The New Testament canon: is it reliable?
- Cobus Prinsloo
- Sep 21
- 21 min read
Updated: Oct 12
How can we know if orthodox Christianity, with its beliefs concerning Jesus and the books of the New Testament canon, corresponds with that of the early church in the first century AD?
Quick Chapter Links:
Extra-Biblical references to Jesus and the early Christians
There are some liberal Bible scholars who claim that the “Jesus of history” is not the same as the “Jesus of faith.” It is also often believed that Jesus’ divine character and His resurrection from the grave only later developed as legend … and that we cannot know with certainty who the historical Jesus really was.
It is further asserted that during the early phase of the church’s history, Christianity consisted of a melting pot of different (yet equally valid), competing ideas about Jesus and His mission. Reference is, for example, made to the other Gnostic “gospels”, of which the Gospel of Thomas is probably the best known in popular media.
Jesus, as presented by the four gospels of the New Testament (NT), according to them, only eventually emerged as the victor in this struggle by the fourth century A.D., while the other “gospels” or unorthodox texts about Jesus were vigorously suppressed. This idea has been especially popularized in the secular media by authors such as Dan Brown. Brown goes so far as to claim that the NT canon (which means “standard” or “list of authoritative sacred books”), representing orthodox Christianity, only originated at the Council of Nicaea (more to follow on this in a follow-up post), which was convened by Emperor Constantine in 325 A.D. Here, bishops supposedly decided which texts would be kept and which would be discarded. Some even assert that it was Constantine himself who decided which NT books were canon.
This raises the question: How reliable is the orthodox image of Jesus that Christians hold of Him? If the picture painted of Him by the four gospel writers and the apostles is perhaps subjective, are there any extra-biblical historical references that support this image, or perhaps … contradict it? Let us kick off by looking at a few such texts from prominent writers of the ancient era:
1. The Early Church Fathers’ view on Jesus and the NT books
Indeed, the twenty-seven books of the New Testament were only officially canonized by the Church in the fourth century. However, claims that these books were recognized as authoritative only at that time are untrue. There is strong evidence that most of the New Testament writings were already widely circulated among the churches by around 100 A.D., and that many of them were regarded as authoritative by church leaders at an early stage. By the mid-second century, twenty-two of the twenty-seven books were already considered undisputed and were regularly quoted from.
This is reflected in the writings of the early church fathers—the first generation of church leaders and theologians who succeeded the apostles. They wrote about church matters and commented on the books of the New Testament. Some of them, such as Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, Papias, and Polycarp, had direct contact with the apostles. Consequently, they could, alongside the apostles, write with authority about Jesus’ teachings and confirm whether the New Testament writings in circulation were indeed authoritative.
NB: A first test for an NT book's authority in the early church was if it could be directly linked to one (or more) of the apostles, i.e., those original disciples of Jesus who lived and walked with him for three years before his crucifixion.
An example of a reliable, unbroken tradition or transmission:
Suppose someone writes a book today about events during the Second World War. How do we know that what is written is reliable? Well, even today (80+ years later), there are still some people alive who experienced it firsthand. Until quite recently, there were still many survivors who could confirm or refute the accuracy of any testimony about the subject. Even if all the eyewitnesses of this historical event have passed away, there is a generation who knew the witnesses, and there exist thousands of documents produced by them, which during their lifetimes could be cross-examined for reliability. We may also assume that the second generation who was aquainted with the eyewitnesses, would have passed on a tradition that should be regarded as trustworthy.
What would happen if someone were to decide to fabricate an alternative version of the Second World War and claim that the Nazi concentration camps were merely an invention and nothing more than false propaganda by the Allied forces? People would laugh such a writer to scorn – even 80+ years later! Why? Because there exist thousands of testimonies from people who survived the concentration camps that corroborate each other, while their children and grandchildren have preserved and passed them on to future generations in written, photographic, or video form. In addition, there were also hundreds of soldiers on both sides (Allied and Nazi forces) who were firsthand witnesses to the horrors of the concentration camps. Such a bogus “historian” would receive no attention in scholarly treatises or journals – unless their distorted history got self-published and uninformed people began to take it seriously. This would prompt serious scholars to respond in public with the evidence at their disposal to dispell any false notions of the war.
