The Historical Jesus
By Timothy Glover
Accepting the person of Jesus on blind faith is difficult for this writer. Some scholars intentionally lead their students to question his claims and then admit that believing them must be accepted on the basis of faith (blind faith). Yet, the kind of faith that we want to emphasize is an objective faith, a historical faith, and a rational faith that invite people to use their minds and examine the evidence.
Historical Figure
The gospels, which were completed within 100 years of his death provide one source of evidence. Scholars have shown that these books were the result of oral traditions and documents from an earlier period. In addition, there are the epistles of Paul and Revelation that accord with some details of the gospels.
The works of the Apostolic Fathers, the apocryphal gospels and the “heretical” writings show a widespread belief that such a man existed. Contemporary historians like Josephus, who wrote toward the end of the first century, has two references to Jesus. Tacitus, writing about 115 C.E., speaks of the “Christiani” whose name was derived from “Christus” who was condemned to death by Pontius Pilate. The letter of Mar-Serapion, written to his son in 73 C.E., tells of the death of Jesus and that he had lived on through the teaching he had given. Suetonius, who lived from 65 to 135, wrote in The Twelve Caesars about Augustus, speaks of the Christian movement. So does Pliny the Younger in his correspondence with Trajan. There are even references to Jesus in the Talmud.
However, most do not doubt a historical figure. Some believe that Jesus’ disciples did not want this good man’s memory or his teachings to die. To prevent it, they concocted much propaganda of him being a miracle healer, and the son of God who was raised from the death and ascended into heaven. The claim is that over time these unhistorical myths about Jesus became accepted as true. The N.T. books are, according to this view, a reflection of this movement.
Reliability of N.T.
If some event is recorded long after it happened, it is not likely that it was written by eyewitnesses nor when other eyewitnesses were around to confirm or dispute its accuracy. The credibility of an account is stronger if there is a first-hand witness. Many assert that the gospels and the book of Acts were written after 130 C.E. Yet, there is evidence for an early writing of the books.
There is internal evidence in the book of Acts (28:30-31) when it ends with Paul in prison waiting for his trial. It is plausible that Luke wrote before Paul appeared before Nero around 62-63. Since Luke’s gospel was written before Acts, both were written within 30 years of Jesus’ life. Second, the gospels record Jesus’ prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem within that generation (Mk. 13:1-4,14,30; Lk. 21:5-9,20-24,32). History records that Jerusalem was destroyed in 70. Yet, not one N.T. book refers to this as having occurred. If the books were merely propaganda, would not at least one writer mention the fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy.
Chester Beatty papyri fragment, dating 200-250 C.E., contain the gospels, Acts, Paul’s epistles, and Revelation, while papyrus Bodmer II (dated 200 C.E.) contains fourteen chapters of John and portions of the last seven chapters. John Rylands MSS, dated 130 C.E. is the oldest fragment and was found in Egypt.
Patristic writings consist of the epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians (120 C.E.) who quotes from the synoptic gospels (the first three), Acts, Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Timothy(which has been argued a forgery), Hebrews, 1 Peter, and 1 John. Also, the letter of Ignatius (dated 115 C.E.) quotes Matthew, John, Romans, 1&2 Cor., Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus. The oldest is the epistle of Clement to the Corinthians (dated 95 C.E.). He quotes from the Gospels, Acts, Romans, 1 Cor. Ephesians, Titus, Hebrews, and 1 Peter. W.F. Albright, wrote, “there is no solid basis for dating any book of the New Testament after 80 A.D.”
The historical accuracy of any document is strengthened when the document was written in the same generation in which the events took place. It takes much confidence or great stupidity for someone to write of such extraordinary events that occurred while the readers were alive, if in fact they were lies. This speaks to the writers’ confidence in its reliability. The Bible would have been circulated to the very people of whom the documents spoke. The people were able to refute their accuracy or argue that it was misleading. The fact that nothing like this appears, shows also the people’s regard for its accuracy.
Archaeology
We are reminded that archaeology should not be used to prove or disprove the Bible. Lest we force a wrong interpretation on the findings. Yet, historically, scholars have discounted the Biblical record because it refers to things not mentioned in any other source. The following list was some of the things disputed: a census, and Quirinuius governorship at the time of Jesus’ birth, Luke’s Lysanias, the pavement (gabbatha) in John 19:13, Ionium as a city of Phyrigia, Luke’s “politarchs” (Acts 17:6). This is just a sampling of the disputed items all of which have been verified as accurate. Jesus was a historical person, the N.T. was written during the time in which the events occurred, and its reliability continues to be confirmed!
Return Home
| God | Christ | Holy Spirit
| Wrath of God
| Christ Ascends
| Blood of Christ
| Indwelling of HS
| Grieving of HS
| HS in Conversion
| |