, they begged Mark (whose gospel is extant), since he was Peter’s follower, to leave behind a written record of the teaching given to them verbally, and did not quit until they had persuaded the man, and thus they became the immediate cause of the scripture called “The Gospel according to Mark.” And they say that the apostle, aware of what had occurred because the Spirit had revealed it to him, was pleased with their zeal and sanctioned the writing for study in the churches. 
(Clement of Alexandria)

Who wrote the Gospel of Mark? According to the church fathers, the author was Mark, who was both the “disciple” or “follower” and the “interpreter” or “translator” (Greek hermēneutēs) of the apostle Peter. Notice that Papias admits that Mark was not an eyewitness to Jesus: “he neither heard the Lord nor followed him.” How was the Gospel written? The earliest Christian writers agree that the Gospel of Mark was based on the “teachings” or “preaching” of the apostle Peter. Significantly, Papias states that while Mark did not necessarily write down what Jesus said “in order,” Mark’s “one concern” was to accurately represent Peter’s oral teaching. In other words, according to ancient Christian belief, Mark acted as a kind of secretary or scribe who wrote on Peter’s behalf and made it his goal to faithfully record what Peter said Jesus did and taught. When was the Gospel of Mark written? With this, we hit our first potential disagreement about the origin of this Gospel. On the one hand, Irenaeus seems to suggest that the Gospel of Mark was published or “handed down” in writing after the “departure” (Greek exodon) of Peter and Paul—presumably a reference to their death by martyrdom (usually dated around AD 66).

 This would place the origin of Mark’s Gospel sometime in the late 60s of the first century AD. On the other hand, Clement of Alexandria claims that Mark was written while Peter was still alive and that the apostle himself “sanctioned” the reading of Mark’s text in his churches. This would place the origin of Mark’s Gospel before the death of Peter, and thus sometime before AD 66. For now, we can say that the church fathers agree that the Gospel was written within the lifetime of Mark, Peter’s disciple and interpreter. Once again, notice that there is not the slightest trace of an idea that the Gospel of Mark was ever originally anonymous. Although the church fathers disagree about exactly when the Gospel was written—some say before Peter’s death, some say after—there is complete unanimity on who wrote the Gospel and how it was written. Mark wrote down the oral teaching of the apostle Peter. Significantly, Papias claims that this account of Mark’s origins goes back to “John the elder,” whom Papias elsewhere identifies as one of “the Lord’s disciples” (Eusebius, Church History, 3.39.4).

The Case for Jesus, Brant Pitre , page 43

8Evidence of the historical Jesus Empty Re: Evidence of the historical Jesus Wed Jun 20, 2018 3:27 pm