This is more or less what also happened in the middle-second century when Gnostic sects started to produce their own so-called "gospels", and church fathers took note and began to warn against them .
One may conclude that the people and events of the Second World War form an undeniable tradition firmly established in human history. While there may be minor discrepancies among witnesses concerning certain details, the overall record can be confidently reconstructed and regarded as authentic.
The same can be said of the apostolic tradition concerning Jesus’ life and teaching. There existed a strong oral tradition about Jesus and his teachings. It was a communal effort, and the apostles, along with many eyewitnesses who personally knew Jesus, exercised a corrective influence on its accuracy. Later, as these witnesses began to pass away, the need to record these oral traditions in writing became evident.
This brings us to the second generation of witnesses to Jesus. The first four church fathers discussed next, personally knew some of the apostles and were therefore able to continue a well-corroborated tradition concerning Jesus and his teaching:
Clement of Rome (30/35 – 100/110 A.D.)
He was the third bishop of Rome (88 – mid-90s A.D.), and the Church Fathers write that he was personally ordained by Peter. He also personally knew some of the other apostles. He may have been the same Clement to whom Paul refers in Philippians 4:3. His letter, 1 Clement, written to a Christian congregation in Corinth in the mid-90s A.D., articulates a doctrine of God’s Trinity and the resurrection of the dead. This letter is one of the oldest Christian documents that has been preserved.
Ignatius of Antioch (35 – 107 A.D.)
He was the second bishop of Antioch after Peter’s leadership in the city and had personal contact with the apostles, especially with John.
In his writings, he refers to Matthew, John, Acts, Romans, Galatians, 1 and 2 Corinthians, James, and 1 Peter. The NT books not mentioned are absent only because there was not yet general consensus about their authority at that stage. Ignatius is known for the letters he wrote, on his way to Rome (where he was to be martyred for his faith in Jesus), in 107 A.D., to seven churches. In them, he writes, among other things, about Jesus’ bodily resurrection and His divinity.
NB: Take note of how early this view of Jesus already existed outside of the Bible. Ignatius’ lifetime overlapped with that of other witnesses who also knew the apostles and were eyewitnesses of Jesus, so that any erroneous representation about Him could have been pointed out and corrected. There was simply no opportunity for legends about Jesus to develop.
Papias (60/70 – 130 A.D.)
This bishop of Hierapolis (modern-day Turkey) is described by Irenaeus as a “hearer of John” and “companion of Polycarp.”He provides the earliest surviving record of who wrote the four Gospels, especially with reference to Matthew and Mark.
Polycarp (69–155 A.D.)
The bishop of Smyrna and an important figure in the early church – he was personally taught by the apostles and had conversations with “many who had seen the Lord.” Polycarp referred to at least 15 of the NT books and wrote in one of his letters about the “holy scriptures” – which very likely alludes to an already existing canon of books.
A detailed account of his martyrdom for his faith in Jesus describes the crowd shouting:
“This is the father of the Christians; the destroyer of our gods, who teaches people not to worship them or bring offerings to them!”
After the magistrate urged him to renounce Christ in exchange for his freedom, Polycarp responded as follows:
“For 86 years I have been His servant, and He has never done me any harm. How then can I blaspheme my King?” (Visalli:115)
Marcion (85–160 A.D.)
Although he was regarded by church leaders as a heretic – a “wolf in Pauline clothing” – Marcion was the first theologian to publish a fixed collection of books – the gospel of Luke and 10 of Paul's letters, together called the Apostolikon and Evangelikon respectively. He believed that Paul was the only true apostle and discarded or altered many writings to create his own “canon.” He also rejected the Old Testament God commonly portrayed as "wrathful" and could not reconcile that image with Jesus's Father. The publication of Marcion’s “canon” indicates that there must already have been a generally accepted list of authoritative NT books on which he based his own version.
Valentinus (ca. 100–160 A.D.)
Another heretic, who particularly promoted Gnosticism, is nonetheless valuable in terms of his references to the authority of NT books. In his work The Gospel of Truth (140–150 A.D.), he presupposes and frequently refers to a large number of NT books that he regarded as authoritative. He makes a distinction between writings as “general books” and those “written within the church of God.” This suggests that a canon must already have existed.
Justin Martyr (100–165 A.D.)
