Changes

More notably, an earlier mention of Jesus is made in a passage that has come to be called the in the ''Testimonium Flavianum'':

More notably, an earlier mention of Jesus is made in a passage that has come to be called the in the ''Testimonium Flavianum'':

:About this time came Jesus, a wise man, if indeed it is appropriate to call him a man. For he was a performer of paradoxical feats, a teacher of people who accept the unusual with pleasure, and he won over many of the Jews and also many Greeks. He was the Christ. When Pilate, upon the accusation of the first men amongst us, condemned him to be crucified, those who had formerly loved him did not cease [to follow him], for he appeared to them on the third day, living again, as the divine prophets foretold, along with a myriad of other marvelous things concerning him. And the tribe of the Christians, so named after him, has not disappeared to this day.<ref>Josephus ''[http://www.ccel.org/j/josephus/works/ant-18.htm Antiquities 18.3.3]''</ref>

:''About this time came Jesus, a wise man, if indeed it is appropriate to call him a man. For he was a performer of paradoxical feats, a teacher of people who accept the unusual with pleasure, and he won over many of the Jews and also many Greeks. He was the Christ. When Pilate, upon the accusation of the first men amongst us, condemned him to be crucified, those who had formerly loved him did not cease [to follow him], for he appeared to them on the third day, living again, as the divine prophets foretold, along with a myriad of other marvelous things concerning him. And the tribe of the Christians, so named after him, has not disappeared to this day.''<ref>Josephus ''[http://www.ccel.org/j/josephus/works/ant-18.htm Antiquities 18.3.3]''</ref>

Most scholars accept the authenticity of the majority of the passage.<ref>John Drane ''Introducing the New Testament'' (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1986) p. 138; also, James H. Charlesworth, ''Jesus Within Judaism'' (Garden City: Doubleday, 1988) p. 96</ref>  However, certain parts have been called into question, especially those which conform with the Christian creed.  These doubts are not based on the manuscript record, which is consistent, nor on the language, which is stylistically harmonious with Josephus.<ref>Henri Daniel-Rops, ''Silence of Jesus' Contemporaries'' p. 21; J.N.D. Anderson, ''Christianity: The Witness of History'' (London: Tyndale, 1969)p. 20; F.F. Bruce, ''New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?'' (Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1967) p. 108.</ref>  Concerning the ''Testimonium Flavianum'', Habermas wrote, "There is no textual evidence against it, and, conversely, there is very good manuscript evidence for these statements about Jesus, thus making it difficult to ignore."<ref>G. R. Habermas, ''The Historical Jesus'' p. 193</ref>  And there are even  a few scholars support the authenticity of the entire passage.<ref>Daniel-Rops, ''Silence of Jesus' Contemporaries'' p. 21</ref>   

Most scholars accept the authenticity of the majority of the passage.<ref>John Drane ''Introducing the New Testament'' (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1986) p. 138; also, James H. Charlesworth, ''Jesus Within Judaism'' (Garden City: Doubleday, 1988) p. 96</ref>  However, certain parts have been called into question, especially those which conform with the Christian creed.  These doubts are not based on the manuscript record, which is consistent, nor on the language, which is stylistically harmonious with Josephus.<ref>Henri Daniel-Rops, ''Silence of Jesus' Contemporaries'' p. 21; J.N.D. Anderson, ''Christianity: The Witness of History'' (London: Tyndale, 1969)p. 20; F.F. Bruce, ''New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?'' (Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1967) p. 108.</ref>  Concerning the ''Testimonium Flavianum'', Habermas wrote, "There is no textual evidence against it, and, conversely, there is very good manuscript evidence for these statements about Jesus, thus making it difficult to ignore."<ref>G. R. Habermas, ''The Historical Jesus'' p. 193</ref>  And there are even  a few scholars support the authenticity of the entire passage.<ref>Daniel-Rops, ''Silence of Jesus' Contemporaries'' p. 21</ref>   