1st and 2nd century sources which verify Jesus as an actual man of history. Each of the following sections offer their own advantages: the non-Christian sources are important as they had nothing to gain by their admissions. On the other hand, the Christian witness had everything to lose- many paying for their testimony with their lives.
The outline we will be following for this discussion is as follows:
1) Secular sources (Documentary)
2) Secular sources (Commentary)
3) Jewish sources (Non-Christian)
4) Extra-Biblical sources (Christian)
5) Answering common skeptic questions concerning Jesus' existence
6) Conclusion
1. Tacitus or more formally, Caius/Gaius (or Publius) Cornelius Tacitus (55/56–c. 118 C.E.) was a Roman senator, orator and ethnographer, and arguably the best of Roman historians.
Confirmation. Roman historian Tacitus’s last major work, Annals, mentions a “Christus” who was executed by Pontius Pilate and from whom the Christians derived their name.
2. Titus Flavius Josephus (born Joseph ben Matityahu) was a first-century Romano-Jewish scholar, historian and hagiographer, who was born in Jerusalem - then part of Roman Judea - to a father of priestly descent and a mother who claimed royal ancestry.
In Jewish Antiquities, Josephus refers to a James, who is described as “the brother of Jesus-who-is-called-Messiah.” Josephus’s mention of Jesus to specify which James was being executed by the high priest Ananus in 62 C.E. affirms the existence of the historical Jesus. Photo: Josephus, Famovs and Memorable Works of Josephvs, trans. by Thomas Lodge (London: J. L. for Andrew Hebb, 1640).
3. Pliny the Younger, a Roman friend of Tacitus, wrote about early Christian worship of Christ “as to a god.
Gaius Plinius Caecilius Secundus, born Gaius Caecilius or Gaius Caecilius Cilo (61 – c. 113), better known as Pliny the Younger, was a lawyer, author, and magistrate of Ancient Rome. Pliny's uncle, Pliny the Elder, helped raise and educate him.
4. Celsus, an eclectic Platonist and polemical writer against Christianity, who flourished towards the end of the second century. Very little is known about his personal history except that he lived during the reign of Marcus Aurelius, that his literary activity falls between the years 175 and 180, and that he wrote a work entitled 'alethès lógos ("The True Word", or "The True Discourse"), against the Christian religion.
5. Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus, a Roman writer, lawyer and historian, commonly known as Suetonius (c. 69 – after 122 AD) wrote of riots in 49 C.E. among Jews in Rome which might have been about Christus but which he thought were incited by “the instigator Chrestus”.
6. Thallus, a pagan chronologer of unknown date who is occasionally mentioned in the works of Christian apologists, modern and ancient, as a 1st century pagan witness to the gospel tradition of a "darkness" at the death of Christ.
What do we know about this Thallus? We have two possible other extra-Africanus references to him. One, Eusebius tells us that this Thallus wrote in Greek an account of world history from the fall of Troy down to the mid-first century--c.52 CE. Thallus' work is generally believed to have been written in the period 50-100 CE.
Two, Josephus possibly refers to a certain Thallus as a wealthy Samaritian freedman of Tiberius (d. 37CE) who had lent a million drachmas to the bankrupt Herod Agrippa. (Ant 18.167):
Now there was one Thallus, a freedman of Caesar's of whom he borrowed a million of dracmae, and thence repaid Antonia the debt he owed her; and by spending the overplus in paying his court to Caius, became a person of great authority with him.
7. Mara bar Serapion, a prisoner of war held by the Romans, wrote a letter to his son that described “the wise Jewish king” in a way that seems to indicate Jesus but does not specify his identity.
8. The Babylonian Talmud in a few cases includes references to Jesus using the term "Yeshu".
9. Other authors: Aristides the Athenian, Justin Martyr, Ignatius of Antioch, Hegesippus, Clement of Rome.

9Evidence of the historical Jesus Empty Re: Evidence of the historical Jesus Sun Dec 29, 2019 6:56 pm



Ancient Evidence for Jesus from Non-Christian Sources


Pliny the elder Natural historica written in 77AD

Quotes from Josephus concerning Giants

10Evidence of the historical Jesus Empty Re: Evidence of the historical Jesus Thu Jan 16, 2020 7:17 pm



Steven Guzzi   the shroud is not even close to the only evidence for Christ, as we have multiple and independent sources, both biblical and secular, up to 43, with 11-12 secular sources, which in themselves give a brief summation that is consistent with the NT description of him. This by standards of assessing ancient history is by far superior to all other evidences for ancient personages. Additionally, the sources we have are closer to the original history and the gaps are exceedingly shorter from the purported history to the writings and the writings to the first extant copies than all other ancient sources showing amazing authenticity for the alleged history of Jesus. This gives us good reasons with good evidence for supporting his personage. However, in re: to the dating of the shroud, you are aware that the shroud was in a fire and damaged, but during the medieval period there were repairs to the shroud. It has been suggested that the carbon dating samples were from the repaired portions of the shroud, rather than the original ones, thus further samples must be taken, which of course, at this point has been innaccessible. Until then we simply don't have enough data upon the sample dating to know definitively the true date of the shroud, so nothing has been proved a fraud by any means as of yet, there is other good evidences for thinking this could actually be a physical remnant of garment from the historical Jesus. Also in re: to cursing, do you think because you are an atheist, that God won't hold you accountable for it, that you have liberty to say whatever you want however you want because you won't face judgment? I trow not. Also, you speak as if intellectual dishonesty is a bad thing, but by what transcendent standard can you make such a judgment on atheism? You also demand evidence, but on atheism evidence is unknowable and unimportant considering you are in a randomly produced universe headed for ultimate heat death and extinction, with no afterlife, no ultimate meaning, value for existence in the first place and are simply a randomly moist robot. It is only on theism that evidence is possible and is important. So your insistence upon such would have to mean God exists, exactly what you are kicking against the pricks in fighting, but it will do you know good, you will stand accountable to him at Judgment.

11Evidence of the historical Jesus Empty Re: Evidence of the historical Jesus Sat Jan 18, 2020 3:44 pm



Last edited by Admin on Thu Mar 19, 2020 8:08 am; edited 3 times in total

12Evidence of the historical Jesus Empty Suetonius Sat Jan 18, 2020 4:13 pm





Suetonius on Christians

Evidence of the historical Jesus Suzoto12

Is This Not the Carpenter? The Question of the Historicity of the Figure of Jesus

page 61

Suetonius was a slightly younger contemporary of Tacitus (c. 70–130). His Lives of the Twelve Caesars do not have the same reputation for accuracy as Tacitus’ writings but are noted for their tendency to focus on the sensational side of their subject. Nevertheless, they are an important source of information and often draw on archival material. Both of the following quotations are found in a list of miscellaneous accomplishments or acts of the emperor in question. This is an important letter because it is the first non-Christian writing to give any information of substance about Christians. Yet it seems clear that Pliny has information only on the Christians in his own time (about 110 ce). There are references to ‘Christ’: he has those claiming not to be Christian to revile the name of Christ, while those Christians who meet in assembly chant verses in honour of Christ. It seems clear that the Christians believe in an individual called Christ whom they honour and worship, but it does not appear that Pliny has any information going back before his own time. All his information is on Christian actions and practices but nothing on the founder of Christianity. This passage gives no information about the historical Jesus beyond the traditional beliefs of Christians themselves.

Evidence of the historical Jesus Sueton11

13Evidence of the historical Jesus Empty Re: Evidence of the historical Jesus Tue Mar 17, 2020 6:52 am



Extrabiblical Non-Christian Sources
Prophecies in the Old Testament
Sources that confirm the existence of the Apostles
Archaeological Evidence
The Shroud of Turin, the burial cloth of Jesus
Prophecies of Jesus in regards to the Jewish Nation
The impossible faith

Did Jesus really exist, or is he a made-up figure?

Are unbelievers right when they claim that there is no evidence of the historical Jesus?

Or is he a historical figure that really walked on this earth?

There are several lines of evidence that permit the conclusion that Jesus was indeed a historical figure.

Reasons why the Shroud of Turin is the burial cloth of Jesus

Last edited by Admin on Tue Mar 17, 2020 8:04 pm; edited 2 times in total

14Evidence of the historical Jesus Empty Re: Evidence of the historical Jesus Tue Mar 17, 2020 3:30 pm



Jewish sources

Flavius Josephus

Roman Sources

Cornelius Tacitus
  Thallus (52AD)
  Pliny the Younger (61-113AD)
  Suetonius (69-140AD)
  Tacitus (56-120AD)
  Mara Bar-Serapion (70AD)
  Phlegon (80-140AD)
  Lucian of Samosata: (115-200 A.D.)
  Celsus (175AD)

The most important Roman evidence comes from the pen of the
Roman historian Tacitus (c. 56–120? CE). He was a careful scholar,
so his brief reference to the historical Jesus is very important. His
collection of books called The Annals includes the famous story
about the six-day fire (likely set by Emperor Nero himself) that
burned much of Rome in July 64 CE. To put that rumor to rest,
Nero blamed Christians for setting the fire:

Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite punishments
on a class hated for their disgraceful acts, whom the crowd called
Chrestians. The founder of this name, Christ, 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, where all things horrible
and shameful from everywhere come together and become
—Tacitus, Annals 15.44

Tacitus misspelled Christian in the passage, but he reported that
typo as a mistake of the crowd that he then corrected when he mentioned
“Christ.” The fact that he calls Jesus “Christ” doesn’t imply
any belief that Jesus is the messiah; it probably just reflects how
Christians were referring to Jesus at that time. His reference that
Jesus was executed doesn’t refer specifically to crucifixion, but the
fact that some Christians were crucified suggests that Nero at least
was aware of the tradition. Finally, Tacitus confirms the canonical
gospel portrait that Pilate executed Jesus as an enemy of Rome;
there’s nothing about any Jewish involvement.