A well-known Christian apologist who listed the four Gospels of the New Testament, Acts, the letters, and Revelation. Justin wrote about a physical resurrection from the dead, as set out in 1 Corinthians 15 and John 12.
Tatian (125–202 A.D.)
A Syrian Christian writer and theologian. His most famous work was the Diatessaron (160 A.D.).
This was a combination of all four New Testament Gospels into a single text, and it became the standard sacred text for the Syrian churches. He also wrote about the resurrection from the dead. Tatian criticized the works of contemporary writers such as the Marcionites and Gnostics, who, according to him, altered the “accepted list of writings.” This once again points to an already existing canon.
Irenaeus (130–202 A.D.)
He was the bishop of Lyons in 177 A.D. and refers, among other things, to Polycarp, “who was taught by the apostles.” He lists 22 of the NT books and regards all four New Testament Gospels as authoritative. The books left out are James, 2 Peter, and Jude. Philemon and 3 John were labelled as “uncertain.” Another book that was included (and occasionally appears in the discussions of other Church Fathers) was The Shepherd of Hermas.
In his work Against Heresies, he emphasizes the fact that heretics such as Marcion and Valentinus made their debut much later than the second generation of theologians and teachers to whom the apostles had passed on their knowledge.
Athenagoras (133–190 A.D.)
A trained philosopher and regarded as the most eloquent Christian apologist of his time, in his writings he articulated the resurrection of the dead in detail and showed high regard for Paul’s letters.
Clement of Alexandria (150–216 A.D.)
He was a highly learned theologian and philosopher who extensively quoted from both the Old and New Testaments. He spoke of the “two parts of the Bible” (i.e., the Old and New Testaments) and confirmed that the “Prophets” (Old Testament) and the "Gospels" (NT) serve as a unified authority for all believers. The Shepherd of Hermas was included in his list of authoritative books. He also wrote in depth about the resurrection of the dead.
Tertullian (160–220 A.D.)
This strong opponent of Gnosticism listed 22 NT books as authoritative. The books omitted include James, 2 Peter, and 2–3 John. Hebrews was regarded as “authoritative” but not as “canon.” The Shepherd of Hermas was also part of this list.
Tertullian described a doctrine of the resurrection of the dead that reflects 1 Corinthians 15 in his De Resurrectione. He also criticized Marcion and Valentinus as representing “two ways in which Scripture can be destroyed”: one was Marcion’s method of cutting out portions that did not suit him; the other was Valentinus, who did indeed use the whole “Instrument” (New Testament), but distorted its meaning through “deliberate misinterpretation.”
Hippolytus (170–235 A.D.)
He wrote many biblical commentaries and quoted from all the NT books except Romans and Corinthians. He wrote extensively about the Resurrection and against heresies such as Gnosticism. His work, The Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus (215 A.D.) is a fundamental confession of faith still in use today. In it, he affirms Jesus’ “oneness” with God, His virgin birth, His bodily resurrection, and the triune nature of God. The “Apostles’ Creed,” still in use today, is based on this.
Origen (185–254 A.D.)
This theologian and philosopher listed all 27 books of the NT as authoritative. He distinguished between “accepted” and “undisputed” books (the four Gospels, Acts, Paul’s letters, 1 Peter, 1 John, and Revelation). Books about which uncertainty existed were Hebrews, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, James, and Jude. He did not, however, doubt the authenticity of these books but acknowledged that their brevity and limited circulation in the churches caused a lack of consensus. Other books listed as authoritative but not as “canon” included The Shepherd of Hermas, Didache, and the Epistle of Barnabas.
Serapion (dates unknown)
He was the eighth bishop of Antioch and showed high regard for the apostles and their teaching by referring to them as the “words of Christ.” He wrote against the false “gospels” that began to surface from time to time. The motivation behind these false “gospels” (such as the Gospel of Peter) was, according to him, the product of “jealous Christians.”
Eusebius (263/265–339 A.D.)
As bishop of Caesarea and a church historian, he was an important source of church history from the time of the apostles up to his own era. He was possibly the first person to make use of the term “canon.” He lists all 27 NT books, although there is uncertainty about James, 2 Peter, 2–3 John, Jude, and Revelation.
