Was Jesus Real?

7/31/2019 Was Jesus Real?

1/22

RESEARCH PAPER

The Historical Jesus: Can We Even Know Jesus Existed?

Matt Rittgers

Understanding the Gospels and Acts NT-511 01

February 18, 2010


2/22

1

Introduction

Christianity is not a religion of ethical and moral teaching. That is, Christianitys

purpose is not to teach people how to be nice, care for others, and how to find happiness.

Instead, Christianity is a religion about trusting and following in the life and actions of one

man: Jesus. Truth be told, following Jesus does imply a certain moral lifestyle and may or

may not lead to temporary happiness.

Nevertheless, the crux of Christianity is whether or not Jesus really existed and

whether or not the Bible is an accurate account of his life. If Jesus neither existed nor are

our biblical accounts of him accurate, then Christianity is nothing more than an interesting

story. This essay will show that there is solid evidence concerning the existence of Jesus

and that the New Testament reliably teaches us about his life.

Jesus Outside of the Bible

Many scholars are quick to dismiss the accounts of Jesus in the New Testament

simply because they believe the authors to be biased. Realistically, however, there may be

no historical record, whether ancient or modern, that is completely objective. Fortunately,

historical evidence for the life of Jesus Christ is not limited to Christian literature. Indeed,

there has been multitudes of accounts written about Jesus throughout history. However,

this essay will limit its scope only to the earliest and arguably most objective and accurate

of accounts.

One of the most celebrated non-Christian historians who mentions Jesus in his work

is Flavius Josephus. Josephus was born shortly after Jesus death and died around 100 AD.


3/22

2

He was a Pharisee and a military commander during the Jewish revolt in the 60s. When

the Jewish forces were defeated, Josephus was captured, and whether through divine

providence or political maneuvering, he grew in favor in Rome. While in Rome Josephus

took upon himself the task of chronicling Jewish history and the Jewish revolt. 1

Although the vast majority of Josephus works do not reference Jesus or Christianity,

there are three short passages that mention Jesus or the Christian movement in passing.

One passage in particular mentions John the Baptist when describing the death of Herod

Agrippa I. Josephus describes John the Baptist who was a good man, and commanded

the Jews to exercise virtue, both as righteousness towards each other, and piety towards

God, and so to come to baptism; for that the washing [with water] would be acceptable to

him (Antiquities of the Jews, 18.5.2) While historians need to search for alterations and

additions to any document transcribed through history, even the secular scholar G.A. Wells

accepts Josephuss account that John the Baptist lived and ministered in the first century

AD.2

Although evidence for John the Baptist is helpful, Josephus text concerning Jesus

Christ is even more valuable. In one passage, Josephus writes:

Festus was now dead, and Ablinus was but upon the road; so he assembled

the sanhedrin 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

1 The New Encyclopedia Britannica 15thed., s.v. Josephus, Flavius (Chicago:

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1992).2G.A. Wells, The Historical Evidence for Jesus, (Buffalo: Prometheus Books, 1982),

226.


4/22

3

breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned (Antiquities of the

Jews, 20.9.1)

G.A. Wells is more skeptical of this passage than the one concerning John for only one

discernable reason: the phrase called the Christ is identical to the wording in Matthew

1:16. To Wells, the two words legovmeno cristov (legomenos christos) appear as

irrefutable evidence that this passage was written not by Josephus, but a Christian.3

However, Robert E. Van Voorst vocally disagrees with Wells. He asserts that the vast

majority of scholars accept this passage as authentic and that (t)he passage fits its context

well.4Likewise, Van Voorst believes that the Josephus using the title of Christ was done

in a neutral way intended neither to confess or deny Jesus as the Christ.5 Clearly Wells

is stretching to describe this passage as fabricated. Instead, this passage is evidence that a

secular historian believed that there was a man named Jesus, who some accepted as Christ,

who had a brother and followers that were stoned.

In addition to these two passages, there remains another passage that is even more

well-known and has been the focal point for much debate. In what has come to be known as

the Tesimonium Flavium (the testimony of Flavius), a passage emerges which describes

Jesus bluntly:

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 worksa teacher of such men as receive

the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many Jews, and many of

the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the

3 Wells, The Historical Evidence for Jesus, 210.4 Robert E. Van Voorst,Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the

Ancient Evidence, (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000), 83.5 Ibid., 84.


