.jpg)
Non- Christian sources
Throughout history, critics of Jesus have questioned who he was and whether he ever existed. Over the next few weeks, we will examine several independent, reliable, non-biblical sources from the first century AD to argue for the historicity of the existence of a man named Jesus of Nazareth.
These sources stand as reliable accounts in rebuttal to the claim that there is insufficient independent evidence to substantiate his existence.
We begin with Tacitus. Cornelius Tacitus (AD 55-120) was a Roman leader and historian who began his career as a senator under Vespasian, finally culminating in his appointment to proconsul of Asia.
As a historian, Tacitus’s most popular works were The Annals, which cover the period from Augustus’s death in AD 14 to Nero’s death in AD 68, and The Histories, which cover the period from Nero’s death to the death of Domitian in AD 96. In The Annuals, Tacitus writes of the Christians: Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite torture 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 Judea, 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 for the crime of firing the city, as of hatred of mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with skins of beast they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or doomed to flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired.
This passage provides evidence that Tacitus himself believed that Jesus of Nazareth was a real person. In addition, there are other essential aspects to glean from the Tacitus material. Resurrection scholar Josh McDowell notes that Tacitus “provides from historical evidence that Christians in Rome, only thirty years after the death of Christ, were being killed for their convictions that Jesus was a real person, he lived, died, and rose again on their behalf.”
However, resurrection skeptic G. A. Wells has mounted one of the most publicized criticisms of Tacitus’s work regarding its confirmation of Jesus as a real historical person. Wells (19262017), was a professor of German at Birkbeck University in London and spent much of his career challenging the historicity of Jesus. As one might expect, Wells states that this passage from Tacitus “has no historical value.” He argues that Tacitus is not a reliable and accurate source and maintains that he just accepted from Christians that Jesus was crucified by Pontius Pilate under the reign of Tiberius. By doing this, Wells contends that Tacitus is unreliable and undisciplined as a historian. Wells, however, may not be correct in his assessment of Tacitus.
To answer the question of Tacitus’s reliability and discipline, we look to several sources to establish his reputation as an accurate historian. Ronald Syme, one of the foremost Tacitean scholars, wrote that one of Tacitus’s qualities was his distrust of source information in general. Tacitus was no stranger to “industrious investigation, and his diligence was exemplary.”
Michael Grant writes that Tacitus “was careful to contrast what had been handed down orally with literary tradition ... There is no doubt that Tacitus took great care in selecting his material.”
Herbert Benario states that Tacitus “chose judiciously among sources, totally dependent upon none, and very often, at critical points, ignored the consensus of his predecessors to impose his own viewpoint and his own judgment.” Mc-Dowell writes, “Tacitus is universally considered the most reliable of historians a great honesty in the examination of Documents.” In light of these scholar’s praise of Tacitus as a reliable historical source, Well’s criticism seems unwarranted.
So it is that Tacitus seems to pass the test for reliability and discipline in his role as an ancient Roman historian. Nonetheless, the critical skepticism is far from over. Wells accuses Tacitus of Christian bias and suggests his use of certain pro-Christian words and phrases proves it.
Join us again next time as we continue to look at what this Roman historian has to say about a man named Jesus, who lived in the first century and was crucified by the Romans. All of this and more as we move closer to answering the question: is God dead?
Gloria in excelsis Deo.
Ty B. Kerley, DMin., is an ordained minister who teaches Christian apologetics and relief preaches in Southern Oklahoma. Dr. Kerley and his wife, Vicki, are members of the Waurika church of Christ and live in Ardmore, OK. You can contact him at [email protected].