Books that were rejected include The Shepherd of Hermas, Didache, the Epistle of Barnabas, Acts of Paul, Apocalypse of Peter, and the Gospel according to the Hebrews.
Athanasius (296/298–373 A.D.)
The bishop of Alexandria and a strong defender of the doctrine concerning God’s triune nature and the divinity of Jesus. He confirmed all 27 books of the NT canon and rejected the following as “apocryphal” – that is, works without apostolic origin: The Shepherd of Hermas, Didache, the Epistle of Barnabas, Acts of Paul, Apocalypse of Peter, and the Gospel according to the Hebrews. In his Festal Letter, written to his own church in Alexandria, he declared that faith in Jesus as the Son of God is not optional but essential.
Conclusion
By the time the Council of Nicaea was held in 325 A.D., all the books of the NT had already been widely (unofficially) accepted as canon. The main purpose of this synod was not to decide what should be included in the New Testament, but to debate a new, growing heresy – namely Arianism. The council merely reaffirmed the NT books as canon. There was a continuous flow of witnesses who passed down the records concerning Jesus’ life from one generation to the next. That is, since the apostles (who lived with Jesus for three years), there were always overlaps with other witnesses who could confirm or refute the stories about Jesus.
It is also noteworthy that the alternative “gospels” (mostly stemming from Gnosticism) did not appear until the middle of the second century A.D. The Gospel of Thomas, for instance, was originally written in Syriac and was probably composed for Syrian churches in the late second century. Even if these heresies had existed earlier, none of the early Church Fathers took notice of them. They were disregarded as being of any significance. These writings were a second-century phenomenon, later identified by church fathers such as Irenaeus, Tatian, Tertullian, and Serapion, who rightly rejected them as false because they:
arose much later than the four New Testament Gospels,
were not directly linked to the apostles (even though many were falsely attributed to them in an attempt to gain legitimacy), and
differed significantly in theology from the canonical Gospels, being largely Gnostic in nature.
What also becomes clear is that the canonization of the New Testament, as we have it today, was a pragmatic and critical process — a filtering of writings “from the bottom up,” rather than “from the top down.” In other words, the highest church authorities did not dictate what was to be considered canonical (as some secular skeptics claim); rather, they formally recognized what was already widely accepted by the Christian communities at the grassroots level.
2. Other writings and symbols outside the NT that support an orthodox theology regarding Jesus
Epistle of Barnabas (dated between 70–132 A.D.)
Although it is named after Barnabas, a companion of Paul, it does not mention the author. It reflects an orthodox, early understanding of the Christian faith and was highly valued and often cited by the church fathers.
Didache (Teaching of the Twelve Apostles) (circa 100 A.D.)
This is a short manual that outlines standard forms of worship, describes Christian ethics, rituals such as baptism and the Lord’s Supper, and celebrates Jesus as “the true king.” Quotations from the NT are mainly from Matthew 24.
The “Unknown Gospel” (dated 100–150 A.D.)
This text borrows portions from all four NT gospels, suggesting that they were already regarded as authoritative.
Epistula Apostolorum (dated circa 150 A.D., or earlier)
This fictional letter from the eleven apostles to Christians worldwide reflects an orthodox theology similar to that of the New Testament and presents a solid picture of Jesus’ bodily resurrection.
Muratorian Canon (dated no later than 160 A.D.)
This text lists most of the NT books (except Hebrews, James, 1 and 2 Peter) as accepted by the churches as canon.
It also includes the Apocalypse of Peter and the Wisdom of Solomon. It mentions heresies (such as those of Marcion, Valentinus, Mitliades, Basilides, and Montanus). It is dated no later than 160 A.D. because it refers to “The Shepherd, written by Hermas in the city of Rome; very recently, in our own time.” (Green: 67). It also refers to Pius I, the bishop of Rome (140–155 A.D.), as “recent.”
The Megiddo Mosaic (circa 200 A.D.)
Last but certainly not least: this relatively recent discovery in 2005 is the oldest archaeological artifact that refers to Jesus as “God.” It is a 581-square-foot mosaic discovered beneath the Megiddo Prison in Israel and excavated piece by piece over a span of four years. Inscriptions on the mosaic record the names of people, including a Roman centurion (a commander over 100 men) who contributed financially to its creation, which would serve as a “table” in the center of a sacred room. The main motif in the middle is two fish — the first Christian symbol used even before the cross.
