Jesus Christ: Was He a Real Person

Was the man known as Jesus Christ a real person who walked the Earth? A book written by Bible historian Joseph Atwill claims that Roman aristocrats invented the story of Jesus to pacify Jewish sects within the Palestinian area, who were seeking the return of the Messiah. Since it the beginning of Lent celebrated throughout the world, leading to the time of Easter, it may be a good time to examine his works in comparison to historical evidence.

Atwill, following the publishing of his book, Caeser’s Messiah, held a one-day symposium in London last October, discussing his “conclusive” findings. He makes several points to support his argument, two of which dominate his view. He first believed that the reason Jesus was invented by the Romans was to mollify the Jewish sects, who were looking to create unrest awaiting the return of the Messiah. Atwill states that different religious sects in the Palestine area of the first century were waiting on the prophesied Messiah to return as a warrior, and that it was because of this that they “were a constant source of violent insurrection during the first century.” He later adds that the Romans became disillusioned by the constant struggle to control the Jews, and created this “myth” as a means to stop the constant rebellions. It was a “psychological warfare” tactic used by the Romans to defeat the Jews.

Atwill supports his claims further by pointing to the “sequence of parallels” between the works of Jewish historian Josephus and the Gospel accounts. He adds that the sequence of locations that Jesus appeared in, are the same of that of Emperor Titus Flavius described by Josephus. He states that this was a deliberate attempt to create a constructed pattern between the military exploits of the Emperor, and the woes that Jesus claimed would later occur during His ministry.

Why had no one noticed these parallels before? Atwill has an answer. He states that “the authors did not want the average believer to see what they were doing,” however he adds that “An educated Roman in the ruling class would probably have recognized the literary game being played.” He also adds that Roman Caesars created a set of literary puzzles so that later they could say, “We invented Jesus Christ, and we’re proud of it.’”

Was Jesus Christ a real person? According to Atwill the answer is no, based upon his research and hypothesis. This is all very interesting supposition on the part of Atwill, but there is a slew of evidence that not only supports the fact that Jesus did live on earth, it also contradicts the research of Atwill.

The Josephus Argument

Atwill postulates that Josephus’ work, War of the Jews, supports the idea that the Gospel writers wanted the woes and calamities, which Jesus claimed, to be fulfilled prophecy. Therefore the Gospel writers wrote accounts specifically making sure that the cities that Jesus claimed would be destroyed were defeated by the Romans. He points out that the Emperor Titus Flavius visited the cities that Jesus did, and this supports his claim. This may be a valid argument, but there are two problems with it. First, Jesus only ever claimed that three cities were to be destroyed: Jerusalem, Chorazin, and Bethsaida. It wasn’t like he called for the destruction of hundreds of cities, and this was the order that Titus destroyed them. There were three. To say that Josephus’ works supports his claims with “dozens” of examples is a complete stretch.

Secondly, Mark and Matthew were written prior to the siege that Titus brought upon Judea. They were written long before Jerusalem was laid waste, and the temple destroyed. War of the Jews was written in 78 CE, telling of the battles that happened long after they occurred. Mark and Matthew were supplying Jesus’ account before these things ever occurred.

It should be noted that if Josephus was trying to give information to make people believe in a fictional character, he didn’t really do much in his own works to directly help this cause. Of the four massive volumes of books he wrote, Jesus appears in just one, Antiquities of the Jews, and is in one brief paragraph, chapter 3, verse 3 of Book XVIII. There, Josephus describes Jesus as a lawful and wise man, who did many great works. He then tells of how Christians were drawn from both Jews and Gentiles alike. The explains that Jesus died on the cross and rose again, and that Christians got their name from Him.

Many would believe that if a person was trying to invent another person, then they would be a little more detailed about it.

Caesar’s Invention

Atwill proposes that Caesars invented Jesus to control the masses. If this is true, then why did they punish Roman citizens who openly supported the faith? Many people are not aware of this, but Pontius Pilate, the man who condemned Jesus to death, became a Believer himself. He wrote to the Roman Caesar, imploring the Caesar Claudius to follow the ways of Christ, but the request was rejected by the Roman Senate. Tertullian addresses the issue in chapter 21 of his Apology where he writes:

“All these things Pilate did to Christ; and now in fact a Christian in his own convictions, he sent word of Him to the reigning Caesar, who was at the time Tiberius. Yes, and the Caesars too would have believed on Christ, if either the Caesars had not been necessary for the world, or if Christians could have been Caesars.”

According to Atwill, the “educated Romans” and “ruling class” were all aware of the ruse, yet they rejected this idea, which would have totally supported the invention that Atwill claims they created. That makes no sense.

In addition, Pilate was sentenced to death by the order of the Emperor Caligula, for his failure to follow the other Roman gods. He had committed himself to Christ and Christ alone at this point, and, as a result, he was sentenced to death. It is not known for sure whether he committed suicide as the sentence or whether Caligula had him killed. Which ever happened is irrelevant. What would make no sense is that a man, who would openly know that the story was a ruse, would die following the belief of someone that he knew was a fake story. Atwill would say he did however.

To refute his claim, there is no need to look any further than the actions of the Roman Caesar Nero toward Peter, Paul, and Christians in the city of Rome. If the Caesars were all in on the big hoax, then the actions of Nero made no sense whatsoever. He became emperor in 54 CE. A few years later, he banned Christians from the capital city. In 64 CE he executed Peter and in 67 he executed Paul. These were the two primary guys spreading the message of Jesus throughout the Jewish regions. Why would they be executed, when they would be the chief perpetrators of the “hoax?” That, also, makes no sense.

Non-Biblical Supporting Documents

It makes no sense to use Roman historians and writings to support the claim that Jesus is real, because Atwill would just say that this was part of the ruse. Romans would need to create documents supporting the idea of Jesus, and so they would make up documents about Him.

However, there are other writings outside the Bible that support that Jesus existed. Some are not considered “sacred Scripture,” but they still speak of Jesus as an actual person, and speak of his life and teachings. The Didache is one of the most significant of these documents. The Didache, which is Greek for “teaching,” provides a set of rules and guidelines for following Christ. One of the most significant one of these is in chapter 14, related to assembly on “the Lord’s Day.” Here it reads:

“For this is that which was spoken by the Lord: “In every place and time offer to me a pure sacrifice; for I am a great King, says the Lord, and my name is wonderful among the nations.”

This was believed to have been written between 50-60 CE.

If this was a Roman “ruse,” then it would have been one that would have been done to outrage Romans themselves. It must be understood that Romans had hated the idea of a king, since they freed themselves from Etruscan rule over 500 years before Christ came. The reason he was sentenced to death, under Roman law, was because he claimed to be a king. This was punishable by death. Kings were hated that much.

Yet, this man, they made up, is taught as a great “King” and Lord? Really? This would have done the exact opposite of what they were seeking to have done. People would have rejected Roman rulers and followed this man over them.

Another set of writings come from Ignatius, the Bishop of Antioch. He was born in 30 CE, and died a little after the turn of the century. It is clear from his writings that he had actually met Jesus, and, it is a widely held tradition, that he is the little boy that Jesus held as an example of entering the Kingdom of God like “this child.” (Matthew 18). Ignatius tells of the crucifixion:

“On the day of the preparation, then, at the third hour, He received the sentence from Pilate, the father permitting that to happen; at the sixth hour He was crucified; at the ninth hour He gave up the ghost; and before sunset He was buried. During the Sabbath, He continued under the earth in the tomb in which Joseph of Arimathea had laid him. At the dawning of the Lord’s Day He arose from the dead. . . The day of the preparation, then, comprised the passion; the Sabbath embraces the burial; the Lord’s Day contains the resurrection.”

He is telling this story as an eye-witness, not a Biblical scholar. He even tells that he was one of the 500 witnesses who saw Jesus in the flesh after He rose from the dead:

“And I know that He was possessed of a body not only in His being born and crucified, but I also know that He was so after His resurrection, and believe that He is so now.”

This was an eye-witness testimony to the truth that Jesus existed.

There is no better testimony to the truth that Jesus existed than the Jewish Talmud. Scholars believe that excerpts from the Talmud related to Christianity in general, and to Jesus in particular, date back to the latter half of the second century CE. While these accounts paint Jesus in a particularly bad light, calling him a sorcerer, born of a prostitute, a liar, and a con-artist, they in no way dispute that he existed. They do all they can to malign Him, to keep Jews from converting to the new faith, but they do not deny, for one second, that He actually existed.

All it would have taken was for them to document that He was a complete fabrication, and it would have been over. No one would have followed this faith, but no one in Judaism doubted the truth of His existence. This is an essential point that Atwill fails to consider.

Now, many could say that the Romans could have coerced the Jews into attacking the character, rather than refuting His existence, but why would the Jews want to support a false story about a guy that was created specifically to control them? Does that make sense?

Here is one last part that adds some credence to His existence. Jesus’ uncle, Joseph of Arimethea, who is named in the Gospel accounts as the one that put Jesus in the tomb after He was dead, was a merchant. He traveled all throughout the Roman Empire, most specifically to Britain. Research shows that his Epistle to the Romans, was actually written to the noble court of Britain that was imprisoned in Rome. These citizens of Britain were fully aware of who Jesus was, because Jesus had travelled with Joseph when he had gone to Britain on business. They were already calling Him Yesu, which was their transliteration of the name Yeshua (in Greek Ieoseous, in Latin Jesus). Now even if they had not met Jesus directly, they knew of Him, because they had heard of Him through His uncle Joseph. These were people who did not grow up in Palestine, and were, in fact, on the opposite end of the empire, yet still knew who He was.

A lot of people believe in the existence of historical figures with a lot less documentation and proof than this. For example, many believe in the author Homer, who wrote the Illiad and the Odyssey. Outside of these stories, and a 400 year old account by the Greek historian Herodotus, there is no mention of this guy in history at all. Yet, he is the most renowned author in the Western Culture. No one disputes his existence, and they shouldn’t. Yet, they will dispute the existence of Jesus with a great deal more support than Homer.  Interesting.

Atwill has a nice story that probably made him a lot of money. A lot of people would like to believe that Jesus is a myth, but it just isn’t the truth. Whether one believes he is the Messiah, the Son of God, or just a wacky guy with a crazy story, He did exist. Jesus Christ was a real person. Those who don’t want to believe that, just need to deal with the truth.