The Historical Jesus

So I recently came across this article on my Facebook feed claiming our Lord Jesus never existed, and I was wondering what your take on it is? I was under the impression that the historical existence of Jesus was actually better documented than many historical figures no one questions (including one or two Roman emperors). Are there any good rebuttals to the article out there?

Thanks and God bless!


It’s being discussed already on an existing thread:

Bottom line, few legitimate scholars think that Jesus didn’t exist, and only by claiming a different historical standard that we apply to other generally accepted historical figures can one come to the conclusion that Jesus was mythical. There is more historical evidence for Jesus than, say, Spartacus.

There is little surviving documentation from 1st century Roman Palestine, and what there is (Biblical texts, Josephus) supports His historicity.

Several ancient historians mention Jesus, including Tacticus and Josephus. Also, for some reason people tend to discount the bible as a historical text which parts of it certainly are.

There is the shroud of turin, which, IMO is pretty good proof.

However, the biggest problem is for some historians there isn’t enough smoking gun type of texts for them. This is because most of what Jesus did and where he lived happend in a remote area of the Roman Empire and Romans were know at the time to go into new areas and murder entire villiges and destroy pretty much everything.

So, basically most of of the life and ministry happened in the an area that is like the remote areas of Siberia today. Most of the notable historians of the day were Romans, most of them didn’t spend any time near Nazareth or anywhere where Jesus was during his ministry.

Anyway you look at it, it would be hard to believe that so many people ended up following some fictional person.

Bart Ehrman, the renowned textual critic, and agnostic, does not believe in the divinity of Jesus, but says that claims about the “mythological Jesus” are embarrassing.

Exactly, it is pretty well established that most historians say it is clear that he existed. Still, there are some who don’t for various reasons, which are questionable.

Some of these people simply won’t believe he was real unless you found video of him.:wink:

There is a stream of rumors and books that attack in many different kinds of ways our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, true God and true man, and those who follow Him.

The following is a response from an atheist regarding the claims of 126 writers…
I did see a swear word on this person’s blog, so be warned. He has some strong words:

Here is also a response to the mythist claims from an Ncregister blog:

I wouldn’t worry much over the article.

I am nearly 50 yrs old. In my entire life I have only met 3 people who actually thought that Jesus wasn’t a real person.

Atheists, agnostics, pagans, angry former Catholics, angry former Protestants included, they all believed Jesus was real.

Lots of people don’t believe Christ was God, but most believe that he was an actual person in history.

But it would be interesting to ask people who are teens now, if they think Jesus really lived. Folks in my generation do, but I don’t know what young people today think about the issue.

Matt all history is based on human “faith” if that is your base issue.
If Jesus of Nazareth didn’t live then a lot of other historical “truths” that anti-Christians do accept become suspect too.

You do accept that your dad actually is your dad don’t you?
You actually base that on trust too - we cannot live a communal life without such faith.

Excellent answers here:

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit