did jesus really exist?

how can we know the truth about history?

We cannot directly observe the past, so history can only be known through writings that record what people say happened, and archaeology that supports these writings. Because different writers have different purposes, and because recording the objective truth may not have been among their purposes, historians have to compare the various accounts with each other, with archaeology and with what may be known through other disciplines such as science and anthropology, to determine what is consistent. Historians try to recognise, and discount, biases in the writings, and use methods to reduce the influence of their own opinions.

Thus history can only describe what probably happened. Those of us who are not historians must rely on the findings of the consensus of historians.

how can we know the truth about jesus?

The question of whether Jesus actually lived, and if so, what he did and said, is first of all a historical question. Therefore it should be examined using the normal methods of historical analysis. Belief or disbelief in Jesus is a separate question.

However not all who write about Jesus are historians, and not all apply the normal methods of historical analysis. Some already believe in Jesus, and so write from the viewpoint of faith; others already disbelieve and write from the viewpoint of scepticism. If we want to know the objective, historical truth, we must get our information from those historians who discount their own beliefs and seek to find the truth. We can do this by following the consensus of scholars.

In the following summary, I have used only recognised historians from the mainstream, and have avoided using those whose conclusions may be influenced by their beliefs.

do historians conclude that jesus existed?

The answer to this question is a simple "yes". The following quotes from two of the most respected historians who have specialised in that period of history are typical:

Prof Marcus Borg, Oregon State University: "some judgments are so probable as to be certain; for example, Jesus really existed, and he really was crucified, just as Julius Caesar really existed and was assassinated." and "We can in fact know as much about Jesus as we can about any figure in the ancient world."

Prof James Charlesworth, Princeton Theological Seminary: "Jesus did exist; and we know more about him than about almost any Palestinian Jew before 70 C.E."

how is it that some people deny jesus ever lived?

I cannot say why people come to other conclusions, but it is true that:

• Many who write about Jesus are not recognised experts; some are not even historians.
• People have their beliefs and disbeliefs, and some may allow these to interfere with their judgment.
• Some people approach the question of Jesus and history with a view to reject everything that cannot be absolutely proven. This is not appropriate for a study of history, where we can obtain probability, but not certainty.

Eminent historian of the Roman Empire, the late Michael Grant (who did not believe in Jesus) said: "To sum up, modern critical methods fail to support the Christ myth theory. It has 'again and again been answered and annihilated by first rank scholars.' In recent years, 'no serous scholar has ventured to postulate the non historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary."

links

Let us know what you think (or ask a question) on the forum, or send an email - we'd love get feedback.

For more detailed information on what historians can tell us about Jesus (including more quotes), and how they know, see jesus and history. You can also check out what christians believe.

Go to list of questions, reason and belief home or return to the previous page