Cornelius Tacitus (Early Second Century)

Cornelius Tacitus, a Roman historian living in the early second century, wrote about the reign of Caesar Nero. Tacitus records that Nero shifted the blame for the burning of Rome from himself to the Christians:

Hence to suppress the rumor, he falsely charged with guilt, and punished with the most exquisite tortures, the persons commonly called Christians, who were hated for their enormities. Christus, the founder of the name was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius: not only through Judea, where the mischief originated, but through the city of Rome also (Annals, XV, 44).

Tacitus also refers to Christianity in another section of his Histories when speaking of the burning of the temple. We know about this reference from another writer, Sulpicius Serverus (Chronicles, 30.6), who preserved the reference from Tacitus.

Tacitus' writings confirm the existence of Jesus as well as the spread of Christianity at an early date. Several other details that he mentions line up with the New Testament:

Christ's public ministry began during the reign of Tiberius Caesar (Luke 3:1).
Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea at the time of Christ's death (Matthew 27:6).
Jesus was put to death as a criminal (Luke 23:2).
His death occurred in Judea (Mark 11:6).
Jesus' death stopped the " superstition" for a short time but is soon broken out again.

Even hostile witnesses attest to the truth of the crucifixion event:

Secular Non Biblical Sources For The Existence Of The Lord Jesus Christ in History - video (5 mins - hostile ancient witnesses to Jesus life & crucifixion)

15Evidence of the historical Jesus Empty Re: Evidence of the historical Jesus Mon Apr 20, 2020 8:40 pm



The Nazareth Inscription: Proof of the Resurrection of Christ?

Evidence of the historical Jesus Resurr10

16Evidence of the historical Jesus Empty Re: Evidence of the historical Jesus Thu Apr 23, 2020 7:09 am



9 archaeology finds that confirm the New Testament

17Evidence of the historical Jesus Empty Re: Evidence of the historical Jesus Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:12 am



The Historical Proof of the Existence of Jesus

* The idea that Jesus was an invention derived from pagan myths is unfounded. There is more evidence for his existence than any other historical figure.
* Atheist Scholar, Bart Ehrman validates the existence of Jesus through extrabiblical sources.
* Roman Historian, Tacitus references “Chrestians” when speaking of the followers of Jesus Christ.
* Jewish priest, Josephus uses the phrase “brother of Jesus-who-is-called-Messiah” when referencing James during his execution trial.
A frequent argument against the existence of Jesus Christ is that he never existed, that he was a myth or legend. But scholars attest that not only did a real person named Jesus Christ exist, but we have more evidence for his existence than we do for all of the other historical figures that we never question.
Myth #1: Jesus Invented Out of Other Pagan Myths
Many documentaries, foremost among them Zeitgeist, assert that Jesus Christ was an invention of pagan myths and/or that of dying-and-rising gods.
Internet-based conspiracy theories aside, scholars strongly disagree with this concept, as we will explain.
Did Jesus Exist? Atheist Scholar Defends Jesus
One of the most unlikely people to defend the existence of Jesus Christ is an agnostic atheist scholar and professor of religious studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill named Bart Ehrman. While Ehrman has written and or edited 30 books, six of them being New York Times bestsellers, and are all critical of Christianity, he is also among the first to defend the existence of a real person named Jesus Christ.

In a book called “Did Jesus Exist? The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth,” written by Ehrman in 2012, he writes that all experts in the area of study agree that “whatever else you may think about Jesus, he certainly did exist.”
Further, Ehrman refutes the idea that Jesus was invented from pagan myth, says that Christians were influenced by Jewish ideas – not those of Greeks or Romans.
Historical and Independent Confirmation of Jesus Existence Outside the Bible
Logically, to avoid bias, one of the best places to prove the existence of Jesus Christ is from sources outside of the Bible. Scholars say such proof is abundant and “historically astounding.”
Ehrman actually defends the idea that Jesus Christ did exist, and he does so by taking a historical rather than religious viewpoint to prove Christ’s existence on Earth.
In his works, Ehrman reiterates what many scholars – agnostic, atheist and believers alike – have already said – Jesus is one of the most well-documented figures in all of history. The independent confirmations for the existence of Jesus are actually “astounding for an ancient figure of any kind” Ehrman says.

