# Is there no reference to Jesus in first christian century **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [September 14, 2013, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-no-reference-to-jesus-in-first-christian-century/668870 "2013-09-14T22:55:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![destry](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c67d28/32.png) [@destry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/destry)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2013, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-no-reference-to-jesus-in-first-christian-century/668870/1 "2013-09-14T22:55:29Z")
Can anybody verify or disprove the following? “In the entire first Christian century Jesus is not mentioned by a single Greek or Roman historian, religion scholar, politician, philosopher or poet. His name never occurs in a single inscription, and it is never found in a single piece of private correspondence. Zero! Zip references!” ~Bart D. Ehrman, James A. Gray Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill If true, it seems so strange that it’s not been mentioned before. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2013, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-no-reference-to-jesus-in-first-christian-century/668870/2 "2013-09-14T23:06:00Z")
We’re putting aside the Pauline epistles and synoptic gospels, I take it? If so, then yes, that’s true. There are two references to Jesus in Josephus, but a lot of religious scholars (including Ehrman), argue they’re later additions and weren’t in the original. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2013, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-no-reference-to-jesus-in-first-christian-century/668870/3 "2013-09-14T23:07:19Z")
[Not true.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus) ---
**Author:** ![Prof.Pepperwinkle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/prof.pepperwinkle/32/13627_2.png) [@Prof.Pepperwinkle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Prof.Pepperwinkle)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2013, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-no-reference-to-jesus-in-first-christian-century/668870/4 "2013-09-14T23:22:14Z")
Not that amazing when you consider they were just getting started. Since the early Christians were expecting Jesus’s return at any given moment, they had no need to put anything in writing until the mid-to-late 1st Century. They were generally perceived for most of the 1st Century as a sect of Judaism, and there wasn’t any call to differentiate. In his book_Did Jesus Exist_ Bart Ehrman does state > [@](#): > > At the outset I should emphatically state the obvious. Every single source that mentions Jesus up until the eighteenth century assumed that he actually existed. That is true no matter which period you choose to examine… It is true of every source from our earliest periods, the fourth century, the third century, the second century, and the first century. It is true of every author of every kind, Christian, Jewish, or pagan. Most striking, it is true not just of those who came to believe in Jesus but also of nonbelievers in general, and of the opponents of Christianity in particular… Not even the Jewish and pagan antagonists who attacked Christianity and Jesus himself entertained the thought that he never existed. and, speaking of early Non-Christian Sources: > [@](#): > > Tacitus almost certainly had information at his disposal about Jesus, for example, that he was crucified in Judea during the governorship of Pontius Pilate. Josephus appears to have known as well about Jesus, both some major aspects of his life and his death under Pontius Pilate. What I did not stress earlier but need to point out now is that there is absolutely nothing to suggest that the pagan Tacitus or the Jewish Josephus acquired their information about Jesus by reading the Gospels. They heard information about him. That means the information they gave predated their writings… Indirectly then, Tacitus and (possibly) Josephus provide independent attestation to Jesus’s existence from outside the Gospels although, as I stated earlier, in doing so they do not give us information that is unavailable in our other sources. ---
**Author:** ![njtt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ecd19e/32.png) [@njtt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/njtt)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2013, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-no-reference-to-jesus-in-first-christian-century/668870/5 "2013-09-14T23:38:25Z")
At least some of the Gnostic Gospels, particularly parts of the [Gospel of Thomas](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_thomas#Date_of_composition), are thought to date from the first century. ---
**Author:** ![Aspidistra](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspidistra/32/3894_2.png) [@Aspidistra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspidistra)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-no-reference-to-jesus-in-first-christian-century/668870/6 "2013-09-15T00:02:36Z")
If you mean a _physical bit of paper_ (papyrus), then no, there’s not. I think the earliest bit of manuscript out of the bible is a fragment of John’s gospel dated to about AD 140 or so. However, that only imposes a _latest_ limit on when it could have been written. The bit of papyrus we’ve got is unlikely to be the very first edition. So it’s quite likely that the gospel of John was, in fact, written in the first century. And since most scholars on both sides of the Jesus debate seem to agree that John is likely later than the other gospel writers, it’s quite likely the others are too. I’ve seen people argue for dates as early as about AD50 for the synoptics - that’s not the consensus position, some will argue as late as 2nd century, but I think something like 70-90AD would be regarded as medium-uncontroversial. ---
**Author:** ![Meatros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Meatros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Meatros)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 12:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-no-reference-to-jesus-in-first-christian-century/668870/7 "2013-09-15T00:18:37Z")
Jesus was rather unremarkable during his life, so it’s not surprising that we have no first hand accounts of him. It was only through Paul that the movement started to really spread. We are lucky we have anything at all about him fom so close to his life. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-no-reference-to-jesus-in-first-christian-century/668870/8 "2013-09-15T00:32:26Z")
Please go back to the OP and reread the quote. It clearly is referring to writing outside of those included in (or deliberately excluded from) the Bible. So why is everyone bringing them up as refutation? The Wiki link given above talks about the earliest known references, in Josephus. There’s only one that may not be a later interpolation: > [@](#): > > Modern scholarship has almost universally acknowledged the authenticity of the reference to “the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James” [12] and has rejected its being the result of later interpolation.[13][31][1][2][16] Moreover, in comparison with Hegesippus’ account of James’ death, most scholars consider Josephus’ to be the more historically reliable.[28] However, a few scholars question the authenticity of the reference, based on various arguments, but primarily based on the observation that various details in The Jewish War differ from it.[32][33] Richard Carrier argues that the words “the one called Christ” resulted from the accidental insertion of a marginal note added by some unknown reader.[34] He proposes that the original text referred to a brother James of the high priest Jesus ben Damneus mentioned in the same narrative.[34] I don’t remember Ehrman’s position on this, but he is a renowned scholar and should be taken seriously. He may be wrong or he may be making a point not evident from taking the quote out of context. Either way, we have far better independent reason to believe that the religion existed than did the individuals named. ---
**Author:** ![njtt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ecd19e/32.png) [@njtt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/njtt)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-no-reference-to-jesus-in-first-christian-century/668870/9 "2013-09-15T00:47:42Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > Please go back to the OP and reread the quote. It clearly is referring to writing outside of those included in (or deliberately excluded from) the Bible. So why is everyone bringing them up as refutation? The fact that Jesus (or, indeed, anyone) should not be mentioned in any or many writings except those by people who thought him important, is not particularly remarkable. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-no-reference-to-jesus-in-first-christian-century/668870/10 "2013-09-15T01:40:07Z")
> [@njtt](#): > > The fact that Jesus (or, indeed, anyone) should not be mentioned in any or many writings except those by people who thought him important, is not particularly remarkable. That is a rational position, and therefore particularly inapplicable to the discussion, especially here in America, where most people believe that the Bible was written in English and Jesus had a listing in the Jerusalem phone book. ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-no-reference-to-jesus-in-first-christian-century/668870/11 "2013-09-15T01:49:01Z")
According to what I’m reading in ‘Zealot’, Jesus was one of hundreds (possibly thousands) of miracle workers/exorcists claiming to be the messiah at the time. So he wouldn’t be remembered by historians, people like him were everywhere. Isn’t the existence of Jesus’s brother James considered a historical fact? Doesn’t that imply something about his existence? However the book Zealot does imply Jesus’s family was known. So I don’t know if James (brother of Jesus) was pretending to have a brother Jesus he never had. Or if the apostles were pretending to know a Jesus that never existed. So historians don’t remember him, but the impression I got is his friends and family did. But the book implies they were illiterate, so they couldn’t really leave a record of their experiences. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-no-reference-to-jesus-in-first-christian-century/668870/12 "2013-09-15T01:50:09Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > … especially here in America, where most people believe that the Bible was written in English and Jesus had a listing in the Jerusalem phone book. Even as an exaggeration, that is a preposterous statement to make in this forum. ---
**Author:** ![Gorsnak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gorsnak/32/7587_2.png) [@Gorsnak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorsnak)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 2:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-no-reference-to-jesus-in-first-christian-century/668870/13 "2013-09-15T02:00:08Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Even as an exaggeration, that is a preposterous statement to make in this forum. [No it isn’t.](http://lmgtfy.com/?q=hyperbole&l=1) ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 2:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-no-reference-to-jesus-in-first-christian-century/668870/14 "2013-09-15T02:49:47Z")
The _Alexamenos Grafitto_ might date from the first century. It’s on a wall in Rome and depicts a crucified human figure with a donkey’s head, and a nearby figure with raised hand. the inscription possibly (probably?) reads _Alexamenos worships his god_. Some sources reported a Roman belief that the god of the Jews had a donkey’s head, and there are other sources suggesting that Christians were believed to do so. It’s not definite, but it looks pretty good that this is a bit of Anti-Christian grafitti. On tyhe other hand, such things are hard to datwe, so even if it is anti-cyhristian, it might date from after the first century. > **[Alexamenos graffito](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexamenos_graffito)** > > The Alexamenos graffito (also known as the graffito blasfemo, or blasphemous graffito): 393  is a piece of Roman graffito scratched in plaster on the wall of a room near the Palatine Hill in Rome, Italy, which has now been removed and is in the Palatine Museum. It may be meant to depict Jesus; if so, it competes with an engraved gem held in the British Museum as the earliest known pictorial representation of the Crucifixion of Jesus. It is hard to date, but has been estimated to have The image d... ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 3:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-no-reference-to-jesus-in-first-christian-century/668870/15 "2013-09-15T03:02:11Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Even as an exaggeration, that is a preposterous statement to make in this forum. I apologize, John. Everybody knows that Jesus had an unlisted number. ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 3:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-no-reference-to-jesus-in-first-christian-century/668870/16 "2013-09-15T03:13:42Z")