The first inscription reads: “Gaianus, also called Porphyrius, centurion, our brother, made the mosaic at his own expense as a symbol of generosity.”
The second inscription names the artist who made the mosaic as Brutius.
The third inscription reads as follows: “The God-fearing Akeptous has offered this table to God Jesus Christ as a memorial.” Akeptous was likely a woman of financial means and high social status. The rest of the text calls on the reader to also remember four other women: Primillia, Cyriaca, Dorothea, and Chreste.
3. Hostile witnesses concerning Jesus and the early Christians
In a court case, the testimony of an enemy that can help prove someone’s innocence is regarded as more credible than that of such a person’s friends or family. The reason, of course, is that friends or family, who may want to ensure the accused’s acquittal, are more likely to be subjective in their witness.
The same principle applies to hostile testimonies concerning Jesus or His followers. Ironically enough, they actually do researchers of church history many centuries later a favor. Here follow a few such examples from ancient times:
Jewish Synagogue Liturgy (circa 85 A.D.)
We know that all the first Christians were also Jews, but later a distinction was drawn between “Christians” and “Jews” (the latter clinging to Judaism). This piece contains a formal curse against Jewish Christians: “May the Nazarenes be suddenly destroyed from the Book of Life.” (Visalli: 101)
The Babylonian Talmud (70–200 A.D.)
It consists of a collection of legal, ethical, theological, ritual, and historical insights from a Jewish perspective. One passage, namely Sanhedrin 43a, refers to Jesus as “a sorcerer who attracted followers and led Israel astray and was hanged on the eve of Passover.” Not at all friendly toward Jesus – and yet it confirms Him as a historical figure who was crucified. What’s more, it does not deny His miracles, but interprets them negatively as “sorcery.”
Lucian of Samosata (circa 125–180 A.D.)
A historian and satirist who liked to mock Christians:“The Christians … worship a man to this day – the extraordinary person who introduced new, strange ceremonial practices and was crucified. ‘The Christians’ … deny the gods of Greece and worship this crucified sage and live according to his laws.” (Muncaster: 221) It is telling that Lucian does not deny Jesus’ existence or crucifixion, but more importantly, he confirms that Christians were already worshiping Him as God. This contradicts the assumption of some sceptics, like Dan Brown, that Jesus was only later “deified” by a specific group within Christianity.
NB: Lucian simply writes of “the Christians” and does not indicate that there were different groups.
Celsus (circa 170 A.D.)
A Greek philosopher and another mocker of Christians, who also claimed that they ignored the world’s impressive gods and targeted uneducated people with their religion. According to Origen, he wrote in the first half of the 2nd century AD, but modern scholars place it rather between 170–180 AD.
Celsus refers to the earthquake and darkness during Jesus’ crucifixion, but mockingly rejects the Christians’ conclusion that He was a “god.” He cynically describes the risen Jesus as someone seen by a “hysterical” woman – “and maybe one other person” – both deceived by His “sorcery” and so grieved by His death that they hallucinated His resurrection as a form of wishful thinking (there is much literature refuting such an interpretation).
NB: Despite all the cynicism, Celsus acknowledges Jesus as a miracle-worker, the earthquake and darkness during his crucifixion, and the conviction of Christians that He was physically risen.
Porphyry (circa 234–305 A.D.)
A Neoplatonist philosopher and fierce opponent of Christianity who dismissed the Gospels as “mainly fantasy” in his work Against the Christians (circa 270 AD). He compared Jesus with Apollonius (circa 3 BC – circa 97 AD), a Greek philosopher and non-Christian who achieved “similar feats.” He therefore did not deny Jesus’ miracles but tried to dismiss them as insignificant by comparing Him to another “wonder-worker.”
Eusebius responded critically, pointing out that Philostratus (Apollonius’ biographer, writing 100 years after his death) was a fable writer and that Apollonius had worked as a sorcerer under demonic influence.
4. Secular ancient writers about Christ and the early Christians
Cornelius Tacitus (55 – 120 A.D.)
This well-known Roman historian writing around 115 AD, described Christians as “a class of men loathed for their vices” as he referred to the great fire in Rome in 64 AD, after which Emperor Nero found them guilty and executed them – not so much for arson – but because of their “anti-social tendencies.” This confirms Jesus’ statement to His disciples: “The world will hate you.” (Mathew 24:9)
Of particular value is his confirmation of Jesus’ historicity in the following passage:
“Christus, from whom the name [Christian] has its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius under one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus; and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all hideous and shameful things from every part of the world find their center and become popular.” (Boyd, 126)
Key points from this passage:
Tacitus confirms Jesus’ existence, referring to Him as Chrestus.
He mentions Jesus’ crucifixion under Pontius Pilate during Tiberius’s reign (AD 14–37).
Tacitus shows clear contempt for Christians, calling Christianity a “mischievous superstition,” likely because they believed in Jesus as God or that He rose from the dead (or both).
He describes Nero’s persecution of Christians as scapegoats for the fire in Rome.
Authenticity and importance:
Most scholars regard this text as authentic, since Tacitus had no sympathy for Christianity and no reason to fabricate such details.
It aligns with other historical records of Jesus’ crucifixion and Nero’s persecution of Christians.
The description of Christianity spreading from Judea to Rome is also historically accurate.
Phlegon (2nd century A.D.)
This Greek historian also wrote about the darkness and earthquakes during Jesus’ crucifixion. The church father Origen referred to him in his rebuttal of a claim that it was an eclipse.
Pliny the Younger (61–circa 113 A.D.)
This governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor writes to Emperor Trajan (circa 112 AD) asking advice on how to deal with Christians who refuse to worship images of the emperor (the reason why temples were “almost deserted”). (Visalli, 155)
This was during a time when smear campaigns and false rumors against Christians were rampant. They were accused, among other things, of cannibalism (because of the symbolism behind the Lord’s Supper) and incest, since they addressed one another as “brother” and “sister” and exchanged kisses. Initially, some Christians were executed by him, but later he decided to investigate the credibility of all the charges. His question to Trajan was whether he should continue persecuting Christians simply because they bore the name, or whether he should focus instead on their alleged misdeeds.
After his investigation, Pliny discovered that Christians innocently met to sing hymns of praise to “Christ as a god.” The food they shared was also “ordinary” and “harmless.”
Hadrian (117–138 A.D.)
This Roman emperor tried to eliminate all the holy sites related to Jesus by building pagan temples over them. Although not friendly toward Christians, he nevertheless warned against unjust treatment. In a letter to the governor of Asia in 112 A.D., he wrote that accusations against Christians ought to be investigated and that they should be fairly tried before a tribunal. Those who made false accusations were to be punished.
Mara Bar-Serapion (dated between 73–200 A.D.)
This Stoic philosopher from Syria wrote from prison to his son, encouraging him to follow the wise teachers of the past. He refers to the unjust killing of “three wise men” – the murder of Socrates, the burning of Pythagoras, and the execution of the “wise king of the Jews.” He indicated that God avenged these martyrs – the people of Athens died from famine; the people of Samos were overwhelmed by the sea; and the Jews were “ruined and driven from their land.”
NB: With his reference to “king of the Jews,” rather than “Son of God” or “Savior,” it suggests that his impressions of Jesus were not shaped by Christian sources but more likely by the inscription Pilate nailed to the cross, as described in Mark 15:26.
Suetonius (circa 70 - c. 160 A.D. )
This Roman historian writes around AD 120 as follows: “Because the Jews in Rome constantly caused unrest at the instigation of Chrestus (a misunderstanding of the word ‘Christ’), Claudius expelled them from the city.” (Visalli: 64)
A plausible case can be made that the “Chrestus” referred to here must, in fact, be Christ. “Chrestus” was a common name among Gentiles but not among Jews. It is easy to see how Suetonius, unfamiliar with the Jewish title Christ, might have misunderstood it as the more common Greek name Chrestus.
In the New Testament book of Acts, we read of various incidents in which Jews hostile to Paul stirred up riots in the cities where he preached Christ. Against this background, it is likely that Suetonius interpreted such unrest as “instigation by Chrestus.” This same event is described in Acts 18:2, which records that Jews were expelled from Rome by Claudius because a riot had broken out over the preaching of Christ. This confirms that the apostle Luke, who also wrote the Book of Acts, took great care to record events within the framework of real people, places, and historical circumstances.
