A few of the more radical skeptics deny that Jesus was an historical person. This is called “the Jesus myth.” In 2012, for example, Timothy Freke published The Jesus Mysteries: Was the ‘Original Jesus’ a Pagan God?
Following is a refutation of the myth of the Jesus myth:
- The historicity of Jesus was not disputed until recent times.
Had there been any question whatsoever about the actual existence of Jesus, the opponents of Christianity in the early centuries would have used this to refute Christianity’s legitimacy, but this was never done.
The Encyclopedia Britannica says:
“These independent accounts prove that in ancient times even the opponents of Christianity never doubted the historicity of Jesus, which was disputed for the first time and on inadequate grounds by several authors at the end of the 18th, during the 19th, and at the beginning of the 20th centuries” (“Jesus Christ,” Encyclopedia Britannica, 1974).
Historian Jaroslav Pelikan observes:
“Regardless of what anyone may personally think or believe about him, Jesus of Nazareth has been the dominant figure in the history of Western culture for almost twenty centuries” (Jesus Through the Centuries, p. 1).
- The New Testament, which is the major witness of Jesus, is an historical record of the highest authority, even from a secular standpoint.
The evidence that the New Testament was written soon after Christ’s death is irrefutable. We have already examined this evidence in the section on “The Bible’s Nature.”
In his book Redating the New Testament, John A.T. Robinson concluded that the whole of the New Testament was written before the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70.
William Ramsay, one of the most renowned archaeologists, wrote:
“We can already say emphatically that there is no longer any solid basis for dating any book of the New Testament after about AD 80, two full generations before the date between 130 and 150 given by the more radical New Testament critics of today” (Recent Discoveries in Bible Lands, 1955, p. 136).
“In my opinion, every book of the New Testament was written by a baptized Jew between the forties and the eighties of the first century AD.” (Christianity Today, Jan. 18, 1963).
William Albright, another influential archaeologist, stated:
“Thanks to the Qumran discoveries, the New Testament proves to be in fact what it was formerly believed to be: the teaching of Christ and his immediate followers between cir. 25 and cir. 80 AD” (From Stone Age to Christianity, p. 23).
Beginning with the first century itself, we have solid historical evidence that the New Testament existed and was commonly recognized as Scripture by the believers. We have the extant writings of men who knew the apostles personally. These include Clement of Rome, Ignatius, and Polycarp. Thus there is no gap between the writing of the New Testament and the historical record that exists of it.
Portions of the New Testament exist dating to the late first and early second centuries, only a few decades after the books were written. No other ancient book comes close to having such clear manuscript authority.
Consider some of the early historical evidences witnessing to the authenticity of the New Testament:
Clement of Rome was taught directly by some of the apostles. He was an elder in the church at Rome beginning in AD 88, only 30 years after Paul wrote his epistle to Rome. “Clement of Rome, whose first letter to the Corinthians is usually dated about AD 96, made liberal use of Scripture, appealing to its authority, and used New Testament material right alongside Old Testament material. He clearly quotes from Hebrews, 1 Corinthians and Romans and possibly from Matthew, Acts, Titus, James and 1 Peter. Here is the bishop [pastor] of Rome, before the close of the first century, writing an official letter to the church at Corinth wherein a selection of New Testament books are recognized and declared by episcopal authority to be Scripture, including Hebrews” (Wilbur Pickering, The Identity of the New Testament Text).
Ignatius (c. AD 110) referred to “all the epistles of Paul.”
Polycarp personally knew the apostle John and other believers who were eyewitnesses of Jesus’ resurrection. In his letter to the Philippian church in about 115 AD, Polycarp “weaves an almost continuous string of clear quotations and allusions to New Testament writings. … There are perhaps fifty clear quotations taken from Matthew, Luke, Acts, Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Timothy, 1 and 2 Peter, and 1 John, and many allusions including to Mark, Hebrews, James, and 2 and 3 John. (The only NT writer not included is Jude!)” (Pickering).
Justin Martyr (died 165 AD) testified that the churches of his day met on Sundays and “read the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets” (Apology, I, 67).
Irenaeus (died in 202 AD) left many works which are still extant. Their translation into English covers between 600-700 pages in the Ante-Nicene Library. “Irenaeus stated that the apostles taught that God is the Author of both Testaments (Against Heretics IV, 32.2) and evidently considered the New Testament writings to form a second Canon. He quoted from every chapter of Matthew, 1 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians and Philippians, from all but one or two chapters of Luke, John, Romans, 2 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Timothy, and Titus, from most chapters of Mark (including the last twelve verses), Acts, 2 Corinthians, and Revelation, and from every other book except Philemon and 3 John. These two books are so short that Irenaeus may not have had occasion to refer to them in his extant works–it does not necessarily follow that he was ignorant of them or rejected them. Evidently the dimensions of the New Testament Canon recognized by Irenaeus are very close to what we hold today” (Pickering).
Irenaeus heard Polycarp preach and relate accounts from his time with John and other first century Christians. In his letter to Florinus, Irenaeus wrote the following: “I could tell you the place where the blessed Polycarp sat to preach the Word of God. It is yet present to my mind with what gravity he everywhere came in and went out; what was the sanctity of his deportment, the majesty of his countenance; and what were his holy exhortations to the people. I seem to hear him now relate how he conversed with John and many others who had seen Jesus Christ, the words he had heard from their mouths.”
Thus we have the extant writings of men who knew the apostles and first century Christians personally and who quoted from the New Testament books.
This is irrefutable evidence that the New Testament existed then and that it was the same as the New Testament that we have today.
Even some naturalistic textual critics have concluded that the New Testament in its current 27-book canon existed in Greek no later than the middle of the 2nd century. See David Trobisch, The First Edition of the New Testament, Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.
From the second century we have evidence that it was customary for each church to have its own copy of the writings of the apostles that they might read and preach from them. “And on the day called Sunday there is a meeting in one place of those who live in cities or the country, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read as long as time permits. When the reader has finished, the president in a discourse urges and invites us to the imitation of these noble things” (Justin Martyr, Apology).
Dr. Wilbur Pickering observes: “Both Justin Martyr and Irenaeus claimed that the Church was spread throughout the whole earth, in their day … IT BECOMES CLEAR THAT THERE MUST HAVE BEEN THOUSANDS OF COPIES OF THE NEW TESTAMENT WRITINGS IN USE BY 200 AD” (The Identity of the New Testament Text).
In about the year 208, Tertullian mentioned churches founded by the apostles and indicated that the “authentic writings” were still extant and were the absolute standard by which the truth was measured in the believing churches. He urged heretics to “run to the apostolic churches, in which the very thrones of the apostles are still pre-eminent in their places, IN WHICH THEIR OWN AUTHENTIC WRITINGS ARE READ, UTTERING THE VOICE AND REPRESENTING THE FACE OF EACH OF THEM SEVERALLY. Achaia is very near you, (in which) you find CORINTH. Since you are not far from Macedonia, you have PHILIPPI; (and there too) you have the THESSALONIANS. Since you are able to cross to Asia, you get EPHESUS. Since, moreover, you are close upon Italy, you have ROME, from which there comes even into our own hands the very authority (of the apostles themselves)” (Tertullian, Prescription against Heretics, 36, cited from Pickering).
Pickering observes: “Some have thought that Tertullian was claiming that Paul’s Autographs were still being read in his day (208), but at the very least he must mean they were using faithful copies. Was anything else to be expected? for example, when the Ephesian Christians saw the Autograph of Paul’s letter to them getting tattered, would they not carefully execute an identical copy for their continued use? Would they let the Autograph perish without making such a copy? (There must have been a constant stream of people coming either to make copies of their letter or to verify the correct reading.) I believe we are obliged to conclude that in the year 200 the Ephesian Church was still in a position to attest the original wording of her letter (and so for the others)…”
Compare this wealth of ancient evidence for the Bible with that of other famous books of antiquity:
