What contemporary historical evidence is there for Jesus having actually lived?

Question

Jolly Roger: thank you for your second edit, saved me the trouble... sometimes I wonder if we all speak the same language here...

Answer 1

The Jewish historian Josephus, who was a contemporary of Jesus, wrote about him, also mentioning his counsin John the Baptist and hid beheading by Herod, and writes about James the brother of Jesus, who was the first pastor of the Jerusalem church, and how he was stoned by the Pharisees (a group to which Josephus belonged). Josephus was a close personal friend of Herod. He would not have recorded Herod beheading John (a wicked deed in that day) if it was not true.

In all three passages, he also used the word Christ to refer to Jesus. He writes about his miracles, healings, good deeds, teachings, death and "supposed" resurrection. All written with 20 years of Jesus' lifetime.

In 70 AD, the Pharisees would be driven out of Israel by the Roman. They would regroup in Tyre where they would compile a book called the Talmud which records many of their teachings and traditions. Several of the authors were living at the time of Jesus' ministry. They record that Jesus was a miracle worker and teacher who did healing by black magic. He was executed by the Romans, but his disciples stold his body and claimed he came back to life. If there was no Jesus, why did his enemies record a biography of him? These were men who were then when the events happened. Instead they would have denied he ever lived.

Cornelius Tacitus (A.D. 55-120), a Roman historian, writes about the problems that the followers of the man called "Christ" had given Nero, and his decision to persecute and execute all that he could find. Nero blamed them for a fire which destroyed much of Rome in the 60s AD. Within 30 years of his life, Jesus was famous enough that emporers where writing laws about him.

Pliny the Younger, governor of Bithynia, another Roman historian, writing around 111 AD, records details about Jesus and mentions the Christian faith which worshipped him.

The Hellenistic (Greek) historian Thallus writing some time around 55 AD refers to the darkness that covered the earth at the time of Jesus' crucifixion, mentioning Jesus by name.

Another historican, Suetonius, refers to "Chrestus", a common alternate spelling for the title "Christus" or "Christ", and how his followers were driven out of Roman in the 60s AD.

The Roman playwriter Lucian mocks both Jesus and the Christian faith in a play written in the 90s AD. If he had had any reason to believe that Jesus had not existed, he certainly would have used that in his satire to make the play even more mocking.

What we do NOT have is a single document anywhere that denies the existence of a Jesus. Within 20 years of his lifetime, the Christian faith ahd become so common in Jerusalem that the Jewish leaders had to drive thousands of them out of the country, where they went to Egypt and formed the Coptic church. Had Jesus NOT existed, why did all these thousands (estmates say they may have exceeded a million) of people - who lived in the area where Jesus never lived, never taught, never healed, never held meeting that numbered in the thousands, never rode into Jerusalem, was never tried, never crucified, and never rose - still believe in him?

Why is there no single document anywhere that denied his existence? Rather there is history after history by his friends (in the gospels), his enemies (in the Talmud and Josephus), and by secular historians that attest that he did live.

Answer 2

No. Outside of the 4 gospels, Jesus simply vanishes from history. Christians like to cite some extra biblical sources but these do not qualify because if you actually read them, these later scribes are referencing the gospels themselves, not writing an independent account. In any case they are decades, even centuries, after the alleged events the closest one is Josephus (about 55A.D) and that is a well known forgery. The gospels themselves are wildly contradictory, and I do mean wildly contradictory. One gospel has Mary and two women going to visit Jesus' tomb, only to find the stone rolled away and the tomb empty except for a young boy who says that Jesus has risen. Another gospel has Mary, a different woman and a man going to visit Jesus' tomb. Only this time the stone is in place and the tomb is guarded by two Roman soldiers, then an angel comes flying down from the sky, kills the guards with a death ray, moves the stone and sits on top of it. Yeah you get the picture. The fact that nothing, nothing, in the gospels appears outside of the gospels is very telling. For example in one gospel when Jesus dies on the cross, hundreds or even thousands of graves crack open and a horde of undead go walking through the city. Yet not one local historian bothers to mention this, nor do the Roman authorities seem to take any notice to the plague of zombies. Even the resurrection itself, think about it this way. Jesus' body is now missing. Pontius Pilate has a problem on his hands because he is the procurator and, miraculously or not, a man he had put to death as an enemy of the state has apparently survived his execution, escaped, and is back in charge of his rebels. He is now a fugitive but apparently the Roman authorities never bothered because it is not mentioned at all anywhere. The only logical conclusion here is that the reason they aren't mentioned is because they didn't happen. The entire Jesus story is fabrication start to finish.