5/22

4

principle 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. (Antiquities of the Jews, 18.3.3)

While this is indeed a remarkable passage, scholars nearly unanimously believe it to either

have been fully fabricated or at least tampered with after written by Josephus. Perhaps the

best evidence of this is that none of the early church fathers although familiar with

Josephus quoted this text, and more importantly, Origen recorded that Josephus did not

believe Jesus to be the messiah.6

Another trustworthy non-Christian historian from antiquity is Gaius Suetonius

Tranquillus (ca. 79- after 122).7 In a short passage concerning the life of Emperor Claudius,

Suetonius wrote, Since the Jews constantly made disturbances at the instigation of

Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome (Claudius, 25.4). While there is some debate

whether or not there was a Jew by the name ofChrestus, Van Voorst maintains thatChrestus

was a simple phonetic spelling mistake ofChristus. Indeed, this misspelling contributes to

the authenticity of the passage, for if a Christian were to have tampered with the document,

they surely would have spelled Christus correctly. 8

History also provides letters written between the Emperor Trajan and a governor,

Pliny the Younger (ca. 61-ca. 113).9 In one such letter, Pliny asks Trajan how he should

6 Voorst,Jesus Outside the New Testament, 92.7 The New Encyclopedia Britannica 15thed., s.v. Suetonius (Chicago: Encyclopaedia

Britannica, 1992).8 Voorst,Jesus Outside the New Testament, 32, 38, 33.9 The New Encyclopedia Britannica 15thed., s.v. Pliny the Younger (Chicago:

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1992).


6/22

5

proceed with the trials of Christians who refused to denounce their faith and worship the

Emperor. From this letter, a few telling details about Christians come out. First, Christians

refused to worship the Roman Gods nor offer wine and frankincense to the Emperor.

Second, Christians were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was

light Third, Christians sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a God. Finally,

Christians committed themselves to not perform any wicked deeds, but never to commit

any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word(Letters 10.96)

Remarkably, in addition to these three sources, there are other references to Jesus

and Christians in the early second century that are trustworthy. Tacitus recounts that

Christus was punished by Pontius Pilate, yet his movement broke out once again in Judea.

Likewise, it is from Tacitus record that recounts Emperor Nero blaming and persecuting

Christians for the 64 AD fire in Rome.10 Also, Lucian of Samosata insults the Christians in

Palestine by mocking them of their worship of a man who was crucified in Palestine

because he introduced this new cult into the world (The Passing of Peregrinus 11-13)11

Therefore, even without opening the Bible and using evidence dating only until the

mid-second century, much can be said about Jesus and early Christians. First, John the

Baptist lived, preached repentance, and was executed by Herod Agrippa. Second, Jesus

Christ had a brother named James, who with some others were stoned at the order of the

Sanhedrin under the charge of breaking the law. Third, Jews following Christ were

10 Voorst,Jesus Outside the New Testament, 41.11 Luke Timothy Johnson, The Real Jesus: The Misguided Quest for the Historical Jesus

and the Truth of the Traditional Gospels, (New York: HarperSanFrancisco, 1997), 115-116.


7/22

6

bothersome enough to be kicked out of Rome during the reign of Emperor Claudius in the

40s and 50s AD. Fourth, Christians were persecuted in Rome under Emperor Nero in the

60s AD. Fifth, Christians refused to worship the Roman gods and the Emperor. Sixth,

Christians regularly met together on a fixed day. Seventh, Christians worshiped Jesus as a

God. Eighth, Christians lived notably moral lives. Ninth, Pontius Pilate punished Jesus.

Tenth, Jesus was crucified.

