Is there any Non-Biblical Evidence that Jesus Existed?

"The implication is that the Biblical evidence for Jesus is biased because it is encased in a theological text written by committed believers." - John P. Meier

Tacitus (or Caius/Gaius (Publius) Cornelius Tacius (55/56-118 AD)) was a Roman senator, orator and ethnographer, and was arguably the best of Roman historians. Translated from Latin by Robert Van Voorst, Tacitus's work titled Annals (c.116-117 AD) includes:

"Neither human effort nor the emperors generosity nor the placating of the gods ended the scandalous belief that the fire had been ordered [by Nero]. Therefore, to put down the rumour, Nero substituted as culprits and punished in the most unusual ways those hated for their shameful acts ... whom the crowd called "Chrestians." The founder of this name, Christ, had been executed in the reign of Tiberius by the procurator Pontius Pilate ... Suppressed for a time, the deadly superstition erupted again not only in Judea, the origin of this evil, but also in the city [Rome], where all things horrible and shameful from everywhere come together and become popular."

This agrees with the Biblical facts that:

1. Christ was one distinctive way by which some referred to Jesus, even though Tacitus took it for a personal name rather than a title.

2. Christ was associated with the beginning of the movement of Christians.

3. He was executed by the Roman governor of Judea.

4. The time of Jesus' death was during Pontius Pilate's governorship of Judea, during the reign of Tiberius.

Many New Testament scholars date Jesus' death to c.29 AD.

Pilate governed Judea in 26-36 AD

Tiberius was emperor in 14-37 AD

Josephus, a Jewish priest who grew up as an aristocrat in first-century Palestine and ended up living in Rome, stood in a unique position as a Jew who was secure in Roman imperial patronage and protection.

The shorter of the two major references is incidental to identifying Jesus' brother James, the leader of the church in Jerusalem. In the absence of a Roman governor between Festus's death and governor Albinus's arrival in 62 AD, the high priest Ananus instigated James's execution. Josephus writes:

"Being therefore this kind of person [ie, a heartless Sadducee], Ananus, thinking that he had a favourable opportunity because Festus had died and Albinus was still on his way, called a meeting of judges and brought into it the brother of Jesus-who-is-called-Messiah ... James by name, and some others. He made the accusation that they had transgressed the law, and he handed them over to be stoned."

The sole reason for referring to James was that his death resulted in Ananus losing his position as high priest. Josephus needed to specify which James he meant, and the common custom of simply giving the fathers name would not work because both "James" and "Joseph" were common names. Therefore Josephus identified this James by reference to his famous brother, of whom also had a common name. Therefore he specified which Jesus by adding the phrase "who is called Messiah."

Josephus was a non-Christian author. This may be because the phrase - "who is called Christ" - would not have been used for two reasons. First, in the New Testament and early Church fathers of the first two centuries AD, James was referred to by Christians as "the brother of the Lord" and similar terms. Never the "brother of Jesus," presumably because the name was common. Second, Josephus's description in Jewish Antiquities of how and when James was executed disagrees with Christian traditions.

The longer passage that refers to Jesus is known as the Testimonium Flavianum:

"Around this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who did surprising deeds, and a teachers of such people as accept the truth gladly. he won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Messiah. When Pilate, upon hearing him accused by men of the highest standing among us, had condemned him to be crucified, those who in the first place came to love him did not give up their affection for him, for on the third day, he appeared to them restored to life. The prophets of God had prophesied this and countless other marvellous things about him. And the tribe of Christians, so called after him, have still to this day not died out."

This whole passage if not authentic and written by Josephus alone. In contrast to the obviously Christian statement "He was the Messiah," Josephus elsewhere "writes as a passionate advocate of Judaism," says expert Steve Mason. The bold affirmation reads as a resounding Christian confession that echoes St. Peter. It cannot be Josephus.

But we cannot assume that this whole passage is forgery and written by Christians. Despite a few words that don't seem characteristic of Josephus's writings, what is said generally fits much better with Josephus's writings than with Christian writings. It is possible that a forger could have learned to imitate Josephus's style, but such a deep level of attention, based on extensive, detailed reading of Josephus's works and such a meticulous adoption of his vocabulary, goes far beyond what a forger would need to do. Even more important, the passage that mentions Jesus in order to identify James appears in a later section of the Jewish Antiquities and implies that Jesus was mentioned previously.

This passage is based on an original report by Josephus that has been modified by others. After extracting that appear to be Christian additions (in bold), the remaining text appears to be pure Josephus. The Latin version says Jesus "was believed to be the Messiah." The Syriae version, "He was thought to be the Messiah." And the Arabic version suggests, "He was perhaps the Messiah concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders."

These independent historical sources (one a non-Christian and the other Jewish) confirm what we read in the Gospels:

1. He existed as man.

Josephus grew up in a priestly family in first-century Palestine and wrote only decades after Jesus' death. "If any Jewish writer were ever in a position to know about the non-existence of Jesus,, it would have been Josephus. His implicit affirmation of the existence of Jesus had been, and still is, the most significant obstacle for those who argue that extra-Biblical evidence is not probative on this point," Robert Van Voorst observes.

2. His personal name was Jesus.

3. He was called Christos in Greek and Messiah in Hebrew.

4. He had a brother named James (Jacob).

5. He won over both Jews and "Greeks" [ie, Gentiles of Hellenistic culture].

6. Jewish leaders of the day expressed unfavourable opinions about him.

7. Pilate rendered the decision that he should be executed.

8. His execution was specifically by crucifixion.

9. He was executed during Pontius Pilate's governorship over Judea.

"No pagans and Jews who opposed Christianity denied Jesus' historicity or even questioned it," Robert Van Voorst observes, "... If anyone in the ancient would had a reason to dislike the Christian faith, it was the rabbis. To argue successfully that Jesus never existed but was a creation of early Christians would have been the most effective polemic against Christianity ... [Yet] all Jewish sources treated Jesus as a fully historical person ... The rabbis ... used the real events of Jesus' life against him." But they do not deny his existence.

Lucian of Samosata (c.115-200 AD) was a Greek satirist who wrote The Passing of Peregrinus, two sections of which refer to Jesus. Lucian seems to have gathered all of his information from sources independent of the New Testament and other Christian writings, which is why his writing is usually valued as evidence for the existence of Jesus.

"It was then that he learned the marvellous wisdom of the Christians, by associating with their priests and scribes in Palestine. And - what else? - in short order made them look like children, for he was a prophet, cult leader, head of congregation and everything, all by himself. He interpreted and explained some of their books, and wrote many himself. They revered him as a god, used him as a lawgiver, and set him down as protector - to be sure, after that other whom they still worship, the man who was crucified in Palestine because he introduced his new cult into the world.

For having convinced themselves that they are going to be immortal and live forever, the poor wretches despise death and most even willingly give themselves up. Furthermore, their first lawgiver persuaded them that they are all brothers of one another after they have transgressed once for all by denying the Greek gods and by worshiping that crucified sophist himself and living according to his laws."

Lucian despised Christians for worshiping someone thought to be a criminal worthy of death and especally despised "that crucified sophist."

The Platonist philosopher, Celsus, considered Jesus to be a magician who made exobitant claims.

Pliny the Younger, a Roman governor and friend of Tacitus, wrote about early Christian worship to Christ "as to a god."

Suetonius, a Roman writer, lawyer and historian, wrote of riots in 49 AD among Jews in Rome which might have been about Christus, but which he thought were incited by "the instigator Chrestus," whose identification with Jesus is not completely certain.

Mara bar Serapion, a prisoner of war held by Romans, wrote a letter to his son that described "the wise Jewish kind" in a way that seems to indicate Jesus but does not specify his identity.

One can label the evidence above as documentary or as archaeological. Almost all sources covered above exist in the form of copied and preserved documents over the course of many centuries, rather than excavated in archaeological digs. Therefore, most would prefer to say that these texts are ancient documentary sources, rather than archaeological discoveries.

http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/people-cultures-in-the-bible/jesus-historical-jesus/did-jesus-exist/