==== Tacitus ====

==== Tacitus ====

Tacitus was a Roman historian who, writing c. A. D. 116, included in his ''Annals '' a mention of Christianity and Jesus Christ. In describing Nero's persecution of Christians following the Great Fire of Rome in A. D. 64, he wrote:

Tacitus was a Roman historian who, writing c. A. D. 116, included in his ''Annals '' a mention of Christianity and Jesus Christ. In describing Nero's persecution of Christians following the Great Fire of Rome in A. D. 64, he wrote:

:Nero fastened the guilt [of starting the blaze] and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. ''Christ'', from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius [14-37] at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilate, and the most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, 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.<ref>Tacitus, ''Annals'' 15.44.</ref>

:''Nero fastened the guilt [of starting the blaze] and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. ''Christ'', from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius [14-37] at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilate, and the most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, 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.''<ref>Tacitus, ''Annals'' 15.44.</ref>

Tacitus was obviously hostile to Christianity and thus had no desire to give credence to the claims of the faith.  Nonetheless, he identifies “Christ” (Latin ''Christus'') as the origin of the religion, and even mentions his crucifixion at the hands of Pontius Pilate.  Tacitus's source was likely an imperial record, and it has been speculated that this may even have been one of Pilate's reports to the emperor.<ref>F.F. Bruce, ''Jesus and Christian Origins Outside the New Testament'', (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), p. 23.</ref>  No scholar doubts the authenticity of the passage, in part because, as R. E. Van Voorst noted, it would be most improbable that a Christian would have interpolated "such disparaging remarks about Christianity".<ref>Robert E. Van Voorst, ''Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence'' (Eerdmans, 2000), p. 43.</ref>

Tacitus was obviously hostile to Christianity and thus had no desire to give credence to the claims of the faith.  Nonetheless, he identifies “Christ” (Latin ''Christus'') as the origin of the religion, and even mentions his crucifixion at the hands of Pontius Pilate.  Tacitus's source was likely an imperial record, and it has been speculated that this may even have been one of Pilate's reports to the emperor.<ref>F.F. Bruce, ''Jesus and Christian Origins Outside the New Testament'', (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), p. 23.</ref>  No scholar doubts the authenticity of the passage, in part because, as R. E. Van Voorst noted, it would be most improbable that a Christian would have interpolated "such disparaging remarks about Christianity".<ref>Robert E. Van Voorst, ''Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence'' (Eerdmans, 2000), p. 43.</ref>

==== Thallus ====

==== Thallus ====

Thallus, whose identity is difficult to determine, is known to have written a history from the Trojan War to his own time, which was sometime in the first or early second century.  His work has been lost.  However, an important reference to it was made by Sextus Julius Africanus.  Julius Africanus, writing around 221, described the darkness and earthquakes which occurred when Our Lord was crucified (mentioned in the gospels).  He cited Thallus as a non-Christian who gave testimony to these events:

Thallus, whose identity is difficult to determine, is known to have written a history from the Trojan War to his own time, which was sometime in the first or early second century.  His work has been lost.  However, an important reference to it was made by Sextus Julius Africanus.  Julius Africanus, writing around 221, described the darkness and earthquakes which occurred when Our Lord was crucified (mentioned in the gospels).  He cited Thallus as a non-Christian who gave testimony to these events:

:On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down.  This darkness Thallus, in his third book of ''History'', calls (as appears to me without reason) an eclipse of the sun.<ref>Julius Africanus, ''Extant Writings'' XVIII in ''Ante-Nicene Fathers'', ed. A. Roberts and J. Donaldson (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1973) vol. VI, p. 130</ref>

:''On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down.  This darkness Thallus, in his third book of ''History'', calls (as appears to me without reason) an eclipse of the sun.''<ref>Julius Africanus, ''Extant Writings'' XVIII in ''Ante-Nicene Fathers'', ed. A. Roberts and J. Donaldson (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1973) vol. VI, p. 130</ref>

==== (lost) Acts of Pilate ====

==== (lost) Acts of Pilate ====

=== Jewish records ===

=== Jewish records ===

Rabbi Akiba, before his death in A. D. 135, recorded oral traditions, especially of a legal nature, in what is known as the Mishnah.  This, together with commentaries called the “Gemaras”, constitute the Talmud.  ''Sanhedrin'' 43a, which dates to the earliest period of composition (Tannaitic period) contains the following:

Rabbi Akiba, before his death in A. D. 135, recorded oral traditions, especially of a legal nature, in what is known as the Mishnah.  This, together with commentaries called the “Gemaras”, constitute the Talmud.  ''Sanhedrin'' 43a, which dates to the earliest period of composition (Tannaitic period) contains the following:

:One the eve of the Passover, Yeshu was hanged.  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.  Any one 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.<ref>''The Babylonian Talmud'', translated I. Epstein (London: Soncio, 1935), vol. 3, ''Sanhedrin'' 43a, p. 281</ref>

:''One the eve of the Passover, Yeshu was hanged.  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.  Any one 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.''<ref>''The Babylonian Talmud'', translated I. Epstein (London: Soncio, 1935), vol. 3, ''Sanhedrin'' 43a, p. 281</ref>

The reference is certainly laconic, and at first the details seem incompatible with what is known about Jesus’ death.  However, once it is observed that the phrase “hanged” was a manner of speech that was used to signify crucifixion (as in “hanged from a tree”), the passage may be interpreted as providing important support for Jesus’ death, around the Passover, in part because of accusations of blasphemy (enticing Israel to apostacy) and because of his wonderworkings (taken as sorcery, i.e. the product of devilish aid – an accusation recorded in the gospels).  The act of stoning is not directly paralleled in the gospels, though John’s gospel does record such an attempt.  It is important not to push this harmonization too far, especially because it misses the point, which is to observe a plausible Jewish record of key feature’s of Jesus’ life.

The reference is certainly laconic, and at first the details seem incompatible with what is known about Jesus’ death.  However, once it is observed that the phrase “hanged” was a manner of speech that was used to signify crucifixion (as in “hanged from a tree”), the passage may be interpreted as providing important support for Jesus’ death, around the Passover, in part because of accusations of blasphemy (enticing Israel to apostacy) and because of his wonderworkings (taken as sorcery, i.e. the product of devilish aid – an accusation recorded in the gospels).  The act of stoning is not directly paralleled in the gospels, though John’s gospel does record such an attempt.  It is important not to push this harmonization too far, especially because it misses the point, which is to observe a plausible Jewish record of key feature’s of Jesus’ life.

The mythological view has been rejected by the historical community.  Michael Grant stated that the view derives from a lack of application of historical methods:

The mythological view has been rejected by the historical community.  Michael Grant stated that the view derives from a lack of application of historical methods:

:…if we apply to the New Testament, as we should, the same sort of criteria as we should apply to other ancient writings containing historical material, we can no more reject Jesus' existence than we can reject the existence of a mass of pagan personages whose reality as historical figures is never questioned.<ref>M. Grant, ''Jesus: An Historian's Review'', pp. 199-200</ref>

:…''if we apply to the New Testament, as we should, the same sort of criteria as we should apply to other ancient writings containing historical material, we can no more reject Jesus' existence than we can reject the existence of a mass of pagan personages whose reality as historical figures is never questioned.''<ref>M. Grant, ''Jesus: An Historian's Review'', pp. 199-200</ref>

Perhaps the scholarly opinion of the position is best summed by Robert E. Van Voorst:

Perhaps the scholarly opinion of the position is best summed by Robert E. Van Voorst:

:The nonhistoricity thesis has always been controversial, and it has consistently failed to convince scholars of many disciplines and religious creeds. ... Biblical scholars and classical historians now regard it as effectively refuted."<ref>Robert E. Van Voorst, ''Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence'' (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000), p. 16.</ref>

:''The nonhistoricity thesis has always been controversial, and it has consistently failed to convince scholars of many disciplines and religious creeds. ... Biblical scholars and classical historians now regard it as effectively refuted.''<ref>Robert E. Van Voorst, ''Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence'' (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000), p. 16.</ref>

==Notes==

==Notes==