Changes

Other independent New Testament texts, like Hebrews (50s or 60s AD), acknowledge that Jesus existed. The book of Acts, written by Luke, discusses the final part of the life of Jesus, including interactions with his disciples and others, along with statements like the house of Israel put Jesus to be crucified (Acts 2:36).  

Other independent New Testament texts, like Hebrews (50s or 60s AD), acknowledge that Jesus existed. The book of Acts, written by Luke, discusses the final part of the life of Jesus, including interactions with his disciples and others, along with statements like the house of Israel put Jesus to be crucified (Acts 2:36).  

There are also numerous non-biblical sources within reasonable time frames on Jesus as well. Josephus was a Jewish general of Galilee, the region where Jesus had his ministry, in the 60s AD and worked directly under Anannus II who had James, the brother of Jesus, executed.<ref name="schm">Thomas Schmidt. 2025. [https://watermark02.silverchair.com/isbn-9780192866783.pdf?token=AQECAHi208BE49Ooan9kkhW_Ercy7Dm3ZL_9Cf3qfKAc485ysgAAAzMwggMvBgkqhkiG9w0BBwagggMgMIIDHAIBADCCAxUGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAeBglghkgBZQMEAS4wEQQMcFXNpp1zqB2-ZEExAgEQgIIC5iDxCDkedhmvrWMa9PKdwrZKXpB6prskV-GQkhjFFKpszJJ-hBmFvf1GlfWeGF__iCT25QK8PArBGeGJqthxVGT1VGQPA544dZOPD_4UP7I9-tkRBfXTYAV64-na0r8kQfODp-Y7LZYIpfmlP6bjyfLWQvT0InkswDAu_er8eT4fDIjr_frqAmHieGIJ1K49kPbHGNDitQRSNGZyScAzaA8B8cNZUDVzFlCpEM9OekUHY2mHbiRFWcTJySxCtjfE96jiGikzaULs-vxVHCZY3e15ocOftVXyQnNdfa-6JKR3NOxQCLc1Q3CLKmkHCdQrnI03xGmItBXBOQ9FhBr7hjyeqYsSSIGdaTywqh3f9TGjQe4n3OTvTScw2CWHE35lsWFdNPO8SCsX7cDO_9-glr9zYGKt-5pPN4JbVzxxBnBheANG_Mwo0Sf78jqYf-3l8pZ5ITIHrcxSlFKxZli4zePv107365IXnEWKyjVSSNL88c_3hRAnc_F--VGIMZ8eHa5lvB4gHKj5at1W-JBaVOljDoamX9Rze-600I-q1q00tBIEsWVl1wcjQGvQSBWmw7KLymrzdKCFRqurTmpGH_n0RItvpKUS5HdiKL9DqDzlxpzJtKxqDj9ldSbN9lmH1v6CWMfMRdPaUPH4Uywdq05i-c_b_qnHy_o1XKJk0lgaIiFy_CBsiDDGqu4VTkohceusjRQLHAwTPfVzM5L_cG963qKpDLdHyij2YdcMTWUidIyt2EOntnffn6uQwgWvtS2MlRCbhc4CfIW8W_xa_xLOGdZEXn1n7HS5tvdH0dohSLbFlyTeuTHIXtCdQ4UDoHW4ia7n1Ih9-bNtD3bBAF-6C8JVChiZJkBOTxHbcyiPJHWgqCkFVUgjlH81bb6PamgDqHpztJfYGWcpRIFFu6ZsqL1DFMMnOCxpgzdkjOQNIFNrL7hs3WCK47rtwmJOFx6OsLSlEeo_jZ_v3ID53V-i6ffQvCQ Josephus and Jesus: New Evidence for the One Called Christ] (free ebook). Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780191957697. pages 145–147.</ref> The father of Annaus II, namely Annanus I, was at the trial of Jesus, giving a strong set of sources for Josephus’ information on Jesus, his brother James, and other events in Galilee.<ref name="schm" /> Furthermore, Josephus even lived near Nazareth, the hometown of Jesus, for a time and trained tens of thousands of soldiers in Galilee during the Jewish revolt against the Romans.<ref name="schm" /> Other non-biblical sources include Roman sources such as Tacitus, Suetonius, etc; the early church fathers, other writings from early Christians and some other Jewish sources.   

