Jesus Mythicists: A Dying Breed of Historians
Although there are virtually no historical scholars today who doubt whether or not Jesus existed, there are still plenty of skeptic laymen (and women) who have only a pop-level understanding of the historicity of Jesus of Nazareth.
In a recent online encounter with a skeptic, I was told that there is no proof that Jesus even existed. I smiled as I contemplated the possible routes I could take him to show off the wealth of historical evidence there is; not only in the New Testament, but in several non-Christian sources as well! Sadly, he wasn’t open to the evidence and promptly changed the subject. He likely had never encountered a believer who has studied the subject.
First, Let me quote one of the most famous historical textual critics of our day, who happens to self-identify as agnostic, Bart Ehrman. In his book, Did Jesus Exist? Ehrman writes the following: “I do not discuss mythicists in the class, since as I’ve repeatedly indicated, the mythicist view does not have a foothold, or even a toe-hold among modern critical scholars of the Bible.”
Do you crave a second opinion? Here is a quote from Maurice Casey; another agnostic New Testament scholar who was very respected in the field, from his book (written shortly before his death in 2014) Jesus: Evidence and Argument or Mythicist Myths? Casey ends his book, “I therefore conclude that the mythicist arguments are completely spurious from beginning to end. They have been mainly put forward by incompetent, and unqualified people.”
So how do we know whether someone existed in history? How do we know, for example, that Alexander the Great existed? Diodorus, a Greek historian (~90 B.C.- ~30 B.C.) Writes extensively of the life and conquest of Alexander in his Bibliotheca Historica. Even earlier was Polybius, another Greek/Roman historian (~208 B.C. - ~117 B.C.) who was not very fond of Alexander as suggested in his Histories. There are multiple other sources for the life of Alexander the Great, including Arrian, Plutarch, and Curtius Rufus.
From these works of antiquity, we have great reason to believe that there existed a king of Macedon named Alexander who accomplished great military conquests all over the known world.
Now let’s take a look at some of the historical evidence we have for the life of Jesus of Nazareth. It would be a rookie mistake to disqualify the Gospels and other New Testament literature from being historical, simply because they are “Christian” works. Bias of any kind does not change certain aspects of historical authenticity. If that were so, we would know little-to-nothing about the past, because no one is truly unbiased.
However, just for the sake of argument, let’s set aside these “Christian” sources, such as Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, etc. and focus on non-Christian sources:
First and perhaps the best known is the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (~37 A.D. - ~100 A.D.), who writes of Jesus on two occasions in Antiquities 18.3.3 and 20.9.1, and even mentions James, the brother of Jesus, and records his execution for the belief that his brother was the Christ. Now some who are familiar with Josephus might object to this first source on grounds of the controversy surrounding one of his mentionings of Jesus (18.3.3), in which most scholars believe there to be a “doctoring of the text,” by a Christian copyist. However, most scholars do believe that while a later copyist most likely altered the text, Josephus did at the very least mention Jesus and that aside, the other mention by Josephus is not debated amongst scholars concerning its authenticity or integrity.
Next we have Publius Cornelius Tacitus (~56 A.D. - ~120 A.D.). Considered to be one of, if not the greatest of Roman historians, he wrote in Annals 15.44 that Emperor Nero fastened the guilt of the burning of Rome on Christians and recalls that the name “Christians” came from it’s founder, “Christus” whom he records was executed by Pontius Pilatus during the reign of emperor Tiberius. Now Tacitus was no fan of Christianity. He referred to it as a “mischievous superstition.” It wouldn’t matter to him whether Jesus existed or not. The most likely reason he records these events concerning Jesus is that they actually happened.
In addition to these two impressive sources, we also find Jesus referenced in the works of Lucian of Samosata, a Greek satirist who was known for ridiculing religion. Also, Mara Bar Serapion, a philosopher from Syria who mentions, in a letter he wrote to his son, the murder of Jesus by His own people, the Jews, who were responsible for Jesus’s crucifixion as were the Romans.
And for the last source I’ll mention in this article, Jesus is mentioned in the Jewish Talmud in Sanhedrin 43a which reads, “On the eve of the passover Yeshu was hanged,” giving us not only record of Jesus’s existence, but also His crucifixion.
To summarize, in historical terms, the existence of Jesus of Nazareth is one of the most well attested facts of antiquity. “Jesus mythicists,” as they are commonly referred to, are a dying breed of scholars that, according to agnostic scholar Bart Ehrman, “do not have a foothold, or even a toehold among modern critical scholars of the Bible.”
Recommended Resources:
Book: The Historical Jesus by Gary Habermas