Nonbiblical references to Jesus

From SkepticWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

[edit] Introduction

The vast bulk of material about Jesus of Nazareth comes from the New Testament, but he is alluded to briefly in a few non-Christian sources. The following discusses these various references, their reliability, and their importance.

[edit] Discussion

[edit] Josephus

[edit] Testimonium Flavianum

Perhaps the most well-known, and the most disputed, non-Christian reference to Jesus of Nazareth is the Testimonium Flavianum, verse 18:63 in Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews. A translation of the passage in the known manuscripts reads as follows (the parts in ALL CAPS are believed to be interpolations from a later redactor [1]).

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 wonders, A TEACHER OF SUCH MEN AS RECEIVE THE TRUTH WITH PLEASURE. He drew many after him BOTH OF THE JEWS AND THE GENTILES. HE WAS THE CHRIST. When Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal 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 ABOUT HIM, and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.

Annette Merz, in the book The Historical Jesus: A Comprehensive Guide had pointed out that on the one hand, the passage has content that would be highly unlikely to come from a non-Christian Jew, such as the phrases "if it be lawful to call him a man" and "He was the Christ." On the other hand, much of the language of the text follows Josephus' style. Because of this, most scholars have concluded that the passage as a whole was not a Christian interpolation, but rather that Christians tampered with the passage, either by adding the overtly Christian phrases like "if it be lawful to call him a man" or by changing Josephus' language, i.e. from "he led astray many" to "he drew over many". There is also an Arabic version of the Testimonium quoted by Bishop Agapius of Hieropolis, and it appears to lack such an obvious Christian slant.

Josephus ... says that at the time there was a wise man who was called Jesus, who led a good life and was known to be virtuous (or learned) and had many people of the Jews and other peoples as disciples. Pilate had condemned him to crucifixion and death, but those who had become his disciples did not give up his discipleship (or teaching) and related that he appeared to them three days after the crucifixion and was alive, and therefore perhaps was the Messiah in connection with whom the prophets said marvellous things. (From The Historical Jesus: A Comprehensive Guide, p. 72)

Agapius' actual source is not extant, so it is hard to tell if he is quoting a translation of the original text without the interpolations, or if he is quoting from a text with interpolations but is careful to take the interpolations with a grain of salt. Even with this Arabic version, it is still possible, if perhaps less likely, that the Testimonium Flavianum was wholly fabricated.

One point against the Testimonium Flavanium being authentic is the singular fact that this passage is never quoted, either by the early fathers of the Church, or by the early Church historian Eusebius, although Eusebius in particular quoted frequently from Josephus in his works. Origen, who cites Josephus in his Contra Celsus (I xlvii) describes him as "not believing in Jesus as the Christ". [2], indicating that the highlighted passages in Josephus were unknown to him.

[edit] Reference to "brother of Jesus, who was called Christ"

While the majority of scholars favor partial authenticity of the aforementioned Testimonium, there isn't a clear consensus on the matter. However, a much shorter mention of Jesus in Josephus, Antiquities 20:200, is regarded as nigh certain.

But this younger Ananus, who, as we have told you already, took the high priesthood, was a bold man in his temper, and very insolent; he was also of the sect of the Sadducees, (23) who are very rigid in judging offenders, above all the rest of the Jews, as we have already observed; when, therefore, Ananus was of this disposition, he thought he had now a proper opportunity [to exercise his authority]. Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim 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 breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned. [emphasis added]

There are three reasons that Merz (The Historical Jesus: A Comprehensive Guide, pp. 64-5) gives as to why this reference is authentic. The text is closely connected to its context. Josephus commonly identifies people in the following manner "So-and-so, who is such-and-such." The way James is identified is consistent with this pattern. The phrase "called Christ" (or as some translations have it, "so-called Christ") implies neither assent nor doubt, but only serves to distinguish this particular Jesus from the other men named Jesus mentioned in Josephus' works.

Earl Doherty objects that "The Jewish Messiah concept ("Christ" in Greek) would not necessarily be a subject with which Josephus' readers were all that familiar. If Josephus were going to introduce the term, one would expect him to feel constrained to provide a discussion of it somewhere.[3]" On the academic e-list XTalk (Crosstalk), it was pointed out that at about the time Josephus was writing (circa 90 C.E.), Christians were undergoing their second round of persecution, so the name "Christos" would be known to Josephus' audience [4] (though not necessarily the details of its religious significance, especially to the Jews). Also, as discussed below, Tacitus uses the name "Christus" in his Annals.

