This is the first of my two JESUS IS posts. This one is about why Jesus is a real, historical person.
Fortunately, this is the least denied aspect of Jesus, thanks to how overwhelming the evidence is. It really is astounding just how definite the existence of Jesus actually is. Let us take a look at the facts:
- There is more manuscript evidence for the reliability of the Gospels than many other widely-accepted aspects of history. There are thousands of ancient scripts that speak of the life of Jesus. Some of them are as early as the first couple centuries, and most educated scholars believe that the Gospels were all written within a maximum of seventy years after the of Jesus. All Gospel manuscripts are in basic accordance. Although exact details, syntax, and wording vary somewhat, there is not one definite disagreement between any of the four Gospels and any copy of them. Such is to be expected when four different people write accounts of the life of one astounding Person, each emphasizing a different aspect of His identity. Three of the writers were eyewitnesses to many of the things of which they spoke, and the forth was closely associated with other eyewitnesses.
- The writers of the genealogies of the Gospels were Jewish, and Jews were highly precise in genealogical records. That really makes it seem unlikely that either Matthew’s or Luke’s genealogy for Jesus could be pure fabrications. If either had been, it would have been dismantled by any Jewish readers within a few years. Yet both remained unchanged. More than likely, one traces Jesus’ biological genealogy (from Adam to Mary) while another traces His legal genealogy (from Abraham to Joseph). Some refer to a statement of Joseph as being the “son of Heli” as invalidating this argument, but the word used for “son” was very general and broad, not necessarily a direct son, and in plenty of cases a son-in-law, such as Joseph would have been to Heli. Another argument is that the number of generations in Luke is far greater than those in Matthew, meaning one of the genealogies had to cover way too much time. However, Luke’s starts at Adam as opposed to Abraham, whom Matthew starts with. Once you cut that out, you have a much closer number of generations, which can be further brought close by the realization that Matthew’s genealogy was more representative, cutting out some less significant names for three sets of fourteen generations (since fourteen was double seven, and seven was considered a number of perfection and completion, three sets of fourteen would be a good aesthetic choice for the genealogy). Therefore, since the Jews were so particular about their genealogical records and these genealogies are not contradictory, it is only reasonable for them to be considered valid.
- Speaking of Luke, the census in Luke is historically valid. This has been a point of heated debate for decades, but it appears to be true. Although many believe Luke made a mistake or outright fabricated the event, evidence points to the contrary. The biggest issue is that people claim the statement about Quirinius being governor of Syria contradicts the timeline, since he was not governor until AD 6, while Jesus was born some time a few years BC. However, given that Luke has been shown to be a credible historian in his Acts account, and that early opponents of Christianity did not seem to debate the census, it is likely that our records are the issue, not Luke’s account. Indeed, evidence has emerged which indicates he could be right. The Greek word translated as “governor” can refer to many different positions of authority. It seems that Quirinius was actually a high military commander in Syria several years prior, in order to put down an uprising. Another argument is against the method of the census. However, an ancient Egyptian document by a Roman governor of Egypt reads as follows: “Since the enrollment by households is approaching, it is necessary to command all who for any reason are out of their own district to return to their own home, in order to perform the usual business of the taxation.” The document later reads, “I register Pakebkis, the son born to me and my wife, Taasies and Taopis in the 10th year of Tiberius Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus Imperator [Emperor], and request that the name of my aforesaid son Pakebkis be entered on the list.” At this revelation, George Barton, PhD, said, “Luke’s statement, that Joseph went up from Nazareth to Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, to enroll himself with Mary (Luke 2:4, 5), turns out to be in exact accord with the governmental regulations as we now know them from the papyri.” Finally, as for the tax itself, read this: “...archeological discoveries prove beyond doubt that regular enrollment of taxpayers was a feature of Roman rule and have shown that a census was taken every fourteen years. A large Egyptian papyrus, telling of an enrollment AD 174-175, refers to two previous enrollments, one in 160-161 and another in 146-147, at intervals of fourteen years. A much earlier papyrus, dated in the reign of Tiberius [14-37 AD] reports a man’s wife and dependents for enrollment and apparently has a reference to a tax roll compiled AD 20-21. Another shows an enrollment under Nero AD 62-63; another lists those exempt from the poll tax in the forty-first year of Augustus, who began his reign in 27 BC. Since Augustus records that he set about early in his reign to organize the empire, the first census may have been either 23-22 BC or in 9-8 BC; the latter would be the census to which the Gospel of Luke refers.” (Elder, J. 1960. Prophets, Idols, and Diggers. Indianapolis/New York: Bobbs-Merrill Co., pp. 159-60).