There are also numerous non-biblical sources within reasonable time frames on Jesus as well. Josephus was a Jewish general of Galilee, the region where Jesus had his ministry, in the 60s AD and worked directly under Anannus II who had James, the brother of Jesus, executed.<ref name="schm">Thomas Schmidt. 2025. [https://watermark02.silverchair.com/isbn-9780192866783.pdf?token=AQECAHi208BE49Ooan9kkhW_Ercy7Dm3ZL_9Cf3qfKAc485ysgAAAzMwggMvBgkqhkiG9w0BBwagggMgMIIDHAIBADCCAxUGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAeBglghkgBZQMEAS4wEQQMcFXNpp1zqB2-ZEExAgEQgIIC5iDxCDkedhmvrWMa9PKdwrZKXpB6prskV-GQkhjFFKpszJJ-hBmFvf1GlfWeGF__iCT25QK8PArBGeGJqthxVGT1VGQPA544dZOPD_4UP7I9-tkRBfXTYAV64-na0r8kQfODp-Y7LZYIpfmlP6bjyfLWQvT0InkswDAu_er8eT4fDIjr_frqAmHieGIJ1K49kPbHGNDitQRSNGZyScAzaA8B8cNZUDVzFlCpEM9OekUHY2mHbiRFWcTJySxCtjfE96jiGikzaULs-vxVHCZY3e15ocOftVXyQnNdfa-6JKR3NOxQCLc1Q3CLKmkHCdQrnI03xGmItBXBOQ9FhBr7hjyeqYsSSIGdaTywqh3f9TGjQe4n3OTvTScw2CWHE35lsWFdNPO8SCsX7cDO_9-glr9zYGKt-5pPN4JbVzxxBnBheANG_Mwo0Sf78jqYf-3l8pZ5ITIHrcxSlFKxZli4zePv107365IXnEWKyjVSSNL88c_3hRAnc_F--VGIMZ8eHa5lvB4gHKj5at1W-JBaVOljDoamX9Rze-600I-q1q00tBIEsWVl1wcjQGvQSBWmw7KLymrzdKCFRqurTmpGH_n0RItvpKUS5HdiKL9DqDzlxpzJtKxqDj9ldSbN9lmH1v6CWMfMRdPaUPH4Uywdq05i-c_b_qnHy_o1XKJk0lgaIiFy_CBsiDDGqu4VTkohceusjRQLHAwTPfVzM5L_cG963qKpDLdHyij2YdcMTWUidIyt2EOntnffn6uQwgWvtS2MlRCbhc4CfIW8W_xa_xLOGdZEXn1n7HS5tvdH0dohSLbFlyTeuTHIXtCdQ4UDoHW4ia7n1Ih9-bNtD3bBAF-6C8JVChiZJkBOTxHbcyiPJHWgqCkFVUgjlH81bb6PamgDqHpztJfYGWcpRIFFu6ZsqL1DFMMnOCxpgzdkjOQNIFNrL7hs3WCK47rtwmJOFx6OsLSlEeo_jZ_v3ID53V-i6ffQvCQ Josephus and Jesus: New Evidence for the One Called Christ] (free ebook). Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780191957697. pages 145–147.</ref> The father of Annaus II, namely Annanus I, was at the trial of Jesus, giving a strong set of sources for Josephus’ information on Jesus, his brother James, and other events in Galilee.<ref name="schm" /> Furthermore, Josephus even lived near Nazareth, the hometown of Jesus, for a time and trained tens of thousands of soldiers in Galilee during the Jewish revolt against the Romans.<ref name="schm" /> Jesus is mentioned two times (''Testimonium Flavianum'' and the James Brother of Jesus passage) and the consensus among experts is that that Josephus did write about Jesus.<ref>Alice Whealey. 2015. "The Testimonium Flavianum". A Companion to Josephus. Wiley-Blackwell. page 354. ISBN 9781118325162."Although the thesis of total fabrication was probably in the majority by the late nineteenth century, this opinion was never unanimous among critical scholars; many, pointing in particular to Jerome’s ancient literal translation with the variant reading “he was believed to be the Christ” (“credebatur esse Christus”), argued that the phrase in the textus receptus “he was the Christ,” and perhaps a few others, had been corrupted over time. By the late twentieth century, the view that the text was partly authentic gained scholarly ground: in part because stylistic studies revealed it to be closer to Josephus’s language than was once assumed, and in part because scholars of the primitive church no longer assume that a Jew of priestly background—like Josephus—could not have written in such a positive way about Jesus or those he attracted. The discovery that a literal Syriac translation of the text containing a phrase parallel to Jerome’s phrase reading “he was believed to be the Christ” reveals that there must once have been a Greek Testimonium with such a reading, and this has played a role in shifting the view that the text is at least partly authentic towards what seems to be a current scholarly consensus, with those scholars maintaining the thesis of complete fabrication becoming a minority, if still a significant one."</ref><ref>Louis  Feldman. 1987. Josephus, Judaism and Christianity.BRILL. p.56 ISBN 9789004085541. "That, indeed, Josephus did say something about Jesus is indicated, above all, by the passage—the authenticity of which has been almost universally acknowledged—about James, who is termed (A XX, 200) the brother of "the aforementioned Christ."</ref> Other non-biblical sources include Roman sources such as Tacitus, Suetonius, etc; the early church fathers, other writings from early Christians and some other Jewish sources.   

Christ myth theories have been around for more than a century and are widely considered as fringe or conspiracy theories by experts since they failed to convince experts over a century ago and continue to fail to convince experts even today.<ref>Christopher Hansen. 2022. "[https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/2222582X.2021.2001667 Re-examining the Pre-Christian Jesus]". Journal of Early Christian History. 12 (2): 17–40 "The theory of a pre-Christian Jesus, while exceptionally intriguing, still has not found any decent footing in recent years. Though there have been some attempts at innovating the concept, invariably the arguments for this have relied heavily on conjectural interpretations of biblical and extrabiblical literature in an attempt to validate the hypothesis. The arguments tend to rely on specious interpretations of the ancient texts, various conjectures, and, in Price's case, a reliance on outdated and long-since disproven concepts. All of these issues, and more, demonstrate that the pre-Christian Jesus hypothesis is still an unreliable thesis, and likely should be discounted as it was a century ago. The renovated theories fail to convincingly explain the evidence at hand."</ref> Secular and non-Christian scholars generally agree that mythicist theories are fringe and widely rejected by actual experts in history, the ancient world, and other relevant fields.<ref name="be" /> Even prominent mythicists like secularist G.A. Wells, who promoted mythicism in the late 20th century and into the 21st century, eventually rejected mythicism and came to believe that Jesus did exist.<ref>George A. Wells. "[https://web.archive.org/web/20210630131437/https://secularhumanism.org/2012/06/cont-ehrman-on-the-historicity-of-jesus-and-early-christian-thinking/ Ehrman on the Historicity of Jesus and Early Christian Thinking]". Free Inquiry. Volume 32. Number 4. Issue June/July 2012. pages: 58-62. "Ehrman is well aware that I have come to modify my originally mythicist position, and he states correctly that I now think that there really was a man Jesus but that we can know very little about him (19, 241). In fact I agree with his view that “Jesus really existed” but “was not the person most Christians today believe in” (143). That he nevertheless continues to label me a mythicist is confusing."</ref> Critics of mythicism such as atheist scholars acknowledge that mythicism is supported and driven mainly by atheists and atheist ideology, not historical research, and that their views contradict the views of experts from all religious and non-religious backgrounds.<ref>Daniel Gullotta. 2017."[https://web.archive.org/web/20250124073547/https://scapegoatshadows.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/2b22b-17455197-journal-for-the-study-of-the-historical-jesus-on-richard-carriers-doubts.pdf On Richard Carrier's Doubts: A Response to Richard Carrier's On the Historicity of Jesus: Why We Might Have Reason for Doubt]". Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus. 15 (2–3): 310–346."Scholars, however, may rightly question whether Carrier’s work and those who evangelize it exhibit the necessary level of academic detachment. If David L. Barrett was right, ‘That every generation discovers the historical Jesus that it needs’, then it is not surprising that a group with a passionate dislike for Jesus (and his ancient and modern associates) has found what they were looking for: a Jesus who conveniently does them the favor of not existing anywhere except in the imagination of deluded fundamentalists in the past and present. Whereas mythicists will accuse scholars of the historical Jesus of being apologists for the theology of historic Christianity, mythicists may in turn be accused of being apologists for a kind of dogmatic atheism."</ref><ref name="be2">Bart Ehrman. 2012. Did Jesus Exist?: The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth. Harper Collins. ISBN 9780062206442. pages 336-338 "It is no accident that virtually all mythicists (in fact, all of them, to my knowledge) are either atheists or agnostics. The ones I know anything about are quite virulently, even militantly, atheist...To be sure, they are doing theology in order to oppose traditional religion. But the question is not driven by historical concerns but by religious ones."</ref><ref>Bill Cooke. "[https://web.archive.org/web/20240823022402/https://secularhumanism.org/2024/07/five-challenges-to-christ-myth-theorists/#cooke-bill Five Challenges to Christ Myth Theorists]". Free Inquiry. Volume 44. Number 5. Issue August/September 2024. "The understanding of Jesus advanced by the Third Quest scholars is shared by people of different persuasions: Christian, Jewish, and atheist. It is a conclusion open to anyone who values evidence over prior belief. The myth theory, by stark contrast, is supported only by a minority of mostly American humanists. No significant humanist body outside North America invests any serious time with the myth theory. For example, a recent pamphlet from the British Humanist Association titled “Who Was Jesus?” deals peremptorily with this issue of historicity: “Did Jesus exist? Almost all scholars believe that Jesus existed in the first century CE in Palestine.”</ref>  

Christ myth theories have been around for more than a century and are widely considered as fringe or conspiracy theories by experts since they failed to convince experts over a century ago and continue to fail to convince experts even today.<ref>Christopher Hansen. 2022. "[https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/2222582X.2021.2001667 Re-examining the Pre-Christian Jesus]". Journal of Early Christian History. 12 (2): 17–40 "The theory of a pre-Christian Jesus, while exceptionally intriguing, still has not found any decent footing in recent years. Though there have been some attempts at innovating the concept, invariably the arguments for this have relied heavily on conjectural interpretations of biblical and extrabiblical literature in an attempt to validate the hypothesis. The arguments tend to rely on specious interpretations of the ancient texts, various conjectures, and, in Price's case, a reliance on outdated and long-since disproven concepts. All of these issues, and more, demonstrate that the pre-Christian Jesus hypothesis is still an unreliable thesis, and likely should be discounted as it was a century ago. The renovated theories fail to convincingly explain the evidence at hand."</ref> Secular and non-Christian scholars generally agree that mythicist theories are fringe and widely rejected by actual experts in history, the ancient world, and other relevant fields.<ref name="be" /> Even prominent mythicists like secularist G.A. Wells, who promoted mythicism in the late 20th century and into the 21st century, eventually rejected mythicism and came to believe that Jesus did exist.<ref>George A. Wells. "[https://web.archive.org/web/20210630131437/https://secularhumanism.org/2012/06/cont-ehrman-on-the-historicity-of-jesus-and-early-christian-thinking/ Ehrman on the Historicity of Jesus and Early Christian Thinking]". Free Inquiry. Volume 32. Number 4. Issue June/July 2012. pages: 58-62. "Ehrman is well aware that I have come to modify my originally mythicist position, and he states correctly that I now think that there really was a man Jesus but that we can know very little about him (19, 241). In fact I agree with his view that “Jesus really existed” but “was not the person most Christians today believe in” (143). That he nevertheless continues to label me a mythicist is confusing."</ref> Critics of mythicism such as atheist scholars acknowledge that mythicism is supported and driven mainly by atheists and atheist ideology, not historical research, and that their views contradict the views of experts from all religious and non-religious backgrounds.<ref>Daniel Gullotta. 2017."[https://web.archive.org/web/20250124073547/https://scapegoatshadows.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/2b22b-17455197-journal-for-the-study-of-the-historical-jesus-on-richard-carriers-doubts.pdf On Richard Carrier's Doubts: A Response to Richard Carrier's On the Historicity of Jesus: Why We Might Have Reason for Doubt]". Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus. 15 (2–3): 310–346."Scholars, however, may rightly question whether Carrier’s work and those who evangelize it exhibit the necessary level of academic detachment. If David L. Barrett was right, ‘That every generation discovers the historical Jesus that it needs’, then it is not surprising that a group with a passionate dislike for Jesus (and his ancient and modern associates) has found what they were looking for: a Jesus who conveniently does them the favor of not existing anywhere except in the imagination of deluded fundamentalists in the past and present. Whereas mythicists will accuse scholars of the historical Jesus of being apologists for the theology of historic Christianity, mythicists may in turn be accused of being apologists for a kind of dogmatic atheism."</ref><ref name="be2">Bart Ehrman. 2012. Did Jesus Exist?: The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth. Harper Collins. ISBN 9780062206442. pages 336-338 "It is no accident that virtually all mythicists (in fact, all of them, to my knowledge) are either atheists or agnostics. The ones I know anything about are quite virulently, even militantly, atheist...To be sure, they are doing theology in order to oppose traditional religion. But the question is not driven by historical concerns but by religious ones."</ref><ref>Bill Cooke. "[https://web.archive.org/web/20240823022402/https://secularhumanism.org/2024/07/five-challenges-to-christ-myth-theorists/#cooke-bill Five Challenges to Christ Myth Theorists]". Free Inquiry. Volume 44. Number 5. Issue August/September 2024. "The understanding of Jesus advanced by the Third Quest scholars is shared by people of different persuasions: Christian, Jewish, and atheist. It is a conclusion open to anyone who values evidence over prior belief. The myth theory, by stark contrast, is supported only by a minority of mostly American humanists. No significant humanist body outside North America invests any serious time with the myth theory. For example, a recent pamphlet from the British Humanist Association titled “Who Was Jesus?” deals peremptorily with this issue of historicity: “Did Jesus exist? Almost all scholars believe that Jesus existed in the first century CE in Palestine.”</ref>