[edit] Tacitus

This is the passage where Tacitus refers to "Christus" and Christians, verse 15.44:

Such indeed were the precautions of human wisdom. The next thing was to seek means of propitiating the gods, and recourse was had to the Sibylline books, by the direction of which prayers were offered to Vulcanus, Ceres, and Proserpina. Juno, too, was entreated by the matrons, first, in the Capitol, then on the nearest part of the coast, whence water was procured to sprinkle the fane and image of the goddess. And there were sacred banquets and nightly vigils celebrated by married women. But all human efforts, all the lavish gifts of the emperor, and the propitiations of the gods, did not banish the sinister belief that the conflagration was the result of an order. Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures 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 one of our procurators, 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, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired. Nero offered his gardens for the spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus, while he mingled with the people in the dress of a charioteer or stood aloft on a car. Hence, even for criminals who deserved extreme and exemplary punishment, there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but to glut one man's cruelty, that they were being destroyed. [5]

The passage is unlikely to be an interpolation. The Latin is typical of Tacitus. Also, and more importantly, Christians here are described as being criminals deserving of extreme punishment, and their beliefs described as superstition, which is not something that would likely come from the hand of a Christian tampering with the document. [6]. Prof. Darrell Doughty dissents from the scholarly consensus that this passage is authentic, and he objected that the Christian interpolator used such disparaging terms for the sake of verisimilitude. Yet the Christian who tampered with the Testimonium Flavianum in Josephus' Antiquities (or inserted it altogether) was not so concerned with verisimilitude that he allowed Jesus to be described in disparaging terms. Further, it is hard to see what the perceived advantage would be in interpolating Tacitus this way. It would hardly improve the image of Christians to write "an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted," which implies that Christians "ratted out" other Christians. This writer also makes other objections. He argues from silence by saying that if Tacitus wrote about Christians being scapegoated as the ones who burnt Rome, then the Christian writers like Tertullian or Origen should have mentioned it. He argues that the reference to Pontius Pilate is a "hint of Christian theology," which is a misuse of the word "theology," since it is not a metaphysical or spiritual claim. His reconstruction of the text is also strained:

Therefore, to put an end to the rumor [of him having had Rome burned] Nero created a diversion and subjected to the most extra-ordinary tortures those hated for their abominations by the common people. Nero had thrown open the gardens for the spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus, while he mingled with the people in the dress of a charioteer or drove about in a chariot. Hence, even for crimnals who deserved extreme and examplary punishment there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but glut one man's cruelty, that they were being punished.

He is saying that Nero distracts attention from reports of his own culpability in the fire of Rome, not by using an already hated minority as a scapegoat, which is hardly an uncommon tactic, but by merely ramping up the cruelty in the circuses, which, unlike scapegoating, isn't even an attempt to deflect blame onto someone else. S.C. Carlson pointed out another problem with Doughty's reconstruction. "Doughty cannot propose something as simple block interpolation as the following, because the relative clause, quos per flagitia invisos vulgus Chrestianos appellabat, would then be missing its verb." He then quoted the relevant passage, highlighting in strikethrough what Doughty tries to extract.

Sed non ope humana, non largitionibus principis aut deum placamentis decedebat infamia, quin iussum incendium crederetur. ergo abolendo rumori Nero subdidit reos et quaesitissimis poenis adfecit, quos per flagitia invisos vulgus Chrestianos appellabat. auctor nominis eius Christus Tibero imperitante per procuratorem Pontium Pilatum supplicio adfectus erat; repressaque in praesens exitiablilis superstitio rursum erumpebat, non modo per Iudaeam, originem eius mali, sed per urbem etiam, quo cuncta undique atrocia aut pudenda confluunt celebranturque. igitur primum correpti qui fatebantur, deinde indicio eorum multitudo ingens haud proinde in crimine incendii quam odio humani generis convicti sunt. et pereuntibus addita ludibria, ut ferarum tergis contecti laniatu canum interirent aut crucibus adfixi [aut flammandi atque], ubi defecisset dies, in usu[m] nocturni luminis urerentur. hortos suos ei spectaculo Nero obtulerat, et circense ludicrum edebat, habitu aurigae permixtus plebi vel curriculo insistens. unde quamquam adversus sontes et novissima exempla meritos miseratio oriebatur, tamquam non utilitate publica, sed in saevitiam unius absumerentur.[7]

In short, Doughty's argument depends on the English translation rather than the underlying Latin.

[edit] Other nonbiblical references

There are a few other non-Christian references, mentioned here for the sake of completeness:

  • A letter from Pliny the Younger to Trajan (Letters 10.96-97) on how to deal with the Christians, written about 111-113 C.E. Like the passage from Tacitus, it is useful more for determining a timeline for when certain Christian claims had circulated, than for independent confirmation of the claims.
  • A brief reference in Suetonius' Lives of the Caesars, Life of Claudius 25.4, where he writes that Claudius expelled the Jews from Rome, since supposedly "the Jews constantly made disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus." [8] If this is a reference to Jesus, then it shows that Suetonius' knowledge of the situation is inaccurate, since as Merz points out, he not only misspells the name "Christus," but appears to assume that he is a Jewish rabblerouser in Rome (p. 84, The Historical Jesus).
  • Mara bar Serapion wrote a letter to his son from a Roman prison that makes a vague reference to the Jews killing their "wise king." This "wise king" is thought to be Jesus, but his name is not mentioned, nor is there a reference to any "Christ" or "Chrestos".

[edit] Related Topics

[edit] References

Retrieved from "http://skepticwiki.org/index.php/Nonbiblical_references_to_Jesus"
Personal tools