Confirmation by Roman Historian Tacitus
The Roman historian Tacitus wrote about the crucifixion of Jesus in his last major work, titled Annals, which was written roughly in 116-117 AD.
Tacitus writes:
“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.”
Confirmation by Jewish Priest Josephus
Being that the Jews did not believe Christ was the Messiah, they have no motive for proving his existence, and they certainly did not believe he was the son of God, but rather a criminal blasphemer before referring to himself as such.
The Jewish priest Josephus wrote of both Jesus and his brother James, who was the leader of the church in Jerusalem. He writes about events that occurred with the execution of James, which occurred in the temporary absence of the Roman governor between Festus’s death and Governor Albinus’s arrival in 62 CE.
Josephus writes:
“Ananus, thinking that he had a favorable opportunity because Festus had died and Albinus was still on his way, called a meeting ["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.”
Events Scholars Agree On About Jesus Christ
* Jesus Christ was born sometime before 4 BC.
* Jesus Christ grew up in Galilee.
* Jesus Christ was raised Jewish and removed deeply Jewish his entire life.
* Jesus’ father was a carpenter, and he became one, too.
* Jesus saw himself doing something within Judaism, not forming a new religion.
* Jesus became noted as a healer, teacher and prophet.
* Jesus Christ was executed by Roman Imperial authority by crucifixion.

Evidence of the historical Jesus Ertred10

18Evidence of the historical Jesus Empty Re: Evidence of the historical Jesus Tue Aug 11, 2020 9:02 am



Jesus never existed?

One of the most uneducated, foolish, and stupid things that I see our contemporary New Atheists TM claiming in a surprisingly frequent manner is that Jesus never existed or that there is no evidence for his historical existence. One, yesterday said, that there are no original writings of him.. That is not only ridiculous but embarrassing for the claimant by all means. There is no man in human history, that has been more influential than Jesus. The evidence of his existence is nothing short of extraordinary. By all means. Not only through the detailed accounts in the Bible. But also extrabiblical mentionings, and in special, and foremost, the extraordinary Shroud of Turin, with high probability, the burial cloth of Jesus, with a documented imprint of the suffering and crucifixion that he went through. And not to mention all the prophecies that fulfilled in Jesus. Atheists that deny his existence are inexcusable and will have to face the consequences of their willingly chosen ignorance and illiteracy.

Evidence of the historical Jesus

The shroud of turin

Fullfilled prophecies in the bible

What are the chances that Jesus is not the Messiah? Remember, there are over 300 prophecies related to the Messiah, and Jesus fulfilled them! The numbers for the probabilities are so astronomical that one person fulfilling all these prophetic conditions mathematically eliminates with absolute certainty the probability that it could be anyone else.

For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.
WE HAVE ALSO A MORE SURE WORD OF PROPHECY; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed,
2 Peter 1:16,19 (KJV)

19Evidence of the historical Jesus Empty Re: Evidence of the historical Jesus Fri Oct 16, 2020 2:44 pm



