Did Jesus Ever Exist?
There are a number of
radical skeptics today who claim that Jesus did not exist, or they seriously
doubt his existence. However, there are a number of critical problems
with doubting Jesus’ existence due to the early and abundant evidence that we
have of Jesus’ life and deeds. In fact, there is almost unanimous consent
among scholars today (Atheist, Agnostic, and Christian) that Jesus existed. Any person, regardless of motive, who claims
that Jesus never even existed on this earth, simply has not done any research
whatsoever.
There are at least 42
sources within 150 years after Jesus’ death which mention his existence and record
many events of his life. Some of these
include:
9 Traditional New
Testament Authors: Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Author of Hebrews, James,
Peter, and Jude.
20 Early Christian
Writers Outside the New Testament:
Clement of Rome, 2 Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp, Martyrdom of Polycarp, Didache,
Barnabas, Shepherd of Hermas, Fragments of Papias, Justin Martyr, Aristides,
Athenagoras, Theophilus of Antioch, Quadratus, Aristo of Pella, Melito of Sardis,
Diognetus, Gospel of Peter, Apocalypse of Peter, and Epistula Apostolorum.
4 Heretical Writings:
Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Truth, Apocryphon of John, and Treatise on
Resurrection.
Why is there not even more evidence for Jesus’ existence?
The fact is that few
records survive for thousands of years. There are a number of ancient
writings that have been lost, including 50% of the Roman historian Tacitus’
works, all of the writings of Thallus and Asclepiades of Mendes. In fact,
Herod the Great’s secretary named Nicolas of Damascus wrote a Universal History
of Roman history which comprised nearly 144 books and none of them have
survived. Based on the textual evidence,
there is no reason to doubt the existence of Jesus of Nazareth.
Pagan Sources: Several
early pagan writers briefly mention Jesus or Christians prior to the end of the
second century. These include Thallus,
Phlegon, Mara Bar-Serapion and Lucian of Samosate. Thallus’ remarks about Jesus were written in
a.d. 52, about twenty years after Christ.
In total, nine early
non-Christian secular writers mention Jesus as a real person within 150 years
of his death. Interestingly, that is the
same number of secular writers who mention Tiberius Caesar, the Roman emperor
during Jesus’ time. If we were to
consider Christian and non-Christian sources, there are forty-two who mention
Jesus, compared to just ten for Tiberius.
Roman Historians and
Roman Officials
Early Roman historians
wrote primarily of events and people important to their empire. Since Jesus wasn’t of immediate importance to
the political or military affairs of Rome, very little Roman history referenced
him. However, two important Roman
historians, Tacitus and Suetonius, do acknowledge Jesus as a real person.
Christians were
considered enemies of Rome because of their worship of Jesus as Lord rather
than Caesar. The following Roman
government officials, including two Caesars, wrote letters from that
perspective, mentioning Jesus and early Christian origins.
Historical Facts about Jesus:
MANY early non-Christian
sources provide the following facts about Jesus Christ:
• Jesus was from Nazareth.
• Jesus lived a wise and virtuous life.
• Jesus was crucified in Judea under Pontius Pilate during
the reign of Tiberius Caesar at Passover time, being considered the Jewish
king.
• Jesus was believed by his disciples to have died and risen
from the dead three days later.
• Jesus’ enemies acknowledged that he performed unusual
feats.
• Jesus’ disciples multiplied rapidly, spreading as far as
Rome.
• Jesus’ disciples lived moral lives and worshiped Christ as
God.
• This general outline of Jesus’ life agrees perfectly with
the New Testament.
Gary Habarmas notes, “In
total, about one-third of these non-Christian sources date from the first
century; a majority originate no later than the mid-second century.” According to the Encyclopedia Britannica,”These
independent accounts prove that in ancient times even the opponents of
Christianity never doubted the historicity of Jesus.”
References to Jesus in Other Secular Works
Citations in writings of
the early church Fathers reveal that there were also references to Jesus in
other secular works that are now lost to us.
These include:
•A letter by Justin
Martyr to the Roman Emperor Antonius Pius, in which he cites the official ‘Acts
of Pilate’ as corroboration for the crucifixion account.
•A skeptical reference
by Julius Africanus to an attempt by the first century historian Thallus to
explain the darkness at the time of Jesus’ death in terms of a solar eclipse.
•References by both
Julius Africanus and Origen to a second century historian, Phlegon, who
mentions the eclipse and accompanying earthquake, as well as acknowledging that
Jesus had the ability to predict future events.
Jesus: A Real Person in History
"What then, does a historian know about Jesus Christ? He knows, first and foremost, that the New
Testament documents can be relied upon to give an accurate portrait of
Him. And he knows that this portrait cannot be rationalized away by
wishful thinking, philosophical presuppositions, or literary maneuvering."[1]
[1] Bruce, F. F. (ed.), "The New International Commentary on the New Testament," Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eedmans Publishing Co., 1971
Evidence from the Babylonian Talmud
There are only a few
clear references to Jesus in the Babylonian Talmud, a collection of Jewish
rabbinical writings compiled between approximately A.D. 70-500. Given this time frame, it is naturally
supposed that earlier references to Jesus are more likely to be historically
reliable than later ones. In the case of the Talmud, the earliest period of
compilation occurred between A.D. 70-200.[1] The most significant
reference to Jesus from this period states:
On the eve of the
Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty
days before the execution took place, a herald ... cried, "He is going
forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to
apostasy."[2]
Let's examine this
passage. You may have noticed that it
refers to someone named "Yeshu." So why do we think this is Jesus? Actually, "Yeshu" (or
"Yeshua") is how Jesus' name is pronounced in Hebrew. But what does the passage mean by saying that
Jesus "was hanged"? Doesn't
the New Testament say he was crucified? Indeed
it does. But the term "hanged"
can function as a synonym for "crucified." For instance, Galatians 3:13 declares that
Christ was "hanged", and Luke 23:39 applies this term to the
criminals who were crucified with Jesus.[3] So the Talmud declares that Jesus was crucified
on the eve of Passover. But what of the
cry of the herald that Jesus was to be stoned? This may simply indicate what the Jewish
leaders were planning to do.[4] If so, Roman involvement
changed their plans![5]
The passage also tells
us why Jesus was crucified. It claims He
practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy! Since this accusation comes from a rather
hostile source, we should not be too surprised if Jesus is described somewhat
differently than in the New Testament. But
if we make allowances for this, what might such charges imply about Jesus?
Interestingly, both
accusations have close parallels in the canonical gospels. For instance, the charge of sorcery is similar
to the Pharisees' accusation that Jesus “casts out demons only
by Beelzebul the ruler of the demons.” (Matthew 12:24).[6] But notice this: such a charge actually tends
to confirm the New Testament claim that Jesus performed miraculous feats. Apparently Jesus' miracles were too well
attested to deny. The only alternative
was to ascribe them to sorcery! Likewise,
the charge of enticing Israel to apostasy parallels Luke's account of the
Jewish leaders who accused Jesus of misleading the nation with his teaching. Luke 23:2, 5) Such a charge tends to
corroborate the New Testament record of Jesus' powerful teaching ministry. Thus, if read carefully, this passage from the
Talmud confirms much of our knowledge about Jesus from the New Testament.
