THE HISTORICITY OF JESUS
Doesn't it seem a little strange that someone as important as Jesus is never mentioned in any secular historical records? No Roman registry... no contemporary historian...nothing.
Is it possible that Jesus might not have been a physical person at all, but rather an idealized concept that took on personality with time?
When confronted with this, apologists routinely cite Josephus, Suetonius, Tacitus, and Pliny the Younger as extrabiblical historical resources. But do they serve as such? The mention of Jesus in Josephus is a forgery, Suetonius doesn't mention Jesus at all, and the mentions in Tacitus and Pliny refer only to Christians, without any discussion of the man Jesus at all.
1. DOES JOSEPHUS MENTION JESUS?
2. DOES SUETONIUS MENTION JESUS?
3. DOES TACITUS MENTION JESUS?
4. DOES PLINY MENTION JESUS?
The following is a list, taken from the American Atheists website, of historians living within a century of the time Jesus is supposed to have lived, who never mention Jesus.
Josephus
Philo-Judæus
Seneca
Pliny Elder
Arrian
Petronius
Dion Pruseus
Paterculus
Suetonius
Juvenal
Martial
Persius
Plutarch
Pliny Younger
Tacitus
Justus of Tiberius
Apollonius
Quintilian
Lucanus
Epictetus
Hermogones
Silius Italicus
Statius
Ptolemy
Appian
Phlegon
Phædrus
Valerius Maximus
Lucian
Pausanias
Florus Lucius
Quintius Curtius
Aulus Gellius
Dio Chrysostom
Columella
Valerius Flaccus
Damis
Favorinus
Lysias
Pomponius Mela
Appion of Alexandria
Theon of Smyrna
While the absence of evidence is not proof of nonexistence, the logic can be explained this way:
The claim is made by an independent researcher that a catastrophic event has taken place, say nuclear testing in a large lake.
The supposed testing was reported in a newspaper in a city in another state, several hundred miles from the lake.
Reporters arrive and interview residents of the area. None of them recall seeing a mushroom cloud. No local newspapers reported a mushroom cloud. It is possible that the government has paid for their silence, so tests are run in the water. No radioactive traces are found in the samples.
In this case, absence of evidence almost certainly demonstrates that the supposed event did not take place.
If the claim was made that the event took place 50 years ago, it could possibly complicate the research.
The Jesus Myth theory runs as follows: Since no contemporary historians recorded the events claimed by the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, there is a strong possibility that they did not actually take place.
The fact that the four Gospels were written many years after the time the events are supposed to have taken place, and likely by authors who were not eyewitnesses to the events, causes further reason for doubt.
In Paul's writings, there is a conspicuous absence of any mention of the details of Jesus' life. None of the events claimed by the four Gospels are even briefly mentioned in the epistles, with the exeption of the central theme of Paul's teachings - the crucifixion and resurrection.
The fact that death and resurrection are also important themes in the stories of many other mythical deities suggests the possibility that Paul was borrowing from these stories.
Since the Gospels were written years after Paul began preaching, the possibility exists that they were an expansion upon a legend that had already begun to grow.
Though the community of believers remained relatively small for a few centuries, the conversion of Constantine gave Christianity the strength and universality it needed to finally beome a world religion.
In my opinion, Christian apologists' strongest evidence for a physical Jesus is the early existence of a Christian community - whatever it's size in the first century.
While the Jesus Myth theory presents some interesting ideas, there are some weak points that I have not yet found to be adequately addressed in the resources I have studied.
1) Paul's writings state there was already a community of believers in Jesus at the time of his conversion. Unless these writings are forgeries, Paul was not the founder of Christianity, as the Jesus Myth proponents claim.
2) The Jesus Myth proponents contend that Paul never taught that Jesus was a physical person, and cite a partial verse in Hebrews out of context to substantiate this claim. However, numerous other statements found in his writings do point to a physical Jesus.
Is it possible that Jesus might not have been a physical person at all, but rather an idealized concept that took on personality with time?
When confronted with this, apologists routinely cite Josephus, Suetonius, Tacitus, and Pliny the Younger as extrabiblical historical resources. But do they serve as such? The mention of Jesus in Josephus is a forgery, Suetonius doesn't mention Jesus at all, and the mentions in Tacitus and Pliny refer only to Christians, without any discussion of the man Jesus at all.
1. DOES JOSEPHUS MENTION JESUS?
2. DOES SUETONIUS MENTION JESUS?
3. DOES TACITUS MENTION JESUS?
4. DOES PLINY MENTION JESUS?
The following is a list, taken from the American Atheists website, of historians living within a century of the time Jesus is supposed to have lived, who never mention Jesus.
Josephus
Philo-Judæus
Seneca
Pliny Elder
Arrian
Petronius
Dion Pruseus
Paterculus
Suetonius
Juvenal
Martial
Persius
Plutarch
Pliny Younger
Tacitus
Justus of Tiberius
Apollonius
Quintilian
Lucanus
Epictetus
Hermogones
Silius Italicus
Statius
Ptolemy
Appian
Phlegon
Phædrus
Valerius Maximus
Lucian
Pausanias
Florus Lucius
Quintius Curtius
Aulus Gellius
Dio Chrysostom
Columella
Valerius Flaccus
Damis
Favorinus
Lysias
Pomponius Mela
Appion of Alexandria
Theon of Smyrna
While the absence of evidence is not proof of nonexistence, the logic can be explained this way:
The claim is made by an independent researcher that a catastrophic event has taken place, say nuclear testing in a large lake.
The supposed testing was reported in a newspaper in a city in another state, several hundred miles from the lake.
Reporters arrive and interview residents of the area. None of them recall seeing a mushroom cloud. No local newspapers reported a mushroom cloud. It is possible that the government has paid for their silence, so tests are run in the water. No radioactive traces are found in the samples.
In this case, absence of evidence almost certainly demonstrates that the supposed event did not take place.
If the claim was made that the event took place 50 years ago, it could possibly complicate the research.
The Jesus Myth theory runs as follows: Since no contemporary historians recorded the events claimed by the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, there is a strong possibility that they did not actually take place.
The fact that the four Gospels were written many years after the time the events are supposed to have taken place, and likely by authors who were not eyewitnesses to the events, causes further reason for doubt.
In Paul's writings, there is a conspicuous absence of any mention of the details of Jesus' life. None of the events claimed by the four Gospels are even briefly mentioned in the epistles, with the exeption of the central theme of Paul's teachings - the crucifixion and resurrection.
The fact that death and resurrection are also important themes in the stories of many other mythical deities suggests the possibility that Paul was borrowing from these stories.
Since the Gospels were written years after Paul began preaching, the possibility exists that they were an expansion upon a legend that had already begun to grow.
Though the community of believers remained relatively small for a few centuries, the conversion of Constantine gave Christianity the strength and universality it needed to finally beome a world religion.
In my opinion, Christian apologists' strongest evidence for a physical Jesus is the early existence of a Christian community - whatever it's size in the first century.
While the Jesus Myth theory presents some interesting ideas, there are some weak points that I have not yet found to be adequately addressed in the resources I have studied.
1) Paul's writings state there was already a community of believers in Jesus at the time of his conversion. Unless these writings are forgeries, Paul was not the founder of Christianity, as the Jesus Myth proponents claim.
2) The Jesus Myth proponents contend that Paul never taught that Jesus was a physical person, and cite a partial verse in Hebrews out of context to substantiate this claim. However, numerous other statements found in his writings do point to a physical Jesus.
posted by Seeker at 5:15 PM
7 comments
links to this post
