Not an LDS apologist, but useful to the general topic of this blog.
Question on Quora:
Dr. Bart Ehrman, a prominent secular New Testament scholar and agnostic (not a Christian), wrote the book "Did Jesus Exist?" (2012). In it, he states:
“Virtually every modern scholar of antiquity—across the theological spectrum—agrees that Jesus existed and was crucified.”
He calls Jesus mythicism—the theory that Jesus never existed—
“A fringe theory held by a tiny, tiny minority of non-experts.”
This isn’t just Christian scholars defending their faith. A 2011 survey of experts across theological and ideological lines—biblical, Jewish, Islamic, secular, and even skeptical historians—showed over 99% agreement that Jesus of Nazareth was a real historical person
Actually, the claim “there are no sources for Jesus outside of the Bible” is a common claim that circulates every couple of years given the increasingly secular makeup of society: but regardless of increasing secularism changing our religious makeup- this claim Jesus isn’t mentioned outside of biblical text collapses under intellectual and historical scrutiny. The real “debate” is: was he who he claimed to be? Not if he existed.
First: Jesus is absolutely mentioned by multiple first-century or near-first-century sources, both Christian and non-Christian.
So, who outside the Bible mentions Jesus during the first and second century? Several.
1. Tacitus (c. 56–120 AD):
In Annals (15.44), Tacitus — a Roman historian and no friend of Christians — records that "Christus, from whom the name [Christian] had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus."
This is a hostile Roman source confirming Jesus’s execution, time frame, and the existence of early Christians.
2. Josephus (c. 37–100 AD):
In Antiquities of the Jews (Book 18, 3.3), Josephus — a Jewish historian writing for a Roman audience — mentions Jesus explicitly:
“At this time there was a wise man called Jesus... He was the Christ. Pilate condemned him to be crucified... those who had loved him did not cease to do so. To this day the tribe of Christians named after him has not disappeared.”
Even though later Christian interpolations may have expanded this, scholars broadly agree that Josephus did mention Jesus—and also his brother James in Antiquities 20.9.1.
3. Pliny the Younger (c. 61–113 AD):
Writing to Emperor Trajan (Letter 10.96), Pliny describes early Christians as gathering to “sing hymns to Christ as to a god.” This reflects established worship of Jesus within decades of the crucifixion.
- This shows worship of Jesus as divine within decades of his death.
4. Suetonius (c. 69–122 AD):
In Lives of the Twelve Caesars, Suetonius refers to disturbances in Rome under Claudius due to “Chrestus,” a variant spelling of Christus. This is strong evidence of early Christian activity and conflict.
- In context, Suetonius is not describing a living agitator in Rome at the time (c. 49 AD), but rather disturbances caused by debates among Jews over Christ, whose movement had already spread.
Online critics outside of academic circles love to point out that Philo of Alexandria (prominent Jewish philosopher) never mentioned Jesus, as if that proves something—but it doesn’t. This is a classic argument from silence. Philo was a wealthy Jewish aristocrat, steeped in Greek philosophy and living in cosmopolitan Alexandria, far removed from the political and religious strife of rural Judea- not to mention the poor area of Nazareth Jesus was from was routinely ridiculed for. His focus was elite intellectual synthesis—not documenting fringe movements from the peasant class.
Jesus, by contrast, was a provocative figure from Galilee, specifically Nazareth—a backwater region viewed with disdain by the Jerusalem and Roman establishment. He surrounded himself with local fishermen, tax collectors, and social misfits, the sick, prostitutes, drunkards- preaching a kingdom that eventually overturned conventional Jewish power. From Philo’s vantage point, this wasn’t just distant—it was beneath notice- that is until the movement picked up steam in later decades after his death. This is the viewpoint of scholars today.
The real issue isn’t lack of evidence — it’s historical double standards. If we judged other ancient figures by the same criteria people on Quora online use to try and dismiss the life of Jesus- despite scholarly consensus- we’d have to discard half of classical history. Yet Jesus is one of the most attested figures of antiquity- and there isn’t a debate about this among scholars- it’s settled, both in manuscript volume and external corroboration. The Gospels themselves, written within living memory of the events, reflect the fiery spread of a movement- despite Roman and Jewish opposition- too explosive to fabricate. The claim that “there’s no evidence” is not just lazy — it’s false.
Again, serious criticism of Jesus begins with his claims of divinity — not with denying he walked the earth, which virtually no credible historian disputes.
