Historicity of Jesus

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A series of articles on

Jesus Christ and Christianity Christology Chronology Ministry Miracles Parables Names and titles Relics

Non-religious aspects Background Historicity Greek • Aramaic Race

Perspectives on Jesus New Testament view Christian views Religious perspectives Jewish view Islamic view Historical Jesus Jesus Seminar Jesus as myth

Jesus in culture Cultural depictions of Jesus Images This box: view • talk • edit

The historicity of Jesus concerns the historical authenticity of Jesus of Nazareth. Scholars draw a distinction between Jesus as reconstructed through historical methods and the Christ of faith as understood through theological tradition. The historical figure of Jesus is of central importance to many religions, but especially Christianity and Islam, in which the historical details of Jesus’ life are essential.

Most scholars in the fields of biblical studies and history agree that Jesus was a Jewish teacher from Galilee who was regarded as a healer, was baptized by John the Baptist, was accused of sedition against the Roman Empire, and on the orders of Roman Governor Pontius Pilate was sentenced to death by crucifixion.^[1] A small minority ^[2]argue that Jesus never existed as a historical figure, but merely as a metaphorical or mythical figure syncretized from various non-Abrahamic deities and heroes.^[3]

The four canonical Gospels and the writings of Paul of the New Testament are among the earliest known documents relating to Jesus' life. Some scholars also hypothesize the existence of early texts such as the Signs Gospel and the Q document. There are arguments that the Gospel of Thomas is likewise an early text. Many later texts provide valuable historical information as well.

Scholarly opinions on the historicity of the New Testament accounts are diverse. They range from the view that they are inerrant descriptions of the life of Jesus,^[4] to the view that they provide no historical information about his life.^[5] As with all historical sources, scholars ask: to what extent did the authors' motivations shape the texts, what sources were available to them, how soon after the events described did they write, and whether or not these factors lead to inaccuracies such as exaggerations or inventions.

Contents 1 Earliest known sources 1.1 Christian writings 1.1.1 Gospels 1.1.2 Pauline Epistles 1.1.3 Ancient Creeds 1.1.4 New Testament apocrypha 1.1.4.1 Gnostic texts 1.2 Early Church fathers 1.3 Greco-Roman sources 1.3.1 Josephus 1.3.2 Tacitus 1.3.3 Suetonius 1.3.4 Pliny the Younger 1.3.5 Others 1.4 Jewish records 2 Jesus as an historical person 3 Jesus as myth 4 Notes 5 References 6 See also 7 External links

[edit] Earliest known sources

[edit] Christian writings

Jesus is featured throughout the New Testament and other early Christian writings, as can be seen in such works as the Gospels, the Pauline Epistles, the book of Acts, the writings of the early Church Fathers, and the New Testament apocrypha.

[edit] Gospels

Main articles: Gospels, Synoptic problem, and Authorship of the Johannine works

The most detailed sources of historical information about Jesus in the Bible are the four canonical Gospels: the Gospel of Matthew; the Gospel of Mark; the Gospel of Luke; and the Gospel of John. These Gospels are narrative accounts of the life of Jesus. They concentrate on his ministry, and conclude with his death and resurrection. The extent to which these sources are interrelated, or used related source material, is known as the synoptic problem. The date, authorship, access to eyewitnesses, and other essential questions of historicity depend on the various solutions to this problem.

The four canonical Gospels are anonymous. The introduction to Luke mentions other accounts by eyewitnesses, and claims to have "diligently investigated all things from the beginning." The epilogue to John identifies the source of the book as "the beloved disciple" whose "testimony we know to be true". The authors in antiquity who discussed the authorship of the Gospels generally asserted the following:^[6] Matthew was written by Matthew, an apostle of Jesus; Mark was written by Mark, a disciple of Simon Peter, who was an apostle; Luke was written by Luke, who was a disciple of Paul; John was written by John, who was an apostle.

The first three Gospels, known as the synoptic gospels, share much material. As a result of various scholarly hypotheses attempting to explain this interdependence, the traditional association of the texts with their authors has become the subject of criticism. Though some solutions retain the traditional authorship,^[7] other solutions reject some or all of these claims. The solution most commonly held in academia today, the two-source hypothesis, has Mark being written in the 60's or slightly after the year 70, with Luke and Matthew following 10-20 years later.^[8] Other solutions, such as the Augustinian hypothesis and Griesbach hypothesis, would give Matthew priority and a possible date of 40. John is most often dated to 90-100,^[9] though a date as early as the 60s, and as late as the second century have been argued by a few.^[10]

"Thus our prime sources about the life of Jesus were written within about fifty years of his death by people who perhaps knew him, but certainly by people who knew people who knew him. If this is beginning to sound slightly second hand, we may wish to consider two points. First... most ancient and medieval history was written from a much greater distance. Second, all the Gospel writers could have talked to people who were actually on the spot, and while perhaps not eyewitnesses themselves, their position is certainly the next best thing."^[11]

Even in the traditional analysis, it must be asserted that the authors wrote with certain motivations and a view to a particular community and its needs. Furthermore, it is also certain the authors relied on various sources, including their own memories, the testimony of eyewitnesses, and as even the traditional analysis asserted, the later authors did not write in ignorance of some texts that preceded them, as is claimed explicitly by the author of Luke. Other possible source documents have been proposed: an Aramaic Matthew, a proto-Matthew, Q document, and others, although none of these texts, if they were real, have been found.

The extent to which the Gospels were subject to additions, redactions, or interpolations is the subject of Textual criticism, which examines the extent to which a manuscript changed from its autograph, or the work as written by the original author, through manuscript transmission. Possible alterations in the Gospels include Mark 16:8-20 and John 7:53-8:11.

Other issues with the historicity of the Gospels include possible conflicts with each other, or with other historical sources. The most frequent suggestions of conflict relate to the Census of Quirinius as recounted in Luke, the two genealogies contained in Luke and Matthew, and the chronology of the Easter events.^[12]

[edit] Pauline Epistles

Main articles: Pauline epistles and Authorship of the Pauline epistles

Jesus is also the subject of the writings of Paul of Tarsus, who wrote letters to various churches and individuals from c. 48-68. Paul was not an eyewitness of Jesus' life, though he knew some of Jesus' disciples including Simon Peter, and claimed knowledge of Jesus through visions.

There are traditionally fourteen letters attributed to Paul, thirteen of which claim to be written by Paul, with one anonymous letter. Current scholarship is in a general consensus in considering at least seven of the letters to be written by Paul, with views varying concerning the remaining works. In his letters, Paul quoted Jesus several times,^[13] and also offered details on the life of Jesus.

In his First Epistle to the Thessalonians Paul says in chapter 2:14-15, speaking about his fellow Jews, that they "...killed the Lord Jesus..." He also quotes Jesus in chapter 4:15.

In his Epistle to the Galatians, Paul claims he went to Jerusalem three years after his encounter with Jesus on the road to Damascus. He had traveled in Arabia and back to Damascus before going to see Peter, who Paul calls an apostle of Jesus, and James, "the Lord's brother", believed by many to be James the Just. (1:18–20) Paul then says that fourteen years later he traveled back to Jerusalem, at which time he held a meeting with the Jerusalem Christians. Believed by most scholars to be the Council of Jerusalem, this was a debate with Paul arguing against the need for circumcision to be a member of the group. Paul says he won the argument and that Peter, James, and John agreed that he should be the preacher to the Gentiles. Peter later visited Paul at Antioch and associated with the Gentiles, but when certain friends of James showed up, they seem to have discouraged Peter from associating with the Gentiles, and Paul rebuked Peter for this. (2) Galatians is one of the undisputed letters of Paul and is early textual evidence for the existence of Jesus, as it relates that Jesus' "brother" and "apostles" were arguing with Paul over what Jesus' intentions were during his life. Acts of the Apostles, written at least twenty but probably thirty or forty years after Galatians, gives a more detailed account of the Council in chapter 15.

In Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians he says in chapter 2:8 that the "...rulers of this age...", Paul's age, "...crucified the Lord...". He then quotes what he says are Jesus' commands regarding the unacceptability of divorce in 7:10-11. In 9:5 he references Jesus' brothers and their wives and again quotes Jesus in 9:14. Paul then gives a description of the Last Supper in 11:23-26. He then, in 15:3-8, talks about Jesus' death and resurrection and witnesses to it. Paul also talks about Jesus' human and divine natures in his letter to the Philippians in 2:5-11 and his letter to the Romans in 1:1-4.

[edit] Ancient Creeds

The authors whose works are contained in the New Testament sometimes quote from creeds, or confessions of faith, that obviously predate their writings. Scholars suppose that some of these creeds date to within a few years of Jesus' death, and were developed within the Christian community in Jerusalem.^[14] Though embedded within the texts of the New Testament, these creeds are a distinct source for early Christianity.

1Corinthians 15:3-4 reads: "For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures." This contains a Christian creed of pre-Pauline origin.^[15] The antiquity of the creed has been located by many Biblical scholars to less than a decade after Jesus' death, originating from the Jerusalem apostolic community.^[16] Concerning this creed, Campenhausen wrote, "This account meets all the demands of historical reliability that could possibly be made of such a text,"^[17] whilst A. M. Hunter said, "The passage therefore preserves uniquely early and verifiable testimony. It meets every reasonable demand of historical reliability."^[18]

Other relevant creeds which predate the texts wherein they are found that have been identified are 1John 4:2: "This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God",^[19] 2Timothy 2:8: "Remember Jesus Christ, raised from the dead, this is my Gospel",^[20] Romans 1:3-4: "regarding his Son, who as to his human nature was a descendant of David, and who through the spirit of holiness was declared with power to be the Son of God by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord.",^[21] and 1Timothy 3:16: "He appeared in a body, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory," an early creedal hymn.^[22]

[edit] New Testament apocrypha

Jesus is a large factor in New Testament apocrypha, works excluded from the canon as it developed because they were judged not to be inspired. These texts are almost entirely dated to the mid second century or later, though a few texts, such as the Didache, may be first century in origin. Some of these works are discussed below:

[edit] Gnostic texts

Gnostic texts date to the mid second century at the earliest, and show a lack of attention to history, generally avoiding the standard historical narrative in favour of sayings framed in the structure of a private, and often secret revelation, and therefore emphasize allegory. The Gnostics' opinion of Jesus varied from viewing him as docetic to completely metaphorical, in all cases treating him as someone to allegorically attribute gnostic teachings to, his resurrection being regarded an allegory for enlightenment, in which all can take part. Nonetheless, certain Gnostic texts mention Jesus in the context of his earthly existence, and some scholars have argued that Gnostic texts could contain plausible traditions.^[23] Examples of such texts include the Gospel of Truth, Treatise on Resurrection, and the Apocryphon of John, the latter of which opens with the following:

It happened one day when John, the brother of James — who are sons of Zebedee — went up and came to the temple, that a Pharisee named Arimanius approached him and said to him: "Where is your master whom you followed?" And he said to them: "He has gone to the place from which he came." The Pharisee said to him: "This Nazarene deceived you all with deception and filled your ears with lies and closed your hearts and turned you from the traditions of your fathers."^[24]

Of all the Gnostic texts, however, the Gospel of Thomas had drawn the most attention. It contains a list of sayings attributed to Jesus. Though it lacks a narrative of Jesus treating his deeds in a historical sense, and though it is generally dated to the second century, other scholars contend for an early date of perhaps 50, citing a relationship to the hypothetical Q document among other reasons.^[25]

[edit] Early Church fathers

Early Christian sources outside the New Testament also mention Jesus and the historical details of his life. Important texts from the Apostolic Fathers are, to name just the most significant and ancient, Clement of Rome(c. 100),^[26] Ignatius of Antioch(c. 107-110),^[27] Quadratus,^[28] Justin Martyr,^[29] and others.

[edit] Greco-Roman sources

See also: Yeshu and Yuz Asaf

Of the non-Christian writings from that time that have been preserved, very few mention Jesus or Christianity, and for that matter few of their authors showed much interest in Judea or the Near East in general. Nonetheless, there are passages relevant to Jesus in the works of four major non-Christian writers of the late 1st and early 2nd centuries – Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius, and Pliny the Younger – as well as others. However, these are generally references to early Christians rather than a historical Jesus. Of the four, Josephus' writings, which document John the Baptist, James the Just, and possibly also Jesus, are of the most interest to scholars dealing with the historicity of Jesus (see below). Tacitus, in his Annals written c. 115, mentions popular opinion about Christus, without historical details (see also: Tacitus on Jesus). There is an obscure reference to a Jewish leader called "Chrestus" in Suetonius. Pliny condemned Christians as easily-led fools.

[edit] Josephus

Main article: Josephus on Jesus

Flavius Josephus (c. 37–c. 100), a Jew and Roman citizen who worked under the patronage of the Flavians, wrote the Antiquities of the Jews in 93. In it, Jesus is mentioned twice. In the second very brief mentioning, Josephus calls James, "the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ".^[30] This is considered by the majority of scholars to be authentic,^[31] though a few have raised doubts.^[32]

More notably, in the Testimonium Flavianum, it is written:

About this time came Jesus, a wise man, if indeed it is appropriate to call him a man. For he was a performer of paradoxical feats, a teacher of people who accept the unusual with pleasure, and he won over many of the Jews and also many Greeks. He was the Christ. When Pilate, upon the accusation of the first men amongst us, condemned him to be crucified, those who had formerly loved him did not cease [to follow him], for he appeared to them on the third day, living again, as the divine prophets foretold, along with a myriad of other marvellous things concerning him. And the tribe of the Christians, so named after him, has not disappeared to this day.^[33]

Concerns have been raised about the authenticity of the passage, at least in part, and it is widely held by scholars that part of the passage is an interpolation by a later scribe. In antiquity, Origen recorded that Josephus did not believe Jesus was the Christ.^[34] Michael L. White argued against authenticity, citing that parallel sections of Josephus's Jewish War do not mention Jesus, and that some Christian writers as late as the third century, who quoted from the Antiquities, do not mention the passage.^[35] However, most scholars have "no doubts" about the authenticity of the majority of the passage.^[36] Certain scholars of Josephus's works have observed that this portion is written in his style.^[37] Habermas wrote: "There is no textual evidence against it, and, conversely, there is very good manuscript evidence for these statements about Jesus, thus making it difficult to ignore."^[38] Lastly, a few scholars support the authenticity of the entire passage.^[39]

[edit] Tacitus

Main article: Tacitus on Jesus

Tacitus (c. 56–c. 117), writing c. 116, included in his Annals a mention of Christianity and Christ. In describing Nero's persecution of Christians following the Great Fire of Rome c. 64, he wrote:

Nero fastened the guilt [of starting the blaze] 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 [14-37] 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 Judaea, 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.^[40]

Tacitus simply refers to "Christus" the Latinized Greek translation of the Hebrew word "Messiah", rather than the name "Jesus", and he refers to Pontius Pilate as a "procurator", a specific post that differs from the one that the Gospels imply that he held—prefect or governor. In this instance, the Gospel account is supported by archaeology, since a surviving inscription discovered at Caeserae states that Pilate was prefect.^[41]

Concerning Tacitus' source, it was likely an imperial record, and it has been controversially speculated that this may even have been one of Pilate's reports to the emperor.^[42] R. E. Van Voorst noted the improbability that later Christians would have interpolated "such disparaging remarks about Christianity".^[43]

Biblical scholar Bart D. Ehrman summarized the historical importance of this passage:

"Tacitus's report confirms what we know from other sources, that Jesus was executed by order of the Roman governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate, sometime during Tiberius's reign. We learn nothing, however, about the reason for this execution, or about Jesus' life and teachings."^[44]

[edit] Suetonius

Gaius Suetonius Tranquillas (c. 69–140) wrote the following in 112 as part of his biography of Emperor Claudius in his Lives of the Twelve Caesars about riots which broke out in the Jewish community in Rome in 49: "As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he [Claudius] expelled them from Rome".^[45] The passage refers to riots among the Jews around the year 50. The event was noted in Acts 18:2. The term Chrestus also appears in some later texts applied to Jesus, and Robert Graves,^[46] among others,^[47] consider it a variant spelling of Christ, or at least a reasonable spelling error. On the other hand, Chrestus was itself a common name, particularly for slaves, meaning good or useful. Some scholars believe it just as likely that this passage is not a spelling error and does not refer to Jesus or Christians.^[48]

Because these events took place around 20 years after Jesus' death, the passage most likely is not referring to the person Jesus, although it could be referencing Christians, whom Suetonius also mentioned in regards to Nero and the fire of Rome.^[49] As such, this passage offers little useful information about Jesus.^[50]

[edit] Pliny the Younger

Pliny the Younger, the provincial governor of Pontus and Bithynia, wrote to Emperor Trajan c. 112 concerning how to deal with Christians, who refused to worship the emperor, and instead worshiped "Christus". The name "Jesus" is not used.

Those who denied that they were or had been Christians, when they invoked the gods in words dictated by me, offered prayer with incense and wine to your image, which I had ordered to be brought for this purpose together with statues of the gods, and moreover cursed Christ — none of which those who are really Christians, it is said, can be forced to do — these I thought should be discharged. Others named by the informer declared that they were Christians, but then denied it, asserting that they had been but had ceased to be, some three years before, others many years, some as much as twenty-five years. They all worshipped your image and the statues of the gods, and cursed Christ.

They asserted, however, that the sum and substance of their fault or error had been that they were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god, and to bind themselves by oath, not to some crime, but not to commit fraud, theft, or adultery, not falsify their trust, nor to refuse to return a trust when called upon to do so. When this was over, it was their custom to depart and to assemble again to partake of food—but ordinary and innocent food. Even this, they affirmed, they had ceased to do after my edict by which, in accordance with your instructions, I had forbidden political associations.^[51]

[edit] Others

Thallus, whose identity is difficult to determine, is known to have written a history from the Trojan War to his own time, which was sometime in the first or early second century. His work has been lost. In discussing Jesus' crucifixion and subsequent darkness, Julius Africanus, writing c. 221, referenced the lost work of Thallus:

On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in his third book of History, calls (as appears to me without reason) an eclipse of the sun.^[52]

Lucian, a second century Romano-Syrian satirist, who wrote in Greek, wrote:

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.^[53]

Celsus, though a late second-century critic of Christianity, accused Jesus of being a bastard child and a sorcerer; yet he never questions Jesus' historicity even though he hated Christianity and Jesus.^[54] He is quoted as saying that Jesus was a "mere man".^[55]

The Acts of Pilate is a lost text, purportedly an official document from Pilate reporting events in Palestine to the Emperor Tiberius (thus, it would have been among the commentaii principis). It was mentioned by Justin Martyr, in his First Apology (c. 150) to Antoninus Pius, Marcus Aurelius, and Lucius Verus, who said that his claims concerning Jesus' crucifixion, and some miracles, could be verified by referencing the official record, the "Acts of Pontius Pilate".^[56] With the exception of Tertullian, no other writer is known to have mentioned the work, and Tertullian's reference says that Tiberius debated the details of Jesus' life before the Senate, an event that is almost universally considered absurd.^[57] There is a later apocryphal text, undoubtedly fanciful, by the same name, and though it is generally thought to have been inspired by Justin's reference (and thus to post-date his Apology), it is possible that Justin actually mentioned this text, though that would give the work an unusually early date and therefore is not a straightforward identification.^[58]

[edit] Jewish records

Main article: Yeshu

The Talmud Sanhedrin 43a, which dates to the earliest period of composition (Tannaitic period) contains the following:

One the eve of the Passover, Yeshu was hanged. Forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried: "He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy. Any one who can say anything in his favour, let him come forward and plead on his behalf." But since nothing was brought forward in his favour he was hanged on the eve of the Passover.^[59]

The name Yeshu (ישו) uses the same letters as the abbreviation "Y.Sh.V." (יש״ו), which scribes use to stand for the longer phrase, "his name will be erased and its memory" (ימח שמו וזכרו Yemakh Shmo V-zikhro), which signifies a Jew convicted of enticing to idolatry, whose name has been blotted out.^{[citation needed]} Thus, this may be referring to somebody other than Jesus.^{[citation needed]}

[edit] Jesus as an historical person

Main articles: Historical Jesus and Quest for the Historical Jesus

The Historical Jesus is a reconstruction of Jesus using modern historical methods. Most historians consider the accounts of Jesus' life to be historically useful.

Paul Barnett pointed out that "scholars of ancient history have always recognized the 'subjectivity' factor in their available sources" and "have so few sources available compared to their modern counterparts that they will gladly seize whatever scraps of information that are at hand." He noted that modern history and ancient history are two separate disciplines, with differing methods of analysis and interpretation. ^[60]

In The Historical Figure of Jesus, E.P. Sanders used Alexander the Great as a paradigm—the available sources tell us much about Alexander’s deeds, but nothing about his thoughts. "The sources for Jesus are better, however, than those that deal with Alexander" and "the superiority of evidence for Jesus is seen when we ask what he thought."^[61] Thus, Sanders considers the quest for the Historical Jesus to be much closer to a search for historical details on Alexander than to those historical figures with adequate documentation.

Consequently, scholars like Sanders, Geza Vermes, John P. Meier, David Flusser, James H. Charlesworth, Raymond E. Brown, Paula Fredriksen and John Dominic Crossan argue that, although many readers are accustomed to thinking of Jesus solely as a theological figure whose existence is a matter only of religious debate, the four canonical Gospel accounts are based on source documents written within decades of Jesus' lifetime, and therefore provide a basis for the study of the "historical" Jesus. These historians also draw on other historical sources and archaeological evidence to reconstruct the life of Jesus in his historical and cultural context.

[edit] Jesus as myth

Main article: Jesus as myth

A few scholars have questioned the existence of Jesus as an actual historical figure. The views of scholars who entirely reject Jesus' historicity are summarized in the chapter on Jesus in Will Durant's Caesar and Christ; it is based on: a suggested lack of eyewitness, a lack of direct archaeological evidence, the failure of certain ancient works to mention Jesus, and alleged similarities between early Christianity and contemporary mythology.^[62]

Perhaps the most prolific of these scholars disputing the historical existence of Jesus is George Albert Wells. In more recent times, it has been advocated by Earl Doherty and Robert M. Price.

This view has not found acceptance by the historical community. Michael Grant stated that the view is derived from a lack of application of historical methods:

…if we apply to the New Testament, as we should, the same sort of criteria as we should apply to other ancient writings containing historical material, we can no more reject Jesus' existence than we can reject the existence of a mass of pagan personages whose reality as historical figures is never questioned.^[63]

The mythological view generally explains the emergence of Christianity, not as a result of any teachings of Jesus, since they reject his existence, but instead as a synchronism of various mystery religions, essentially building a mystery religion on the foundation of a Judaic tradition via the fulfillment of Old Testament prophesies, and including the idealizing and metaphorically exalting a Jewish leader into a Son of God. Adherents of this view point to certain similarities between Christianity and these ancient religious movements in support of their position.

In their work The Jesus Mysteries, Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy argued that Jesus did not exist as a historical figure but was in fact one of the forms of Osiris-Dionysus. The book's use as cover art of an image of Orpheus crucified, an amulet which is probably a forgery, has caused critics to accuse them of deceptive methods.^[64] Gerald Massey, in his work The Historical Jesus and Mythical Christ: A Lecture, published in 1880, explored the similarity between what has been written about Jesus and what has been written about Jehoshua Ben-Pandira, who "may have been born about the year 120 BC". From page two of the lecture: "According to the Babylonian Gemara to the Mishna of Tract 'Shabbath', this Jehoshua, the son of Pandira and Stada, was stoned to death as a wizard, in the city of Lud, or Lydda, and afterwards crucified by being hanged on a tree, on the eve of the Passover." Dennis R. MacDonald ^[65] argued that the Gospel of Mark and parts of Acts may have been written by an ancient author practising the common Greek form of mimesis upon the works of Homer, as he argued there are parallels to Jesus and Odysseus. ^{[66] [67]} Earl Doherty further argued that "the words of the first century writers never speak of Jesus' arrival or life on earth. Rather, they speak of his revelation, of his manifestation by God."^[68]

There are various difficulties with this position that have caused historians and Biblical scholars to reject the view. For one example, there is no known case of a mythical deity in the mystery religions with clear and early evidence that a resurrection was taught prior to the late second century AD.^[69] Michael Grant wrote:

Judaism was a milieu to which doctrines of the deaths and rebirths of mythical gods seemed so entirely foreign that the emergence of such a fabrication from its midst is very hard to credit.^[70]

Other adherents of the "mythological school" do not absolutely deny Jesus' existence, but contend that the miraculous aspects of the Gospel accounts are metaphorical and that Jesus' life story has been so heavily manipulated to fit Messianic prophecy as to render his actual existence irrelevant and indiscernible and that the surviving documents are of almost no value concerning the historical Jesus. Some of the most well-known early adherents of the mythological school include Voltaire, Friedrich Engels, Karl Kautsky,^[71] David Strauss (1808–74), and Paul-Louis Couchoud (1879–1959).

[edit] Notes

[edit] References

[edit] See also

Authorship of the Pauline Epistles Alleged inconsistencies in the Bible Cultural and historical background of Jesus Historical Jesus Death and Resurrection of Jesus

History of Christianity Jesus-Myth Jesus Seminar Markan priority

New Testament apocrypha Textual criticism Two source hypothesis Yeshu The God Who Wasn't There

[edit] External links

• Extrabiblical, Non-Christian Witnesses to Jesus before 200 a.d., an argument from a Christian point of view.
• From Jesus to Christ, a PBS site.
• Writings from William Lane Craig on the Historical Jesus
• Why I Believe The New Testament Is Historically Reliable by Gary Habermas
• Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Christ, a Christian discussion on the reliability of textual evidence.
• The Historical Jesus and Mythical Christ by Gerald Massey
• Historicity Of Jesus FAQ (1994), a critical look at textual evidence.
• Jesus: A Historical Reconstruction
• The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?, by F.F. Bruce.
• The Origins of Christianity, a discussion of potential syncretisms with other religions.
• The Quest of the Historical Jesus: A Critical Study of its Progress from Reimarus to Wrede, by Albert Schweitzer
• Scholarly opinions on the Jesus Myth, by Christopher Price
• Quest for the Historical Jesus
• The Jesus Puzzle by Earl Doherty
• The Homeric Epics and the Gospel of Mark A review of Dennis R. MacDonald's book by Richard Carrier
• Arguments that a historical Jesus never existed
• Jesus Myth - The Case Against Historical Christ