If you close your eyes to the evidence, then you won't be able to see it,
but that doesn't mean it's not there. Maybe you just need to open your eyes. This is Red Pen
Logic with Mr. B where we help you assess bad thinking by using good thinking. Plus, we try
to have some fun in the process. In today's tweet, Eater makes the incredible claim that there is "no
documentation for Jesus' existence except for the Bible...just saying." The implicit assumption is that
if the Bible is the only historical documentation we have for Jesus existing, then we don't have good
reason to believe he actually existed. What color pen should we use today? Just kidding.
You may be surprised to hear that there are some people who think Jesus never existed. They believe
Jesus is a mere myth with no historical evidence to back him up. This, my friends, is simply false.
And it's not only false, it's foolish. At least that's the word that world-class Bible scholar and
agnostic skeptic Bart Ehrman uses to describe what he calls "Jesus mythicists." So why don't you take it
from here, Bart? "I think that atheists have done themselves a disservice by jumping on the
bandwagon of mythicism because, frankly, it makes you look foolish to the outside world.
If that's what you're going to believe, you just look foolish." But Bart, is there any historical
evidence for Jesus' existence? "I mean, okay yeah, I mean I have a whole book on it." So there's a little
bit of evidence. "There is a lot of evidence. I mean, there is so much evidence." Like how much evidence?
It is not—I mean, I know in the crowds you all run around with it's commonly thought that
Jesus did not exist. Let me tell you, once you get outside of your conclave, there's nobody who— I mean,
this is not even an issue for scholars of antiquity." But surely, there must be some scholars
of antiquity who doubt Jesus' existence. "There is no scholar in any college or university in the
western world who teaches classics, ancient history, New Testament, early Christianity, any related field,
who doubts that Jesus existed." But Bart, what are the reasons that scholars give for Jesus' existence?
"The reason for thinking Jesus exists is because he is abundantly attested in early sources.
That's why." So here's the question: Why don't these scholars doubt the existence of Jesus like so many
skeptics do? Because of evidence like the records of 2nd century Roman historian, Cornelius Tacitus
who is one of the best historians of antiquity. In his last major work titled Annals, Tacitus records
how Nero, concerned about rumors that he secretly burned Rome, shifted the blame to Christians.
"Therefore, to put down the rumor, 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
its name, Christ, had been executed in the reign of Tiberius by one of the procurators Pontius Pilate."
Or consider the evidence of first century Jewish historian Flavius Josephus. He mentions Jesus twice
in his Jewish Antiquities - once in book 18 and once in book 20 where he describes the killing
of James, the leader of the Jerusalem church whom Josephus calls the brother of Jesus who
is the Messiah. Then there's the evidence from the second century Greek satirist, Lucian of Samosata.
Though he doesn't specifically name Jesus, he clearly refers to Jesus with contempt
as a crucified sophist whom the Christians worshiped as a god. So it's simply not true
that there's no historical documentation of Jesus' existence outside the Bible. There's lots of it
coming from nearly 20 secular sources. But there's another problem with this tweet. What about the
historical evidence inside the Bible? Eater assumes that the biblical evidence doesn't count as actual
evidence. Since the biblical documentation for Jesus must be biased (the argument goes) it cannot
be a reliable source of historical information. In other words, if we want real evidence, then we have
to look elsewhere. Well, we did look elsewhere, and we came up with some pretty cool stuff.
But why not count the Bible as real evidence? Here's why you should. The Bible isn't just
an individual book that can be dismissed because it's not just an individual book.
It's a bunch of books. It's a library. What we call the Bible is actually a collection of individual
historical documents that ancient historians do not just dismiss because they're under one cover.
Sure, they may not believe everything they read in the Bible because of their own bias. I get it. But
that doesn't mean they write the whole thing off. The reality is, within the biblical text,
we have reliable historical evidence for Jesus just like Bible scholar and agnostic Bart Ehrman
said. In fact, speaking of the apostle Paul, Bart says, "One author that we know about knew Jesus' brother
and knew Jesus' closest disciple, Peter. He's an eyewitness to both Jesus' closest disciple
and his brother." There you have it. So, what have we learned? First, the claim that we have no historical
documentation for Jesus' existence outside the Bible is just plain false. Authors like Tacitus,
Josephus, and Lucian, and many others all make reference to a historical Jesus. Second, even if we
didn't have any extra biblical evidence, so what? We still have reliable historical documentation from
early witnesses collected together in a book that we now call the Bible. Only a blind-eyed
bias against the Bible would dismiss this early evidence for Jesus. Though popular on the internet,
the idea that Jesus never existed completely ignores the facts. In the introduction to
Bart Ehrman's book, "Did Jesus Exist?" he says, "I am not a Christian, and I have no interest in promoting
a Christian cause with a Christian agenda. I am an agnostic with atheist leanings... But as a historian
I think evidence matters. And the past matters. And for anyone to whom both evidence and the past
matter, a dispassionate consideration of the case makes it quite plain Jesus did exist." Those who
care about evidence follow the facts rather than dismiss them. The evidence is right there
before their eyes if they just open them up and look. Class dismissed.