Tacitus
Let's begin our inquiry
with a passage that historian Edwin Yamauchi[7] calls "probably the
most important reference to Jesus outside the New Testament." Reporting on
Emperor Nero's decision to blame the Christians for the fire that had destroyed
Rome in A.D. 64, the Roman historian Tacitus wrote:
[2] The
Babylonian Talmud, transl. by I. Epstein (London: Soncino, 1935), vol. III,
Sanhedrin 43a, 281, cited in Habermas, The Historical Jesus, 203.
[6] F.
F. Bruce, Jesus and Christian Origins Outside the New Testament (Grand Rapids,
Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1974), 13.
[7] Edwin
Yamauchi, quoted in Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ (Grand Rapids, Michigan:
Zondervan Publishing House, 1998), 82
in The Annals: Nero fastened the guilt ... on a class hated for their
abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin,
suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of ...
Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the
moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but
even in Rome....[1]
What can we learn from
this ancient (and rather unsympathetic) reference to Jesus and the early
Christians? Notice, first, that Tacitus
reports Christians derived their name from a historical person called Christus
(from the Latin), or Christ. He is said
to have "suffered the extreme penalty," obviously alluding to the
Roman method of execution known as crucifixion. This is said to have occurred
during the reign of Tiberius and by the sentence of Pontius Pilatus. This
confirms much of what the Gospels tell us about the death of Jesus.
But what are we to make
of Tacitus' rather enigmatic statement that Christ's death briefly checked
"a most mischievous superstition," which subsequently arose not only
in Judaea, but also in Rome? One historian suggests that Tacitus is here
"bearing indirect ... testimony to the conviction of the early church that
the Christ who had been crucified had risen from the grave."[2] While this interpretation
is admittedly speculative, it does help explain the otherwise bizarre
occurrence of a rapidly growing religion based on the worship of a man who had
been crucified as a criminal.[3] How else might one explain that?
From yet another source:
Cornelius Tacitus was a Roman historian, born A.D. 56. He was Governor of Asia in A.D. 112 and
son-in-law of Julius Agricola, the Governor of Britain, A.D. 80-84.
Writing of the reign of Nero he says, "But not all the relief that
could come from man, not all the boundaries that the prince could bestow, nor
all the atonements which could be presented to the gods, availed to relieve
Nero from the infamy of being believed to have ordered the conflagration, the
fire of Rome. Hence to suppress the
rumor, he falsely charged with the guilt, and punished with the most exquisite
tortures, the persons commonly called Christians, who were hated for their
enormities. Christus, the founder of the
name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of
Tiberius: but the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time broke out
again, not only through Judea, where the mischief originated, but through the
city of Rome also."[4]
Lucius Annaeus Seneca
Lucius Annaeus Seneca
(often known as Seneca the Younger or simply Seneca (c. 4 BC – AD 65) was a
Roman Stoic philosopher, statesman, dramatist, and in one work humorist, of the
Silver Age of Latin literature. The
following snapshot is from Dissertations on the Apostolic Age by Joseph Barber
Lightfoot[5].
[1] Tacitus,
Annals 15.44, cited in Strobel, The Case for Christ, 82.
[2] N.D.
Anderson, Christianity: The Witness of History (London: Tyndale, 1969), 19,
cited in Gary R. Habermas, The Historical Jesus (Joplin, Missouri: College
Press Publishing Company, 1996), 189-190.
[3] Edwin
Yamauchi, cited in Strobel, The Case for Christ, 82
[4] Annals
XV, 44, A.D.112
[5] Lightfoot,
J. (1892). Dissertations on the Apostolic Age. Cambridge: University Press.
Why doesn't Pliny the Elder or Seneca mention the resurrection in
their writings?
Pliny focused his
writings on natural astronomical events that had physical, scientific
explanations. It is doubtful he would
have found it necessary to record an event of supernatural origin. I can also find no mention of him being in
Judea at the time so it is doubtful he would have mentioned it if he did not
witness the event first hand.
Seneca focused his
writings on dramas, dialogues, and tragedies but also wrote a meteorological
essay, Natural Questions, composed of theories pertaining to ancient
cosmology. However this was by no means
a complete scientific almanac of events- it was a literary work. And like Pliny, it is doubtful Seneca was in
Judea during this event.
Pliny the Younger (63 - 113 A.D)
Gaius Plinius Caecilius
Secundus was a lawyer, author, and magistrate of Ancient Rome. Pliny is known for his hundreds of surviving
letters, which are an invaluable historical source for the time period. Many are addressed to reigning emperors or to
notables such as the historian, Tacitus.
Pliny himself was a notable figure, serving as an imperial magistrate
under Trajan (reigned AD 98–117). Pliny
was considered an honest and moderate man, consistent in his pursuit of
suspected Christian members according to Roman law, and rose through a series
of Imperial civil and military offices, the cursus honorum.
In his correspondence
with the emperor Trajan (Epistulae X.96) he reported on his actions against the
followers of Christ. He asks the Emperor
for instructions dealing with Christians and explained that he forced
Christians to curse Christ under painful torturous inquisition:
“They were accustomed to
meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a
god, and bound themselves to a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never
to commit any fraud, theft, adultery, never to falsify their word, not to deny
a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up. When this was over,
it was their custom to depart and to assemble again to partake of a meal–but
ordinary and innocent food.”
So not only was Pliny
aware of Jesus Christ, he also provides description of the activities of the
early church. In a later writing he
details persecution against Christians:
“Even this practice,
however, they had abandoned after the publication of my edict, by which,
according to your orders, I had forbidden political associations. I therefore
judged it so much more the necessary to extract the real truth, with the
assistance of torture, from two female slaves, who were styled deaconesses: but
I could discover nothing more than depraved and excessive superstition.
In the meanwhile, the
method I have observed towards those who have denounced to me as Christians is
this: I interrogated them whether they were Christians; if they confessed it I
repeated the question twice again, adding the threat of capital punishment; if
they still persevered, I ordered them to be executed. For whatever the nature of their creed might
be, I could at least feel no doubt that contumacy and inflexible obstinacy
deserved chastisement. There were others possessed of the same folly; but
because they were Roman citizens, I signed an order for them to be transferred
to Rome.”
So here we see that not
only did Pliny not follow the Christian faith, he was torturing Christians and
threatening death against them. And he
even records that under threat of execution (just for believing in Jesus Christ
as God) the early church members refused to deny their faith in Jesus. This is
remarkable evidence of Jesus’ existence outside of the Bible.
Pliny the Younger admits
to torturing and executing Christians who refused to deny Christ. Those who
denied the charges were spared and ordered to exalt the Roman gods and curse
the name of Christ. Pliny addresses his
concerns to Emperor Trajan that too many citizens were being killed for their
refusal to deny their faith.
