# Review finds no mention of Christ in ancient texts **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 30, 2014, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/review-finds-no-mention-of-christ-in-ancient-texts/700003 "2014-09-30T19:59:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![leahcim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/b4bc9f/32.png) [@leahcim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/leahcim)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2014, 10:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/review-finds-no-mention-of-christ-in-ancient-texts/700003/81 "2014-10-01T10:25:53Z")
The most compelling argument I’ve heard for the existence of a historical Jesus is that he is consistently known as “Jesus of Nazareth”, but there is this whole shaggy dog story about how there was a census so he was really born in Bethlehem to fulfill some prophecy. If the gospel writers were making up Jesus from whole cloth, they would have just called him “Jesus of Bethlehem” and saved themselves some trouble. ---
**Author:** ![UDS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecae2f/32.png) [@UDS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UDS)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2014, 10:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/review-finds-no-mention-of-christ-in-ancient-texts/700003/82 "2014-10-01T10:26:11Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > not the point. religious people want to assert the existence of jesus as a historical figure as an indisputable fact. well, they don’t get to make such claims, not without proof. This thread is not about “religious people who want to assert the existence of jesus as a historical figure as an indisputable fact” and nobody in this thread has made such a claim, with or without proof. It’s about the historicity of Jesus, which is a historical question, not a religious one, and in particular about a researcher who claims that his research shows that Jesus did _not_ exist. It’s his claims, and more generally the Christ myth theory, that we are scrutinising here. ---
**Author:** ![aruvqan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aruvqan/32/2891_2.png) [@aruvqan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aruvqan)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2014, 10:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/review-finds-no-mention-of-christ-in-ancient-texts/700003/83 "2014-10-01T10:29:16Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > please provide sources from Jews and Pagans dipsuting Jesus as a religious figure written while Jesus was alive Exactly. Where is a Jewish Ecclesiastical document written in 33AD[ish] that specifically names Jesus as a false messiah, and discusses his execution and burial? Where is a grafitto scrawled somewhere obscure poking fun at The King of the Jews on a cross? How about a letter from one Jewish congregation to another discussing the crazy JewBoy who wants to change Judaism? _Something_ from 33AD-44AD [I guess that is current best guess of date of death and a bit afterwards for slop] mentioning him directly by the several names he could possibly be using. [URL=“[http://www.pinterest.com/pin/create/extension/](http://www.pinterest.com/pin/create/extension/)”] ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2014, 10:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/review-finds-no-mention-of-christ-in-ancient-texts/700003/84 "2014-10-01T10:38:32Z")
> [@UDS](#): > > This thread is not about “religious people who want to assert the existence of jesus as a historical figure as an indisputable fact” and nobody in this thread has made such a claim, with or without proof. It’s about the historicity of Jesus, which is a historical question, not a religious one, and in particular about a researcher who claims that his research shows that Jesus did _not_ exist. It’s his claims, and more generally the Christ myth theory, that we are scrutinising here. really? i thought this was a free country and i was allowed to talk about whatever i wanted to. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2014, 10:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/review-finds-no-mention-of-christ-in-ancient-texts/700003/85 "2014-10-01T10:43:11Z")
> [@UDS](#): > > Only if you ignore the fact that claims that he did these things date from 40 to 50 years after his supposed death. Claims that he lived at all, however, are much earlier. Scepticism about the later claim does not affect the credibility of the earlier claim. > > I can be sceptical about the claim that the infant George Washington chopped down a cherry tree without going to the extreme of denying that he was ever born. It’s reasonable to ask “where’s the evidence?” It’s not so reasonable to assert “I looked in all the wrong places, and was shocked that I didn’t find the evidence” ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2014, 10:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/review-finds-no-mention-of-christ-in-ancient-texts/700003/86 "2014-10-01T10:44:47Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > really? i thought this was a free country and i was allowed to talk about whatever i wanted to. There is a sort of general expectation that the topic of a conversation will continue to be the topic of that conversation. ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2014, 10:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/review-finds-no-mention-of-christ-in-ancient-texts/700003/87 "2014-10-01T10:48:33Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > There is a sort of general expectation that the topic of a conversation will continue to be the topic of that conversation. agreed but my point is the topic of the historical accuracy of jesus is not really a problem when discussed among agnostics or atheists. it’s a problem when religious people make the claim. and i’m more interested in preventing problems than i am in having pointless philosophical discussions with agnostics. ---
