Evidence of Jesus

GJG

Active Member
Jul 16, 2003
272
1
✟412.00
Question: Is there historical evidence for Jesus outside of the Bible?

Answer: The Bible makes historical statements many of which can be easily confirmed by other historical documents. For example, we are told in the Old Testament portion of the Bible that King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon conquered Jerusalem. In the Gospel biography of Jesus written by Luke he tells us that John the Baptist began his ministry, "in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar." But what about Jesus? Do any documents exist from first century that confirm the existence and nature of Jesus? The answer is yes. Not only do they exist, but they are the work of historians who would had a natural prejudice against religious zealots, and therefore gave an objective opinion.

Josephus was a Jewish historian born around A.D. 37. In Book 18 of his works, Josephus is primarily concerned with the Caesars of Rome, and their sub-rulers in the eastern part of the Roman Empire including Jerusalem. In Chapter 3 Paragraph 3 of this book we read:

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

This is important because Josephus was not a Christian. In addition to the reference above, Josephus also makes mention of John the Baptist and of James the brother of Jesus. The following quote from Book 20 Chapter 9 Paragraph 1 of his work is interesting:

"Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the Sanhedrim of 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."

But Josephus is not the only writer to make mention of Jesus. Pliny the Younger was governor of Pontus/Bithynia from A.D. 111-113. His writings are interesting in light of the fact that he reported to the emperor of Rome, Trajan, how he would interrogate and persecute Christians that would not worship the emperor:

"Meanwhile, in the case of those who were denounced to me as Christians, I have observed the following procedure: I interrogated these as to whether they were Christians; those who confessed I interrogated a second and a third time, threatening them with punishment; those who persisted I ordered executed." and "They asserted, however, that the sum and substance of their fault or error had been that they were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god, and to bind themselves by oath, not to some crime, but not to commit fraud, theft, or adultery, not falsify their trust, nor to refuse to return a trust when called upon to do so."

Other accounts could be listed here, but these give enough evidence to establish the fact that as early as the first century A.D. Christians existed who considered Jesus as the Christ, that He rose from the dead, they followed Him in obedience, and worshipped Him as God.
 

Nathan David

Well-Known Member
Sep 5, 2002
1,861
45
53
Saint Paul, MN
Visit site
✟2,226.00
Faith
Atheist
That Josephus account is widely accepted as being fake.

GJG said:
these give enough evidence to establish the fact that as early as the first century A.D. Christians existed who considered Jesus as the Christ, that He rose from the dead, they followed Him in obedience, and worshipped Him as God.

Which is only evidence for the beliefs of those people, not evidence for the existence of Jesus.
 
Upvote 0

TScott

Curmudgeon
Apr 19, 2002
3,353
161
76
Arizona
Visit site
✟11,974.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Politics
US-Democrat
GJG said:
Other accounts could be listed here, but these give enough evidence to establish the fact that as early as the first century A.D. Christians existed who considered Jesus as the Christ, that He rose from the dead, they followed Him in obedience, and worshipped Him as God.

The Josephus accounts are, unfortunately, not conclusive since the first one, known as Testimonium Flavianum was obviously redacted by early Christians. I personally believe the second one you mentioned referring to James is authentic, but others debate that it too was a fabrication. The other accounts you mention are not contemporary to Jesus.

It is my belief that the best evidence for Jesus would be the parables found in scripture. These were actually passed down by word of mouth from the time of Jesus to the time the gospels were written, which IMO would have assured that they were somewhat accurate.
 
Upvote 0

tcampen

Veteran
Jul 14, 2003
2,704
151
✟18,632.00
Faith
Unitarian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
It's a little scary to see any apologist refer to Josephus as independent evidence of Jesus for the reasons stated below by others. But another point needs to be made. Just because ancient manuscripts refer to real people and places that once existed, this is a far cry from any kind of evidence of supernatural claims that same manuscript may contain.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, not just the same tools and techniques used to support perfectly natural explanations to events, such as the existence of a King or the destruction of a Temple. Remember, Josephus also wrote about a cow giving birth to a sheep - or the other way around - as a miraculous event totally unrelated to Jesus or Christianity. Does anyone really believe that happened too, even tho the place and circumstances surrounding the event are verifiable? Don't think so.

The quest to "prove" the supernatural events in the NT are fruitless. Those who believe these things do not do so because of all the reliable independent evidence. Very few people have been lead to Jesus in this way. Those who promote such arguments already believe, then construct arguments to logically and rationally justify that belief. I don't see spiritual beliefs subject to such analysis given the qualitative nature of the supernatural. It's just better to keep such things separate - in my opinion.
 
Upvote 0

Wills

Active Member
Jul 24, 2003
286
0
✟416.00
Faith
Messianic
THERE SHOULD NOT BE any evidence. That is the whole idea.

God requires faith... and anyone who seeks evidence is really wasting his/her time.

God knowing humans, ensured no physical evidence. Faith not sight of bones or some veil or some shroud.

The word is faith , and that is what Christ taught.

He did not leave any cups behind.
 
Upvote 0

tcampen

Veteran
Jul 14, 2003
2,704
151
✟18,632.00
Faith
Unitarian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Wills said:
THERE SHOULD NOT BE any evidence. That is the whole idea.

God requires faith... and anyone who seeks evidence is really wasting his/her time.

God knowing humans, ensured no physical evidence. Faith not sight of bones or some veil or some shroud.

The word is faith , and that is what Christ taught.

He did not leave any cups behind.


Whew! Finally, someone talking some sense around here. Yes, it's all about faith. Faith, faith, faith. Not proof, proof, proof. If you had proof, you wouldn't need faith.
 
Upvote 0

tcampen

Veteran
Jul 14, 2003
2,704
151
✟18,632.00
Faith
Unitarian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
oneiric said:

Interesting site, but essentially demonstrates the lack of independent evidence for the supernatural Jesus. (I don't think most informed people deny the person Jesus actually lived.)

I find it interesting that they list Josephus' quote about Jesus while recognizing practically every credible scholar believes this to be a later embellishment by christians. (But not because it is so favorable to Jesus, as they incorrectly assert, but because it fails to to be consistent with Josephus' demonstrated literary styles.)

All the other so called "proofs" merely attest to the devotion of the Christians to their faith, which is hardly disputed anyway. However, the site provides no independent account for the physical resurrection, miracles, or other supernatural feats performed by Jesus, and witnessed by tens of thousands of people. Hmmmmmmmmm. Wonder why. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Maybe its becuase they don't exist. Let's refer back to the previous post...it's about faith, not proof.
 
Upvote 0

tcampen

Veteran
Jul 14, 2003
2,704
151
✟18,632.00
Faith
Unitarian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Outspoken said:
tcampen...you didn't seem to address any of the points on that page but just dismissed them without good reason???

No, I don't think so. I stated that they incorrectly relied on Josephus' antiquities as a valid source, and that all the other sources simply referred to Jesus' followers, but not to any supernatural feats of Jesus himself. As such, they really only support the existence of the person of Jesus, and not the countless miracles performed, the physical resurrection, etc. I don't know what else there is to say, sorry.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

EltronRangamma

Grand Imperial Asiatic
Jul 31, 2003
794
8
40
Good, Togo
Visit site
✟8,491.00
Faith
Protestant
tcampen said:
Interesting site, but essentially demonstrates the lack of independent evidence for the supernatural Jesus. (I don't think most informed people deny the person Jesus actually lived.)

I find it interesting that they list Josephus' quote about Jesus while recognizing practically every credible scholar believes this to be a later embellishment by christians. (But not because it is so favorable to Jesus, as they incorrectly assert, but because it fails to to be consistent with Josephus' demonstrated literary styles.)

All the other so called "proofs" merely attest to the devotion of the Christians to their faith, which is hardly disputed anyway. However, the site provides no independent account for the physical resurrection, miracles, or other supernatural feats performed by Jesus, and witnessed by tens of thousands of people. Hmmmmmmmmm. Wonder why. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Maybe its becuase they don't exist. Let's refer back to the previous post...it's about faith, not proof.

Hey one question, are you a layman or are you a scholar?

If you are a scholar, what is your method with going about things?

HG Wells, more of a historian that anyone will be, believed in the historical Jesus, to put the cherry on the, the man was a skeptic, some speculated an atheist.

CREDIBLE scholars?
 
Upvote 0

Outspoken

Standing in the Gap
Nov 8, 2002
6,441
16
47
✟22,188.00
Faith
Christian
"I stated that they incorrectly relied on Josephus' antiquities as a valid source,"

No, you simply dismissed it without providing any backing to your statements. I'm sure they are out there, I'm just pointing out you didn't provide any. Besides its very logical that upon his exsistance, the bible is much more creditable to the everyday skeptic and its stories much more believable.
 
Upvote 0

tcampen

Veteran
Jul 14, 2003
2,704
151
✟18,632.00
Faith
Unitarian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Outspoken said:
"I stated that they incorrectly relied on Josephus' antiquities as a valid source,"

No, you simply dismissed it without providing any backing to your statements. I'm sure they are out there, I'm just pointing out you didn't provide any. Besides its very logical that upon his exsistance, the bible is much more creditable to the everyday skeptic and its stories much more believable.

I really don't want to nit pick on this, but here's precisely what I said: "I find it interesting that they list Josephus' quote about Jesus while recognizing practically every credible scholar believes this to be a later embellishment by christians. (But not because it is so favorable to Jesus, as they incorrectly assert, but because it fails to to be consistent with Josephus' demonstrated literary styles.)" Do I need to get more specific than this? I'm happy to do so, but I just thought it was universally known by anyone who refers to Josephus that this particular reference is generally considered a later embellishment by Christian apologists.

As for the last sentence of your post, I really don't understand what you're saying. I'm sorry. Perhaps you could clarify.
 
Upvote 0

tcampen

Veteran
Jul 14, 2003
2,704
151
✟18,632.00
Faith
Unitarian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
EltronRangamma said:
Hey one question, are you a layman or are you a scholar?

If you are a scholar, what is your method with going about things?

HG Wells, more of a historian that anyone will be, believed in the historical Jesus, to put the cherry on the, the man was a skeptic, some speculated an atheist.

CREDIBLE scholars?

I am not a biblical scholar, but must rely on the analysis of such scholars to determine what the most credible determinations are. Being an attorney, I do hold an advanced degree dealing directly with critical analysis. It's what I do as a profession. However, anyone with a critical mind can evaluate the credibilty of information.

As for H.G. Wells, we can all reference credible historians and scholars who accepted or rejected any particular historical account as being reliable. Such an appeal to authority really should be accompanied by WHY they came to their conclusions, as such a reference has little weight by itself. For example, would it do any good for me to refer to Thomas Jefferson as a brilliant man who rejected the supernatural events of the bible? Not without some reference.
 
Upvote 0

Wills

Active Member
Jul 24, 2003
286
0
✟416.00
Faith
Messianic
tcampen said:
Whew! Finally, someone talking some sense around here. Yes, it's all about faith. Faith, faith, faith. Not proof, proof, proof. If you had proof, you wouldn't need faith.

That is the point... you missed it it, obviously.

Jesus's followers would not be required by Jesus, to believe him by virtue of their finding proof of his miracles.

People seeking signs and proof do so for humano-scientific reasons, which Jesus is not

interested in.

Proof--- why look back at trying to find water being changed to wine

Proof is in the oxygen you breathe... that is proof. Wonder who stabilises the atmosphere

nah... it did not establish percentages of Oxygen, nitrogen, inert gases by chance

jeez, there is absolutely no proof of our atmosphere maturing by chance, and
settling at those relative gaseous percentages

What if the percentages of oxygen and nitrogen in our atmosphere started oscillating

madly--we did not "manufacture' a Planet Earth oxygen-air back up system last year.

This should not confuse you

Jesus stabilises the atmosphere... yes yes Go to Genesis 1-6.... do not restrict yourself to chasing shadows of miracles of old in the New testament when Jesus
miracles of the earth's rotation stares right at you in the face.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

EltronRangamma

Grand Imperial Asiatic
Jul 31, 2003
794
8
40
Good, Togo
Visit site
✟8,491.00
Faith
Protestant
tcampen said:
I am not a biblical scholar, but must rely on the analysis of such scholars to determine what the most credible determinations are. Being an attorney, I do hold an advanced degree dealing directly with critical analysis. It's what I do as a profession. However, anyone with a critical mind can evaluate the credibilty of information.

As for H.G. Wells, we can all reference credible historians and scholars who accepted or rejected any particular historical account as being reliable. Such an appeal to authority really should be accompanied by WHY they came to their conclusions, as such a reference has little weight by itself. For example, would it do any good for me to refer to Thomas Jefferson as a brilliant man who rejected the supernatural events of the bible? Not without some reference.

Nevermind, I thought we were assessing the actuality of the historical Jesus :rolleyes:

Just because we haven't happened on EXTRA-BIBLICAL accounts of Jesus performing supernatural feats, doesn't mean it did not happen.

Josh McDowell once said, "If a person discards the Bible as unreliable [in the historical sense], then he or she must discard almost allt he literature of antiquity."
 
Upvote 0

Outspoken

Standing in the Gap
Nov 8, 2002
6,441
16
47
✟22,188.00
Faith
Christian
tcampen said:
IDo I need to get more specific than this? I'm happy to do so, but I just thought it was universally known by anyone who refers to Josephus that this particular reference is generally considered a later embellishment by Christian apologists.


I think the fact that it proves his exsistance gives lots of credit to the biblical accounts.
 
Upvote 0

radorth

Contributor
Jul 29, 2003
7,393
165
75
LA area
Visit site
✟16,044.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Re: tcampen

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, not just the same tools and techniques used to support perfectly natural explanations to events, such as the existence of a King or the destruction of a Temple. Remember, Josephus also wrote about a cow giving birth to a sheep - or the other way around - as a miraculous event totally unrelated to Jesus or Christianity. Does anyone really believe that happened too, even tho the place and circumstances surrounding the event are verifiable? Don't think so.

Good points. However I think there is extraordinary internal evidence, such as the remarkable statement that "He could not work many miracles..." (in Galilea). Mere inventors would never have made such a statement. They would have hidden Jesus' own moments of doubt, (not to mention his disciples' doubts) and many other things which set the story in an entirely separate category from say, the story of Hercules. I DO think there are inaccurate statements in the passion/resurrection stories which were gleaned third or fourth hand, leading to some few contradictions. But these have the happy consequence of keeping incorrigible nit-pickers out of heaven.

Another statement which IMO opinion proves the resurrection is Luke's remark that "they disbelieved for joy" when they saw Jesus. I find the number of such lucid and detailed comments very extraordinary.

Such statements, along with the negative comments made by the Gospel narrators, are the primary reason even skeptical historians like Durant, Klausner and Schonfield were brought to argue that Jesus may not have died on the cross but "swooned." They well know there is no other made-up historical narrative to be compared with the Gospels.

Durant, a skeptic until he died, calls the arguments against basic authenticity minutiae.

Rad
 
Upvote 0

tcampen

Veteran
Jul 14, 2003
2,704
151
✟18,632.00
Faith
Unitarian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
EltronRangamma said:
Nevermind, I thought we were assessing the actuality of the historical Jesus :rolleyes:

Just because we haven't happened on EXTRA-BIBLICAL accounts of Jesus performing supernatural feats, doesn't mean it did not happen.

Josh McDowell once said, "If a person discards the Bible as unreliable [in the historical sense], then he or she must discard almost allt he literature of antiquity."

That is an overly simplistic analysis that fails to separate the natural from the supernatural. I would never advocate throwing the baby out with the bathwater. And no one believes all the writings of antiquity of perfectly accurate anyway.

Originally Posted By: tcampen
"I Do I need to get more specific than this? I'm happy to do so, but I just thought it was universally known by anyone who refers to Josephus that this particular reference is generally considered a later embellishment by Christian apologists."

Outspoken:
I think the fact that it proves his exsistance gives lots of credit to the biblical accounts.

I really don't see how this particular quote from Josephus' Antiquities - which is generally known to be a forgery by later Christians - helps anything. I really don't see your point. Also, I don't doubt that the person of Jesus existed.


Good points. However I think there is extraordinary internal evidence, such as the remarkable statement that "He could not work many miracles..." (in Galilea). Mere inventors would never have made such a statement. They would have hidden Jesus' own moments of doubt, (not to mention his disciples' doubts) and many other things which set the story in an entirely separate category from say, the story of Hercules. I DO think there are inaccurate statements in the passion/resurrection stories which were gleaned third or fourth hand, leading to some few contradictions. But these have the happy consequence of keeping incorrigible nit-pickers out of heaven.

Another statement which IMO opinion proves the resurrection is Luke's remark that "they disbelieved for joy" when they saw Jesus. I find the number of such lucid and detailed comments very extraordinary.

Such statements, along with the negative comments made by the Gospel narrators, are the primary reason even skeptical historians like Durant, Klausner and Schonfield were brought to argue that Jesus may not have died on the cross but "swooned." They well know there is no other made-up historical narrative to be compared with the Gospels.

Durant, a skeptic until he died, calls the arguments against basic authenticity minutiae.

Rad

I am not familiar with the specific people you mention, but am familiar with the theories that Jesus never actually died on the cross, and appeared to have physically resurrected some days later. This theory is used to account for the devotion of his followers after the crucifixion. While these theories present possible scenarios, it is impossible to verify them really.

The interesting point I find when relying on the devotion of the disciples following the cruxifiction as evidence of the resurrection, one must then seriously call into question the miracles performed by Jesus prior to the crucifixion. Here's what I mean. After the crucifixion, the disciples scattered and hid for fear of a similar fate. But once they say Jesus alive after believing him to be dead, they became absolutely devoted and willing to face death, torture and the like for their faith. If true, this behavior is inconsistent with the rest of the gospels. Remember, the disciples had already witnessed countless miracles, including at least 3 people brought back from the dead. Even John's gospel said Jesus did more than could be written down in many volumes, thus we can deduce from that Jesus performed many more miracles than what is recorded in the four christian gospels.

Now, considering it is well documented that many, many people have been willing to be tortured and killed for their beliefs without witnessing a single supernatural event, it would seem some, if not most of the disciples would not have lost their faith in Jesus so easily after the crucifixion. This is especially so considering Jesus explicitly said he would die and return in three days, and every other prediction he made had been fulfilled up to that point. Heap on top of this the countless miracles they witnessed, supernatural feats never seen before or since, and you would expect a different behavior - at least by few. It is inexplicable why yet another resurrection would be the turning point when one examines all that preceeded it.

And one last thing regarding independent verification. Upon Jesus' death on the cross, some crazy things happened. Among them were dead jewish people coming out of their graves and walking about - being seen by many others. I don't know about you, but that's a pretty darn remarkable thing. Yet not a single mention anywhere of dead people walking around except in one gospel ( I think its John). This is a HUGE deal. Considering contemporary historians wrote about far more mundane details, it seems somebody would have picked up on this. Imagine if such a thing occured today - it would be the most shocking thing ever. This is but one example.

Ok, that's all for now.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums