Did the New Testament Authors Tell the Truth?
The Third "E": Enemy Testimony
In the original post in this series I outlined The Five E’s and Three C’s of New Testament Reliability. In this third post we will explicate the third “E,” Enemy Testimony, and how it provides another powerful line of evidence in support of the reliability of information given to us by the New Testament authors.
What could be better than many sincere, early and eyewitness accounts, giving you details about the life of Jesus? How about having a body of literature written by people not seeking to affirm Christianity who inadvertently reinforce it? As it turns out this is exactly what numerous early and extra-biblical sources, written by those outside of the Christian faith (some of whom were rather hostile to Christianity), have done.
There are at least ten non-Christian sources from the ancient world (within 150 years of Christ’s time) which corroborate certain details about the life of Jesus reported by the New Testament authors. Many of these writers are considered by historians to be critically important and reliable sources of information about the early Roman Empire, providing much of what we understand about that era and its personalities.1 For the sake of brevity I will discuss just six of these sources.
Six Ancient Non-Christian Sources
Josephus (c. 37-97 A.D.): perhaps the most famous Jewish historian of all time, Flavius Josephus was a member of the Pharisee sect. He participated in the Jewish wars against Rome which led to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. Despite this fact he came into favor with imperial Rome and became the court historian for emperor Vespasian. In his most well known work, The Antiquities of the Jews, there are a handful of references to Jesus Christ. Among these the following controversial passage may be found:
Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man. For he was one who wrought surprising feats. . . . He was (the) Christ . . . he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him.2
The above quotation has, admittedly, been a matter of much debate. Some have pointed out that Josephus, who never converted to Christianity, would be unlikely to say that Jesus was the Christ as a matter of fact or questions whether it was right to question whether it was right to call him a mere man. Nevertheless, this is how the text has come down to us and this is how it reads. Eusebius, in his Church History (c. 315), records Josephus’s words in the above fashion. Critics have often suggested that somewhere along the way in the transmission of the text (apparently between the original writing and the time of Eusebius) a Christian must have manipulated the original wording of the text. This is possible, although ultimately it is bare conjecture without hard evidence.
Interestingly Gary Habermas, in his book The Historical Jesus, tells us that “In 1972 Professor Schlomo Pines of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem released the results of a study on an Arabic manuscript containing Josephus’ statement about Jesus.”3
At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus. His conduct was good and (he) was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. But those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion, and that he was alive; accordingly he was perhaps the Messiah, concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders.4
This quotation of Josephus, since it was preserved separately from the main manuscript tradition for Josephus, is believed by some scholars to be Josephus’ original wording concerning Jesus. Regardless of the debate surrounding the original rendering of Josephus’ text, the evidence is well beyond doubt that Josephus writings (both the above cited and other references) corroborate that Jesus was crucified under Pontius Pilate, that he was called the Christ, that he was the brother of James, and that his followers believed that Jesus was risen from the dead three days later.
Tacitus (c. 55-120 A.D.): One of Rome’s greatest historians, he wrote The Annals of Rome (from Caesar Augustus to Nero) and The Histories of Rome (from Nero to Domitian). Large sections of these works are still extant but there is also much that has gone missing throughout the centuries. Nevertheless, in his remaining sections of the Annals, we find this important quote:
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
Tactitus’ reference here again corroborates some important details. Christ “suffered the extreme penalty” (crucifixion) during the reign of Tiberius and under Pontius Pilate. Also of great interest is Tacitus’ note that this “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.” In other words, Christianity was thought to be defeated when Jesus was put to death but, to the Roman people’s great surprise it rebounded on them and grew remarkably fast across the empire.
Pliny the Younger (61-c.113 A.D.): Pliny was the nephew of the also famous Roman politician Pliny the Elder. Pliny the Younger is best known today for his numerous letters that have been preserved such as On Contentment and The Eruption of Vesuvius. In one of Pliny’s letters to emperor Trajan, wherein he explained the fact that the pagan temples were becoming empty due to the influence of the Christians, he had this also to say,
They (the Christians) were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food — but food of an ordinary and innocent kind.6
This, in addition to numerous other relevant comments throughout Pliny’s letter, serves as a powerful testimony to the Christian conviction that Jesus is God. Further it supports the fact that Christians observed a strong commitment to living a godly and moral life; the way of life outlined as the Christian ethic in the New Testament documents. Pliny seems also to reference the Lord’s day assembly and the practice of taking the Lord’s Supper as a convened body of believers.
Lucian (c. 125-180 A.D.): Famous as satyrical pamphlet writer, rhetorician, and critic of religion in general, Lucian once wrote these scathing words about the Christians of his own day:
The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day — the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account. You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws. All this they take quite on faith, with the result that they despise all worldly goods alike, regarding them merely as common property.7
Lucian notes again, the crucifixion of Christ and the Christian ethic, noting among other things the way in which the gospel of Jesus brought down the dividing wall of hostility between people and made them “brothers.” He also acknowledges that they worship Jesus as God and deny all other gods. His mention of the Christian “contempt of death” is also a powerful witness to the brave witness of many Christians who gave their life fearlessly for the gospel of Jesus.