**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:** [October 1, 2014, 10:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/review-finds-no-mention-of-christ-in-ancient-texts/700003/88 "2014-10-01T10:50:19Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > i’m quite interested in what you are gong to provide as evidence… Happy. This is a passage from Josephus “Antiquities of the Jews”, chapter 9 (available from Project Gutenberg, if you’re interested) “Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he [Ananus, the current high priest] assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned.” Here we have a respectable Jewish historian, not a Christian himself so no particular axe to grind, mention in passing Jesus as a person of the period, under the clear assumption that readers will know who he’s talking about. It’s totally compatible with other evidence from the period (the Gospel writers and Paul also say that Jesus had a brother called James, who was active in the early church), and what happens in the passage is exactly the sort of thing we know happened to early Jesus followers once the movement got big enough to be a threat to the Jewish establishment. Is there any reason you think this passage is not evidence for the existence of a person by the name of Jesus in first century Palestine, who was being called the Jewish Messiah or Christ? (there is _also_ an extremely hagiographic description of Jesus elsewhere in Josephus which most historians consider either to be a later invention/insertion, or at the very least seriously embellished. But that is not this one.) ---
**Author:** ![UDS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecae2f/32.png) [@UDS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UDS)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2014, 10:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/review-finds-no-mention-of-christ-in-ancient-texts/700003/89 "2014-10-01T10:51:43Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > really? i thought this was a free country and i was allowed to talk about whatever i wanted to. It’s a free country and you’re allowed to talk about whatever you want, but it’s considered rude to interrupt other people’s conversations and try and derail them in this fashion, and if you do you risk being misunderstood. You wait untiil post #76 of this thread to say that all along you have not been discussing the OP but instead challenging propositions which no-one in this conversation has made or even mentioned? Seriously? With freedom comes responsibliity; you should expect a bit of blowback when you behave like this. ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2014, 10:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/review-finds-no-mention-of-christ-in-ancient-texts/700003/90 "2014-10-01T10:54:38Z")
> [@Aspidistra](#): > > Happy. This is a passage from Josephus “Antiquities of the Jews”, chapter 9 (available from Project Gutenberg, if you’re interested) > > “Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he [Ananus, the current high priest] assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned.” > > Here we have a respectable Jewish historian, not a Christian himself so no particular axe to grind, mention in passing Jesus as a person of the period, under the clear assumption that readers will know who he’s talking about. It’s totally compatible with other evidence from the period (the Gospel writers and Paul also say that Jesus had a brother called James, who was active in the early church), and what happens in the passage is exactly the sort of thing we know happened to early Jesus followers once the movement got big enough to be a threat to the Jewish establishment. > > Is there any reason you think this passage is not evidence for the existence of a person by the name of Jesus in first century Palestine, who was being called the Jewish Messiah or Christ? > > (there is _also_ an extremely hagiographic description of Jesus elsewhere in Josephus which most historians consider either to be a later invention/insertion, or at the very least seriously embellished. But that is not this one.) look, in all seriousness, those comments of Josephus are contested as to their validity. don’t you see that as a problem? ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2014, 10:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/review-finds-no-mention-of-christ-in-ancient-texts/700003/91 "2014-10-01T10:57:04Z")
> [@UDS](#): > > It’s a free country and you’re allowed to talk about whatever you want, but it’s considered rude to interrupt other people’s conversations and try and derail them in this fashion, and if you do you risk being misunderstood. You wait untiil post #76 of this thread to say that all along you have not been discussing the OP but instead challenging propositions which no-one in this conversation has made or even mentioned? Seriously? > > With freedom comes responsibliity; you should expect a bit of blowback when you behave like this. my comments are still connected to the topic at large. ---
**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:** [October 1, 2014, 11:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/review-finds-no-mention-of-christ-in-ancient-texts/700003/92 "2014-10-01T11:07:04Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > look, in all seriousness, those comments of Josephus are contested as to their validity. don’t you see that as a problem? That’s not the part of Josephus that’s contested. The part of Josephus that’s contested is the so called Testimonium Flavianum, ie, this part: > [@](#): > > About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who performed surprising deeds and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Messiah. And when, upon the accusation of the principal men among us, Pilate had condemned him to a cross, those who had first come to love him did not cease. He appeared to them spending a third day restored to life, for the prophets of God had foretold these things and a thousand other marvels about him. And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared. The general assumption, though, is that that passage is partly authentic, and partly had things added by later Christian scribes, so the original was something like: > [@](#): > > About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man. For he was one who performed surprising deeds and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. And when, upon the accusation of the principal men among us, Pilate had condemned him to a cross, those who had first come to love him did not cease. And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared. ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2014, 11:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/review-finds-no-mention-of-christ-in-ancient-texts/700003/93 "2014-10-01T11:20:19Z")
> [@Captain\_Amazing](#): > > That’s not the part of Josephus that’s contested. The part of Josephus that’s contested is the so called Testimonium Flavianum, ie, this part: > > The general assumption, though, is that that passage is partly authentic, and partly had things added by later Christian scribes, so the original was something like: ok… so even if James the brother of jesus called the christ… was recorded by Josephus, how is it not anything but heresay? ---
**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:** [October 1, 2014, 11:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/review-finds-no-mention-of-christ-in-ancient-texts/700003/94 "2014-10-01T11:24:24Z")
So you’re saying that nothing is acceptable evidence of someone’s existence except a written document of a historian who knew them personally? ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2014, 11:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/review-finds-no-mention-of-christ-in-ancient-texts/700003/95 "2014-10-01T11:28:52Z")
> [@Aspidistra](#): > > So you’re saying that nothing is acceptable evidence of someone’s existence except a written document of a historian who knew them personally? no, i’m saying that second hand accounts of a traveling charlatan are much more suspect than second hand accounts of political figures or generals or similar individuals ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2014, 11:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/review-finds-no-mention-of-christ-in-ancient-texts/700003/96 "2014-10-01T11:32:18Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > … heresay? Hearsay. Look, if you think the only way you can disprove Christianity is by disproving a historical Jesus, you’re wrong. Most agnostics and atheists that I’ve discussed the subject with tend to believe that there was, most likely, a cult leader named Jesus in that time and place. That doesn’t make the religious aspects associated with him true. ---
**Author:** ![njtt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ecd19e/32.png) [@njtt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/njtt)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2014, 11:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/review-finds-no-mention-of-christ-in-ancient-texts/700003/97 "2014-10-01T11:36:57Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > i’m quite interested in what you are gong to provide as evidence… Somebody must have started the darned religion. If it was not somebody called Jesus (or, rather, the Hebrew or Aramaic name of which that is a translation), it was somebody who lived in roughly the same area at roughly the same time, but who is otherwise unknown except for the fact that he had a different name. Do you think the hypothesis that it might have been someone unknown, with a different name, really advances our historical understanding? If you think it does, you will also have to explain why so many people, within a few years of whatsisname’s death or retirement from the scene, started saying that his name was Jesus (and why none of them, neither supporters nor critics of the religion, seemed to question this, despite disagreeing on much else about him). The hypothesis that Christianity was founded by someone quite unknown, called something other than Jesus is an ontological extravagance that flies in the face of Occam’s razor. As in science, you do not get absolute proofs in history, you get best, most plausible hypotheses. In the light of the available evidence, our best available hypothesis is that Christianity was founded by someone called Jesus. This does not entail believing that he was the son of God, did miracles, etc. ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2014, 11:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/review-finds-no-mention-of-christ-in-ancient-texts/700003/98 "2014-10-01T11:40:48Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > Hearsay. > > Look, if you think the only way you can disprove Christianity is by disproving a historical Jesus, you’re wrong. Most agnostics and atheists that I’ve discussed the subject with tend to believe that there was, most likely, a cult leader named Jesus in that time and place. That doesn’t make the religious aspects associated with him true. in other words, what is more reasonable? that Jesus was totally and completely made up as a work of fiction, or, that he was one of many charlatan/con artists operating in the period at the time. the second - seems - much more reasonable but you’ll never get me to admit it, not until you have actual proof. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2014, 12:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/review-finds-no-mention-of-christ-in-ancient-texts/700003/99 "2014-10-01T12:03:09Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > … the second - seems - much more reasonable but you’ll never get me to admit it, not until you have actual proof. There’s no way to show you that proof/evidence if you’re going to dance around the argument like you did in posts #90, #93 and #95. Seriously, we had: “That bit’s fake” (refuted) “Well, it’s hearsay” (answered) “Well, the writer was a charlatan” ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2014, 12:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/review-finds-no-mention-of-christ-in-ancient-texts/700003/100 "2014-10-01T12:07:51Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > There’s no way to show you that proof/evidence if you’re going to dance around the argument like you did in posts #90, #93 and #95. > > Seriously, we had: > > “That bit’s fake” (refuted) > “Well, it’s hearsay” (answered) > “Well, the writer was a charlatan” oh! I’m not saying Josephus was a charlatan. I’m saying religious figures are by definition, charlatans. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/review-finds-no-mention-of-christ-in-ancient-texts/700003.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/review-finds-no-mention-of-christ-in-ancient-texts/700003.md?page=6)