Independent Sources for the Life of Jesus.


What is multiple attestation, and why is it important?

Independent attestation is a useful tool used by historians for trying to determine whether certain actions or sayings by Jesus, or a historical figure, can be established as historically probable. The more independent witnesses and/or authors we have mentioning an event or saying in Jesus’ life, the more confidence we can have in its historicity. Establishing historicity via this method is important for both the historian and the Christian.

What are our independent sources for Jesus?

Our primary sources for learning about Jesus come from the biographical gospels Mark, Luke, Matthew, and John. We learn much about Jesus’ three-year ministry, his teachings, his final week alive, his crucifixion, and the subsequent events of his resurrection from the dead. In the book of Acts (also written by the author of Luke) we find the manifestation of the early church as a result of the mark in history Jesus evidently left behind. The basic fact that we have four biographies is lucky, especially since less than 3% of people actually could write in Jesus’ time.

We then have another independent attestation to Jesus in the form of Paul, our earliest Christian writer. We have seven Pauline letters/epistles to work with (1 Thessalonians, Galatians, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Philippians, Philemon, Romans). Following Paul we have several non-Pauline letters. Non-Pauline epistles, or “disputed” letters, are works that have traditionally been ascribed to Paul by the early church, but that most modern scholars view were probably not penned by him.

Several other important New Testament letters follow, such as Hebrews, Jude, James, Revelation, Petrine letters (1 Peter, 2 Peter), Johannine letters (1 John, 2 John, 3 John), and the Pastoral letters (1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, 3 Timothy). Each attests to the historical Jesus with some of them providing independent attestation. We also have two references to Jesus by the 1st century historian Josephus in his Antiquities of the Jews (95 AD), as well as by Roman historian Tacitus (of the early second century). Following on we have two independent accounts from a pair of early church fathers: Clement of Rome (1 Clement, +-95 AD) and Ignatius of Antioch (Ignatius to the Smyrneans, 110 AD). We are clearly lucky to have Jesus attested to in these many independent sources, as captured by exegete Habermas:

“When the combined evidence from ancient sources is summarized, quite an impressive amount of information is gathered concerning Jesus and ancient Christianity. Few ancient historical figures can boast the same amount of material” (1).


1. Habermas, G. 1996. The Historical Jesus:  Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ. p. 219.


3 responses to “Independent Sources for the Life of Jesus.

  1. Pingback: Vridar » Historical Sources, Independent Sources, and the Need to be Quick·

  2. As for Josephus, assuming that the refererence is to the Testimonium Flavianum there is much argument to say that those Jesus references are later interpolations.

    That of Kenneth Olson has argued that the entire Testimonium must have been forged by Eusebius himself, basing his argument on textual similarities between the Testimonium and Eusebius’ writings in the Demonstrations of the Gospels.

    Eusebius has a track record as one of those early Fathers of the Church, together with Clement , Jerome, John Chrysostom, all adept at justifying deceit/lies for the good of the poor sinner.

    …For great is the value of deceit, provided it be not introduced with a mischievous intention. In fact action of this kind ought not to be called deceit, but rather a kind of good management, cleverness and skill, capable of finding out ways where resources fail, and making up for the defects of the mind …

    …And often it is necessary to deceive, and to do the greatest benefits by means of this device, whereas he who has gone by a straight course has done great mischief to the person whom he has not deceived…
    Chrysostom, Treatise On The Priesthood, Book 1.

  3. As an historian who has studied the Historical Evidence of Jesus Christ, or lack thereof, for 45 years, the only objective conclusion is that he did not exist, at least as described in the New Testament.

Let me know your thoughts!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s