Michael A. Dingwall (michael_a_dingwall@hotmail.com)

        Early church leaders like Eusebius were busy "correcting" historical documents

Perhaps the best non-biblical “evidence” that Christian apologists use is the writings of a Jewish historian by the name of Josephus.  Josephus, who lived to within one hundred years of Jesus was not a Christian.  He wrote many volumes concerning what was happening in his homeland – ancient Israel.    The writings, called “The Antiquities” were considered one of the best historical works of that time.  Included in The Antiquities is a famous quote that has been attributed to Josephus.  This is the quote:

“About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who wrought surprising feats and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Christ. When Pilate, upon hearing him accused by men of the highest standing among us, had condemned him to be crucified, those who had in the first place come to love him did not give up their affection for him. On the third day he appeared to them restored to life, for the prophets of God had prophesied these and countless other marvelous things about him. And the tribe of Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared.”

For centuries, defenders of Christianity have used this quote as their best non-biblical evidence for the resurrection.  However, a careful look at who Josephus was shows, very clearly, that he could not have written such a passage.

For one thing, the first time that this quote appeared anywhere was in the fourth century.  Josephus was supposed to have written it in the first century.  Why the two hundred year gap?  For the first two hundred years after Jesus, Christianity was a struggling sect.  Most people ignored it as a group fit for fanatics and outcasts – similar to how Rastafari was viewed just a few decades ago.  Many of the very early Christian leaders were doing all they can to establish the truthfulness of Christianity.

Now, how is it that these early Christian defenders did not see any need to use this quote for two hundred years, even thought the writings of Josephus was well know to many of them?  How could all of them ignore Josephus, a well-known historian who was under the patronage of none other than the Roman Emperor himself?  Some Christian Apologists have said that these early Christian defenders did not use Josephus’ writings, as he was seen as a Jewish traitor – an enemy.  But this is nonsense.  These same Christian defenders tell us that one reason why they know that Jesus’ divinity is true is because even enemies were saying this.  Why then wasn’t this “enemy” used to defend to faith?

Josephus wasn’t a Christian, but a member of the same Pharisee class that convicted Jesus of blasphemy.  Can anyone really imagine Josephus calling this convicted blasphemer “a wise man”, “the Christ” and what he said as “the truth”?  Hardly likely!  However, the speculation as to whether or not Josephus really wrote that passage could be settled quite assuredly when one considers that a copy of his Antiquities was found in the seventeenth century – without this famous quote.  It is very interesting to note that it was the church that held Josephus’ writings and it was a church leader by the name of “Eusebius“ who first made mention of this quote.  Eusebius, was not a very honest man, he once said that lying was good – if it furthered the cause of the gospel!

This was the prime non-biblical evidence used by many Christian defenders.  All, except for the most stubborn have ceased using it, for obvious reasons.  However, lets look at a few of the other “convincing” extra-biblical evidence.

Reference is sometimes made by Julius Africanus, writing around 221 AD about Thallus, who wrote a history of the Eastern Mediterranean around 52 AD.  Thallus is supposed to have recorded the darkness that is recorded in the New Testament that covered the land when Jesus was killed.  This is the quote:

"Thallus, in the third book of his histories, explains away the darkness as an eclipse of the sun – unreasonably, as it seems to me."

Christian Apologists will go to great lengths to verify the truthfulness of the resurrection – including making reference to irrelevant events.  So what if there was an eclipse?  There is nothing supernatural about these things – they have occurred very frequently throughout recorded history, we even can predict them now.  However, notice that no historical corroboration has been found about the many saints who rose from the dead and were seen by “many” when Jesus as killed.  I wonder why?

The Jewish Talmud was also used as “evidence”.  Here is a quote compiled between 70 and 200 AD, that is said to refer to the “saviour of the world”:

"On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For 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. Anyone 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."

Now, if this is true, then the bible can’t be.  According to this quote Jesus was hanged.  The gospels all agree (yes, they do agree on at least one thing!) that Jesus was nailed to a cross.  Was there another Jesus that we don’t know anything about?  In any case, how does this confirm the resurrection?

Cornelius Tacitus is called "the greatest historian" of ancient Rome.  He lived around 55 to 120 AD.  This is the quote that some Apologists use from him:

"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 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 center and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; 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 is similar to the most of the other quotes – no resurrection proven here.  All Tacitus was saying was that a group of people who believed the claims of the first disciples that Jesus was god was being punished.  Again, seeing that Tacitus was supposed to be writing to within one hundred years of Jesus, doesn’t it seem odd that he does not mention anything about the miracles that Jesus was supposed to have done and for which he became famous?

So, it would seem that secular history says nothing about the resurrection or event the miracles that Jesus did.  It is clear, the devine Jesus that Christians talk about so much is nothing but a myth.

[Back to Main Page]