Given that Christianity arose in an obscure part of the empire and saw its leadership

crucified and stoned, it is remarkable that the movement was strong enough to spread one

and a half thousand miles to Rome in as little as ten to twenty years after Christs death

especially to the extent that the emperors were taking notice! Clearly the amount and

variety of these historical accounts demand that scholars take seriously the existence and

life of Jesus Christ. Yet many scholars visible in popular culture ignore the evidence. in a

video interview writer Christopher Hitchens denies there being any evidence for the

existence of Jesus of Nazareth.12 Unfortunately witty remarks and clever rhetoric from

individuals like Christopher Hitchens mislead popular culture away from any actual

evidence.

Evidence of Jesus in the Gospel Accounts

12Silverstream314, The Existence of Jesus- Christopher Hitchens, YouTube, Online

Video Clip, http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ZXXqVZFyEpg

(accessed 28 January, 2011).


8/22

7

When searching for historically reliable information about Jesus, one is inevitably

lead to the New Testaments account of his life, ministry, death, and resurrection. Indeed,

while other historical documents are helpful when it comes to establishing whether or not

Jesus was an actual historical figure, the earliest evidence of what Christians actually

believed about Christ have been preserved in the pages of the New Testament. Within the

New Testament, the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John contain the broadest

selections of Jesus life and ministry as recorded by his followers. The next section of this

essay, will examine the historical validity in two accounts of Jesus birth and resurrection as

found in Luke. Then, this essay will examine a text in John considered to be added at a later

date to the original manuscripts, and this essay will study how Christian scholars have

treated this and other texts similar to it.

Luke 2:1-5

1 In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be

taken of the entire Roman world.2 (This was the first census that took placewhile Quirinius was governor of Syria.)3 And everyone went to their own

town to register. 4 So Joseph also went up from the town of Nazareth in

Galilee to Judea, to Bethlehem the town of David, because he belonged to the

house and line of David.5 He went there to register with Mary, who was

pledged to be married to him and was expecting a child (Lk 2:1-5 NIV).

When discussing anyones life, it is usually best to start at the beginningwhere

they were born and the circumstances surrounding their birth. The story that Luke paints

concerning Jesus birth is marvelous indeed. After tales of angelic encounters and

supernatural conception, Luke 2:1-5 describes the political and geographic circumstances

that lead to Jesus birth. If a skeptic of the life of Jesus wants to call into question the


9/22

8

validity of Jesus existence, often they find themselves calling into question these firstfacts

about his life. For example, Christopher Hitchens declares,

But Herod died four years BC, and during his rulership the governor of

Syria was not Quirinius. There is no mention of any Augustan census by any

Roman historian, but the Jewish chronicler Josephus mentions one that did

occurwithout the onerous requirement for people to return to their places

of birth, and six years after the birth of Jesus is supposed to have taken

place.13

Indeed, Hitchens charges demand attention, but unfortunately he acts as if no Christian

scholar has attempted to address these issues.

First, the best Christian scholarship attests that Jesus of Nazareth was not born in

the year 1 AD. In fact, our current calendar which attempted to date Jesus birth was not

introduced until the ninth or tenth century. Thus scholars are not bound to the year 1 AD

for the date of Jesus birth (on this calendar there was no year zero). While some have tried

to ascribe the date of Jesus birth to 6ADthe date of the Josephus recorded census, this

appears to be a minority opinion.14 Instead, recent scholarship suggests that Jesus was

born between 6-4 BC.15Therefore, Herod was indeed alive and well at Jesus birth.

There is little to no question concerning that Caesar Augustus was in power during

this time period. Instead, what is called into question is whether or not he issued a census

preceding the birth of Jesus. Using the corrected dates for the birth of Jesus, this census

needed to have been declared not at 1 AD but 6-4 BC or shortly before. Although Hitchens

13 Hitchens, God is not Great, 112.14J. Duncan M. Derritt, Further Light on the Narratives of the Nativity, Novum

Testamentum, 17/ 2 (1975), 84.15 Blomberg, Jesus and the Gospels, 222.


10/22

9

is correct that Josephus mentions a census taking place in 6 AD, he is incorrect concerning

there being no recorded census during the reign of Caesar Augustus. Blomberg attests that

Augustus himself recorded calling a census in 8 BC in The Deeds of the Divine Augustus 8.2-

4.16 Given that Augustus indeed ordered a census in 8 BC, it is perfectly reasonable for the

order to take a couple of years for the distant region of Judea to oblige.17

One of the stickiest points for historians concerning the Luke 2 passage is that it

appears to indicate that Quirinius was the governor of Syria at the time of Jesus birth. Yet,

Quirinius did not govern Syria until 6-7 AD. However, the Greek in the Luke 2 passage has

been called awkward and may in fact be translated This registration happened before

Quirinius became governor of Syria. 18 Yet, Blomberg believes that this is not the most

natural reading of the text. Instead, he argues that Quirinius was known to have served in a

military role in the region and may have very well been considered a type of joint-

governor.19Thus, while there are certainly questions surrounding Lukes usage of Quirinius

in his nativity account, by no means can it be used as evidence against Lukes historical

reliability.

Other minor details concerning this passage include Marys inclusion in the census

and the necessity of their trip to Bethlehem. Perhaps Mary was traveling not for herself, but

for the birth of her son. If the child was born in Bethlehem, he would have been considered

16 Craig L. Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of the Gospels, 2ndEdition, (Downers

Grove: IVP Academic, 2007), 248.17 Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of the Gospels, 248.18John Nolland, Luke 1-9:20, ????????(Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers,

1989), 99, 101.19 Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of the Gospels, 248.


11/22

10

a citizen and exempted from fifty-percent of the poll tax when he was older.20 Or maybe

Joseph wanted to protect his child from insults during his absence.21 Why however, did

Joseph need to travel to Bethlehem? Nolland suggests that Joseph may have feared losing

some ancestral claims to the land around Bethlehem if he did not register there.22

Luke 24:1-6a

If beginning with the birth narrative of Jesus is a good place to start for the historical study

of his life, then perhaps the story of his resurrection is a fitting place to look as well. For, if

these two facets of Jesus life can be established, much else about Jesus can be affirmed.

1 On the first day of the week, very early in the morning, the women took the

spices they had prepared and went to the tomb. 2 They found the stone

rolled away from the tomb, 3 but when they entered, they did not find the

body of the Lord Jesus. 4 While they were wondering about this, suddenly

two men in clothes that gleamed like lightning stood beside them. 5 In their

fright the women bowed down with their faces to the ground, but the men

said to them, "Why do you look for the living among the dead? 6 He is not

here; he has risen! (Lk 24: 1-6a)

Critics of the resurrection will find themselves in good company, for even the

faithful women visiting Jesus tomb did not expect Jesus to have risen from the dead. This is

evidenced by the spices that they carried to anoint his dead body. Undoubtedly they were

shocked when they realized that Jesus body was not present in the tomb!23

Yet, this clearly would not seem to be convincing evidence to a skeptic of the

resurrection of Jesus Christ. Certainly one could have fabricated the story and included the

20Derritt, Further Light, 93-94.21 Hoehner, Chronological Aspects, 342.

22Nolland, Luke 1-9:20, 101.23 Darrell L. Bock, Luke, (Downers Grove: Intervarsity Press, 1994), 380.


12/22

11

shock of the women for dramatic effect. However, herein lies the rub: the story uses women

as the first witnesses to the resurrection.

Women at the time of Jesus were not considered to be reliable witnesses. In fact,

womens testimonies were generally not allowed in the court of law. Surprisingly, all of the

gospel accounts attribute women to being the first witness to the resurrection of Jesus.24

Since anyone fabricating such a monumental story would have certainly not have used

women as the primary witnesses, it seems that the story itself has the air of reliability.

Some skeptics offer suggestions other than resurrection as to how the body of Jesus

may have disappeared. These include: the disciples stole the body, Jesus was accidentally

placed in another tomb, or that Jesus had notreallydied on the cross but left the tomb on

his own power. First, if the disciples would have stolen the body of Jesus (the first

accusation of skeptics and listed in Mt. 28:12-15), it is most surprising to see what kind of

men the disciples become. They do not stage a violent political revolution as they had

expected and hoped. Instead, they lived pious lives preaching Christs resurrection up to

the moment of their martyr deaths. Likewise, if Jesus did not appear as risen from the dead,

then one would have expected that neither Jesus skeptical half-brother, James, nor Saul of

Tarsus to have come to faith (1 Cor. 15:7-8).25

Second, if the disciples had merely confused themselves about the placement of

Jesus dead body, then his body should still be there to this day! Jewish authorities could

24Gary R. Habermas, The Case for Christs Resurrection, in To Everyone An Answer:

A Case for the Christian Worldview, ed. by Francis J. Beckwith, William Lane Craig, and J.P.

Moreland, (Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2004), 188.25 Ibid., 190.


13/22

12

have simply have exhumed Jesus body as evidence of the Christians error, yet there is no

recording in any literature that the Jews were able to have done any such thing.26

Third, the belief that Jesus had simply appeared to be dead but regained his strength

and walked out of the tomb on his own power is fanciful thinking. Crucifixion was the

cruelest from of execution known to the Roman world, and when Jesus appeared to have

died, the Roman guards stabbed Jesus with a spear just to be sure (Jn 19:34). Certainly

Jesus was dead.

Blomberg notes that each of these scenarios are often rejected because they seem

even more difficult to believe than the resurrection itself. Instead, it is currently more

popular to suggest that the disciples did not believe that Jesusphysicallyrose from the

dead, but that Jesus spirituallyappeared to them instead. 27 Yet, this theory stands against

the accounts themselves in which Jesus is clearly missing from the tomb (Lk 24:6), he is

touched by Thomas (Jn 20:27), and he eats (Lk 24:40-43).

Cleary, early Christians believed in the resurrection stories from the start. Perhaps

some of the strongest evidence for this is that they separated their holy day from the Jewish

Sabbath to coincide with Jesus resurrection on the first day of the weekthat is,

Sunday.28With all of these considerations taken into account, Habermas notes that most

critical scholars still think that the tomb where Jesus was buried was later discovered to be

empty.29 Even more, Blomberg professes: It is also arguable that of all the alleged

26 Ibid., 189.27 Blomberg, Jesus and the Gospels, 409, 412.28 Ibid., 411.29Habermas, The Case for Christs Resurrection, 189.


14/22

13

miracles in ancient history, the resurrection is actually the one with by far the most

historical support.30

John 7:53-8:11

3 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in

adultery. They made her stand before the group 4 and said to Jesus,

"Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 In the Law Moses

commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?"6 They were

using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him. But

Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7 When

they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "Let any

one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her." 8 Again he

stooped down and wrote on the ground.9 At this, those who heard began togo away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the

woman still standing there. 10 Jesus straightened up and asked her,

"Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?"11 "No one, sir," she

said. "Then neither do I condemn you," Jesus declared. "Go now and leave

your life of sin." (John 7:53-8:11)

While often considered to be one of the favorite passages of many believers, most

would be surprised to learn that scholars are very certain that John 7:53-8:11 was not in

the original manuscripts of the Gospel of John! In fact, this happens to be one of the chief

cornerstones of Hitchens criticism of the New Testament. In his work, Hitchens displays

Bart Ehrman as marvelous scholar who realized that some of the best-known Jesus

stories were scribbled into the canon long after the fact.31 Indeed, Hitchens and Ehrman

are both correct that the John 7:53-8:11 were not in the original manuscripts. However,

they are gravely wrong by not acknowledging that this fact was well established centuries

30 Blomberg,Jesus and the Gospels, 412.

31 Hitchens, God is not Great, 120.


15/22

14

ago. Christian scholarship, it seems, is fully committed to determining the original

manuscripts of its own sacred literature.

John 7:53-8:11 is found neither in Origens commentary on John nor in any of the

Eastern Greek fathers writings until the twelfth century. Other church fathers in the west

did in fact mention it, including Ambrose and Augustine, which enabled it to have been

considered part of the canon for the Western Catholic Church.32 Nevertheless, the story

itself is missing in many manuscripts, and when it is included, its location varies wildly.33

Today the vast majority of scholars have concluded that this passage was not in the

original manuscripts. It includes vocabulary unlike that in other Johannine literature.

Nevertheless, the story itself may indeed harken to a real account of Jesus.34 Due to the

storys popularity, as well as its alignment with other theological teachings of Jesus, the

passage remains in most modern Bibles yet often denoted as being a later tradition.

Similar to the John 7:53-8:11 passage, there are other variants found in scriptural

manuscripts that can cause scholars question the authenticity of a text. Some make claims

that this disables scholars today from ever reconstructing the original biblical texts.

However, the vast majority of variations in the text are stemmed from variations in

spelling, word order, and the usage of definite articles. Apart from these, only a handful of

variants (such as the John 7:53-8:11 passage) hold any significance in the text. Nonetheless,

32 Gary M. Brge, A Specific Problem in the New Testament Text and Canon: The

Woman Caught in Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society

27/2 (1984), 142-143.33 Timothy Paul Jones, Misquoting Truth: A Guide to the Fallacies of Bart Ehrmans

Misquoting Jesus, (Downers Grove: IVP Books, 2007), 63.34 Craig S. Keener, The Gospel of John: A Commentary, Vol. 1, (Peabody: Hendrickson

Publishers, 2003), 735-736.


16/22

15

Timothy Paul Jones proclaims, Most importantly, none of the differences affect any central

element of the Christian faith.35

To be sure, John 7:53-8:11 displays a picture of Jesus that is completely reconcilable

with the other accounts of him that are found within the New Testament. The gospels

establish well that the Pharisees and teachers of the law continually looked for

opportunities to trip Jesus up (Mt 16:1, 22:15, 22:33-36, Mk 8:11, 10:2). Likewise, here

Jesus follows his similar pattern of being full of grace to the sinnerbut being harsh with the

righteous (Mt 9:12, Mk 2:17, Lk 15:1-2).

Christians can be confident that the Bible they read today is trustworthy. In fact, if

John 7:53-8:11 can teach Christians anything, it can teach them that the Bible is treated

with utmost scrutiny and care. While John 7:53-8:11 is included it is almost always

bracketed or labeled as being not in the original texts. Likewise most Study Bibles clearly

label questionable passages and/or variant readingseven to the extent of indicating

minuscule differences.

In Defense of the Reliability of the Gospel Accounts

A common assault on the validity of the Christian scriptures is voiced clearly by

Christopher Hitchens: just like the Old Testament, the New one is a also a work of

crude carpentry, hammered together long after its purported events, and full of improvised

attempts to make things come out right.36 While Hitchens book is loaded with

unsupported facts (his entire chapter on the New Testament includes only four

35 Jones, Misquoting Truth, 43-44. Emphasis Jones.36 Christopher Hitchens, God is not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything, (New

York: Twelve, 2007), 109.


17/22

16

references), the concerns he raises do need to be addressed and in fact are done so to great

length by a great number of scholars. Indeed, the earliest gospel, Mark, was written no

earlier than the late 50s AD.37 Even so, recent scholarship has declared that twenty to

thirty years is not a long enough time for stories in an oral culture, such as first century

Palestine, to become overtly corrupted. In fact, it is believed that oral cultures can reliably

transmit trustworthy history for events 80 to 150 years earlier!38 Nonetheless, the earlier a

text can be dated the more certain scholars can be that a passage is faithful to the original

beliefs of early Christians. Fortunately, this is what scholars find in 1 Corinthians 15.

In the midst of 1 Corinthians 15, Paul is writing a letter to the Corinthian church in

which he references a creed about Jesus that almost certainly he received from others in

the early church. 1 Corinthians itself appears to have been written in in the mid-50s AD.39

However, the date of the creed within 15:3-7 dates much earlier as Kirk R. MacGregor

claims: virtually all critical scholars agree that Paul received the tradition no later than

five years after the crucifixion, with a majority holding that the material was passed on to

him when he visited Jerusalem three years after his conversion40 Thus the oral creed

within 1 Corinthians 15 is some of the earliest Christian doctrine and beliefs about Christ

that are available to scholars and Christians today.

37 Craig L. Blomberg,Jesus and the Gospels: An Introduction and Survey, 2ndEdition,(Nashville: B & H Academic, 2009), 137.

38Paul Rhodes Eddy and Gregory A. Boyd, The Jesus Legend: A Case for the Historical

Reliability of the Synoptic Jesus Tradition, (Grand Rapids: BakerAcademic, 2007), 395.39Verlyn D. Verbrugge, 1 Corinthians, in Expositors Bible Commentary Revised, ed.

David E. Garland and Tremper Longman III, vol. 11 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2006), 248.40Kirk R. MacGregor, 1 Corinthians 15:3B-6A, 7 and the Bodily Resurrection of

Jesus, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society49/2 (2006): 226.


18/22

17

3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ

died for our sins according to the Scriptures,4 that he was buried, that

he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,5 and that he

appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve.6After that, he appeared to

more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most ofwhom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to

James, then to all the apostles, 8 and last of all he appeared to me also, as to

one abnormally born (1 Cor. 15:3-8).

The text presented in bold indicates what most scholars seem to agree on as the core of the

creed in which Paul is quoting.41 However, MacGregor argues that the text presented in

italics may have also been part of the initial creed as well.42

Christians can celebrate the fact that the creed found in 1 Corinthians 15 agrees

with many of the most important claims about Jesus found in the gospels. It attests that

Christ died, was buried, and rose from the dead three days later. Then, Jesus was seen by

Peter and the other disciples. This evidence shows that the beliefs in Jesus resurrection

were not later doctrines that were hammered on to the Christian faith. Instead, Christs life,

death, and resurrection were widely believed by Christians in the immediate years after the

crucifixion.

Conclusion

This essay has shown that Jesus, according to the best scholarship, was a really

historical figure evidenced by his life displayed in the gospels and other secular historical

documents. Likewise, this essay has proven that Christian scholarship is immensely critical

41J. Paul Sampley, The First Letter to the Corinthians: Introduction Commentary

and Reflections, in The New Interpreters Bible: A Commentary in Twelve Volumes, ed. by

Leander E. Keck, vol. 10 (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2002): 976.42MacGregor, 1 Corinthians, 227-229.


19/22

18

when it considers the reliability and authenticity of texts as seen in the Testimonium

Flavium and John 7:53-8:11. By using the best historical research, it has been established

that Jesus was born, ministered in Palestine, died by crucifixion, and disappeared from the

grave. While the miracle accounts of Jesus actual resurrection from the dead may need to

be something taken on faith, the fact of the matter is that early Christians clearly believed

that Jesus rose from the dead and gave their lives in service to him. Without belief in the

resurrection, Christianity even in the earliest centuries would have had no foundation and

thus would have vanished into the plethora of Roman cults and beliefs.

Application

It is often said today that belief in Jesus is a matter of faith, not history or science.

Undoubtedly, stories of miraculous events need to be examined critically in todays day and

age. Therefore, many Christians in America today find themselves with an uncertain faith.

They may believe that the teachings and stories about Jesus are true in a spiritual sense, but

they might notbelieve that Jesus really walked the earth, performed miracles, or rose from

the dead. This is a problem because the Christian faith without the Biblical statements

about Jesus being empirically true is empty. As Paul said in 1 Corinthians 15:17-19, And if

Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins.Then those also who

have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all

people most to be pitied.

As a pastoral leader in a church, I must embrace the academic study of the life of

Jesus. I must learn how to use this careful study to look for ways to lead more into believing

Jesus. Too often today well-educated individuals are told that belief in Jesus or God is


20/22

19

completely foolish. Therefore too many today reject the message of Jesus before even

hearing what it is. However, if I commit myself to not being lazy and become a

knowledgeable student of history, then I may very well find myself being powerfully used

by God to reach college professors, business professionals, and bright students of all ages.

The historical-reliability wall thathas too long separated the academic community from

faith is built on the lie that Jesus was not a historical figure. Instead, with simple

scholarship and study, this wall can become a bridge to faith for many.

Likewise, the study of the historical Jesus can be very helpful in my discipleship of

other believers. Particularly, when a Christian begins to question their faith, I hope to have

more advice than to simply say, Just believe, have faith in things unseen. Without a doubt,

some things in the Christian faith cannot be empirically proven; nevertheless pastors such

as myself must look to opportunities to strengthen faith by displaying the things that can be

seen to those questioning their faith.

In addition to this, if I discover how to teach Christians to study the history of Christ

critically, then they will be protected and armed to engage with sly skeptics such as

Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins. Recently, church leaders found themselves

scrambling when The Da Vinci Code was released. Many churches had not prepared their

members about the certainty of what Christianity professes and the great care that has

occurred in preserving the tradition as authentically as possible. Thus many Christians

found themselves confused and questioning the roots of their faith. This is appalling and

perhaps one of the greatest problems in the Western Church today. As a pastor, it is my


21/22

20

God-given duty to faithfully educate Christians and nonbelievers on the historical certainty

of Jesus and the reliability of the biblical tradition

There is too much at stake in our churches and communities to not take the

historical credibility of Jesus existence seriously. As a pastor, it is my duty to introduce

people to the real person of Jesus Christ. If I cannot say with confidence that Jesus truly is

who the Bible says he is, then I am certainly a shepherd of a people that need to be pitied.

Works Cited:

Blomberg, Craig L. The Historical Reliability of the Gospels, 2ndEdition. Downers Grove: IVP

Academic, 2007.

Blomberg, Craig L.Jesus and the Gospels: An Introduction and Survey, 2ndEdition. Nashville:

B&H Publishing Group, 2009.

Bock, Darrell L. Luke. Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 1994.

Brge, Gary M. A Specific Problem in the New Testament Text and Canon: The Woman

Caught in Adultery (John 7:53-8:11).Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society

27/2 (1984): 141-148.

Derritt, J. Duncan M. Further Light on the Narratives of the Nativity. Novum Testamentum17/ 2 (1975): 81-108.

Eddy, Paul Rhodes and Gregory A. Boyd. The Jesus Legend: A Case for the Historical

Reliability of the Synoptic Jesus Tradition. Grand Rapids: BakerAcademic, 2007.

Habermas, Gary R. The Case for Christs Resurrection. In To Everyone An Answer: A Case

for the Christian Worldview, ed. by Francis J. Beckwith, William Lane Craig, and J.P.

Moreland. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2004.

Hitchens, Christopher. God is not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything. New York: Twelve,

2007.

Hoehner, Harold W. Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ Part I: The Date of Christ's

Birth. Bibliotheca Sacra 130 (1973), 338-351.


22/22

21

Johnson,Luke Timothy. The Real Jesus: The Misguided Quest for the Historical Jesus and the

Truth of the Traditional Gospels. New York: HarperSanFrancisco, 1997.

Jones, Timothy Paul. Misquoting Truth: A Guide to the Fallacies of Bart Ehrmans Misquoting

Jesus. Downers Grove: IVP Books, 2007.

Keener, Craig S. The Gospel of John: A Commentary, Vol. 1. Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers,

2003.

MacGregor, Kirk R. 1 Corinthians 15:3B-6A, 7 and the Bodily Resurrection of Jesus.

Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society49/2 (2006): 225-234.

Nolland, John. Luke 1-9:20. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1989.

Sampley, J. Paul. The First Letter to the Corinthians: Introduction Commentary and

Reflections. In The New Interpreters Bible: A Commentary in Twelve Volumes, ed. by

Leander E. Keck, vol. 10, 773-1003. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2002.

Silverstream314, The Existence of Jesus- Christopher Hitchens, YouTube, Online Video

Clip, http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ZXXqVZFyEpg

(accessed 28 January, 2011).

The New Encyclopedia Britannica 15thed., s.v. Josephus, Flavius (Chicago: Encyclopaedia

Britannica, 1992).

The New Encyclopedia Britannica 15thed., s.v. Pliny the Younger (Chicago: Encyclopaedia

Britannica, 1992).

The New Encyclopedia Britannica 15thed., s.v. Suetonius (Chicago: Encyclopaedia

Britannica, 1992).

Van Voorst, Robert E.Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient

Evidence. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000.

Verbrugge, Verlyn D. 1 Corinthians. In Expositors Bible Commentary: Revised Edition, ed.

David E. Garland and Tremper Longman III, vol. 11, 241-414. Grand Rapids:

Zondervan, 2006.

Wells, G.A. The Historical Evidence for Jesus. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 1982.

Documents

Was Jesus Real?