Exploring what the non-biblical/non-Christian sources say surrounding the claims of the Gospels and the rise of early Christianity is an important exploration when looking at the reliability of the Gospel claims. Clearly, the Gospels were written by advocates of belief in Jesus as the promised Messiah - they may be said to be biased - however, their bias does not mean we should reject their accounts, but rather question whether they accurately reported events. Here we explore 4 sources within around 100 years of the origins of Christianity, which cannot be accused of this potential favorable bias.
Flavius Josephus (AD 37-100)
The first-century Romano-Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, born in Jerusalem around AD 37-38, is almost unquestionably the single most important historian for events in first-century Palestine, exemplified in his work Jewish Antiquities. We read in one passage about Jewish High priest Ananus exploiting a gap in time where there was no governor in AD 62:
"(Ananus) convened the judges of the Sanhedrin and brought before them a man named James, the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ, and certain others. He accused them of having transgressed the law and delivered them up to be stoned"
Josephus, Antiquities 18. 63-64
Josephus was likely living in Jerusalem where these events took place, confirming accounts in Mark 6:3 and Matthew 13:55 that Jesus had a brother called James who we read in Acts and Galatians led the Christians in Jerusalem and was martyred for his faith. Additionally, we see in 1 Corinthians 9:5 written at around AD 56 mentioning that "the brothers" of Jesus also traveled spreading the message of Jesus, so we have a high degree of correlation with the New Testament.
There is also a wealth of contextual value to this account; the fact that James was being persecuted for 'transgressing the law' (Jewish law), likely for blasphemy, indicating the worship of Jesus as God/Messiah, as well as the writer's acknowledgment that Jesus was indeed called 'the Christ' the long-awaited Messiah. James would have had to believe sincerely in order to be proclaiming Jesus as the Son of God and to go to his death for this claim - James did not believe in his brother (Jesus) for the majority of His ministry as recorded in the Gospels, we only see the transformation after the recorded resurrection. James would have known the facts surrounding Jesus' upbringing (virgin-birth, where he was born etc.), ministry, and miracle-working, so his leadership of the early Christians would not have been an environment to allow for any new/distorted teachings to be accepted - we can be confident that these held beliefs of Jesus as God incarnate and His resurrection was always the bedrock of the Church and faith. Notably, with the rapid spread of Christianity in the first 30 years after Jesus' death and resurrection, there would have been no possible way of introducing new innovations after James' martyrdom to be able to sensor all previous doctrine; this would have required the impossibility of traveling far and wide to implement the new doctrine and overcoming the established belief and its resistance.
Josephus also records in Antiquities 18.5.2 where John the Baptist was beheaded by Herod Antipas (the Great), another attested event in the New Testament revealing the early claims made about Jesus, attesting to the hostility and persecution received due to the claim that Jesus was indeed God incarnate. Josephus also paints an extremely accurate picture in other parts of His writing concerning the character of Herod through the atrocities he committed, consistent with the orders of Herod in the advent story of the murder of children under 2 years old in Bethlehem. Josephus has arguably been the most influential historian for the period, widely respected for his accurate reportage, and consistently did not let his own Jewish faith impact his truthful reporting of events associated with other faiths.
In 1972, Professor Schlomo Pines of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem announced his discovery of a different manuscript tradition of Josephus’s writings in the tenth-century Melkite historian Agapius in Antiquities 18:63:
"At this time there was a wise man called Jesus, and his conduct was good, and he was known to be virtuous. Many people among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. But those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that he was alive. Accordingly, he was perhaps the Messiah, concerning whom the prophets have reported wonders. And the tribe of the Christians, so named after him, has not disappeared to this day." (Antiquities 18:63)
The language clearly indicates the Jewish perspective of Josephus, remaining neutral in regards to the claim of Jesus as the expected Messiah, describing Him as 'wise man', commonly used by Josephus in respect to prominent historical figures, and 'perhaps the Messiah'. (Schlomo Pines, An Arabic Version of the Testimonium Flavianum and its Implications [Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1971.]). We read a vivid description of Jesus' influence on the Jewish and gentile populations, including his public crucifixion and the reports of Jesus' appearances three days after his death, and the continued existence and prominence of the Christian sect.
Lucian of Samostata (AD 120-180)
Lucian of Samostata was a Greek satirist, living between 120-180AD. He frequently ridiculed superstition, religious practices, and belief in the paranormal. From his hostile perspective, there is no incentive for him to support the claims made surrounding Jesus. In his work 'The Passing of Peregrinus' he assumes the existence of Jesus as an uncontested fact:
"The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day—the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account… You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws. All this they take quite on faith, with the result that they despise all worldly goods alike, regarding them merely as common property."
(The Passing of Peregrinus, Lucian of Samostata)
We see in this passage the identification of the focus of the Christian faith in the 'worship' of one man - being Jesus Christ, described by Lucian as 'distinguished', pointing toward the wide spread public knowledge of his life and following. The knowledge of His death by crucifixion is also described, which Lucian concurs with the Gospel accounts in being a result of the 'novel rites' and claims that Jesus introduced in His ministry; we know from the gospel accounts that this was because of Jesus' claims to be God incarnate - which the Jews saw as blasphemy for which He was put to death. We can also read deeper into the text to make some more profound conclusions, namely, the fact that Lucian describes the conviction of immortality that the Christian population claimed to, on top of the ' contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion', this would require an extraordinary conviction of an event or claim surrounding Jesus. With Lucian himself convinced of the crucifixion of Jesus (the focus of the Christian worship) as a historical event, only an event like Jesus' resurrection from the dead would have the power to impose such a radical conviction, lifestyle change, and focus of worship on Jesus himself.
Although Lucian is not an eyewitness to the crucifixion and resurrection events, he is writing from around 100 years after Jesus' death, and we know from scientific studies that this is far too short a time for a widespread myth to form - particularly as someone of Lucian's age would have grandparents from the time of Jesus. Lucian simply writes as though these events are fact and common knowledge (this would still be the case if Lucian used source material for his writing) reflecting the general acceptance of Jesus' existence and crucifixion at the time. We can be sure that Lucian would not hold back any doubts or rebukes if he doubted Jesus' existence, reflecting a general prejudice and hostility towards the Christian sect, but still attesting to the fact and acceptance of Jesus' life and death.
Tacitus (AD 56-120)
Tacitus lived in the first century AD with a background as a senator and historian of the Roman Empire, his main work being 'Annuls', providing a year-by-year account of events in ancient Rome, and the 'Histories' writing about Roman emperors during the period of AD 14 - 70. In Annuls 15.44 (Cornelius Tacitus, The Annals, BOOK XV, chapter 44 (tufts.edu)) he explicitly talks about Jesus, during his writings on Emperor Nero. He talks first about the Christian sect who were being blamed for the great fire of Rome (AD 64), before talking about their persecution:
"Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judæa, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular."
Here we get another insight confirming the extreme torture and persecution the early Christian population was undergoing, we can presume that these martyrs had the opportunity to recant their allegiance to Jesus ('Christus') but were convinced to the root of their being, that their loyalty resulted in death - that's powerful. Tacitus also identifies the root of their beliefs originating in the person of 'Christus' and His crucifixion (the most extreme penalty) under the rein of Tiberius, at the hands of Pontius Pilatus, all of which concur with the Gospel accounts. The fact that Tacitus highlights Jesus' death directly with the deriving of the name for the sect called 'Christians' sheds light on how this was one of the central claims and beliefs of the Christian faith. More light is shed on this with regards to the 'mischievous superstition' Tacitus mentions, implying the central belief that Jesus had not only died by crucifixion but had also risen from the dead. We read that this 'superstition' broke out through Judea, agreeing with the Gospel accounts of Jesus' crucifixion, burial, and resurrection appearances. This gives shows us the public knowledge and claims that were being made about Jesus, and although actively persecuted and 'checked', rapidly 'broke out' in the very place where Jesus was publicly crucified and buried; the resultant endeavor and zeal of such claims breaking out in Rome, Italy. The criteria of embarrassment also applies here, with Nero's throne wobbling due to the fire of Rome, and his desperate scape-goating, would have been within his interest not to mention Jesus.
Tacitus continues:
"...then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired. Nero offered his gardens for the spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus, while he mingled with the people in the dress of a charioteer or stood aloft on a car. Hence, even for criminals who deserved extreme and exemplary punishment, there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but to glut one man's cruelty, that they were being destroyed."
This gives us a deeper insight as to why the Christian sect would have been a scapegoat for the fire; with their loyalty to Jesus, they denied allegiance to Emperor Nero, which likely resulted in Nero's personal hatred and 'cruelty', resulting in persecution, which brought about a compassion amongst the on-watching populous.
The writing of Tacitus clearly indicates his personal hostility to the Christian faith, someone who would have no motive to support the gospel accounts, yet as an accurate historian we find His writing providing further support for:
Confirming the biblical account of Jesus’ death, coming from an enemy of the Church, it can be further trusted as he has no incentive to make his account match biblical scripture.
The explosion of the early church (based on the central claim of Jesus being God incarnate -the promised Savior- and His resurrection) from a non-evangelising, intrinsic Jewish society, and its wide and rapid spread despite dire resistance.
The severity of persecution and tribulation for the early followers of Jesus, who were martyrs for their faith - fueled by the deep conviction and hope in Jesus Christ through His reported death and resurrection.
Pliny the Younger (AD 62 -110)
Pliny the Younger (born AD 61/62; died after AD 111) was a man with a very distinguished career in public office, governing Bithynia and Pontus, a region of northwest Turkey from AD 109-111. In his letter (Epistles 10.96) to Emperor Trajan he asks for advice on how to deal with Christians. Due to its length, the full letter can be read here: Pliny Book 10, Letter 96 (English) (vroma.org). Some extractions from the letter read as follows:
"It is a rule, Sir, which I inviolably observe, to refer myself to you in all my doubts; for who is more capable of guiding my uncertainty or informing my ignorance? Having never been present at any trials of the Christians, I am unacquainted with the method and limits to be observed either in examining or punishing them. Whether any difference is to be made on account of age, or no distinction allowed between the youngest and the adult; whether repentance admits to a pardon, or if a man has been once a Christian it avails him nothing to recant; whether the mere profession of Christianity, albeit without crimes, or only the crimes associated therewith are punishable in all these points I am greatly doubtful"
"They affirmed, however, the whole of their guilt, or their error, was, that they were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food but food of an ordinary and innocent kind."
"I therefore adjourned the proceedings, and betook myself at once to your counsel. For the matter seemed to me well worth referring to you, especially considering the numbers endangered. Persons of all ranks and ages, and of both sexes are, and will be, involved in the prosecution. For this contagious superstition is not confined to the cities only, but has spread through the villages and rural districts; it seems possible, however, to check and cure it. 'Tis certain at least that the temples, which had been almost deserted, begin now to be frequented; and the sacred festivals, after a long intermission, are again revived; while there is a general demand for sacrificial animals, which for some time past have met with but few purchasers. From hence it is easy to imagine what multitudes may be reclaimed from this error, if a door be left open to repentance." (Epistles 10:96)
We can deduce from his letter the ongoing persecution of the Christian sect, as well as the opportunities they were given to recant - many of which did not and were killed for their belief. This deep conviction and willingness to die for their allegiance to Jesus is extremely powerful, something so impactful as the claims and eyewitness testimonies of Jesus' resurrection would only be a natural explanation to impose such a hope beyond death - and particularly the worship of Jesus 'as to a God', described as a 'contagious superstition', which could also be referenced to the resurrection claims. It is also quite possible to see that the partaking of food 'of an innocent kind' to be describing the practices of communion with the breaking of bread and drinking of wine associated with the events of Jesus' last supper with his disciples symbolising Jesus' sacrifice and atonement for humanity through His flesh and blood (His life). Empty temples and lack of demand for sacrificial animals further infers the radical transition from the Jewish sacrificial system, to the belief that Jesus had been the fulfillment of this sacrificial symbolism, and therefore rendered the system empty.
Pliny the Younger provides yet another source of enemy attestation; with no reason to falsely support the gospel accounts or show favor towards the early church, we can be confident this is a truthful report on a circumstance concerning the early Christians, giving us a reliable window into the period and the early supernatural claims related to Christ. We can see that there is strong evidence that indeed the 'Biblical Jesus' and the 'historical Jesus' are the same, with no ancient writing or accounts that challenge the historicity and biblical claims of Jesus, only an overwhelming concurrence with the Gospel accounts, and the exposure of the personal biases of the non-biblical authors towards Jesus, which does not negate their ability to accurately report events.
Comments