In a recently published article online, Jesus’ existence has been challenged…again.¹ Are these reasons presented legitimate to doubt Jesus’ existence? Or are these the latest attempts to discredit His existence? Upon examination, they are not sufficient to doubt the preponderance of evidence and truth of the Son of God.

First Claim

First, it is claimed that “No first century secular evidence whatsoever exists to support the actuality of Yeshua ben Yosef [Jesus son of Joseph].” This claim limits the type of evidence it is willing to receive in order to verify Jesus actually existed. The four gospels, the letters of Paul, Peter, Jude, and John are all dismissed, and why, because they were not secular. However, there is much non-Christian evidence for Jesus’s existence. “Dr. G.R. Habermus points out approximately 18 non-Christian sources that within 110 years of Jesus’ crucifixion mention more than 100 facts, beliefs, and teachings from the life of Jesus and early Christianity. These items include almost every major detail of Jesus’ life, including His miracles, resurrection, and claims to deity.”²

For example, Josephus, a Jewish historian offers us two important references to Jesus dating back to the A.D. 90’s. In His Antiquities, Josephus writes about “‘the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ’ (20:9). This confirms the New Testament facts that there was a man named Jesus, who was known as ‘Christ’ and had a brother named Jesus.”³ Furthermore, in Antiquities 18:3, Josephus speaks about Jesus, referencing Him as a wise man, the Christ, and speaks of His resurrected appearance.⁴

Moreover, the Roman historian Tacitus recorded many facts. Concerning the great fire of A.D. 64, the Roman historian Tacitus stated that “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…[Annals 15.44]”⁵

All of this evidence may not fit the precise time of this claim above, but nonetheless it is strong evidence for Jesus’ existence and must be taken into consideration. Moreover, how much should we expect first century secularists to be interested in writing about Jesus, who was considered a religious figure and crucified criminal? Was anyone truly secular back then in terms of its modern use? Didn’t everyone have a god or a religious interest? And what if there was no secular source about a particular event, does that mean it never happened?

Can you imagine a lawyer today saying there is no evidence in the second bedroom that my client was ever in the house to commit this crime. Only to hear the opposing lawyer say maybe so, but there is evidence in every other room in the house, the backyard, the front yard, the sides of the house, the roof, the driveway, and in the street.

In the book Reinventing Jesus, the authors offer valuable insight when they state,

“It is a remarkable thing that we have any statements about Jesus by non-Christian writers. After all, he was a Jewish carpenter who spent most of his time on the shores of the Sea of Galilee, occasionally journeying to Jerusalem with his disciples. What’s more, writers in the Roman Empire were typically upper-class men who looked down on Eastern religions and gazed back on Rome’s celebrated past. So why would they ever pay attention to a Nazarene who founded a religion embraced by the lowest rungs of society? Simply put, he couldn’t be ignored. The rise of the religion bearing Christ’s name was rapid, widespread, and revolutionary. And it turned the Roman Empire upside down.”⁶

Let us not fall into the trap of selective evidence and debating only on the opponent’s particular and limited terms. In reality, the New Testament is God’s Word and it is the greatest evidence we have.

Second Claim

The second claim purports that “The earliest New Testament writers seem ignorant of the details of Jesus' life, which become more crystalized in later texts.” Specifically, Paul is cited as being ignorant of the basic facts of Jesus’ life, such as His virgin birth, and never mentions Jesus’ disciples, ministry, or miracles. Paul is said to dismiss Peter and James “as nobodies and repeatedly opposes them for not being true Christians!”

These claims are misguided. Paul was called to be an apostle of Jesus after meeting Him on the Damascus road and was sent out to preach the Gospel of Jesus and serve the churches. His letters are concerned with calling people to walk with the risen Savior, not necessary to teach a biographical lesson about His earlier days. Paul has a specific focus of building up the church and that focus adjusts to each of the different churches depending on their present needs. But he is always Christ-centered and gospel-centered in his letters and claims to be sent by the Lord.

Paul does not consider James and Peter nobodies! Paul recognized Peter was entrusted with the Gospel (Gal. 2:7), spoke of Peter and James as seemingly pillars in the faith (Gal. 2:9), respected James’ decision at the Jerusalem council (not to mention James’ eyewitness account of Jesus (1 Cor. 15:7), and was a part of delivering his letter (Acts 15:13-30). Paul did rebuke Peter later for not acting in line with the Gospel (Gal. 2:14–16). But that does not mean Paul considered him a nobody or not a Christian. In love, he rebuked him to keep the Gospel in focus in his actions.

Third Claim

The third claim states, “Even the New Testament stories don't claim to be first-hand accounts.” However, upon examination, we see that the New Testament is a mixture of eyewitnesses and companions of eyewitnesses. Hear the New Testament itself.

2 Peter 1:16 - “For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty.”

1 John 1:1–3 - ¹That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we looked upon and have touched with our hands, concerning the word of life—²the life was made manifest, and we have seen it, and testify to it and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was made manifest to us—³that which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ.”

Acts 2:32 - “This Jesus God raised up, and of that we all are witnesses.”

Over 500 eyewitnesses are cited alone in 1 Corinthians 15:6.

The New Testament claims to tell the truth.

Galatians 1:20 - “(In what I am writing to you, before God, I do not lie!)”

The New Testament claims the eyewitness testimony was passed on and is true history.

Luke 1:1–4 - ¹Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, ²just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, ³it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4 that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught.

Luke, a doctor, compiled the historical testimonies of eyewitnesses and at times was himself a witness to the work of Jesus in the book of Acts.

Fourth Claim

The fourth claim states, “The gospels, our only accounts of a historical Jesus, contradict each other.” To begin, the gospels are not our only accounts of the historic Jesus. Before the gospels—Matthew, Mark, Luke and John—were written, we had apostolic letters circulating; James, Galatians, and Romans to name a few. And these are rich both historically and theologically concerning the truth of Jesus.

Furthermore, this article cites EXChristian.net and gives a twenty-question quiz designed to show the contradictions of the Gospels themselves. Let’s look at one together. Question number two has Matthew and John saying that she came while it was still dark (Matt. 28:1; John 20:1) and Mark (16:2) has they come after the sun had risen.

Mark 16:2 - “And very early on the first day of the week, when the sun had risen, they went to the tomb.”

John 20:1 - “Now on the first day of the week Mary Magdalene came to the tomb early, while it was still dark, and saw that the stone had been taken away from the tomb.”

There is a principle that will be helpful as we look at these verses, and that is helpful in interpreting all of Scripture. The principle is this: what the author wrote for the purpose in which the author wrote it and meant it is true. Simply, what the author meant to say with his words is true. One author may emphasize one part of the story while another author gives a bigger picture. They are both inspired and correct.

As for these verses the solution is simple. John emphasized that is was still dark at Jesus’ tomb while focusing on Mary Magdalene. In John 20:1–18, Mary is a special focus of John and part of a bigger point he is making in regard to seeing and believing. Mark on the other hand emphasizes that it is very early on the Sabbath and tells us that the sun had arisen, that is enough for them to see where they are going.⁷ The sun can both be up enough to give light, yet not all the way so as to leave some measure of darkness. It was neither completely dark nor completely light. It was early and both John and Mark communicated that truly to us with their particular emphasis.

Let’s look at one more. Question seven has the woman/women running to tell the disciples (Matt. 28:7–8; Mark 16:10; Luke 24:9; John 20:2) but Mark (16:8) has them running away and telling no one. The solution is not complicated. Mark’s Gospel stops at them running away in failure to tell. But Matthew, Luke, and John eventually show them sharing (Mark 16:10 is not a part of the original manuscripts). Mark does not make an absolute end-of-all type statement here. He merely stops at and emphasizes their failure, which seems to be a part of Mark’s bigger aim to show everyone but Jesus as a failure in his gospel. Matthew, Luke, and John show what eventually happened.

Fifth Claim

The fifth claim states, “Modern scholars who claim to have uncovered the real historical Jesus depict wildly different persons.” It is argued here that modern scholars have concluded various understandings of Jesus including: “a cynic philosopher, charismatic Hasid, liberal Pharisee, conservative rabbi, Zealot revolutionary, and nonviolent pacifist.” Valerie Tarico cites Robert M. Price in his Deconstructing Jesus saying, “The historical Jesus (if there was one) might well have been a messianic king, or a progressive Pharisee, or a Galilean shaman, or a magus, or a Hellenistic sage. But he cannot very well have been all of them at the same time.”⁸

Any claim to understanding the real historical Jesus must begin and ultimately end with the Word of God itself. A simple reading of the Gospels, the earliest, best, and most reliable accounts we have, give striking clarity to who Jesus is, and in His own words. And the Gospels do not depict Jesus as a liberal Pharisee, which is laughable when reading the Gospels, or a cynic philosopher. Rather, Jesus claimed to be the Son of God revealing the Father, fulfilling Scripture, and the object of saving faith. He prepped His disciples for His death, promised the Holy Spirit, and promises to return again as saving Messiah. Jesus is unique in His claims, unique in His miracles, and is the key to understanding the entire historical redemption of the entire Bible.

Various modern scholar understandings of Jesus do not take seriously the Word of God as handed down to us, or they pick and choose Scriptures they think sound more like Jesus. The church has had the Word of God for centuries and the historic faith faithfully passed from one generation to the next.

This article ends by saying, “We may never know for certain what put Christian history in motion. Only time (or perhaps time travel) will tell.” Wrong! We know exactly what put Christianity into motion and that is the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. His disciples abandoned Him only to resurface days after His death proclaiming He is alive. Where did these little Jewish fishermen get such boldness to publicly lay down their lives in preaching the victorious resurrection of Jesus over death and sin? Is it because they wanted to be famous? This kind of message may bring you public attention, but it leads to the kind that results in death. No, they didn’t want to be famous, they saw the resurrected Jesus, just as He said they would.

Jesus’ identity is not in question biblically. It is modern scholars’ faith who is in question in regard to Him.