Dating is uncertain, and these were certainly Christian writers (which goes against the clear intent of the OP), but these aren’t in anyone’s canonical Bible – many of the _Apostolic Fathers_ may date from the late first century. Clement, Ignatious, Polycarp. There are others in my copy not listed in the Wikipedia page. Some date The Shepherd of Hermas before the 2nd century. Again, though, although these are Christian writers, they’re maddeningly stingy on writing about Christ himself. Hermas is pretty allegorical, and the others more concerned with Church matters. > **[Apostolic Fathers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostolic_Fathers)** > > The Apostolic Fathers, also known as the Ante-Nicene Fathers, were core Christian theologians among the Church Fathers who lived in the 1st and 2nd centuries AD who are believed to have personally known some of the Twelve Apostles or to have been significantly influenced by them. Their writings, though widely circulated in early Christianity, were not included in the canon of the New Testament. Many of the writings derive from the same time period and geographical location as other works of ea Th... > **[The Shepherd of Hermas](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shepherd_of_Hermas)** > > The Shepherd of Hermas (Greek: Ποιμὴν τοῦ Ἑρμᾶ, Poimēn tou Herma; Latin: Pastor Hermae), sometimes just called The Shepherd, is a Christian literary work of the late first half of the second century, considered a valuable book by many Christians, and considered canonical scripture by some of the early Church fathers such as Irenaeus. The Shepherd was very popular amongst Christians in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th centuries. It is found in the Codex Sinaiticus. > The book was originally written in Rome in... For non-Christian sources, though, it’s pretty tough. If you’ve read Josephus, it’s impossible to believe that the man wrote the extant passages as we have them now, yet remained an unconverted Jew. It’s abundantly clear to me that the passages, if not made up entirely by a later Christian copyist or editor, were at least reworked to reflect that bias. Writers like G.A. Wells have argued against supposed other early references to Christ in Roman authors. There are several Talmudic references which have been agued as referring to Christ, but it’s not clear when they were written. ---
**Author:** ![Ranger\_Jeff](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ranger_jeff/32/2065_2.png) [@Ranger\_Jeff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ranger_Jeff)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 5:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-no-reference-to-jesus-in-first-christian-century/668870/17 "2013-09-15T05:15:47Z")
The first written copies of the Gospels started appearing around 85 CE, about 50 years after the events noted therein. The book [Misquoting Jesus](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misquoting_Jesus) discusses changes from the earliest manuscripts to later ones, suggesting that scribes added a lot of stuff on their own. To the Romans and most of the citizens of Judea who were NOT followers of Joshua ben Joseph, JbJ was just another of many itinerant Galilean rabbis passing through Jerusalem. And Passover was a particularly BAD time for him to pass through Jerusalem too. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-no-reference-to-jesus-in-first-christian-century/668870/18 "2013-09-15T14:48:07Z")
Just want to note that _Misquoting Jesus_ is in fact by the OP’s Bart Ehrman. And a fascinating look at the progression of textual information across time. ---
**Author:** ![Leo\_Bloom](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leo_bloom/32/10377_2.png) [@Leo\_Bloom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leo_Bloom)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-no-reference-to-jesus-in-first-christian-century/668870/19 "2013-09-15T17:34:16Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > [Not true.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus) Nice cite. Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![Leo\_Bloom](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leo_bloom/32/10377_2.png) [@Leo\_Bloom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leo_Bloom)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-no-reference-to-jesus-in-first-christian-century/668870/20 "2013-09-15T17:39:37Z")
> [@Aspidistra](#): > > If you mean a _physical bit of paper_ (papyrus), then no, there’s not. I think the earliest bit of manuscript out of the bible is a fragment of John’s gospel dated to about AD 140 or so. > > However, that only imposes a _latest_ limit on when it could have been written. The bit of papyrus we’ve got is unlikely to be the very first edition. So it’s quite likely that the gospel of John was, in fact, written in the first century. And since most scholars on both sides of the Jesus debate seem to agree that John is likely later than the other gospel writers, it’s quite likely the others are too. I’ve seen people argue for dates as early as about AD50 for the synoptics - that’s not the consensus position, some will argue as late as 2nd century, but I think something like 70-90AD would be regarded as medium-uncontroversial. Isn’t John considered a late Gospel because a distinct anti-Judaism, as a polity, is apparent? I could very well be talking out of my ass here. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-no-reference-to-jesus-in-first-christian-century/668870.md?page=2)