Skeptic Complaint: There is No Evidence for Jesus Outside the Bible

By Cory Tucholski

This is a fairly typical objection that skeptics forward against the Gospels. Some skeptics think since
references to Jesus’ Resurrection (and other miracles) appear sixty years after Jesus died, that these are
only reports of what Christians at the time believed.
The problem with that notion is that Christians haven’t exactly had the political clout that we’re
accustomed to seeing nowadays. Christians were persecuted in the early days, and the powers that be
had every interest in making Jesus disappear from the public memory. If any conspiracy existed
surrounding the life of Jesus, it wasn’t the Christians trying to insert an idealized version of their Savior
into the historical record. It would have gone the opposite way: an attempt by the ruling authorities to
write into history a permanent “reality check,” putting a stop to messianic claims from Jesus’ followers.
Let’s look at the secular sources for Jesus’ life. Josephus is the primary one, but Tacitus is right up
there in importance. Both are neutral to Jesus, leaning toward hostile. Outright hostile sources like
Lucian or Mara bar-Serapion are of secondary importance, if we should even weigh them at all, but
remember that hostile sources don’t win points with their audience by admitting that Jesus did miracles
or that he is worshiped as one worships God. Secular sources of the day admit to Jesus being a real
person and a worker of miracles, things that you wouldn’t expect to see unless they were incontestably
true.
Finally, a quick look at the reality of the first century Christian’s experience should end any notion
that this rag-tag group could have pulled off a conspiracy to insert a fictitious founder into the historical
record that stands up to 1800 years of scrutiny. They simply didn’t have the resources or political clout
to do something like that.

SECULAR SOURCES FOR JESUS’ LIFE

There are essentially two main secular sources for Jesus’ life. Flavius Josephus, a former Jewish
general during the brief uprising in 70, he turned historian at the behest of the Roman Empire. Also of
interest is Cornelius Tacitus, a second century historian praised across the board for his incredibly
accurate detail.
Around the time of Jesus’ life, the rabbis of the day wrote some polemics against him in the
Talmud. There is little of historical value in these writings, as they are only written in reaction to
Christian claims. However, it is worth noting that they provide evidence in favor of Jesus’ existence, as
the writings assume he exists and even confirm some undisputed historic details.

Josephus
Josephus wrote two works, but of primary concern to the question of Jesus is the Antiquities. There is
no question that Josephus is generally considered a reliable historian. The questions surrounding the
historical Jesus with regard to Josephus never focus on the overall accuracy of his work, but only on
the authenticity of the passages mentioning Jesus.
In Antiquities, there are two references to Jesus. The one called Testimonium Flavium, is the most
hotly contested. The Testimonium is seriously doubted to be authentic even by Christian scholars. The
second passage (in Antiquities 20.9.1), however, is unquestionably authentic. It reads:
But this younger Ananus, who, as we have told you already, took the high priesthood, was a bold
man in his temper, and very insolent; he was also of the sect of the Sadducees, who are very rigid in
 judging offenders, above all the rest of the Jews, as we have already observed; when, therefore,
Ananus was of this disposition, he thought he had now a proper opportunity [to exercise his
authority]. Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim
of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was
James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation
against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned.
This confirms the martyrdom of James the Just (also mentioned by Luke in Acts), and calls him
“the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ,” which further confirms Jesus’ name and title. The early
Christians referred to James as “the brother of our Lord,” so Josephus adds the title “brother of Jesus”
for James in a sort of mocking tone.
The first mention of Jesus in Antiquities is regarded dubiously, even by Christian scholars. It is
likely authentic in some respect, however. The later reference assumes some previous mention of Jesus
in Antiquities, and this is the only other mention. The most practical solution to the problem seems to
be “splitting the baby, by admitting that the passage is authentic, but with some Christian interpolation.
I’ll reproduce the passage, from Antiquities 18.3.3, and put a line through what is likely the Christian
additions:
Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a
doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to
him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the
suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at
the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets
had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of
Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.
Read without the cross-outs, the passage still makes perfect sense. Likely, this passage was
doctored at some point by a Christian. However, much of the anti-Christian sentiment still rings
through and therefore this passage is probably authentic otherwise.

