Historicity of Jesus

Historicity of Jesus
The historicity of Jesus is the question of whether or not Jesus of Nazareth historically existed (as opposed to being a purely mythical figure). The mainstream scholarly consensus is that a Jewish man called Jesus of Nazareth did exist in Palestine in the 1st century CE. The contrary perspective, that Jesus was mythical, is regarded as a fringe theory.
Only two key events of Jesus's life are widely accepted as historical, namely his baptism and crucifixion. There is no scholarly consensus concerning other elements of Jesus's life (including his purported miracles or resurrection). Standard historical criteria are used in evaluating the historicity of the gospel narratives. Academic efforts to determine facts of Jesus's life are part of the quest for the historical Jesus.
Besides the gospels and the letters of Paul, sources for the historicity of Jesus include the works of Jewish historian Josephus and Roman historian Tacitus, who both lived shortly after the time of Jesus and wrote in reference to him and his followers.
Modern scholarship
Virtually all mainstream scholars agree that a Jewish man named Jesus of Nazareth did exist in Palestine in the 1st century CE. Scholars regard the question of historicity as generally settled in scholarship in the early 20th century.
Since the 18th century, three separate scholarly quests for the historical Jesus have taken place, each with distinct characteristics and based on different research criteria, which were often developed during that phase. Currently modern scholarly research on the historical Jesus focuses on what is historically probable, or plausible about Jesus.
Christ myth theory
The Christ myth theory, which developed within the scholarly research on the historical Jesus, is, in Geoffrey W. Bromiley's words, the view that "the story of Jesus is a piece of mythology" possessing no "substantial claims to historical fact". Alternatively, Bart Ehrman (who himself rejects the Christ myth theory) summarises Earl Doherty's view as being "that no historical Jesus worthy of the name existed, that Christianity began with a belief in a spiritual, mythical figure, that the Gospels are essentially allegory and fiction, and that no single identifiable person lay at the root of the Galilean preaching tradition". Many proponents use a three-fold argument first developed in the 19th century: that the New Testament has no historical value with respect to Jesus's existence, that there are no non-Christian references to Jesus from the first century, and that Christianity had pagan and/or mythical roots.
Virtually all scholars of antiquity dismiss theories of Jesus's non-existence or regard them as refuted. In modern scholarship, the Christ myth theory is a fringe theory and finds virtually no support from scholars.
Sources for the historicity of Jesus
There exist secular sources, Jewish sources, and Christian sources that support his existence. Bart D. Ehrman argues that there are about 25 to 30 "independent sources that know there was a man Jesus", including 16 in the New Testament, which represents sources that have become canonical for Christianity. There are also many apocryphal texts that are examples of the wide variety of writings in the first centuries CE that are related to Jesus. Craig A. Evans and Ehrman argue that Paul's letters are among the earliest sources that provide a direct link to people who lived with and knew Jesus since Paul was personally acquainted with Peter and John, two of Jesus's original disciples, and James, the brother of Jesus. Paul's first meeting with Peter was around 36 AD. According to Simon Gathercole, Paul's description of Jesus's life on Earth, his personality, and family tend to establish that Paul regarded Jesus as a natural person, rather than an allegorical figure. Evans argues that archeological research correlates with basic details found in surviving sources on Jesus, shedding light on aspects of his life.
There are numerous Jewish and Roman sources (e.g. Josephus, Suetonius, Tacitus, Pliny the Younger, and rabbinic tradition) that talk about Jesus. Such sources are additional independent sources on Jesus's existence and corroborate details found in other surviving sources. There is no indication that Pagan or Jewish writers in antiquity who opposed Christianity questioned the existence of Jesus.
Among contemporary scholars, there is consensus that the gospels are a type of ancient biography. On the quality of available sources, Hans-Joachim Schoeps argued that the Gospels are unsatisfactory as they were not written as detailed historical biographies, that the non-Christian sources provide no new information, and that the sources hopelessly intertwine history and legend, but present the views and beliefs of the early disciples and the Christian community. However, scholars like Craig Blomberg argue that the source material on Jesus does correlate significantly with historical data. There are also archeological finds that corroborate aspects of the life of Jesus mentioned in the surviving sources. According to Christopher M. Tuckett, most available sources are collections of early oral traditions about Jesus and states that the historical value of traditions are not necessarily correlated with the later dates of composition of writings since even later sources can contain early tradition material. Theissen and Merz state that these traditions can be dated back well before the composition of the synoptic gospels, that such traditions show local familiarity of the region, and that such traditions were explicitly called "memory", indicating biographical elements that included historical references such as notable people from his era. According to Maurice Casey, some of the sources, such as parts of the Gospel of Mark, are translations of early Aramaic sources which indicate proximity with eyewitness testimony.
Historiographical approaches associated with the study of the poor in the past, such as microhistory, can help assess what type of sources can be reasonably expected in the historical record for individuals like Jesus. For instance, Justin Meggitt argues that since most people in antiquity left no sign of their existence, especially the poor, it is unreasonable to expect non-Christian sources to corroborate the specific existence of someone with Jesus's socio-economic status. Ehrman argues that the historical record for the first century was so lacking that no contemporary eyewitness reports for prominent individuals such as Pontius Pilate or Josephus survive. Theissen and Merz observe that even if ancient sources were to be silent on any individual, they would not impact their historicity since there are numerous instances of people whose existence is never doubted and yet were not mentioned by contemporary authors. For instance, Paul is not mentioned by Josephus or non-Christian sources; John the Baptist is not mentioned by Paul, Philo, or rabbinic writings; Rabbi Hillel is not mentioned by Josephus - despite him being a Pharisee; Bar Kochba, a leader of the Jewish revolt against the Romans is not mentioned by Dio Cassius in his account of the revolt. Nonetheless, non-Christian sources do exist and they corroborate some details of the life of Jesus that are also found in New Testament sources.
Historian Michael Grant argues that when the New Testament is analyzed with the same criteria used by historians on ancient writings that contain historical material, Jesus's existence cannot be denied anymore than secular figures whose existence is never questioned.
New Testament sources
Synoptic Gospels
The synoptic gospels are the primary sources of historical information about Jesus and of the religious movement he founded. The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke recount the life, ministry, crucifixion and resurrection of a Jew named Jesus who spoke Aramaic. There are different hypotheses regarding the origin of the texts because the gospels of the New Testament were written in Greek for Greek-speaking communities, and were later translated into Syriac, Latin, and Coptic. Scholars argue that the surviving gospels show usage of earlier independent written and oral sources that extended back to the time of Jesus's death, but did not survive. Aramaic sources have been detected in Mark's Gospel, which could indicate use of early or even eyewitness testimony when it was being written. Historians often study the historical reliability of the Acts of the Apostles when studying the reliability of the gospels, as the Book of Acts was seemingly written by the same author as the Gospel of Luke.
Pauline epistles
The seven Pauline epistles considered by scholarly consensus to be genuine are dated to between AD 50 and 60 (i.e., approximately 20 to 30 years after the generally accepted time period of Jesus's death) and are the earliest surviving Christian texts that may include information about Jesus. Although Paul the Apostle provides relatively little biographical information about Jesus and states that he never knew Jesus personally, he does make it clear that he considers Jesus to have been a real person and a Jew. Moreover, he interacted with eyewitnesses of Jesus since he wrote about meeting and knowing James, the brother of Jesus and Jesus's apostles Peter and John.
Non-Christian sources
Josephus and Tacitus
Non-Christian sources used to study and establish the historicity of Jesus include the first century Jewish historian Josephus and Roman historian Tacitus. These sources are compared to Christian sources, such as the Pauline letters and synoptic gospels, and are usually independent of each other; that is, the Jewish sources do not draw upon the Roman sources. Similarities and differences between these sources are used in the authentication process.
In Books 18 and 20 of Antiquities of the Jews, written around AD 93 to 94, Josephus twice refers to the biblical Jesus. The general scholarly view holds that the longer passage, known as the Testimonium Flavianum, most likely consists of an authentic nucleus that was subjected to later Christian interpolation or forgery. On the other hand, Josephus scholar Louis H. Feldman states that "few have doubted the genuineness" of the reference found in Antiquities 20, 9, 1 to "the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James".
Tacitus, in his Annals (written AD 115), book 15, chapter 44, describes Nero's scapegoating of the Christians following the Fire of Rome. He writes that the founder of the sect was named Christus (the Christian title for Jesus); that he was executed under Pontius Pilate; and that the movement, initially checked, broke out again in Judea and even in Rome itself. The scholarly consensus is that Tacitus' reference to the execution of Jesus by Pilate is both authentic and of historical value as an independent Roman source.
Mishnah
The Mishnah (200) may refer to Jesus as it reflects the early Jewish traditions of portraying Jesus as a sorcerer or magician. Other references to Jesus and his execution exist in the Talmud, but they aim to discredit his actions, not deny his existence.
Historical Jesus
Baptism and crucifixion
The only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate.
According to New Testament scholar James Dunn, nearly all modern scholars consider the baptism of Jesus and his crucifixion to be historically certain. He states that these "two facts in the life of Jesus command almost universal assent" and "rank so high on the 'almost impossible to doubt or deny' scale of historical 'facts' they are obvious starting points for an attempt to clarify the what and why of Jesus' mission."
John P. Meier views the crucifixion of Jesus as historical fact and states that based on the criterion of embarrassment Christians would not have invented the painful death of their leader.
The criterion of embarrassment is also used to argue in favor of the historicity of the baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist as it is a story which the early Christian Church would have never wanted to invent. Based on this criterion, given that John baptised for the remission of sins, and Jesus was viewed as without sin, the invention of this story would have served no purpose, and would have been an embarrassment given that it positioned John above Jesus.
Amy-Jill Levine has summarized the situation by stating that "there is a consensus of sorts on the basic outline of Jesus' life" in that most scholars agree that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist, and over a period of one to three years debated Jewish authorities on the subject of God, gathered followers, and was crucified by Roman prefect Pontius Pilate who officiated 26–36 AD.
Bart Ehrman wrote, in agreement with the view of Albert Schweitzer, that: "The Jesus proclaimed by preachers and theologians today had no existence. That particular Jesus is (or those particular Jesuses are) a myth. But there was a historical Jesus, who was very much a man of his time".
See also
Chronology of Jesus
Denial of the virgin birth of Jesus
Historical background of the New Testament
Historicity of Muhammad
Historicity of the Bible
Jesus and history
Jesus in comparative mythology
Jesus in the Talmud
Jesus Seminar
Mara bar Serapion on Jesus
Suetonius on Christians
Notes
References
Sources
Boyarin, Daniel (2004). Border Lines. The Partition of Judaeo-Christianity. University of Pennsylvania Press.
Doherty, Earl (1999). The Jesus Puzzle. Did Christianity Begin with a Mythical Christ? : Challenging the Existence of an Historical Jesus.
Drews, Arthur & Burns, C. Deslisle (1998). The Christ Myth (Westminster College–Oxford Classics in the Study of Religion).
France, R.T. (2001). The Evidence for Jesus. Hodder & Stoughton.
George, Augustin & Grelot, Pierre (Eds.) (1992). Introducción Crítica al Nuevo Testamento. Herder.
Gowler, David B. (2007). What Are They Saying About the Historical Jesus?. Paulist Press.
Meier, John P., A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus, Anchor Bible Reference Library, Doubleday
(1991), v. 1, The Roots of the Problem and the Person,
(1994), v. 2, Mentor, Message, and Miracles,
(2001), v. 3, Companions and Competitors,
(2009), v. 4, Law and Love,
Mendenhall, George E. (2001). Ancient Israel's Faith and History: An Introduction to the Bible in Context.
Messori, Vittorio (1977). Jesus hypotheses. St Paul Publications.
New Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocrypha, New Revised Standard Version. (1991) New York, Oxford University Press.
Wells, George A. (1988). The Historical Evidence for Jesus. Prometheus Books.
Wells, George A. (1998). The Jesus Myth.
Wells, George A. (2004). Can We Trust the New Testament?: Thoughts on the Reliability of Early Christian Testimony.
Wilson, Ian (2000). Jesus: The Evidence (1st ed.). Regnery Publishing.
External links
Christ myth theory
Jesus
Historical controversies
Historicity of the Bible