17 reasons why the history of Jesus was not invented

Let’s bury once and for all the idea that the disciples of Christ put words in Jesus’s mouth or invented history!  Here are at least 17 reasons below that show that what Jesus said and did was accurately reported.
1.Eyewitnesses: At the time of writing there were many eyewitnesses, including hostile ones, who could have discredited any inventions. This could be true even forty years laer. Many of even the more skeptical scholars will admit this possibility. Josh McDowell quotes Laurence McGinley: “First of all, eyewitnesses of the events in question were still alive when the tradition had been completely formed; and among those eyewitnesses were bitter enemies of the new religious movement. Yet the tradition claimed to narrate a series of well-known deeds and publicly taught doctrines at a time when false statements could, and would, be challenged.”[1]
For example, would any of us more than forty years old believe a story that China was the first nation to put a man on the moon in 1969?
2. Short time interval: There was also no time for legends and myths to develop as there were in the so-called parallel examples used by these scholars. The Gospels were written down no more than thirty to forty years after the events they describe, while the critics’ examples of developing legends span centuries from the events that triggered them.[2]
3.Oral memorization practices: The Jewish rabbis’ method of teaching was to have their pupils memorize their sayings, to the point that it was as reliable as or more so than writing them down to preserve these sayings, and there is plenty of evidence that Jesus used the rabbis’ methods in instructing His disciples. He often used the rabbinical device of answering a question with a question and other styles of teaching that have parallels in the rabbinical literature.[3] There was a cultural emphasis on memorization, and Jesus’ words were often given in poetic form, a great aid to memorization. So there is evidence for a solid oral tradition in place before the writing of the Gospels.
4. The Promise of the Holy Spirit: Some scholars also seem to completely discount Jesus’ promise that the Holy Spirit would remind the disciples of all that Jesus taught them (John 14:26), and, in general, they discount the supernatural workings of the Holy Spirit to quicken the memory and inspire the New Testament writers. These scholars sometimes don’t (and many times don’t want to) believe the New Testament is the inspired Word of God.
Other pertinent questions:
5. If they were inventions, why didn’t the stories grow in number as time passed and new situations arose?[4]
6.And why weren’t any of the many words of Saint Paul put into Jesus’ mouth, to give them the ultimate authority? Paul was very careful to distinguish his own words from what were the Lord’s spoken words that had been passed on to him.
7. If Jesus didn’t say most of the things He was recorded to have said, what reason would they have had to execute Him?
8. And history shows that profound sayings come from individuals, not from inventing communities, so there is no parallel case for their theories.[5]
9. Is it more credible to think the people who spent time with Jesus forgot all He really said and then invented sayings of Jesus later or that they simply remembered what He said? 
10. They were martyrs: Even more important, the disciples of Jesus would not have died martyrs’ deaths for the product of their imaginations. People do not die for what they know is a lie.
A fabricated New Testament would be a greater miracle than an authentic one. Consider:

  • 11. More than three hundred prophecies concerning the details of the life of Jesus Christ and other events have been fulfilled. These fulfillments all would have to be included in the fabrication, even the more obscure ones, and have the account still make sense and the details not look contrived.

  • 12. Furthermore, this account would have to portray the highest standards of honesty and morals, even though being a total deception, with sworn testimonies to its accuracy included.

  • 13. This fabrication would have to be responsible for life transformations and leading people to a relationship with God. How could a book written to deceive people do this?

  • 14.This fabrication would also somehow have to stand up to intense archaeological investigation.

  • 15. If it were an invention, how could its prophecies have been fulfilled as they have in modern times?

  • 16. Would a deceiver have been able to or have the motive for maintaining the incredible consistency found with all other Scripture, including the explaining of all the foreshadowings and symbols of the Old Testament?

  • 17. And why and how could Jesus fake His birthplace and genealogy? Did He pay off the soldiers on duty to gamble for His robe, give Him vinegar, not break His legs and yet pierce His side? How did He arrange to be crucified by His enemies on Passover, and why go through all that to die anyway? And how does anyone fake a resurrection?

We can see that the idea the New Testament was an invention of the authors is preposterous. In fact, the only “invention” seems to be the invention of the skeptics’ theories.

[1] Laurence J. McGinley, Form Criticism of the Synoptic Healing Narratives, Woodstock College Press, Woodstock, MD, 1944,  25, as quoted in McDowell, More Evidence That Demands a Verdict, 211.
[2] McDowell, ibid., 211-212.
[3] McDowell, He Walked Among Us, 238-243.
[4] McDowell, More Evidence That Demands a Verdict, 238.
[5] Ibid., 252.

20Evidence of the historical Jesus Empty Re: Evidence of the historical Jesus Fri Oct 16, 2020 3:02 pm



Is there archaeological evidence for Jesus?