Answer 3

There are a handful of direct mentions of Jesus by various historians dating from the second century on. The reference by Josephus is questionable as to its authenticity. There are many more references to his followers by historians starting in the second century, but this is not direct evidence of his actual existence.

This is not an air tight case, but given the references of his following, it is not unlikely that Jesus actually existed. The nature of his life and his actual teachings are another matter as the gospels were probably not written until a generation or more after his death.

Edit:
Even if Jesus existed, without collaborating evidence of his miracles or those that surrounded his life and death or any evidence that the Old Testament is a record of God's work, it is "meaningless". In other words, any holy man, prophet, or leader could have existed, but if there is no supporting evidence that they actually did miracles, then they were just charismatic leaders with good stories.

Edit 2:
Contemporary in this case means from the time that the event occurred, people really need to expand their vocabularies!!

Answer 4

As far as I am aware, none.


The gospels can not be taken as independent verification. They were written by people with an agenda. They were not written at the time of (an alleged) Jesus, nor were they written by the disciples themselves who would have written in Aramaic, not the Greek that we find.

There is a mention of him by Josephus. But it turns out that some over-zealous scribe added that part later on.

There is mention later of troubles in Judea and parts of the empire about a group of followers of Christos. But Christos means "messiah" and there were a bunch of different messiahs in Judea after the failed Jewish revolt and it's crushing by the Romans. There is no mention of followers of Jesus.

Obviously Paul et al. based their religion around something, but whether it was a real person, or just some compilation of martyred leaders of the Jewish revolt, or a totally made up character lifted from Mithraism and other cults, who knows

Answer 5

Nothing contemporary.

But there is the Jewish historian Josephus (37-100 AD).
A letter from Pliny the Younger in 112 AD to Rome.
Justin Martyr "Defense of Christianity (150AD).
Roman historian Tacitus in 115 AD.
Roman historian Suetonius "Life of Claudius" biography of first 12 Roman emperors.
Thallus (52AD) quoted by Julius Africanus in "Chronography".
Mara bar Serpion (circa 73AD).
The Titulus of St. Croix (placard from Jesus cross) dating from the 1st century, kept in Gerusalemme, Rome.

Answer 6

well, let's see now...all four of the gospels, which are the only stories that mention jesus in the bible, were all written well after the supposed events they chronicle. so there AREN'T any contemporary accounts of his life or deeds. plus the fact that, according to the bible, he was already thirty before anyone had ever heard of him, and that he reflects attributes from many other pagan religions such as having been born of a virgin, performing miracles, dying and being resurrected, AND the fact that NO OTHER WRITER OF THAT TIME MADE ANY MENTION OF HIM WHATSOEVER IN ANY OF THEIR VOLUMINOUS WRITINGS, i would have to come to the conclusion that this "son of god" is simply an invention of men with delusions of grandeur...and those men now control the greatest capitalist nation on the face of this planet... VATICAN CITY!

Answer 7

According to ancient documents during the era before the bible was even written there are records showing a person by the name of Jesus who people said he did strange things. There are documents from the time period calling him crazy, saying that he did have followers, and that he was rebellious and went against the traditions of the times. I forget the names of these documents, but I know they exist. We talked about it in my Theology class. What they do not know is whether these documents are taking about the actual Jesus of the bible, because Jesus was actually a very common name during that time.

Answer 8

This ought to be interesting. I'm unaware of any compelling evidence that Jesus actually existed. I'm not saying it's impossible that there was such a person, I'm just saying that there's a definite lack of evidence.

Answer 9

You mean since 2007 Years A.D?

Answer 10

None. Not a shred of evidence.