Blog

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?