A common objection heard among skeptics today is that there is little to no evidence for Jesus outside the gospels.  Why isn’t there more evidence?  Let me give a general overview in this article, with more specifics to follow in future articles.

First, the fact is that from the first century we have a very very small sample of ancient Roman and Greek writings that have survived.   Further, why would they have written about Jesus anyway?  Roman attention tended to be focused on military and insurrectionist threats, not a minor religious group from a small town.   They also tended not to pay too much attention to Jewish figures in general.  We get an idea of the Roman’s  thinking about Jesus when they were speaking about accusations against Paul in Acts 25:19: “…But had certain questions against him of their own superstition, and of one Jesus, who was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive.”  This shows the insignificance they attached to the whole matter of Jesus and Christianity at the time.
Most of the Roman historians such as Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius, or Pliny wrote long after the events they write about, so their mention of Jesus is actually no different than their mention of other historical figures, such as some of the false “messiahs” like Simon of Perea, Judas the Galilean, and so on.  If we object because these records are long after Jesus’s life, we also must write off all the other people they mention from that time as not historical.  But no historian does this!

Also, even though these were not Christian writers, you can collective glean from these extra-biblical writings that Jesus existed, was crucified, was reported to have done wondrous deeds, his followers believed He had risen from the dead, and He was  worshiped as God.

There is better  historical support for the life of  Jesus than for many other historical figures about whom historians have no doubt about the main details of their lives. For example, records about Julius Caesar are fragmentary and written long after his time, yet historians don’t doubt his existence and the great influence he had on Rome. Within 150 years of his death, there are only five sources that report on his military conquests, including Caesar’s own writings (The Gallic Wars). Yet within 150 years of Jesus’ death, over 42 authors, at least nine of them non-Christian, mention Jesus.  So why does a double standard continue to be applied to the Bible?

And we can’t just dismiss the gospel records by saying we are using the Bible to prove the Bible. Taken as historical documents, apart from any question of inerrancy or divine inspiration, they are the best sources we have about Jesus, as Caesar’s writings are about himself. Contemporary letters such as Paul’s are the strongest kind of historical evidence. Parts of them such as the creed incorporated into the 15th chapter of Paul’s letter to the Corinthians are considered very strong by most scholars in terms of historical reliability.  This creed is actually considered a pre-New Testament source that was incorporated into Paul’s letter to the Corinthians.  Scholars have found many more of these  pre- New Testament creeds and sermon summaries incorporated into the New Testament.  And it makes sense to use early, eyewitness, independent sources such as the gospels as sound historical methodology.
The Book of Acts and the Gospel’s histories have also been abundantly verified archaeologically.

For example:
An inscription was found at Caesarea that confirmed the existence of Pontius Pilate and his title as given in the Bible. Dated around 30 A.D.
A crucifixion victim was found in Jerusalem that confirms many details of the biblical descriptions, including a nail piercing through an ankle bone and attached to a piece of wood from a cross. Date of origin from about second century B.C. to first century A.D.
The Pool of Bethesda was found in Jerusalem. Date of origin about third century B.C.
The tomb of the high priest Caiaphas has been found. Dated in the 40s A.D.
A Galilean fishing boat, the Kinneret boat, was discovered. Dated 30–70 A.D.
The Erastus Inscription―monument with name and title of Erastus, treasurer of Corinth described by Paul in Romans 16:23. Dated 50–100 A.D.
This is a just a sample; numerous reference books describe these and other finds in great detail. These include: The Stones Cry Out by Randall Price; The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict by Josh McDowell; Is the New Testament Reliable? A Look at the Historical Evidence by Paul Barnett.
Sir William Ramsay, who was one of the greatest archaeologists to have ever lived, began a study of the book of Acts as a skeptic, believing it was written in the second century and not historical. As he studied he uncovered evidence that indicated otherwise, and he had a complete reversal in his thinking about Luke’s accuracy: “Luke’s history is unsurpassed in respect of its trustworthiness.  Ramsay also stated of Luke: “This author should be placed along with the very greatest of historians.   So if they got the details about the things and people around Jesus right, why wouldn’t they have also been accurate about Jesus?

Sponsored content

Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum