Claim: There is no contemporary evidence that Jesus existed.
There actually is contemporary evidence that Jesus existed - and the best contemporary evidence of all is the New Testament.
Multiple attestation is the main criterion that historians use to ascertain historical facts.
I have mentioned beforehand that the hostile witness is the best witness. I will begin with some hostile witnesses: witnesses who were not Christian.
GRAFFITI.
Graffiti from the ?late 1st to 2nd Century,
Dated from the years 85-95AD and discovered in Rome on the Palatine, gives an example of polemic, written on the walls. We discover a reprimand written in Greek against a Christian, inscription: “Alexamenos worships his god” - the picture shows a person worshipping a donkey headed man on a cross. and, on the next wall, a simple and gentle answer in Latin, probably from the insulted person, who says "Alexamenos is faithful"
THE NAZARETH INSCRIPTION
The “Nazareth Inscription” is a rather intriguing stone acquired by Wilhelm Froeher in 1878, which bears the following inscription:
Edict of Caesar
It is my decision [concerning] graves and tombs—whoever has made them for the religious observances of parents, or children, or household members—that these remain undisturbed forever. But if anyone legally charges that another person has destroyed, or has in any manner extracted those who have been buried, or has moved with wicked intent those who have been buried to other places, committing a crime against them, or has moved sepulchre-sealing stones, against such a person, I order that a judicial tribunal be created, just as [is done] concerning the gods in human religious observances, even more so will it be obligatory to treat with honor those who have been entombed. You are absolutely not to allow anyone to move [those who have been entombed]. But if [someone does], I wish that [violator] to suffer capital punishment under the title of tomb-breaker.
TACITUS (56AD -120AD, WRITING EARLY 100s AD) WRITING ON NERO’S PERSECUTION OF CHRISTIANS (64AD)
Tacitus (56AD to 120 AD) wrote this account in the early second century, basing his research on the Roman Senate records.
“But all human efforts, all the lavish gifts of the emperor (Nero) and the propitiations of the gods, did not banish the sinister belief that the conflagration (burning of Rome in 64 AD) was the result of an order (given by Nero). 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 “Chrestians” 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 Pilate, 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 (Christians) 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.” Tacitus, Annals, 15.44
Josephus wrote the history of Palestine in the First Century, and everything he wrote about confirms the historical background of the Gospels. Josephus wrote about the two King Herods, Pilate, the Zealots, and the destruction of Jerusalem and the last stand of the Jews in the fortress of Masada in 70AD. He mentions Jesus twice in his writings:
JOSEPHUS (37AD to 100AD, WRITING 70-90s AD) ON JESUS’ RESURRECTION (36AD)
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 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 (Antiquities 18:3:3).
JOSEPHUS (37AD to 100AD, WRITING 90s AD) ON THE EXECUTION OF JESUS’ YOUNGER BROTHER JAMES THE JUST (62AD)
Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he [Ananus] assembled the Sanhedrin 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 (Antiquities 20:9:1).
PLINY THE YOUNGER(Gaius Plinius Caecilius Secundus) (61AD to 112AD) writing to Emperor Trajan 112 AD (Not really first century but important) and Trajan’s reply.
The reference to the Christians singing a hymn to “Christ, as to a god,” only makes sense if you assume that Christ was a human being. This letter is of course, written in the 2nd century AD, however Pliny did live most of his life in the 1st century AD.
They 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.
The letter then goes on to enumerate how Pliny identified Christians and how he punished them.
Trajan’s reply contains four orders, that reveal that Christians were punished simply for being Christians:
Do not seek out the Christians for trial.
If the accused are found guilty of being Christian, then they must be punished.
If the accused deny they are Christians and show proof that they are not by worshipping the gods, then they must be pardoned.
Anonymous accusations should not be considered.
BABYLONIAN TALMUD (Collected from 70AD to 200AD)
Jesus’ name is Yeshua, which means “Yahweh Saves.” The Talmud in their passage about Jesus shortens his Hebrew name to a term of abuse, Yeshu, meaning, “Let his name be cursed.” Crucifixion in contemporary sources is called being hanged.
Their testimony is not reliable, but demonstrates that Jesus was certainly known in Jewish circles and his existence was not in dispute, nor his reputation for performing miracles.
On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald . . . cried, "He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy."
Interestingly, 1 Corinthians 12:3 indicates that this attitude towards Jesus among people who did not believe in Him was already present in the 1st Century AD.
THALLUS AND PHLEGON MENTION THE DARKNESS AT THE DEATH OF JESUS
A weak case can be made for Thallus as a kind of witness, he was a first century historian, who apparently mentioned the darkness at Jesus’ death.
Thallus’ books are no longer extant. Thallus is only known because he is mentioned third hand by the Byzantine historian Georgius Syncellus, who quotes Julian Africanus, saying about Thallus:
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 unreasonably, an eclipse of the sun. For the Hebrews celebrate the passover on the 14th day according to the moon, and the passion of our Saviour fails on the day before the passover; but an eclipse of the sun takes place only when the moon comes under the sun. And it cannot happen at any other time but in the interval between the first day of the new moon and the last of the old, that is, at their junction: how then should an eclipse be supposed to happen when the moon is almost diametrically opposite the sun? Let that opinion pass however; let it carry the majority with it; and let this portent of the world be deemed an eclipse of the sun, like others a portent only to the eye. Phlegon records that, in the time of Tiberius Caesar, at full moon, there was a full eclipse of the sun from the sixth hour to the ninth — manifestly that one of which we speak. But what has an eclipse in common with an earthquake, the rending rocks, and the resurrection of the dead, and so great a perturbation throughout the universe? Surely no such event as this is recorded for a long period. But it was a darkness induced by God, because the Lord happened then to suffer. And calculation makes out that the period of 70 weeks, as noted in Daniel, is completed at this time.
William Lane Craig has much more to say about this in his article on Thallus.
Historical accounts of the darkness at the hour of Jesus’ crucifixion in the Chinese archives?
According to Chan Kei Thong’s Faith of Our Fathers (2006), historical Chinese archives contain accounts of the darkness at the hour of his crucifixion. Not being able to read ancient Chinese, I cannot confirm this, but it is intriguing.
“Summer, fourth month [of the year], on the day of Ren Wu, the imperial edict reads, “Yin and Yang have mistakenly switched, and the sun and moon were eclipsed. The sins of all the people are now on one man. Pardon is proclaimed to all under heaven.”
History of Latter Han Dynasty, Volume 1, Chronicles of Emperor Guang Wu, 7th year
And also:
“Eclipse on the day of Gui Hai, Man from Heaven died”.
History of Latter Han, Annals, No. 18, Gui Hai.
WHY DID PHILO -OR OTHER CONTEMPORARY HISTORIANS - NOT MENTION JESUS?
The ancient historians were entirely uninterested in the lives and doings of the common people. They considered themselves, the rich class, as entirely superior to the commoners, and you had to be at least a general in the Roman army to be of interest to a history. Richard Bauckham says more about this below.
Philo of Alexandria was indeed a contemporary of Jesus’ earthly life. Philo only visited Jerusalem once, he lived in Alexandria, and died in 40AD. Jesus was not famous in a conventional sense: if anything he was infamous in Jerusalem, and died the most ignominious and shameful death of all, crucifixion. Jesus only became of interest to historians and Emperors in the latter part of the First Century, from the 60s AD onwards, when Christianity had become a massive movement that was spreading rapidly throughout the Roman Empire.
Jesus was not a celebrity in his time on earth; he was not rich or high status, he did not engage in politics, he wrote no books or Greek philosophical treatises, he did not address the Roman Senate, he did not travel outside of Palestine; in fact, he was a poor, Jewish itinerant preacher. Jesus did not change the socio-political circumstances of his time. Jesus was executed as a criminal, between two thieves. Jesus’ teachings on religion, possessions and riches, leadership and authority, who is to be honoured, who is important in God’s eyes, the place of women, and nearly every other subject were completely counter cultural both to Jews and Gentiles in his time.
And Jesus associated with the despised and rejected: tax collectors, prostitutes, zealots (terrorists, in other words), poor labourers, fishermen, He was a poor, rural person in a country run by rich city folk.
Class-based chauvinism and racial prejudice against Jews would have made Jesus the least likely person for a Graeco-Roman historian to have written a biography about. Indeed, how were the Graeco-Roman historians of the time to have foreseen the influence Jesus would later have on the whole world?
FOUR JEWISH HISTORIANS WHO WROTE IN GREEK - MATTHEW, MARK, LUKE AND JOHN
Ancient historians such as Thucydides, Polybius, Tacitus believed that historians could only write about events at which they were eyewitnesses, or could at least speak to the eyewitnesses of the events; the ideal eyewitness was someone who was actually involved and actively participating in the events.
I believe they were correct in this: journalists often miss details that occur behind closed doors, details that come out years later when the participants write their memoirs or when their private correspondence becomes available. Think of the revelations of the personal meetings Gorbachev had with Reagan, that only came out years and years later. Think of the fact that there were missiles in Turkey pointed towards Russia in the time of the Cuban missile crisis, a fact that was unknown at the time, and only came out when some of the participants at the time revealed things unknown to the wider world.
Well, actually, there were four Jewish historians writing in Greek who did write biographies of Jesus, who were either involved in the events as participants and eyewitnesses, or who wrote down the testimony of eyewitnesses: their names were Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.
To say these biographers were Christians when they wrote their gospels is probably true - however, when the events were witnessed that they wrote about they were certainly not, for the term Christian did not exist at that time.
Matthew, when (according to Papias of Hieropolus) he collected the sayings of Jesus was not a Christian at the time: he was a disciple of Jesus, yes, but he was definitely not a Christian, in fact, because until Peter’s confession of Christ (Matthew chapter 16) none of Jesus’ disciples had acknowledged Jesus as the Christ or Messiah, and in fact, the term Christian didn’t even exist until Jesus had ascended into heaven and the disciples had received the Holy Spirit and the community at Antioch had been in operation for a year.
And it came about that for an entire year they met with the church, and taught considerable numbers; and the disciples were first called Christians at Antioch. (Acts 11:23-26).
A kind of shorthand existed, at the time, by the way, in Graeco Roman times, by which people could transcribe conversations and facts quickly, and Matthew as a tax-collector would have certainly been in the kind of occupation where he would have needed shorthand and used it, so he is the ideal person to have collected his own eyewitness accounts of Jesus.
Luke definitively set out to collect other people’s eyewitness accounts. He spoke to eyewitnesses and collected their accounts – the dedication to Theophilus (either his patron a real person, or the ideal reader) at the start of the Gospel of Luke mentions this aim, in elevated language that establishes his work as a true eyewitness history in the tradition of Thucydides.
Many have undertaken to compose an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by the initial eyewitnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, having carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught. Luke 1:1-4
Luke later on in the book of Acts, the sequel to Luke, was indeed a participant in the events. This passage shows the moment he is in the story instead of just telling the story:
After the Holy Spirit had prevented them from speaking the word in the province of Asia, they traveled through the region of Phrygia and Galatia. And when they came to the border of Mysia, they tried to enter Bithynia, but the Spirit of Jesus would not permit them. So they passed by Mysia and went down to Troas.
During the night, Paul had a vision of a man of Macedonia standing and pleading with him, “Come over to Macedonia and help us.” As soon as Paul had seen the vision, we got ready to leave for Macedonia, concluding that God had called us to preach the gospel to them. Acts 16:6-10
John himself says in his gospel and his epistles(letters) that he was an eyewitness. This excellent article on John’s eyewitness testimony makes some good points about this.
John tells what the qualifications of the eyewitness are:
When the Counsellor comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father – shall testify about me. You also are to testify because you are with me from the beginning. John 15:26-27
Incidentally Acts of the apostles includes the same qualification for an apostle to replace Judas; the qualification was that he had to be an eyewitness of the events from the start of Jesus’ ministry:
“Thus one of the men who have accompanied us during all the time the Lord Jesus associated with us, beginning from his baptism by John until the day he was taken up from us—one of these must become a witness of his resurrection together with us.” Acts 1:21-22
John in his prologue to his gospel tells us that
The Word became flesh and made His dwelling among us. We have seen His glory, the glory of the one and only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. John 1:14
John was standing at the cross.
Now standing beside Jesus’ cross were his mother, his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. So when Jesus saw his mother and the disciple whom he loved standing there, he said to his mother, “Woman, look, here is your son!” He then said to his disciple, “Look, here is your mother!” From that very time the disciple took her into his own home. John 19:25-27
Later on, the scribe or community for whom John wrote the gospel insert a comment indicating that the author of the gospel was present at the crucifixion.
He who saw it has borne witness. John 19:35.
The scribe or community for whom the summarises his role as an eyewitness at the end of the Gospel:
This is the disciple who is bearing witness about these things, and who has written these things, and we know that his testimony is true John 21:24.
Later on, in the fist letter written by John, he claims to have touched the Word of life with his own hands.
That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our own eyes, which we have gazed upon and touched with our own hands—this is the Word of life. And this is the life that was revealed; we have seen it and testified to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life that was with the Father and was revealed to us.
We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And this fellowship of ours is with the Father and with His Son, Jesus Christ. We write these things so that our joy may be complete. 1 John 1:1-4
Mark, according to church tradition, was also an eyewitness.
THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONTEXT
I have covered the archaeological context of the New Testament a little in my earlier fact check, “Jesus Rose from the Dead”, but I will briefly say that archaeology has only confirmed the New Testament as historical. Major figures such as Pilate and Caiaphas not only are attested in contemporary authors such as Josephus and archaeological finds, but even minor New Testament figures have been affirmed as historical by archaeological finds. We are in a unique position for studying the New Testament as historical fact because major population centres such as Capernaum and Herod’s palace have been discovered and explored by archaeologists, and even minor places such as the pool of Bethesda in John 5 and have been found and studied, places such as Bethany, and Bethlehem and other locations have been preserved throughout the last two thousand years, and places such as the Mount of Olives and the Temple Mount and Golgotha; even the locations of Paul’s travels have been identified, the islands and cities he visited, and the winds during the year in the Mediterranean and his sea travels have been studied and analysed. The New Testament is surely the most examined book in history, regarding its historicity, and has come out smelling of roses.
A PLETHORA OF EVIDENCE
For an ancient figure, four biographies that were written virtually contemporaneously with the events is an absolute plethora of evidence, compared to most other historical figures from the time. For Julius Caesar there are only his two autobiographies, De Bello Gallico, and Commentarii de Bello Civili. The other books about Caesar were written later.
Consider the wealth of evidence for Jesus’ existence in the New Testament: the whole collection is a witness to Jesus’ existence, His deeds and writings, and in particular His death and resurrection.
And it is evident that the four gospel writers did not collaborate, as there are differences in minor details in some of their accounts; indeed, some of the differences are completely explicable in terms of the writing practices of the time among historians and biographers. Today a biographer might well go to some lengths to establish who in particular was present at a particular meeting that was historically important. In the first century, biographers such as Plutarch and Pliny who wrote about a particular event a person was involved in, would only mention the persons present relevant to the point they were making about the subject of their biography.
SEVERAL GREAT CONTEMPORARY SCHOLARS SPEAKING ABOUT THE GOSPEL ACCOUNTS OF JESUS AS HISTORICAL and BIOGRAPHICAL.
Richard Bauckham - an expert on the Gospels as historical biography.