Evidence for the Historicity of Jesus -------------------------------------------- (mainly for Luke Lefebvre) I am going to rule out ANY source which is later than a century after the death of Jesus, dated to around 30CE by most believers. The reason for that is that if no one had written down the evidence within a hundred years, you have to ask, how reliable can it be? It would have to have been passed orally between three or four people at least, before the written word, and so the potential for it to be a tale that grew in the telling is huge. This leaves us with the following types of sources: (1) Pagan sources There are three of these: Tacitus (c 116CE), Pliny (c.112 CE) and Suetonius (c. 121CE). Note that the dates of the sources are all 2nd century, and none of them is an eyewitness to any of the events in Jesus lifetime. (2) Jewish sources There is one of these: Josephus (c. 93 CE). Josephus was an eyewitness to events in the 1st century, but not to the events in Jesus lifetime as he was born about 4 years after Jesus died. For a number of reasons his testimony on a number of issues needs to be viewed critically, and not simply taken at face value. (3) Christian sources [3a] There are four gospels, (variously dated by scholars anywhere from the mid 1st century to the early 2nd century) . The authors are unknown, and so is their place of composition. Only one of these, claims, in any sense, to be an eyewitness account, and that one paradoxically is the one dated uniformly by scholars to be the latest, written either in the the late 1st century or early 2nd, and at least 50 years after Jesus death. The other three gospels share so much material in common, including verbatim passages, that they really must be viewed as more or less one source. We should note that - as historical records of events - these gospels contain conflicting information as the Jesus birth, the length of his ministry, the order and sequence of events, and the circumstances surrounding his death. [3b] Pauls letters (c 50-65 CE). Seven of these are accepted as authentic by almost all scholars. However, Paul does not claim to have met the historical Jesus, and the information about Jesus he provides is scant. [3c] Other non-canonical sources: There are many of these, including the Gospel of Thomas, The Gospel of Peter, The Gospel of Mary Magdelene etc. Their dating is uncertain, but most scholars would place these three within the 100-year time frame. A point to note here is that while historians might accept these as historical evidence, most Christians reject their authenticity. I have excluded other Christian writings such as Hebrews, 1 Clement, Revelation, The Didache, and of the writings of the early church fathers such as Papias, Ignatius and Polycarp because while they provide evidence of thriving Christian communities in the 1st century, they do not provide testimony, either internal or external for the events in the life of Jesus, nor of his existence. Therefore generously, we can count 5 sources outside the Gospels (canonical and non-canonical). The information these non-gospel sources yield about is: Pagan sources: Tacitus: Christus suffered the extreme penalty at the hands of Pilate. Suetonius: Nothing Pliny:Nothing Josephus: (a) Jesus was a ... wise man, And ...Pilate, ... condemned him to the cross. (b) Jesus had a brother called James. Paul: Jesus was a man, born of a woman. He had 12 followers, with whom he ate a last meal. He had a family, including a brother called James, whom Paul has met. In summary, the information we have about Jesus from non-gospel sources is that - Jesus was a man with a brother called James; he had 12 followers, and was killed (probably crucified) under the orders of Pilate.
Posted on: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 17:21:58 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015