"I asked them directly if they were Christians...those who
persisted, I ordered away... Those who
denied they were or ever had been Christians...worshiped both your image and
the images of the gods and cursed Christ.
They used to gather on a stated day before dawn and sing to Christ as if
he were a god... All the more I believed
it necessary to find out what was the truth from two servant maids, which were
called deaconesses, by means of torture.
Nothing more did I find than a disgusting, fanatical superstition.
Therefore I stopped the examination, and hastened to consult
you...on account of the number of people endangered. For many of all ages, all classes, and both
sexes already are brought into danger..."
Pliny's letter to Emperor Trajan
Pliny the Younger was an
imperial magistrate under Emperor Trajan and the Roman Governor of Bthynia in
Asia Minor. In a.d. 112, Pliny wrote to
Trajan of his attempts to force Christians to renounce Christ, whom they
“worshiped as a god.”
Though Pliny states some
of the accused denied the charges, a recurring theme in the correspondence
between Pliny and Trajan is the willingness of the true believer to die for
Christ. This would hardly be reasonable if they knew He never existed!
We have the entire text
of a letter from Pliny the Younger, then governor of Bythinia, to the Emperor
Trajan in about 112 AD, together with Trajan's reply. In it Pliny reports on his interrogation and
execution of Christians and asks whether he should spare those who recanted
their faith, particularly in view of the large numbers of persons 'of all ranks
and ages, and of both sexes' who had embraced 'this contagious superstition'.
Pliny the Younger,
writing near 100 CE, corresponded regularly with the emperor Trajan. In these
writings, Pliny specifically mentions and describes the beliefs and practices
of Christians in Asia Minor, and asks Trajan's advice about what action to take
against them, if any. However, Pliny's
writings provide no independent confirmation of the events of the New
Testament, but merely show that there were indeed Christians living in Asia
Minor.
From
yet another source:
Another
important source of evidence about Jesus and early Christianity can be found in
the letters of Pliny the Younger to Emperor Trajan. Pliny was the Roman governor of Bithynia in
Asia Minor. In one of his letters, dated around A.D. 112, he asks Trajan's
advice about the appropriate way to conduct legal proceedings against those
accused of being Christians.[1]
Pliny says that he needed to consult the emperor about this issue because a
great multitude of every age, class, and sex stood accused of Christianity.[2]
At
one point in his letter, Pliny relates some of the information he has learned
about these Christians:
They
were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when
they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound
themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any
fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when
they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to
separate, and then reassemble to partake of food – but food of an ordinary and
innocent kind.[3]
This
passage provides us with a number of interesting insights into the beliefs and
practices of early Christians. First, we
see that Christians regularly met on a certain fixed day for worship. Second,
their worship was directed to Christ, demonstrating that they firmly believed
in His divinity. Furthermore, one scholar interprets Pliny's statement that
hymns were sung to Christ, "as to a god", as a reference to the rather
distinctive fact that, "unlike other gods who were worshipped, Christ was
a person who had lived on
earth." [4] If this interpretation is correct, Pliny
understood that Christians were worshipping an actual historical person as God!
Of course, this agrees perfectly with the New Testament doctrine that Jesus was
both God and man.
Not only does Pliny's
letter help us understand what early Christians believed about Jesus' person,
it also reveals the high esteem to which they held His teachings. For instance,
Pliny notes that Christians "bound
[1] Pliny,
Epistles x. 96, cited in Bruce, Christian Origins, 25; Habermas, The Historical
Jesus, 198
[2] Pliny,
Epistles x. 96, cited in Bruce, Christian Origins, 27; Habermas, The Historical
Jesus, 198.
[3] Pliny,
Letters, transl. by William Melmoth, rev. by W.M.L. Hutchinson (Cambridge:
Harvard Univ. Press, 1935), vol. II, X:96, cited in Habermas, The Historical
Jesus, 199.
[4] M.
Harris, "References to Jesus in Early Classical Authors," in Gospel Perspectives
V, 354-55, cited in E. Yamauchi, "Jesus Outside the New Testament: What is
the Evidence?", in Jesus Under Fire, ed. by Michael J. Wilkins and J.P.
Moreland (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1995), p. 227,
note 66.
themselves by a solemn
oath" not to violate various moral standards, which find their source in
the ethical teachings of Jesus. In addition, Pliny's reference to the Christian
custom of sharing a common meal likely alludes to their observance of communion
and the "love feast”.[1]This interpretation helps
explain the Christian claim that the meal was merely "food of an ordinary
and innocent kind". They were attempting to counter the charge, sometimes
made by non-Christians, of practicing "ritual cannibalism."[2] The Christians of that day humbly repudiated
such slanderous attacks on Jesus' teachings. We must sometimes do the same
today.
[1] Habermas, The Historical Jesus, 199.
Josephus-1st Century Jewish Historian
Titus Flavius Josephus (37 – c.100)
Flavius Josephus, born
A.D. 37, a Jewish historian, became a Pharisee at age 19; in A.D. He was the commander of Jewish forces in
Galilee. After being captured, he was
attached to the Roman headquarters. He
says, "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 works, a teacher of such men
as receive the truth with pleasure. He
drew over to Him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ, and when Pilate, at the
suggestion of the principle men among 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"[1]
Born to a Jewish
priestly family, Josephus was later adopted into the family of the Roman
Emperor Vespasian. His writings contain
references to James the Just and John the Baptist. But the most famous is the 'Testimonium
Flavianum', concerning Jesus. Most
scholars accept that this passage has been altered by a later Christian hand;
but even if we strike out the suspect portions completely, we are still left
with this, acknowledged as authentic by the vast majority of scholars:
"At this time there
was Jesus, a wise man. For he was one
who performed (surprising / wonderful) works, and a teacher of people who
received the (truth / unusual) with pleasure.
He stirred up both many Jews and many Greeks. And when Pilate condemned him to the cross,
since he was accused by the leading men among us, those who had loved him from
the first did not desist. And until now
the tribe of Christians, so named from him, is not extinct."
The Jewish historian
Flavius Josephus, writing during the second half of the first century CE,
produced two major works: History of the Jewish War and Antiquities of the
Jews. Two apparent references to Jesus
occur in the second of these works. The
longer, and more famous passage, occurs in Book 18 of Antiquities and reads as
follows:
From another online source:[2]
Perhaps the most
remarkable reference to Jesus outside the Bible can be found in the writings of
Josephus, a first century Jewish historian.
On two occasions, in his Jewish Antiquities, he mentions Jesus. The second, less revealing, reference
describes the condemnation of one "James" by the Jewish Sanhedrin. This James, says Josephus, was "the
brother of Jesus the so-called Christ." [3] F.F.
Bruce points out how this agrees with Paul's description of James in Galatians
1:19 as "the Lord's brother.” 14
And Edwin Yamauchi informs us that "few scholars have questioned"
that Josephus actually penned this passage.[4]
As interesting as this
brief reference is, there is an earlier one, which is truly astonishing. Called the "Testimonium Flavianum,"
the relevant portion declares:
About this time there
lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he ... wrought surprising feats.... He was the Christ. When Pilate ...condemned him to be crucified,
those who had . . . come to love him did not give up their affection for him. On the third day he appeared ... restored to
life.... And the tribe of Christians ...
has ... not disappeared.[5]
Did Josephus really
write this? Most scholars think the core
of the passage originated with Josephus, but that it was later altered by a
Christian editor, possibly between the third and fourth century A.D.14
But why do they think it was altered?
Josephus was not a Christian, and it is difficult to believe that anyone
but a Christian would have made some of these statements. [6]
For instance, the claim
that Jesus was a wise man seems authentic, but the qualifying phrase, "if
indeed one ought to call him a man," is suspect. It implies that Jesus was more than human, and
it is quite unlikely that Josephus would have said that! It is also difficult to believe he would have
flatly asserted that Jesus was the Christ, especially when he later refers to
Jesus as "the so-called" Christ. Finally, the claim that on the third day Jesus
appeared to His disciples restored to life, inasmuch as it affirms Jesus'
resurrection, is quite unlikely to come from a non-Christian!
But even if we disregard
the questionable parts of this passage, we are still left with a good deal of
corroborating information about the biblical Jesus. We read that he was a wise man who performed
surprising feats. And although He was
crucified under Pilate, His followers continued their discipleship and became
known as Christians. When we combine
these statements with Josephus' later reference to Jesus as "the so-called
Christ," a rather detailed picture emerges which harmonizes quite well
with the biblical record. It increasingly appears that the
"biblical Jesus" and the "historical Jesus" are one and the
same!
[1] taken
from the standard accepted Greek text of Antiquities 18:63-64 by L. H. Feldman
in the Loeb Classical Library
[2] Gleghorn,
M. (2014, August 20). Ancient Evidence
for Jesus from Non-Christian Sources. Retrieved from: https://www.probe.org/ancient-evidence-for-jesus-from-non-christian-sources-2/
[3] Josephus,
Antiquities xx. 200, cited in Bruce, Christian Origins, 36.
[4] Yamauchi,
"Jesus Outside the New Testament", 212.
[5] Josephus,
Antiquities 18.63-64, cited in Yamauchi, "Jesus Outside the New
Testament", 212.
[6] Another
version of Josephus' "Testimonium Flavianum" survives in a
tenth-century Arabic version (Bruce, Christian Origins, 41). In 1971, Professor Schlomo Pines published a
study on this passage. The passage is interesting because it lacks most of the
questionable elements that many scholars believe to be Christian
interpolations. Indeed, "as Schlomo Pines and David Flusser...stated, it
is quite plausible that none of the arguments against Josephus writing the
original words even applies to the Arabic text, especially since the latter
would have had less chance of being censored by the church" (Habermas, The
Historical Jesus, 194). The passage reads as follows: "At this time there
was a wise man who was called Jesus. His conduct was good and (he) was known to
be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and the other nations became
his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. But those who
had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that
he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion, and that he was
alive; accordingly he was perhaps the Messiah, concerning whom the prophets
have recounted wonders." (Quoted in James H. Charlesworth, Jesus Within
Judaism, (Garden City: Doubleday, 1988), 95, cited in Habermas, The Historical
Jesus, 194).
Publius Aelius Hadrianus
(AD 76 - AD 138)
Born on 24 January AD 76
in Rome, Hadrianus became emperor in 11 August AD 117. Emperor Hadrian wrote about Christians as
followers of Jesus:
'The
High Point' Chronology
“166 Unrest in the upper and middle Danube frontiers, where Quadi and
Marcomanni in movement. Outbreak of
plague. Religious revival. Severe persecution of Christians.”
Suetonius (c. A.D. 120)
A Roman Historian and
court official under Hadrian made two references to Christ. In the Life
of Claudius (25.4) he wrote "As the Jews were making constant
disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus [another spelling of Christus or
Christ], he [Claudius] expelled them from Rome."
In the Lives of the Caesars (26.2) he wrote:
"Punishment by Nero was inflicted on the Christians, a class of men given
to a new and mischievous superstition."
Justin Martyr (~100 - 165 A.D.)
Justin Martyr wrote a
letter to the Roman Emperor Antonius Pius, in which he cites the official 'Acts
of Pilate' as corroboration for the crucifixion account. Justin Martyr, possibly the most well-known
early Christian apologist, was an educated pagan philosopher who converted to
Christianity around 130 A.D. Though he
risked losing his wealth, status, and life, Justin fearlessly spread
Christianity throughout Asia Minor and Rome. Refusing to recant his testimony, he was led
to his death via scourging and
beheading in 165 A. D.
Being a thoroughly educated man, Justin weighed the evidence carefully before
accepting his new faith and explains to the reader he made his decision only
after careful consideration and research.
"There is a village
in Judea, thirty-five stadia from Jerusalem, where Jesus Christ was born, as
you can see from the tax registers under Cyrenius, your first procurator in
Judea…He was born of a virgin as a man, and was named Jesus, and was crucified,
and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven...After He was crucified,
all His acquaintances denied Him. But
once He had risen from the dead and appeared to them and explained the
prophecies which foretold all these things and ascended into heaven, the
apostles believed. They received the
power given to them by Jesus and went into the world preaching the
Gospel."[1]
"At the time of His
birth, Magi from Arabia came and worshipped Him, coming first to Herod, who was
then sovereign in your land...When they crucified Him, driving in the nails;
they pierced His hands and feet. Those
who crucified Him parted His garments among themselves, each casting lots...But
you did not repent after you learned that He rose from the dead. Instead, you sent men into to the world to
proclaim that a godless heresy had sprung from Jesus, a Galilean deceiver, whom
was crucified and that His disciples stole His body from the tomb in order to
deceive men by claiming He had risen from the dead and ascended into
heaven."[2]
Examples of
Extra-Biblical Resource Evidence for Justin:
Justin presents one of
the earliest statements that specifically attest to Jesus' historicity. Justin refers his audience to the Judean tax
registers where they would find evidence of Jesus' birth.
In the second quote
above, Justin is refuting the rumors concerning a resurrection conspiracy and
the accusation that Jesus was a Galilean deceiver. Justin's awareness of the rumors concerning
Jesus reveals his knowledge of extra-Biblical testimony.
Justin uses the healing
ministry of Christians to attest to the very real power of Christ:
"Countless possessed men throughout the land are being exorcised by many
of our Christian men in the name of Jesus Christ, who was crucified under
Pontius Pilate, continue to heal, rendering helpless and driving the demons out
of men, though they could not be cured by any other exorcists or those who used
incantations and drugs."[1]
incantations and drugs."[1]
Justin makes a reference
to The Acts of Pilate which was not a Biblical: "And that these things did
happen, you can ascertain from the Acts of Pontius Pilate."[2]
A skeptical reference by
Julius Africanus to an attempt by the first century historian Thallus to
explain the darkness at the time of Jesus' death in terms of a solar eclipse.
There are also references
by both Julius Africanus and Origen to a second century historian, Phlegon, who
mentions the eclipse and accompanying earthquake, as well as acknowledging that
Jesus had the ability to predict future events.
Thallus (~ 52 A.D.)
In a lost work referred
to by Julius Africanus in the third century, the pagan writer Thallus
reportedly claimed that Jesus's death was accompanied by an earthquake and
darkness. However, the original text is
in fact lost, and we can confirm neither the contents of the text or its date. It is possible that Thallus was merely
repeating what was told to him by Christians, or that the passage which
Africanus cites is a later interpolation.
Outside of the New Testament, no other references to earthquakes or
unusual darkness occur in the contemporary literature. This is very surprising; given the effect
these sorts of events would presumably have had on the populace.
Julius Africanus and Thallus
Sextus Julius Africanus
(c.160 – c.240) was a Christian traveler and historian of the late 2nd and
early 3rd century AD. He is important
chiefly because of his influence on Eusebius, on all the later writers of
Church history among the Fathers, and on the whole Greek school of chroniclers.
Julius Africanus quotes the writings of Thallus, who was a first century non-Christian
historian. In his Chronicles, Africanus
quoting the historian Thallus explains the reason for it being so dark during
the day time on the day of crucifixion of Jesus Christ:
“An eclipse of the sun” unreasonably,
as it seems to me (unreasonably of course, because a solar eclipse could not
take place at the time of the full moon, and it was at the season of the
Paschal full moon that Christ died.”[1]
The importance of this
quote is twofold as it shows: 1) non-Christian proof of Jesus’ existence and 2)
yet another confirmation of the Bible’s account of Jesus’ crucifixion. The Bible states in reference to the time
Jesus was put on the cross: “Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over
all the land unto the ninth hour.” The “sixth hour” is noon and the ninth
hour is 3:00PM. Thus we see that the
historian Thallus was trying to explain the odd occurrence of the sky being
dark at noon during the crucifixion of Jesus as an eclipse. Africanus also quotes the secular scholar
Phlegon, a Greek Historian who lived in the 2nd century AD and also wrote of an
eclipse occurring on the day Jesus was crucified. This again provides proof from a
non-Christian source that confirms the account of Jesus being a real person who
lived as well as confirming the account of His crucifixion straight from the
Bible.
Although his works exist
only in fragments, Julius Africanus debates Thallus' explanation of the midday
darkness which occurred during the Passover of Jesus' crucifixion. Thallus tries to dismiss the darkness as a
natural occurrence (a solar eclipse) but Africanus argues (and any astronomer
can confirm) a solar eclipse cannot physically occur during a full moon due to
the alignment of the planets. Phlegon of
Tralles, a 2nd century secular historian, also mentions the darkness and tries
to dismiss it as a solar eclipse. He
also states the event occurred during the time of Tiberius Caesar.
"On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness. The rocks were rent by an earthquake and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun. For the Hebrews celebrate the Passover on the 14th day according to the moon, and the passion of our Savior falls on the day before the Passover. But an eclipse of the sun takes place only when the moon comes under the sun. And it cannot happen at any other time...
"On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness. The rocks were rent by an earthquake and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun. For the Hebrews celebrate the Passover on the 14th day according to the moon, and the passion of our Savior falls on the day before the Passover. But an eclipse of the sun takes place only when the moon comes under the sun. And it cannot happen at any other time...
Phlegon records that, in
the time of Tiberius Caesar, at full moon, there was a full eclipse of the sun
from the sixth hour to the ninth-manifestly that one of which we speak.[1]
Evidence from Lucian
Lucian of Samosata was a
second century Greek satirist and spoke scornfully of Christ
and the Christians. He connected them
with the synagogues of Palestine and alluded to Christ as: "...the man who was crucified in
Palestine because He introduced this new cult into the world... Furthermore,
their first lawgiver persuaded them that they were all brothers one of another
after they have transgressed once for all by denying the Greek gods and by
worshipping that crucified sophist Himself and living under His laws."[2]
In one of his works, he
wrote of the early Christians as follows:
The Christians ... worship a
man to this day – the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites,
and was crucified on that account.... [It]
was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers,
from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and
worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws.[3]
Although Lucian is jesting
here at the early Christians, he does make some significant comments about
their founder. For instance, he says the
Christians worshipped a man, "who introduced their novel rites.” And though this man's followers clearly
thought quite highly of Him, He so angered many of His contemporaries with His
teaching that He "was crucified on that account."
Although Lucian does not
mention his name, he is clearly referring to Jesus. But what did Jesus teach to arouse such wrath? According to Lucian, he taught that all men
are brothers from the moment of their conversion. That's harmless enough. But what did this conversion involve? It involved denying the Greek gods,
worshipping Jesus, and living according to His teachings. It's not too difficult to imagine someone
being killed for teaching that. Though
Lucian doesn't say so explicitly, the Christian denial of other gods combined
with their worship of Jesus implies the belief that Jesus was more than human. Since they denied other gods in order to
worship Him, they apparently thought Jesus a greater God than any that Greece
had to offer![4]
Just to recap:
first, both Josephus and Lucian indicate that Jesus was regarded as wise. Second, Pliny, the Talmud, and Lucian imply
He was a powerful and revered teacher. Third,
both Josephus and the Talmud indicate He performed miraculous feats. Fourth, Tacitus, Josephus, the Talmud, and
Lucian all mention that He was crucified.
Tacitus and Josephus say this occurred under Pontius Pilate. And the Talmud declares it happened on the
eve of Passover. Fifth, there are
possible references to the Christian belief in Jesus' resurrection in both
Tacitus and Josephus. Sixth, Josephus
records that Jesus' followers believed He was the Christ, or Messiah. And finally, both Pliny and Lucian indicate
that Christians worshipped Jesus as God![5]
[1] Chronography
XVIII, 47
[2] The
Passing Pereguis, Early second century
[3] Lucian,
"The Death of Peregrine", 11-13, in The Works of Lucian of Samosata,
transl. by H.W. Fowler and F.G. Fowler, 4 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon, 1949), vol.
4., cited in Habermas, The Historical Jesus, 206.
[4] http://www.bethinking.org/jesus/ancient-evidence-for-jesus-from-non-christian-sources
[5] http://www.bethinking.org/jesus/ancient-evidence-for-jesus-from-non-christian-sources
HEGESIPPUS (110 A.D. - 180 A.D.)
Hegesippus converted to
Christianity from Judaism after extensively researching the Gospel story for
himself. Instead of accepting the Gospel
story at the word of others, he travelled extensively throughout Rome and
Corinth in an effort to collect evidence of the early Christian claims. Hegesippus provides important testimony that
the stories being passed around were not watered down, embellished, or
fabricated.
"This man [James] was a true witness to both Jews and Greeks that Jesus is the Christ...The Corinthian church continued in the true doctrine until Primus became bishop. I mixed with them on my voyage to Rome and spent several days with the Corinthians, during which we were refreshed with the true doctrine. On arrival at Rome I pieced together the succession down to Anicetus, whose deacon was Eleutherus, Anicetus being succeeded by Soter and he by Eleutherus. In every line of bishops and in every city things accord with the preaching of the Law, the Prophets, and the Lord.”[1]
Perhaps of all the figures mentioned in this section, no one uses more extra-biblical resource evidence than Hegesippus (in fact, he hardly uses Biblical testimony at all!). Because his entire manuscript is basically a compilation of outside research, I'll only list a few examples:
"This man [James] was a true witness to both Jews and Greeks that Jesus is the Christ...The Corinthian church continued in the true doctrine until Primus became bishop. I mixed with them on my voyage to Rome and spent several days with the Corinthians, during which we were refreshed with the true doctrine. On arrival at Rome I pieced together the succession down to Anicetus, whose deacon was Eleutherus, Anicetus being succeeded by Soter and he by Eleutherus. In every line of bishops and in every city things accord with the preaching of the Law, the Prophets, and the Lord.”[1]
Perhaps of all the figures mentioned in this section, no one uses more extra-biblical resource evidence than Hegesippus (in fact, he hardly uses Biblical testimony at all!). Because his entire manuscript is basically a compilation of outside research, I'll only list a few examples:
Hegesippus describes the
ministry and demise of James (Jesus' brother) at the hands of the
Pharisees. These accounts were not
mentioned in the New Testament.
Hegesippus fervently
retraced the roots of the early church and states he did so in order to ensure
the circulating testimonies concerning Christ were genuine.
In his research, Hegesippus
recounts the ministries of several witnesses (primarily church fathers) not
included in the Bible.
Hegesippus documents the
interrogation of Jesus' grand-nephews by Domitian and records they lived into
the reign of Trojan.
Hegesippus documents the
martyrdom of Bishop Symeon, (the son of Cleopas mentioned in Luke 24:18). He was believed to be a relative, disciple,
and/or contemporary of Jesus.
Hegesippus addresses
heresies being spread by differing sects, implying he did not focus his research
solely on Biblical teachings.
CELSUS (~ 178 A.D.)
Celsus was a second century Roman author and avid opponent of
Christianity. He went to great lengths
to disprove the divinity of Jesus yet never denied His actual existence. Unfortunately for Celsus, he sets himself up
for criticism by mimicking the exact accusations brought against Jesus by the Pharisees
which had already been addressed and refuted in the New Testament. There are two very important facts regarding
Celsus which make him one of the most important witnesses in this discussion:
Though
most secular passages are accused of being Christian interpolations, we can
accept with certainty this is not the case with Celsus! The sheer volume of his writings (specifically
designed to discredit Christianity) coupled with the hostile accusations
presented in his work dismiss this chance immediately.
The idea
of Celsus getting his information entirely from Christian sources (another
recurring accusation against secular evidence) is wholly absurd. Though he is obviously aware of his opponents'
beliefs (as anyone who is engaging in a debate should be), Celsus wrote his
exposition in the form of a dialogue between a "Jewish Critic" and
himself. This gives us cause to believe
he used non-Christian (probably Jewish) sources.
On Jesus' Miracles
"Jesus,
on account of his poverty, was hired out to go to Egypt. While there he acquired certain [magical]
powers... He returned home highly elated
at possessing these powers, and on the strength of them gave himself out to be
a god... It was by means of sorcery that
He was able to accomplish the wonders which He performed... Let us believe that these cures, or the
resurrection, or the feeding of a multitude with a few loaves... These are nothing more than the tricks of
jugglers... It is by the names of
certain demons, and by the use of incantations, that the Christians appear to
be possessed of [miraculous] power...”
Not only
does Celsus confirm Jesus' existence, he also tries to debate the source of
Jesus' miracles. Like the Pharisees of
Jesus' day, Celsus tries to dismiss these miracles as both demonic possession
and cheap parlor tricks. However, he is
clearly grasping at straws: On one hand Celsus accuses Jesus of performing
magic learned in Egypt, then later states it is by the power of possession,
then states the miracles were not really miracles at all but were illusionary
tricks performed by a deceiver, then finally states the miracles never
occurred!
On the Virgin Birth
"Jesus
had come from a village in Judea, and was the son of a poor Jewess who gained
her living by the work of her hands. His
mother had been turned out by her husband, who was a carpenter by trade, on
being convicted of adultery [with a Roman soldier named Panthera]. Being thus driven away by her husband, and
wandering about in disgrace, she gave birth to Jesus, a bastard."
Celsus
acknowledges Jesus' birth and existence but does not accept the concept of a
virgin conception. He tries to dismiss
Mary's premarital pregnancy as the result of an affair she had with a Roman
soldier. Strangely enough, there is a
very similar passage in the Jewish Talmud which makes the same accusation. This gives us reason to believe Celsus might
have referenced Jewish sources for some of his arguments.
On the Apostles
"Jesus
gathered around him ten or eleven persons of notorious character...
tax-collectors, sailors, and fishermen...[He was] deserted and delivered up by
those who had been his associates, who had him for their teacher, and who
believed he was the savior and son of the greatest God... Those who were his associates while alive,
who listened to his voice, and enjoyed his instructions as their teacher, on
seeing him subjected to punishment and death, neither died with nor for him...
but denied that they were even his disciples, lest they die along with
Him."
Celsus'
intentions were to argue that if the disciples really believed Jesus was the
Son of God, they would not have forsaken Him at His arrest. Instead, he only ends up confirming the Biblical
account! The Bible tells us when Jesus
was arrested the apostles denied being His followers. It was only upon Jesus' resurrection they
understood the spiritual principles concerning Jesus' crucifixion and boldly
went out to preach the Gospel. Celsus is
also wrong with his statement; [they]
neither died with nor for him. We
are told by early historians all but one of the remaining apostles were killed
for their faith.
On Jesus' Divinity
"One
who was a God could neither flee nor be led away a prisoner... What great deeds did Jesus perform as
God? Did he put his enemies to shame or
bring to an end what was designed against him?
No calamity happened even to him who condemned him... Why does he not give some manifestation of
his divinity, and free himself from this reproach, and take vengeance upon
those who insult both him and his Father?"
Celsus
ridicules Jesus for the exact same reasons the Pharisees of His time ridiculed
Him- if Jesus was the Son of God, why didn't He save Himself from the cross? Neither Celsus nor the Pharisees understood
the spiritual implications of Jesus' death to atone for sin. Celsus also asks why no judgment came upon
the Jews but history shows shortly after His death Jerusalem was invaded by the
Romans, the Jewish temple was destroyed, and the Jewish people were dispersed
for almost 2,000 years!
John the Baptist
"If
any one predicted to us that the Son of God was to visit mankind, he was one of
our prophets, and the prophet of our God?
John, who baptized Jesus, was a Jew."
Celsus
confirms Jesus' baptism by John but asserts that John was the only one who
actually prophesied His coming- not the Old Testament Messianic prophecies.
On the Crucifixion
"Jesus
accordingly exhibited after His death only the appearance of wounds received on
the cross, and was not in reality so wounded as He is described to have
been."
In this
statement, Celsus confirms Jesus' death by crucifixion although he claims the
only wounds Jesus received were those inflicted by the crucifixion (thus
denying any previous torture had taken place). But not even history offers Celsus the benefit
of a doubt as floggings were the standard form of torture given to victims
prior to crucifixion. Celsus contradicts
himself yet again when he later states Jesus was probably never even crucified
but instead had an impostor die in His place!
Skeptic
Interjection: Celsus also states, "It is clear to me that the writings of
the Christians are a lie and that your fables are not well enough constructed
to conceal this monstrous fiction."
How do we know Celsus is referring to a historical Jesus and not just
debating myth?
Answer: Evidence which shows Celsus to be refuting aspects of a historical Jesus is as follows:
Our answer
can be found in Celsus' own words: He was therefore a man, and of such a
nature, as the truth itself proves, and reason demonstrates him to be. Satisfied with his presentation of evidence,
Celsus offers his conclusion that Jesus was only a man- not a myth (or a God,
as the apostles had claimed).
Instead of
denying the alleged events, Celsus offers alternative theories to the early
Christian claims (like the virgin birth being a cover-up for an illegitimate
pregnancy and the miracles actually being works of sorcery). If he was discussing a mythical character, he
would not have needed to go to such lengths but merely to have dismissed Jesus
as a myth. After all, there is no easier
way to discredit a religion than to assert its founder never existed! Of course, this is an argument Celsus never
makes.
The "fables"
Celsus refers to is his belief that the claims such as a virgin birth and
resurrection were embellishments created by early Christians- not that Jesus
was Himself a myth. Celsus was debating
the claims of Jesus' divinity, not His existence.
Is belief in the existence
of God irrational? These days, many
famous scientists are also strong proponents of atheism. However, in the past and even today, many
scientists believe that God exists and is responsible for what we see in
nature. This is a small sampling of
scientists who contributed to the development of modern science while believing
in God. Although many people believe in
a "God of the gaps", these scientists, and still others alive today,
believe because of the evidence
Pascal was a French mathematician,
physicist, inventor, writer and theologian.
In mathematics, he published a treatise on the subject of projective
geometry and established the foundation for probability theory. Pascal invented a mechanical calculator, and
established the principles of vacuums and the pressure of air. He was raised a Roman Catholic, but in 1654
had a religious vision of God, which turned the direction of his study from
science to theology. Pascal began
publishing a theological work, Lettres provinciales, in 1656. His most influential theological work, the Pensées
("Thoughts"), was a defense of Christianity, which was published
after his death. The most famous concept
from Pensées was Pascal's Wager. Pascal's last words
were, "May God never abandon me."
[1]
Deem, R. Famous Scientists Who Believed in God.
Retrieved from: http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/sciencefaith.html
Copernicus was the Polish astronomer
who put forward the first mathematically based system of planets going around
the sun. He attended various European
universities, and became a Canon in the Catholic Church in 1497. His new system was actually first presented
in the Vatican gardens in 1533 before Pope Clement VII who approved, and urged
Copernicus to publish it around this time.
Copernicus was never under any threat of religious persecution - and was
urged to publish both by Catholic Bishop Guise, Cardinal Schonberg, and the
Protestant Professor George Rheticus.
Copernicus referred sometimes to God in his works, and did not see his
system as in conflict with the Bible.
[1] John
Banville, Doctor Copernicus (1990), E. Rosen and E. Hiltstein, Copernicus and
His Successors (1994)
Bacon was a philosopher who is known
for establishing the scientific method of inquiry based on experimentation and
inductive reasoning. In De
Interpretatione Naturae Prooemium, Bacon established his goals as being the
discovery of truth, service to his country, and service to the church. Although his work was based upon
experimentation and reasoning, he rejected atheism as being the result of
insufficient depth of philosophy, stating, "It is true, that a little
philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth
men's minds about to religion; for while the mind of man looketh upon second
causes scattered, it may sometimes rest in them, and go no further; but when it
beholdeth the chain of them confederate, and linked together, it must needs fly
to Providence and Deity." (Of
Atheism)
[1] Deem,
R. Famous Scientists Who Believed in God.
Retrieved from:
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/sciencefaith.html
Kepler was a brilliant mathematician
and astronomer. He did early work on
light, and established the laws of planetary motion about the sun. He also came close to reaching the Newtonian
concept of universal gravity - well before Newton was born! His introduction of the idea of force in
astronomy changed it radically in a modern direction. Kepler was an extremely sincere and pious
Lutheran, whose works on astronomy contain writings about how space and the
heavenly bodies represent the Trinity. Kepler suffered no
persecution for his open avowal of the sun-centered system, and, indeed, was
allowed as a Protestant to stay in Catholic Graz as a Professor (1595-1600)
when other Protestants had been expelled!
Galileo is often remembered for his
conflict with the Roman Catholic Church.
His controversial work on the solar system was published in 1633. It had no proofs of a sun-centered system
(Galileo's telescope discoveries did not indicate a moving earth) and his one
"proof" based upon the tides was invalid. It ignored the correct elliptical orbits of
planets published twenty five years earlier by Kepler. Since his work finished by putting the Pope's
favorite argument in the mouth of the simpleton in the dialogue, the Pope (an
old friend of Galileo's) was very offended.
After the "trial" and being forbidden to teach the
sun-centered system, Galileo did his most useful theoretical work, which was on
dynamics. Galileo expressly said that
the Bible cannot err, and saw his system as an alternate interpretation of the
biblical texts.
[1] Annibale
Fantoli, Galileo: For Copernicanism and for the Church (1994), M. Sharratt,
Galileo (1994), M. A. Finnochiaro, The Galileo Affair: A Documentary History
(1989).
Descartes was a French
mathematician, scientist and philosopher who has been called the father of
modern philosophy. His school studies
made him dissatisfied with previous philosophy: He had a deep religious faith
as a Roman Catholic, which he retained to his dying day, along with a resolute,
passionate desire to discover the truth.
At the age of 24 he had a dream, and felt the vocational call to seek to
bring knowledge together in one system of thought. His system began by asking what could be
known if all else were doubted - suggesting the famous "I think therefore
I am". Actually, it is often forgotten
that the next step for Descartes was to establish the near certainty of the
existence of God - for only if God both exists and would not want us to be
deceived by our experiences - can we trust our senses and logical thought
processes. God is, therefore, central to
his whole philosophy. What he really
wanted to see was that his philosophy be adopted as standard Roman Catholic
teaching. Rene Descartes and Francis
Bacon (1561-1626) are generally regarded as the key figures in the development
of scientific methodology. Both had
systems in which God was important, and both seem more devout than the average
for their era.
[1] S.
Gaukroger, Descartes, an Intellectual Biography (1995), M. R. Keith, Rene
Descartes: The Story of the Soul (1987)
[1] Deem,
R. Famous Scientists Who Believed in God.
Retrieved from:
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/sciencefaith.html
In optics, mechanics, and
mathematics, Newton was a figure of undisputed genius and innovation. In all his science (including chemistry) he
saw mathematics and numbers as central.