Mara Bar-Serapion: Habermas tells us “The British Museum owns the manuscript of a letter written sometime between the late first and third centuries AD. Its author was a Syrian named Mara Bar-Serapion, who was writing from prison to motivate his son Serapion to emulate wise teachers of the past.”8 Here is what that text tells us:
What advantage did the Athenians gain from putting Socrates to death? Famine and plague came upon them as a judgment for their crime. What advantage did the men of Samos gain from burning Pythagoras? In a moment their land was covered with sand. What advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise King? It was just after that that their kingdom was abolished. God justly avenged these three wise men: the Athenians died of hunger; the Samians were overwhelmed by the sea; the Jews, ruined and driven from their land, live in complete dispersion. But Socrates did not die for good; he lived on in the statue of Hera. Nor did the wise King die for good; he lived on in the teaching which he had given.
Here we have a fascinating rebuke of killing wise men, among whom he mentions the King of the Jews (c.f. Matthew 2:2; 27:29, et al.). Also of interest is the reference to the destruction of Jerusalem and dispersion of the Jewish (and Christian) people thereafter which Mara Bar-Serapion attributes to the actions of the Jewish authorities against Christ.
The Talmud: An early Jewish writing which was a collection of oral traditions among their people. Habermas notes “It would be expected that the most reliable information about Jesus from the Talmud would come from the earliest period of compilation — AD 70 to 200, known as the Tannaitic period.”9 Here is a key passage from this early period relevant to our current topic:
On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, “He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy. Any one who can say anything in his favour, let him come forward and plead on his behalf.” But since nothing was brought forward in his favour he was hanged on the eve of the Passover!10
Yeshu (Jesus) was hanged on the eve of the passover. Americans tend to read “hanged” and think of a noose and a tree but crucifixion was often referred to as a kind of hanging. This text also corroborates the time of Jesus’ crucifixion as reported in the Gospel accounts. Very interestingly the claim that Jesus was put to death for “sorcery” seems to be a nod to the claims of Jesus’ miracle working and exorcisms during his ministry which resulted in “apostasy” by Israelites. In other words, many people started following Jesus’ teachings and abandoned the religious authorities who rejected Jesus’ messiahship.
Closing Thoughts
“Enemy Testimony” is a helpful tag for remembering this line of evidence, although it may be a bit strong verbiage for some of these sources which are more friendly while entirely appropriate for others. The above sources, as well as others that could be mentioned (such as Celsus, Suetonius, etc.) offer good and early corroboration, from extra-biblical and even sometimes hostile sources, that:
1. Jesus lived during the time of Tiberius Caesar.
2. He lived a virtuous life.
3. He was a wonder-worker.
4. He had a brother named James.
5. He was acclaimed to be the Messiah.
6. He was crucified under Pontius Pilate.
7. He was crucified on the eve of the Jewish Passover.
8. Darkness and an earthquake occurred when he died.
9. His disciples believed he rose from the dead.
10. His disciples were willing to die for their belief.
11. Christianity spread rapidly as far as Rome.
12. His disciples denied the Roman gods and worshiped Jesus as God.11
Geisler and Turek make a powerful point when they note that if “you add those non-Christian writings to the Christian sources over that same 150 years, there are about as many sources who mention Jesus as cite Tiberius Caesar, the Roman emperor at the time of Jesus. In other words, Jesus of Nazareth, who was not even a Roman official in the Roman Empire, is mentioned in ancient writings about as much as the emperor at that time!”12
As we continue to think about various angles that support the reliability of the New Testament authors this Enemy Testimony is just one more ring in the chain mail. Alone it might not be sufficient, but as one more line of evidence it bolsters the cumulative case making it harder and harder to discount. We have now shown that the New Testament has very Early Testimony being written very close to the time of the events it records, that it is full of Eyewitness Testimony written from and to other eyewitness, and now that many of its important details are corroborated by Enemy Testimony (non-Christian sources within 150 years of Christ).
At this point you should begin laughing in scorn at those who try to deny Jesus ever existed. Further, you ought to be able to start saying to yourself (if you haven’t already) “I may need to give the claims of the Christians some more serious consideration” because this kind of evidence is hard to dismiss. Even so, we are far from done. The next line of evidence we will consider, in the following post, is what we are calling “Embarrassing Testimony.” In other words, information included by the New Testament authors that wasn’t particularly flattering to them personally or which was seemingly unhelpful to their case. The kinds of things you would only say because it’s true, not because it’s what you’d prefer to report.
As I will demonstrate in Part 2 of this series on The Reliability of the New Testament (when I discuss the question, How can we know the New Testament has not been changed?) these sources are in fact great sources that warrant a lot of faith on our part, but they are nowhere near as well preserved or reliable as the New Testament documents. As much credit as we should give to Pliny, Tacitus, Suetonius, et al., we should, by force of evidence and reason, show much more confidence to the New Testament documents veracity and preservation.
Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, 18:3.
Habermas, Gary. The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ (p. 204). College Press Publishing Company, Incorporated. Kindle Edition.
Charlesworth, Jesus Within Judaism, p. 95.
Tacitus, The Annals of Rome, 15.44.
Pliny, Letters, transl. by William Melmoth, rev. by W.M.L. Hutchinson (Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1935), vol. II, X:96.
Lucian, The Death of Peregrine, 11-13, in The Works of Lucian of Samosata, transl. by H.W. Fowler and F.G. Fowler, 4 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon, 1949), vol. 4.
Habermas, Gary. The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ (p. 218). College Press Publishing Company, Incorporated. Kindle Edition.
Ibid., 213-214.
The Babylonian Talmud, transl. by I. Epstein (London: Soncino, 1935), vol. III, Sanhedrin 43a, p. 281.
Geisler, Norman L.; Turek, Frank. I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist (p. 223). Crossway. Kindle Edition.
Ibid., p. 222.