- There is no evidence for the mythologizing of the events of Christ’s life. The Gospels lack many traits of mythological accounts. For one, they were written too soon, as I mentioned before. No myths develop in less than half a century, by which time the first of the Gospels would have been completed. As well, the Gospel accounts violate many traditions of mythology. Women played a significant role in the New Testament, while women were usually of little importance in mythology. For example, were the events of the Resurrection fabricated, Peter or John would more than likely have been the first to see the empty tomb, instead of having to be told by the Marys. Another trait common to myths is for all the good guys to be extraordinary. Surely, if the Gospels were mythologized, the disciples would be super-saints. Yet they were anything but. Peter was overly proud and denied Jesus three times. Thomas wouldn’t believe in the Resurrection until he saw Jesus. James and John were nothing but poor fishermen, but convinced their mother to ask Jesus to give them special authority and power. All of the disciples often lacked compassion, understanding, and faith. These traits are very unusual for mega-men in myths. There are also many random details which would be pointless in a myth, although they would make perfect sense if the author were establishing credibility or challenging the reader to ask around. John seems to go out of his way to tell people to check out the witnesses.
- All curent major religions had a single, or at least a prominent, founder whose existence is undisputed. Many people do not believe in Islam, but they believe Muhammad existed. Many do not practice Buddhism, but the life of Buddha is undisputed. There are plenty of people who do not believe in Judaism, but believe that Abraham existed. For whatever reason, Jesus Christ is singled out and said by some not to have existed. This is without cause. Jesus was real.
- The story of Jesus is not adapted from Horus or similar ancient mythological figures. There are some people who try to show off all of these similarities between the Gospel account of Jesus and ancient myths such as those of the Egyptian god Horus. The supposed parallels are astonishing, from the virgin birth to the twelve disciples to the crucifixion to the Resurrection. However, these are all bogus. Only on websites that make Jesus/Horus comparisons or similar ones have such elements added to the myths. On all sites that simply tell the myths without a consideration of Jesus, these details are completely absent. It is a similar story for various claims about Jesus/Sun and Jesus/Zodiac parallels. For more information, see http://www.kingdavid8.com/homepage.html.
- There are valid extra-Biblical records of the existence of Jesus. Some people claim that Josephus was an invalid source, citing the fact that a section of his accounts that mentioned Jesus appears to have been tampered with. However, they neglect to mention that the same general section of text contains a reference to Jesus that does not appear to have been tampered with, and there is another place entirely with an undisputed reference to Jesus. Other historians (from the first few centuries) mentioned Him as well, such as Talmud of the Jews, Tacitus and Suetonius of Rome, the pagan philosopher Celsus, Lucian of Samosata, and Porphyry of Tyre. In light of such overwhelming evidence, the German historian Adolf Harnack said in the nineteenth century that Jesus was “far beyond the power of men to invent” and that anyone who believes He is a myth lacks “the capacity to distinguish between fiction and…documentary evidence.” There is more historical evidence for the life of Jesus Christ than there is for many well-accepted historical figures such as Aristotle, Archimedes, and Plato.
- The Church is one of the largest and most influential organizations of all time. I have an important question for you. Since when does a mythological figure create an organization of millions of people over a period two thousand years that can stand up to endless persecution, scrutiny, and heresy? If you are not sure, it doesn’t happen. That is just how the world works. The only reasonable way for a massive organization to arise is if an influential leader unites people to start it. In the case of the Church, it is so strong and so large that the only candidate would have to be at least capable of miracles. Jesus was much more, and only if He existed could the Church have come into being as we know it.