What is less well known is that he was devoutly religious and saw
numbers as involved in understanding God's plan for history from the
Bible. He did a considerable work on
biblical numerology, and, though aspects of his beliefs were not orthodox, he
thought theology was very important. In
his system of physics, God was essential to the nature and absoluteness of
space. In Principia he stated,
"The most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only
proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful
Being."
[1] R.
S. Westfall, Never At Rest (1985) or The Life of Isaac Newton (1994), A. R.
Hall, Isaac Newton: Adventurer in Thought (1992), J. E. Force and R. H. Popkin,
Essays on the Context, Nature and Influence of Isaac Newton's Theology (1990)
One of the founders and key early
members of the Royal Society, Boyle gave his name to "Boyle's Law"
for gases, and also wrote an important work on chemistry. Encyclopedia Britannica says of him:
"By his will he endowed a series of Boyle lectures, or sermons, which
still continue, 'for proving the Christian religion against notorious
infidels...’ As a devout Protestant,
Boyle took a special interest in promoting the Christian religion abroad,
giving money to translate and publish the New Testament into Irish and
Turkish. In 1690 he developed his
theological views in The Christian Virtuoso, which he wrote to show that
the study of nature was a central religious duty.” Boyle wrote against atheists in his day (the
notion that atheism is a modern invention is a myth), and was clearly much more
devoutly Christian than the average in his era.
[1] Michael
Hunter, Robert Boyle Reconsidered (1994), Jan Wojcik, Robert Boyle and the
Limits of Reason (1991)
Michael Faraday was the son of a
blacksmith who became one of the greatest scientists of the 19th century. His work on electricity and magnetism not
only revolutionized physics, but led too much of our lifestyles today, which
depends on them (including computers and telephone lines and, so, web sites). Faraday was a devoutly Christian member of
the Sandemanians, which significantly influenced him and strongly affected the
way in which he approached and interpreted nature. Originating from Presbyterians, the
Sandemanians rejected the idea of state churches, and tried to go back to a New
Testament type of Christianity.
Mendel was the
first to lay the mathematical foundations of genetics, in what came to be
called "Mendelianism". He
began his research in 1856 (three years before Darwin published his Origin
of Species) in the garden of the Monastery in which he was a monk. Mendel was elected Abbot of his Monastery in
1868. His work remained comparatively
unknown until the turn of the century, when a new generation of botanists began
finding similar results and "rediscovered" him (though their ideas
were not identical to his). An
interesting point is that the 1860’s were notable for formation of the X-Club,
which was dedicated to lessening religious influences and propagating an image
of "conflict" between science and religion. One sympathizer was Darwin's cousin Francis
Galton, whose scientific interest was in
genetics (a proponent of eugenics - selective breeding among humans to
"improve" the stock). He was
writing how the "priestly mind" was not conducive to science while,
at around the same time, an Austrian monk was making the breakthrough in
genetics. The rediscovery of the work of
Mendel came too late to affect Galton's contribution.
Kelvin was foremost among the small
group of British scientists who helped to lay the foundations of modern
physics. His work covered many areas of
physics, and he was said to have more letters after his name than anyone else
in the Commonwealth, since he received numerous honorary degrees from European
Universities, which recognized the value of his work. He was a very committed Christian, who was
certainly more religious than the average for his era. Interestingly, his fellow physicists George
Gabriel Stokes (1819-1903) and James Clerk Maxwell (1831-1879) were also men of
deep Christian commitment, in an era when many were nominal, apathetic, or
anti-Christian. The Encyclopedia
Britannica says "Maxwell is regarded by most modern physicists as the
scientist of the 19th century who had the greatest influence on 20th century
physics; he is ranked with Sir Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein for the
fundamental nature of his contributions.”
Lord Kelvin was an Old
Earth creationist, who estimated the Earth's age to
be somewhere between 20 million and 100 million years, with an upper limit at
500 million years based on cooling rates (a low estimate due to his lack of
knowledge about radiogenic heating).
Planck made many contributions to
physics, but is best known for quantum theory, which revolutionized our
understanding of the atomic and sub-atomic worlds. In his 1937 lecture "Religion and
Naturwissenschaft," Planck expressed the view that God is everywhere
present, and held that "the holiness of the unintelligible Godhead is
conveyed by the holiness of symbols.”
Atheists, he thought, attach too much importance to what are merely
symbols. Planck was a churchwarden from
1920 until his death, and believed in an almighty, all-knowing, beneficent God
(though not necessarily a personal one).
Both science and religion wage a "tireless battle against
skepticism and dogmatism, against unbelief and superstition" with the goal
"toward God!"
Einstein is probably the best known
and most highly revered scientist of the twentieth century, and is associated with
major revolutions in our thinking about time, gravity, and the conversion of
matter to energy (E=mc2).
Although never
coming to belief in a personal God,
he recognized the impossibility of a non-created universe. The Encyclopedia Britannica says of
him: "Firmly denying atheism, Einstein expressed a belief in
"Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of what exists.” This actually motivated his interest in
science, as he once remarked to a young physicist: "I want to know how God
created this world; I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the
spectrum of this or that element. I want
to know His thoughts, the rest are details.”
Einstein's famous epithet on the "uncertainty principle" was
"God does not play dice" - and to him this was a real statement about
a God in whom he believed. A famous
saying of his was "Science without religion is lame, religion without
science is blind."
[1] R.
Highfield and P. Larter, Private Lives of Albert Einstein (1994), I. Paul,
Science and Theology in Einstein's Perspective (1986), J. Goldernstein, Albert
Einstein: Physicist and Genius (1995)
Conclusion
“We should not expect to find non-Christians claiming that Jesus was the Messiah, or that he rose from the dead, but rather, that such references as do exist in non-Christian sources would mostly be disparaging.
That is precisely what we do find. But in amongst this, there is quite a wealth
of historical corroboration. We have
references in both Josephus and Tacitus, two of the finest historical sources
of the period, plus others in various secular writings of the first and second
century, all confirming the salient historical details of Jesus’ life and
death, the names of his contemporaries and the church that he initiated. We even have rabbinic sources acknowledging
the fact of his miracles by accusing him of sorcery.
In fact, what is obvious from both
this evidence and other later writings on the subject is that not even Jesus’
enemies thought to challenge his historicity until centuries after his death. Why would that be, do you suppose, if the only
evidence for his existence were the say-so of his followers, who had been
foolish enough to supply precise details of the supposed date and location of
both his birth and death; and even accused named Roman and Jewish officials of
being responsible for the disgraceful conviction of an innocent man?
So whilst, in numerical terms, there
are not a lot of really early external corroborations of the historicity of
Jesus, those that do exist are of precisely the type and approximate number
that are to be expected; and are of a quality that, on historical grounds,
establish the main facts of his life and death beyond any reasonable doubt. Claims to the contrary are of relatively
recent origin and now find hardly any support amongst serious scholars.”[1]
[1] Corroboration
from Non-Christian Sources. (2013, March 12). Retrieved from Life.liegeman.org:
http://life.liegeman.org/christn/historymaker/extern/
No comments:
Post a Comment