The central person of Christianity is Jesus Christ. If Jesus is fictional or mythical, Christianity collapses. So, was Jesus real?

If Jesus is a fictitious or mythical figure of antiquity, then Christianity collapses. Thus, before one can even address his deity or the nature of his teachings, he or she must first know that Jesus really lived.

Is there sufficient historical evidence to prove that Jesus really lived – that he really walked the earth in the first century?

Non-Biblical Evidence for Jesus

Skeptics and Christians alike concede that the best records for the life, ministry, and teachings of Jesus Christ are the first-century Christian writings we know as the New Testament. However, these writings are not the only evidence for Jesus.

The respected Roman historian Tacitus wrote of Nero’s falsely blaming “persons commonly called Christians” for the fiery destruction of Rome. According to Tacitus, these Christians were followers of “Christus” (Tacitus’ rendering of Christ) who was “put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius.”

Jewish historian Josephus makes at least two references to Jesus. While one shows evidence of being tampered with, scholars nevertheless agree that the Jewish historian made authentic mention of Jesus in his writings. For this article’s purposes, Josephus’ references constitute, at the very least, evidence of the reality of Jesus as a historical figure.

There are also references to Jesus or to early followers of Jesus in the writings of Roman historian Suetonius, second century Greek satirist Lucian, and Syrian philosopher Mara Bar-Serapion.

Scholar R.T. France writes: “Non-Christian evidence…substantiates the fact of Jesus’ existence, his popular following, his execution and the rough date.”

Pre-New Testament Christian Writings

The first-century documents which comprise our New Testament contain what many scholars call “creedal statements.” Christian apologist Josh McDowell explains that these passages reflect “early Christian creedal confessions that were formulated and passed on verbally years before they were recorded in the New Testament.”

Scholars have dated these creedal passages to the years 30-50 AD, well within the primary timeline of Jesus and the generation that followed him. According to scholar Gary Habermas, these affirmations “preserve New Testament material, and are our earliest sources for the life of Jesus.”

Habermas cites Luke 24:34, Romans 1:3-4, Romans 4:24-25, Romans 10:9-10, and I Corinthians 11:23-26 as being among the biblical passages which contain early Christian confessions or affirmations.

What is the significance of this? Simple answer: These pre-New Testament confessions prove that Jesus had a fervent following of people who confessed him as Lord and Son of God before the New Testament was composed and canonized.

What about the Gospels?

Radical critics of Christianity are quick to throw the Gospels in the trash can. They argue that they were religious works composed by priests and religious leaders in order to bolster a certain perspective of Christ. This extremist position is not embraced by most scholars.

Christian critic Bart Ehrman believes that much of the New Testament has been corrupted through deliberate or unintentional manuscript errors. Yet he doesn’t deny there’s a core element of historical fact in the Gospels. He certainly doesn’t question the fact that Jesus of Nazareth walked the earth in the first century.

Anglican Bishop N.T. Wright is somewhat skeptical of the mainstream evangelical claim that “everything the gospels say is…automatically validated.” Nevertheless, Wright explains that the Gospel writers “were able to draw on a bewildering variety of sources, many of them oral (in a world where oral reports were prized more highly than written ones), and many of them from eyewitnesses.”

Luke Timothy Johnson, a moderate in the Jesus scholarship debate, cautions against any extreme in the examination of Jesus in history. Says Johnson: “I find as much fault with the premise that one can read history directly off the pages of the Gospels as I do with the premise that one must junk the Gospels in order to do history.”

While this article’s author considers the Gospels to be reliable history, one truth is clear from a fairly comprehensive review of New Testament study. Rejecting out of hand the ancient Christian writings of the New Testament is irresponsible historical scholarship. It is a radical, extreme prejudice that cannot be sustained with any credibility or intellectual honesty.

The Bottom Line

Liberal theologian John Shelby Spong is one of the most prolific and steadfast critics of traditional, orthodox Christianity. Yet not even Spong denies Jesus lived in history. In his book Jesus for the Non Religious, Spong writes:

Jesus was, first of all, a human being who actually lived at a particular time in a particular place. The man Jesus was not a myth, but a figure of history from whom enormous energy flowed – energy that still in our day cries out to be adequately explained.

While some may argue that Jesus' life has been embellished, it is an absurd to deny the existence of the historical Jesus. This article has only scratched the surface of the evidence. Even if Jesus isn’t God, he most certainly was an authentic first-century Jewish leader.

British New Testament scholar I. Howard Marshall says it best: “It is not possible to explain the rise of the Christian church or the writing of the Gospels and the stream of tradition that lies behind them without accepting the fact that the Founder of Christianity actually existed.”

*****

Sources for this article included:

Simpy Christian by N.T. Wright

The Evidence for Christianity by Josh McDowell

The Real Jesus by Luke Timothy Johnson

Jesus for the Non Religious by John Shelby Spong

The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel