Gospel Not Gossip

There are many, many unsolved murder cases throughout history that did not result in convictions because of the lack of evidence to apprehend or even identify a suspect.  This doesn’t mean these murders never happened, it simply means that no one has discovered the evidence to reconstruct the crime… yet. In fact, according to britanica.com, most criminal convictions are based on circumstantial evidence. Hold that thought.

Last week I wrote about the exodus and the archeological and literary evidence that supports the biblical account. There is more than enough evidence available to establish the plausibility that the Bible is an accurate historical record of this event. Yet skeptics will use a lack of evidence for the Israelites in the Sinai desert as ammunition to discredit the written account and deny the exodus ever happened. However, the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. It simply means that archeologists haven’t looked deep enough (as was the case at Jericho) or haven’t looked in the right spot yet. These skeptics remain willfully ignorant of the evidence that we do have (please refer to Errors in Egyptology, Jan 7, 2023) and there is plenty.

Similarly, the historicity of Jesus is often challenged by skeptical minds, despite abundant literary and archeological supporting evidence (please refer to The Historicity of Jesus, Nov. 24, 2020). Glossy, attractive publications from influential entities such as the History Store (A & E Television Networks) entice bookshelf browsers but present a distorted portrait of Christ (evidenced by their publication, Jesus His Life and Story). They assert that the truth has been embellished by layers of religious propaganda and convey a viewpoint that is clearly biased against the gospels.

By claiming that more is known about Alexander the Great than Christ and that details about Jesus’ life are “vague and unconfirmed”, their presuppositional perspective is more than evident. To be blunt,they focus on what we don’t know and ignore what we do know. The introduction to the editorial begins with the premise that the gospels were written nearly half a century after the death of Jesus. This line of logic implies that the testimonies of the gospel writers are less credible than other ancient writers because of the time that lapsed between the crucifixion and the circulation of the written accounts.

Alexander the Great is a great point of reference if we are to compare ancient historical credibility.  Contrary to what the editorial infers, the best sources for writings about Alexander the Great didn’t appear until four hundred years later (Plutarch and Arrian). Alexander died in 323 BC. Quintus Curtius Rufus wrote his biography of Alexander in the 1^st century AD. Yet the writer of the editorial would have you believe that fifty years is a long time to wait for written material in ancient society.

Tiberius Caesar who was the emperor of Rome at the time of Jesus is well recognized as a historical figure. The best sources about him are Tacitus who wrote 80 years later, Suetonius at +85 years and Cassius Dio at 180 years after the fact.  

Nonbiblical Accounts of Jesus

When it comes to the historicity of Jesus, several nonbiblical writers refer to him, such as Jewish historian Josephus, Roman historian and senator Publius Cornelius Tacitus, Phlegon of Tralles a Greek writer from the second century and Pliny the Younger, a Roman Governor who, in letters to Emperor Trajan, described his frustration with Christians while sentencing them to punishment including execution.

Thallus, an early Greek historian, most of whose work has been lost, has been quoted by Sextus Julius Africanus in his History of the World. Around AD 52, he wrote about the earthquake and darkness that occurred when Christ was crucified. “On the whole world there pressed the most fearful darkness, and the rocks were torn by an earthquake and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness, Thallus, in the third book of his history, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun.”

Around AD 70, a Syrian philosopher named Mara Bar-Serapion wrote to his son and compared the life and persecution of Jesus to other philosophers who were persecuted for their ideas. The fact that Jesus was known to be a real person with this kind of reputation lends credibility to the gospels. Mara Bar-Serapion referred to Jesus as the “Wise King.”

Justin Martyr, in his first apology written around AD 150, defended Christians against wrongful persecution and punishment by the Roman Empire. Since the monotheistic views of Christians (and Jews as well) contradicted the Roman belief of many gods, they were considered atheists by the state and convicted of failing to worship the Roman gods. What makes Justin Martyr’s writing significant is the fact that he references the ‘New Testament,’ proving its existence as a Christian document only 120 years after Christ. In chapter XV, “What Christ Himself Taught,” he cites the Sermon on the Mount with several quotes of Jesus. He then goes on to reference Jesus through the next four chapters, quoting him on subjects including patience and obedience.