Bringing this together, it is easy to see how Suetonius could have mistakenly understood a riot instigated by Christians as having been instigated by Christ himself—whose name, as suggested, he confused with the proper Greek name Chrestus.
Thallus (date of life unknown, but historians estimate his work after the 50s A.D.)
He was an early historian who wrote about the history of the Eastern Mediterranean (circa AD 52). Most of his works have been lost, but some were quoted by the church father Theophilus of Antioch and Christian historian Julius Africanus. He referred to the darkness and earthquake during Jesus’ crucifixion. He attributed it to a solar eclipse, but Julius Africanus (writing circa 221 AD) refuted this, pointing out that an eclipse was impossible during Passover.
Flavius Josephus (37–97 A.D.)
The Jewish historian Josephus is mentioned last because some controversy surrounds his references to Jesus in his history Antiquities of the Jews, published in 93 or 94 AD. Some scholars suspect that parts of this passage were not written by Josephus but were additions by Christian scribes. Nevertheless, the most well-known passage reads as follows:
“At this time, there appeared Jesus, a wise man (if indeed one ought to call him a man). He performed astonishing deeds; a teacher of people who gladly received the truth. He won over many Jews as well as many Greeks. He was the Messiah. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of our leading men, condemned him to the cross, those who had loved him did not cease to do so. For he appeared to them alive again on the third day – just as the divine prophets had foretold these and countless other marvelous things about him. And even to this day, the tribe of Christians, named after him, has not died out.” (Antiquities 18.3.3)
Scholars believe this passage was likely altered by Christian scribes – especially the parts referring to Jesus as Messiah and to His resurrection. Early writers like Origen (3rd century AD) referred to Josephus but did not mention this passage, indicating that the strong Christian elements may have been later additions.
A reconstructed version without the suspected additions reads as follows:
“At this time, there appeared Jesus, a wise man. He performed astonishing deeds; a teacher of people who gladly received the truth. He won over many Jews as well as many Greeks. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of our leading men, condemned him to the cross, those who had loved him did not cease to do so. And even to this day, the tribe of Christians, named after him, has not died out.”
This version is considered more authentic because it maintains a neutral standpoint of a Jewish historian who likely did not view Jesus as the Messiah. It is still valuable, however, since such a secular text correlates with the accounts in the four Gospels.
A second passage Josephus mentions is about the execution of James:
“[Ananus] convened the Sanhedrin of judges and brought before them the brother of Jesus (who was called Christ), namely James, along with some others. After accusing them as lawbreakers, he delivered them to be stoned.” (Antiquities 20.9.1) This reference is widely accepted as authentic because it matches Josephus’s style and lacks Christian bias. Origen did quote this passage, which indicates it already existed before any Christian alterations.
Conclusion
Christians today have good reason to trust the authenticity of the New Testament, which provides a reliable portrait of Jesus, His life, and His mission. Most of the discrepancies between modern texts and older versions, as noted by certain critical scholars, involve only differences in spelling and syntax, which do not affect Christian doctrine at all. The church fathers from the first three centuries AD, quoted so much from the New Testament, that if all of the ancient manuscripts and Bibles were destroyed, one would still be able to reconstruct almost the entire New Testament from these quotes.
Recommended links:
Sources:
Boyd, Gregory A. and Rhodes, Paul E. Lord or Legend? Wrestling with the Jesus dilemma. Baker Books, Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA, 2007.
Muncaster, Ralph O. Examine the Evidence: exploring the case for Christianity. Eugene, Oregon. Harvest House Publishers, 2004.
Green, Michael. The books the church suppressed: fiction and truth in The Da Vinci Code. Oxford, UK & Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA. Monarch Books, 2005.
Collins, Michael, and Matthew A. Price. The story of Christianity: 2000 years of faith. London, UK. Dorling Kindersley Limited, 1999.
Visalli, Gayla. After Jesus: the triumph of Christianity. New York, USA. The Reader’s Digest Association, Inc., 1992.
Wilkins, Michael J. and J.P. Moreland. Jesus Under Fire: Modern scholarship reinvents the hostorical Jesus. Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA, 1995.
Wright, N. T. The resurrection of the Son of God. Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, Great Britain, , 2003.
Comments