A recent survey of religious belief in England concluded that 40% of adults do not believe that Jesus was a historical figure.
During the Christmas period it is worth reflecting on the significance of this increasingly extreme form of scepticism in our culture.
Overwhelming evidence
The evidence for the historicity of Jesus and many of the details about his life are overwhelming by any normal standards of enquiry. The early documents that record his existence are not only the Gospels and letters collected in the New Testament but other less sympathetic sources. Hostile pagan historians of the first century who refer to Jesus include Tacitus, Thallus, Mara Bar-Serapion, Pliny, Suetonius and Josephus. The Jewish Talmud, a body of traditions collected from around the time of Jesus, also make reference to him. They do so in order to deny and reject his claim to divinity but never doubt his existence.
Lured into scepticism
The wealth of literary references to Jesus from the times in which he lived dwarf the information available for any other historical character. So how have 40% of the population been lured into their sceptical state? Most likely, it is connected to the decline in Bible reading. As less and less people are directly familiar with the Bible, more and more people assume it to be myth and legend. Perhaps, the best antidote to such nonsense is to read the Bible!
Quirinius
In the Christmas season it is important for our preaching to emphasise the historicity of the claims we make. One challenge often made to the birth account of Jesus is Luke’s reference to a census at the time of Quirinius (Luke 2:1-3). The objection is made that Quirinius was not recorded as governor until AD 5 and that the only census of his happened a year later in AD 6. This would place the event long after the birth of Jesus and indicate that Luke has muddled his facts.
However, an interesting broken Roman tombstone, found in what would have been ancient Syria, may cast light on this problem. Called the Lapis Tiburtinus it bears a Latin inscription to the life of a man who had been governor twice in Syria around the time of Herod. None of the Roman records tells us of any governor who had held the job twice. But it quite possibly refers to Quirinius in which case he simply had two periods in office. He carried out a census during both of his governorships.
This simple suggestion fits with Luke’s account. Notice that in Luke 2.2 we are told that this is the ‘first’ census carried out by Quirinius. Luke knew of a later census. In fact, he refers to it in Acts 5.37, demonstrating that he was well aware of the later AD 6 census sceptics refer to. Luke knows his history and records it accurately. During the first period of Quirinius as governor there was a census around the time of the birth of Jesus. Sometime later, during a more extended period in office there was a second census with which the gospels are not concerned, though Luke makes reference to it in his second volume.
Not just one census
Ah, but the sceptic objects, that would mean more than one census! Surely that is multiplying events to fit the biblical account? Another archaeological find casts light on the subject. Res Gestae Divi Augusti is the name of a Roman inscription from AD14 found in a number of forms around the Mediterranean. It is the boastful testimony of Casear Augustus describing his accomplishments including carrying out not one census but three!
If we hold the Bible at a distance and gain our facts from urban myths and Internet conspiracy theories we may doubt even the existence of Jesus. But if we read the Bible and take an interest in real historical discovery we find, time and again, that the Bible’s credentials are proven sound. Have a happy, historical Christmas!