A letter to the church at Corinth from Clement of Rome, dated AD 95, quotes from ten of the twenty-seven books of the New Testament and a letter to the church at Philippi from Polycarp in AD 120, from sixteen New Testament books signifying that they were in circulation during the first century and disproving later authorship. Ignatius of Antioch (AD 25 – 107), was a student of the apostle John and he wrote seven letters prior to his execution in the arena in Rome that quote from several New Testament books as well. To keep things in perspective, the printing press wasn’t invented until 1436.

What About Paul?

The apostle Paul is credited with writing half of the New Testament and he did so before his death in AD 64 (a mere 30 years after the crucifixion). Theologian and author Dr. Gary Habermas points out that Paul’s education and intellect are evident in his writing style and comprehensive arguments regarding Jesus. Paul had a thorough knowledge of the scriptures, the ability to articulate his knowledge, was a contemporary of the disciples (eyewitnesses to Christ’s ministry) and did not hide his early opposition to Christianity, making him an overwhelmingly credible source of information on the subject. His credentials are given in Acts 22:3-5.

Paul became a believer in the resurrection of Jesus around AD 33 (Acts 9; Acts 22:6-11; Galatians 1:16) when he encountered Him on the road to Damascus. He immediately began preaching in the synagogues in Damascus that Jesus was the Son of God (Acts 9:20). Paul then went out into Arabia and three years later visited Jerusalem and met Peter and James (Galatians 1:18-19; Acts 9:26-30). He spent 15 days with them.

Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 15:1 that he previously preached in Corinth (AD 51-52 – determined by the name of the synagogue leader Crispus, who is mentioned in Acts 18:8 and 1 Corinthians 1:14, and served a one-year term at that time). He says in 1 Corinthians 15:3-4, that he delivered the message that was given to him (prior to AD 51), and emphasized its importance: that Christ died, was buried and resurrected in fulfillment of prophecy. Paul was uncompromising in his testimony.

Therefore, if Paul encountered the risen Jesus around AD 33 and we add his three years in Arabia, he must have made his first trip to Jerusalem around AD 36.  Fourteen years later he returned to Jerusalem to ensure that he and the disciples had consensus in their message (Galatians 2:1). The theme of the first chapter of Galatians is the “authentic gospel” (Galatians 1:8-9) which confirms this.

Now if you add the fourteen years to AD 36 you arrive at AD 50 as the time of his second visit to Jerusalem. This is known as the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15). It was about this time when Paul wrote his letter to the church at Galatia and just before he preached in Corinth. He wrote 1 Corinthians in AD 55.

A Compelling Conclusion

This chronology establishes that Paul was preaching the gospel within three years of Christ’s death and that Christian churches existed within a decade of the crucifixion. Acts 9:31 depicts the Christian church as a growing entity at the time of his first visit to Jerusalem around AD 36. This constitutes irrefutable evidence that the gospel narrative was not fabricated many decades after the fact or that it gained legendary status much later and offers compelling substantiation that Jesus was indeed an historical figure.

Ultimately, there are no first century sources that offer a convincing counter point or valid opposition to the Christian narrative. There are biblical and nonbiblical sources for – but none against. The fledgling Christian movement during the first century is a documented historical development and an undeniable fact. Yet Christianity’s origin is portrayed today as merely a cult that developed after the martyrdom of a dissident radical by the History Store’s publication and the New Testament is discredited by many scholars as biased and untrustworthy.

The available evidence is enough to compel a verdict in favor of the authenticity of the gospels and the historicity of Jesus Christ. Mainstream media and academia only shed darkness on the debate and misrepresent history by using selective data that support their presuppositions. However, scripture testifies that “We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of His majesty.” (2 Peter 1:16).