Tacitus
Tacitus is best known for writing the Annals. His work garnered quite a bit of critical praise for its
accuracy, so it’s a pity that much of his work has been lost to the ages. Tacitus wrote a passage of
relevance to the debate of the historical Jesus in Annals 15.44:
But all human efforts, all the lavish gifts of the emperor, and the propitiations of the gods, did not
banish the sinister belief that the conflagration was the result of an order. 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 centre 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.
This is an under-appreciated quote. First, it confirms the existence of Christians in the time of Nero
(ruled 54-68), and it tells us that since they were hated by the people, Nero used them as scapegoats for
the Great Fire of Rome in 64.
Second, it confirms that the founder of Christianity was “Christus,” which refers to Jesus Christ.
Most Tacitean scholars, even non-Christian ones, believe this is a genuine reference to Jesus.
Remember that the New Testament refers to Jesus as “Christ” quite often, therefore Tacitus was likely
using the title with which his readers would be most familiar.
Third, it confirms the Gospel details that Jesus was executed by Pontius Pilate. By referencing the
same governor (Tiberius) that Luke does in the opening of the Gospel, Tacitus also confirms Luke’s
timeline.
Fourth, the mention that Jesus’ execution “checked” the “mischievous superstition” “for a
moment,” but it “again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome” is
an oblique reference to the Resurrection. The crucifixion quieted Jesus’ disciples down, but the
Resurrection (and later, Pentecost) started the fire anew and the apostles were able to garner many more
followers than Jesus did, and over a much wider area in a relatively short period of time.
Finally, this passage relays the sad truth that Christians were merely arrested for being Christians,
and their mission was perceived by the secular authorities as dangerous and evil.
In chapter six of the letter to the Hebrews, the writer gives a stark warning that anyone who betrays
the faith will never be welcomed back into it. That is likely a reference to this very event. Tacitus says
that those arrested often gave information that led the authorities to others.

The Talmud
The rabbinic writings from the first century are not useful for gleaning details of the historical Jesus,
and not even the most liberal academic think-tank uses these sources for that purpose.
However, the rabbinic writings do confirm that Jesus existed, had disciples, worked miracles, and
was executed on the eve of Passover. The material in the rabbinic writings, however, was included to
cast dispersions on Jesus’ character. This means that much of what appears may not actually be true.
The rabbis probably were not concerned with accuracy in this regard.
Given that there is nothing in these vehemently anti-Christian sentiments that indicate that Jesus’
life was fictionalized by Christians or that his miracles are phony, it can be accepted with some caution
that it was widely believed and attested that Jesus did perform miracles.

Other Secular Writings

Of course, those aren’t the only secular witnesses to Jesus. There are several others of varying
reliability.
Lucian was a satirist living in the second century, who wrote a play about an unscrupulous man
who became a Christian leader and then reverted to his former cynicism. The play mocks Christians for
worshiping a mere mortal crucified in Palestine for setting up a cult (in other words, Jesus) as a god.
This confirms two things. First, that secular folks believed Jesus existed and was crucified in Palestine
as the other historical records indicate. And second, that early Christians worshiped Jesus as God.
Mara bar-Serapion refers to Jesus in a letter most probably written between 135 and 165. This isn’t
a particularly useful reference, but it does confirm several details of Jesus’ life that we already know
from other sources. At the least, it testifies to the existence of Jesus and to the widespread belief that he
was wise and taught great things. Otherwise, it is nothing more than the opinion of a pagan about
whom we know nothing.
Pliny the Younger wrote a correspondence in 106 to Emperor Trajan in which he described the
tortures he inflicted on Christians. He also confirms that Christians meet once per week, sing hymns to
Jesus as if to a god, and strive to follow a code of ethics: avoid evil, commit no fraud, no theft, no
adultery, never lie, and maintain the utmost integrity always. The younger Pliny used to be a priest, and
so likely knew a little bit about every religion in the empire. Therefore, his assessment of Christian
beliefs, though second hand, should be regarded as reliable.
Suetonius makes two probable references to Jesus, however he doesn’t add any information that
we couldn’t glean from Tacitus, whom he used extensively as a source. Skeptical and Christian scholars
alike regard these references as worthless.
It is reported that Thallus makes mention of the midday darkness that the Gospels report during the
crucifixion of Jesus. We only have a handful of surviving fragments of Thallus’ writings, and the
midday darkness reference occurs as a quote from the Christian Julius Africanus in the third century.
Thallus allegedly made mention of the darkness but explained it as an eclipse of the sun. However, both
the Gospels and the Talmud confirm Jesus was executed on the eve of Passover–during a full moon.
That means that the darkness couldn’t have been a total solar eclipse as Thallus reports. This is the
same conclusion that Africanus reaches in his apologetic against Thallus.
With all of these mentions, even considering the ones of dubious reliability, it is difficult to deny
that Jesus existed, and that he performed the miracles attributed to him. The Christian sources aren’t the
only ones that mention his wise words, integrity, and miraculous deeds. No first or second century
critic of Christianity even tries to rebut the existence or the miracles of Jesus. In fact, the extant secular
witnesses actually seem to confirm that Jesus did these wonderful things.
It’s odd that these sources would confirm the miracles, considering that a hostile source trying to
convince people Jesus was nothing more than a man would actually lose ground in an argument by
admitting that Jesus could perform miracles. The simplest solution to the problem is that the miracles
of Jesus were believed genuine, even by non-Christians, but viewed in some other manner than being a
sign that Jesus was the Son of God.

REALITY OF CHRISTIAN LIFE

Hilariously, many skeptics make horrendously false claims when it comes to the life of the Christian in
the first century. Since Christians make up one-sixth of the world’s population, form the largest
monotheistic religion, wield unparallelled political influence, have the central figure in the largest
denomination recognized as a sovereign head of state, and dominate the philosophical foundations of
Western thought, it is forgivable if the skeptics think that this has always been the case.
In reality, just studying the brief reference in Tacitus above should be enough to enforce a major
reality check. Christians were hated by the world at large in the first century. They were marginalized
by the Romans and the Jews. They were hated so much, and seen as such an evil and destabilizing force
so universally, that Nero was easily able to use them as scapegoats for the Great Fire of Rome in 64.
Christians in the early church had to take great pains to hide their affiliation with the newly formed
church, otherwise they faced loss of job, status, property, family, welfare, ability to buy and sell in the
marketplace, and (most importantly) their life. And the death they faced was neither merciful nor quick.
Sometimes, Christians were used as lighting for night games at stadiums. They were hoisted aloft
and burned in lieu of the powerful lamps that blind us in modern stadiums. Other Christians were fed to
lions for entertainment. Many were tortured so that the authorities could ascertain the location of the
house-church to which they belonged, and they were forced to disclose the identities of other attendees.
The point of recounting this is simple. In order for most of the skeptical theories of the early
formation of Christianity to be true, a massive conspiracy would have to be in place, capable of altering
every extant copy of historical documents and silencing any competing oral traditions running contrary
to the alterations. Someone would have to plant numerous evidences in the historical record that
propagated for 1800 years until they were questioned for the first time during the Enlightenment. These
evidences would have to be able to withstand even the Enlightenment scrutiny so well that a handful of
unbiased 21st century scholars would still regard them as authentic.
Whoever pulled that off would have to literally be an evil genius on par with the best James Bond
villain.
Another cornerstone of skeptical argument is that everyone in the first century is dumber than a
box of rocks. Simply put, since many people believed in the Resurrection, which we all know is
impossible, these people must be ignorant rubes. It’s the only logical explanation.
But how does an ignorant rube plan, organize, and execute a conspiracy of such massive
proportions that it defies detection for 1800 years? You can’t simultaneously be an evil genius and
mouth-breathing redneck who uncritically believes everything. That defies logic.
The historicity of Jesus was never in question until the nineteenth century. All first century
polemics against Christianity revolve around Sonship and variation from Greek philosophy. Justin
Martyr, the first Christian apologist, tired to synthesize Greek philosophy and theology with
Christianity to show similarities in belief, and thus that the Christian position was at least as reasonable
as the Greek. You see the same type of thing with Paul in Acts 17 and his sermon about the Unknown
God. There was never a question about Jesus’ existence or his miracles from opponents, only the
meaning of his teachings and his Sonship.
The other problem is that Christians universally believed that truth was on their side, and they
further held to the highest standards of fidelity and integrity. It just doesn’t make sense for someone
who believed that they had truth in Christ to initiate a campaign of misinformation and cover-up to
bolster this truth. If it were found out, it would ruin any claim that they had to truth, since it would have
been founded on lies. It doesn’t make any sense.
But how reasonable is a conspiracy of misinformation like that? Any conspiracy initiated by
Christians to insert a fabricated person into the historical record and add breadcrumbs that lead
reasonable modern historians to conclude that the Resurrection is at least a possibility would have been
quashed immediately by Roman authorities. Truth is the only reasonable defeater of these powers that
be, so it appears that the Christian has truth on his side. Believing in Jesus, miracles and all, is infinitely
more reasonable than any skeptical explanation offered thus far.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Holding, James Patrick. “Secular References to Jesus: Josephus.” Tekton Education and Apologetics
Ministry. 5 Nov 2010 <http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/josephus.html>.
_____. “Secular References to Jesus: Lucian.” Tekton Education and Apologetics Ministry. 5 Nov 2010
<http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/lucian.html>.
_____. “Secular References to Jesus: Mara bar-Serapion.” Tekton Education and Apologetics Ministry.
5 Nov 2010 <http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/serapion.html>.
_____. “Secular References to Jesus: Pliny.” Tekton Education and Apologetics Ministry. 5 Nov 2010
<http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/pliny.html>.
_____. “Secular References to Jesus: Seutonius.” Tekton Education and Apologetics Ministry. 5 Nov
2010 <http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/suey.html>.
_____. “Secular References to Jesus: The Talmud.” Tekton Education and Apologetics Ministry. 5 Nov
2010 <http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/talmud.html>.
_____. “The Testimony of Tacitus.” Tekton Education and Apologetics Ministry. 5 Nov 2010
<http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/tacitus.html>.
Josephus, Flavius. The Antiquities of the Jews. Trans. William Whiston. The Flavius Josephus
Homepage. 29 Apr 1993. 5 Nov 2010 <http://www.josephus.org/taofj10.zip>.
Tacitus, Cornelius. The Annals. Trans. Alfred John Church and William Jackson Brodribb. The Internet
Classics Archive. 5 Nov 2010 <http://classics.mit.edu/Tacitus/annals.html>.