Jesus: Historicity

“Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed” ­–Wikipedia “Historicity of Jesus” 2013

“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” (Pliny, Roman Governor, 112 A.D.)

Before deciding if Jesus was and is the Son of God, part of the Trinity, the Savior, etc. we must first come to the conclusion that Jesus did, in fact, exist. There are many historical documents from many perspectives documenting and referencing Jesus. I, personally, find the evidence to be overwhelming.

Obviously, the most detailed documentation of Jesus and his life resides in the New Testament, but for those who do not accept this as "historical" in nature, there have been many non-Christian sources in the first few centuries that referenced or alluded to Jesus and his life.

A few examples include:

Cornelius Tacitus-Roman Governor in the first century

“Christus, the founder of [Christians] was put to death by Pontius Pilate…”

Lucian of Samosata: -second century satirist

Alludes to Jesus in his scornful writings

Flavius Josephus: -first century Jewish Historian

Many direct references to Jesus, his execution, and his followers

Suetonis: -first century Roman historian

“…the Jews are making constant disturbances at the instigation of Christus…”

(Source: Evidence that Demands a Verdict, McDowell, 1979)

Even those who did not believe Jesus was the Son of God still referred to him in their historical records. They referred to him as an existing person who had a significant impact on their society. Jesus is an extremely well-documented person, considering the fact that we are gathering evidence on someone who lived 2000 years ago! As Josh McDowell cites in his book Evidence that Demands a Verdict, "Some writers may toy with the fancy of a ‘Christ-myth,’ but they do not do so on the grounds of historical evidence. The historicity of Christ is as axiomatic for an unbiased historian as the historicity of Julius Caesar.” (F.F. Bruce, p.81)

Now, for the critics out there, obviously the contention often brought up is the credibility of the historical evidence. "True" history needs to be "unbiased" to be accepted as "fact." However, every single piece of history ever recorded would need to be dismissed under that definition! History is always the perspective of a biased person recording events as they see them. I always find it amazing at how short-sighted so many people are today. Perhaps it's due to the proliferation of video and its ability to allow everyone to have an artificial "first-hand" perspective on current day "history-in-the-making", but I find that many people are highly cynical of anything they didn't see for themselves. We even have relatively modern events that are being contested (i.e. the moon landing or, in some very controversial circles, even the Holocaust is being brought into question!)

Those trying to prove and disprove Jesus through the use of history may be doing so from a biased intention. Or, as one historian states: “All history [is]..a spiral of knowledge…[an] interaction between interpreter and source material. This is true whether the would-be historian is a Christian, writing about Jesus and Paul with some sort of prior commitment to them, or a non-Christian, writing about them with the expectation that they were misguided.” (Wright, The New Testament and the People of God, p.86)

The fact of the matter is, Jesus is as "provable" a person as any other historical figure. His story is corroborated by many sources. While “...we seldom, if ever, ‘know’ enough, in terms of positive indubitable proof, to give the kind of account we want to give of any period, incident or character from the past...” (Wright, Jesus, p.8), we can rest assured that Jesus is as historically authentic as any major personality recorded in the history books. Jesus' life and death is recorded from a variety of perspectives---from the "first-hand" accounts of his closest disciples to the scornful remarks of his enemies. We know that Jesus did, indeed, walk this earth. The big question that this evidence leads us to is: Was Jesus just an important historical figure, or was he really the Son of God?


*This was part 4 of 7 in the "Why Believe?" series