Cold-Case Christianity

Home > Other > Cold-Case Christianity > Page 21
Cold-Case Christianity Page 21

by J. Warner Wallace


  Something similar can be observed in the gospel accounts. The gospel writers are believed to have written from a number of geographic locations. Mark probably wrote from Rome, Matthew may have written from Judea, Luke from either Antioch or Rome, and John from Ephesus.51 Skeptics have argued that these accounts were not written by people who had firsthand knowledge of the life and ministry of Jesus but were simply inventions written generations later by people who weren’t all that familiar with the locations they were describing. All of the gospel writers described a large number of people as they wrote out their testimonies, and often identified these individuals by name. As it turns out, these names provide us with important clues to help us determine if the writers of the Gospels were actually familiar with life in first-century Palestine.

  Richard Bauckham52 examined the work of Tal Ilan53 and used Ilan’s data when investigating the biblical use of names. Ilan assembled a lexicon of all the recorded names used by the Jews of Palestine between 330 BC and AD 200. She examined the writings of Josephus, the texts of the New Testament, documents from the Judean desert and Masada, and the earliest rabbinic works of the period. She even examined ossuary (funeral-tomb) inscriptions from Jerusalem. Ilan included the New Testament writings in her study as well. She discovered that the most popular men’s names in Palestine (in the time span that encompassed the gospel accounts) were Simon and Joseph. The most popular women’s names were Mary and Salome. You may recognize these names from the gospel accounts. As it turns out, when Bauckham examined all the names discovered by Ilan, he found that the New Testament narratives reflect nearly the same percentages found in all the documents Ilan examined:

  Popularity of Names Cited in Palestinian Literature of the Time

  Popularity of Names Cited by the New Testament Authors

  15.6% of the men had the name Simon or Joseph

  18.2% of the men had the name Simon or Joseph

  41.5% of the men had one of the nine most popular names

  40.3% of the men had one of the nine most popular names

  7.9% of the men had a name no one else had

  3.9% of the men had a name no one else had

  28.6% of the women had the name Mary or Salome

  38.9% of the women had the name Mary or Salome

  49.7% of the women had one of the nine most popular names

  61.1% of the women had one of the nine most popular names

  9.6% of the women had a name no one else had

  2.5% of the women had a name no one else had

  54

  The most popular names found in the Gospels just happen to be the most popular names found in Palestine in the first century. This is even more striking when you compare the ancient popular Palestinian Jewish names with the ancient popular Egyptian Jewish names:

  Top Jewish Men’s Names in Palestine

  Top Jewish Men’s Names in Egypt

  Simon

  Eleazar

  Joseph

  Sabbataius

  Eleazar

  Joseph

  Judah

  Dositheus

  Yohanan

  Pappus

  Joshua

  Ptolemaius

  If the gospel writers were simply guessing about the names they were using in their accounts, they happened to guess with remarkable accuracy. Many of the popular Jewish names in Palestine were different from the popular names in Egypt, Syria, or Rome. The use of these names by the gospel writers is consistent with their claim that they were writing on the basis of true eyewitness familiarity.

  When names are very common, people find themselves having to make a distinction by adding an extra piece of information. My name is Jim Wallace, but I am often confused with Jim Wallis, the founder and editor of Sojourners magazine. For this reason, I will sometimes add the additional descriptor “of PleaseConvinceMe.com” when describing myself. I am Jim Wallace “of PleaseConvinceMe.com” (as opposed to Jim Wallis “of Sojourners”).

  The Corroboration of Location

  The gospel writers were evidently extremely familiar with the locations they wrote about. While late noncanonical forgeries written from outside the area of Palestine seldom mention any city other than Jerusalem (the one famous city that everyone knew was in Israel), the gospel writers alone included the specific names of lesser first-century towns and villages. The gospel writers mentioned or described Aenon, Arimathea, Bethphage, Caesarea Philippi, Cana, Chorazin, Dalmanutha, Emmaus, Ephraim, Magadan, Nain, Salim, and Sychar. Some of these villages are so obscure that only people familiar with the area would even know they existed.

  When you see the addition of a descriptor, you can be sure that the name being amended is probably common to the region or time in history. We see this throughout the gospel accounts. The gospel writers introduce us to Simon “Peter,” Simon “the Zealot,” Simon “the Tanner,” Simon “the Leper,” and Simon “of Cyrene.” The name Simon was so common to the area of Palestine in the first century that the gospel writers had to add descriptors to differentiate one Simon from another. This is something we would expect to see if the gospel writers were truly present in Palestine in the first century and familiar with the common names of the region (and the need to better describe those who possessed these popular names).

  Jesus (Hebrew: Joshua) was one of these popular first-century names in Palestine, ranking sixth among men’s names. For this reason, Jesus was one of those names that often required an additional descriptor for clarity’s sake. Interestingly, the gospel writers themselves (when acting as narrators) didn’t use additional descriptors for Jesus, even though they quoted characters within the narrative who did. Matthew, for example, repeatedly referred to Jesus as simply “Jesus” when describing what Jesus did or said. But when quoting others who used Jesus’s name, Matthew quoted them identifying Jesus as “Jesus from Nazareth in Galilee,” “Jesus the Galilean,” “Jesus of Nazareth,” “Jesus who was called Christ,” “Jesus who was crucified.” Why the difference? Matthew, as the narrator of history, simply called Jesus by His first name over the course of many chapters. His readers were already familiar with the person of Jesus Matthew introduced early in his account. But Matthew accurately recorded the way we would expect people to identify Jesus in the context of the first century. Matthew appears to be acting merely as an eyewitness recorder of facts, limiting himself to “Jesus” when he is doing the talking, but accurately reporting the way he heard others refer to Jesus.

  The manner in which the gospel writers described details (unintentionally supporting one another) and the approach the gospel writers took when they referred to people (using the names and descriptors we would expect in first-century Palestine) corroborate their testimonies internally. The gospel accounts appear authentic from the “inside out.” The words of the Gospels themselves are consistent with what we would expect from eyewitnesses.

  CORROBORATION FROM THE “OUTSIDE IN”

  If the Gospels are true, we should also expect them to be corroborated externally as well. Aimee’s testimony, for example, was corroborated by two additional pieces of evidence (the discovery of the gas receipt and the testimony of Danny’s sister). The Gospels are similarly corroborated from the “outside in” by the testimony of witnesses who reported what they knew to be true, even though they were not Christians an
d did not necessarily believe the testimony of the gospel writers. These non-Christian eyewitnesses were often hostile to the growing Christian movement and critical of the claims of the Gospels. In spite of this, they affirmed many of the details that were reported by the gospel writers.

  As a cold-case detective, I’ve encountered this sort of thing many times. I once had a case with a victim who was killed in her condominium. The primary suspect in her murder originally denied ever being in her home. I interviewed him a second time and told him that we discovered his DNA was in the house, in the very room where the victim was murdered. He changed his story and told me that he remembered that the victim called him and asked him to come over to the house to help her move some boxes from this room to her garage. The suspect said he came over on the day of the murder and was in the victim’s room for a very short time to help her move these boxes. He still denied being involved in her murder, however. Although he continued to deny his involvement in the crime, his new statement included two reluctant admissions. The suspect now admitted to the fact that he had been in the room where the murder occurred and on the very day when the victim was killed. While he still denied the fact that he committed the crime, he reluctantly admitted important facts that would eventually be assembled with other pieces of circumstantial evidence to form the case against him.

  NONBIBLICAL EYEWITNESSES CORROBORATED THE GOSPELS

  In a similar way, ancient observers and writers who were hostile to Christianity reluctantly admitted several key facts that corroborate the claims of the Christian eyewitnesses, even though they denied that Jesus was who He claimed to be. Let’s examine some of these reluctant admissions and reconstruct the picture they offer of Jesus.

  JOSEPHUS (AD 37–CA. 100) DESCRIBED JESUS

  Josephus described the Christians in three separate citations in his Antiquities of the Jews. In one of these passages, Josephus described the death of John the Baptist, in another he mentioned the execution of James (the brother of Jesus), and in a third passage he described Jesus as a “wise man.” There is controversy about Josephus’s writing because early Christians appear to have altered some copies of his work in an effort to amplify the references to Jesus. For this reason, as we examine Josephus’s passage related to Jesus, we will rely on a text that scholars believe escaped such alteration. In 1971, Shlomo Pines, scholar of ancient languages and distinguished professor at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, published a long-lost tenth-century Arabic text written by a Melkite bishop of Hierapolis named Agapius. This Arabic leader quoted Josephus and did so in the Arabic language, unlike the Greek used by other authors from antiquity. Overtly Christian references that are seen in other ancient versions of Josephus’s account are also missing from Agapius’s quote, and as a result, scholars believe that this version best reflects Josephus’s original text:

  At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus. His conduct was good, and [he] was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. And those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that he was alive; accordingly, he was perhaps the Messiah concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders.55

  There are many other ancient versions of Josephus’s citation that are more explicit about the nature of Jesus’s miracles, His life, resurrection, and status as “the Christ,” but this brief and conservative version of Josephus’s text reluctantly admits a number of key facts about Jesus. From this text, we can conclude that Jesus lived, was a wise and virtuous teacher who reportedly demonstrated wondrous power, was condemned and crucified under Pilate, had followers who reported that He appeared to them after His death on the cross, and was believed to be the Messiah.

  THALLUS (CA. AD 5–60) DESCRIBED JESUS

  Thallus was a Samaritan historian who wrote an expansive (three-volume) account of the history of the Mediterranean area in the middle of the first century, only twenty years after Jesus’s crucifixion. Like the writings of many ancient historians, much of his work is now lost to us. Another historian, Sextus Julius Africanus, wrote a text entitled History of the World in AD 221, however, and Africanus quoted an important passage from Thallus’s original account. Thallus chronicled the alleged crucifixion of Jesus and offered an explanation for the darkness that was observed at the time of Jesus’s death. Africanus briefly described Thallus’s explanation:

  On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun.56

  It’s a pity that we don’t have the complete account and explanation from Thallus, but in offering an explanation for the darkness, Thallus “reluctantly admitted” important details that corroborated portions of the Gospels. Even though Thallus denied that the darkness at the point of the crucifixion was caused supernaturally, he inadvertently corroborated the claim that Jesus was indeed crucified and that darkness covered the land when He died on the cross.

  TACITUS (AD 56–CA. 117) DESCRIBED JESUS

  Cornelius Tacitus was known for his analysis and examination of historical documents and is among the most trusted of ancient historians. He was a senator under Emperor Vespasian and was also proconsul of Asia. In his Annals of AD 116, he described Emperor Nero’s response to the great fire in Rome and Nero’s claim that the Christians were to blame:

  Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular.57 (Annals, 15:44)

  Tacitus, in describing Nero’s actions and the presence of the Christians in Rome, reluctantly admitted several key facts related to the life of Jesus. Tacitus corroborated that Jesus lived in Judea, was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and had followers who were persecuted for their faith in Him.

  MARA BAR-SERAPION (AD 70–UNKNOWN) DESCRIBED JESUS

  Sometime after AD 70, a Syrian philosopher named Mara Bar-Serapion, writing to encourage his son, compared the life and persecution of Jesus with that of other philosophers who were persecuted for their ideas. The fact that Mara Bar-Serapion described Jesus as a real person with this kind of influence is important:

  Ancient Jewish Corroboration

  The Jewish Talmud (the writings and discussions of ancient rabbis) dates to the fifth century, but is thought to contain the ancient teachings from the early Tannaitic period from the first and second centuries. Many of the Talmudic writings reference Jesus:

  “Jesus practiced magic and led Israel astray” (b. Sanhedrin 43a; cf. t. Shabbat 11.15; b. Shabbat 104b).

  “Rabbi Hisda (d. 309) said that Rabbi Jeremiah bar Abba said, ‘What is that which is written, “No evil will befall you, nor shall any plague come near your house”? (Psalm 91:10)…. “No evil will befall you” (means) that evil dreams and evil thoughts will not tempt you; “nor shall any plague come near your house” (means) that you will not have a son or a disciple who burns his food like Jesus of Nazareth’” (b. Sanhedrin 103a; cf. b. Berakhot 17b).

  “It was taught: On the day before the Passover they hanged Jesus. A herald went before him for forty days (proclaiming), ‘He will be stoned, because he practiced magic and enticed Israel to go astray. Let anyone who knows anything in his favor come forward and plead for hi
m.’ But nothing was found in his favor, and they hanged him on the day before the Passover” (b. Sanhedrin 43a).

  From just these passages that mention Jesus by name, we can conclude that Jesus had magical powers, led the Jews away from their beliefs, and was executed on the day before the Passover.

  What advantage did the Athenians gain from putting Socrates to death? Famine and plague came upon them as a judgment for their crime. What advantage did the men of Samos gain from burning Pythagoras? In a moment their land was covered with sand. What advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise King? It was just after that that their kingdom was abolished. God justly avenged these three wise men: the Athenians died of hunger; the Samians were overwhelmed by the sea; the Jews, ruined and driven from their land, live in complete dispersion. But Socrates did not die for good; he lived on in the teaching of Plato. Pythagoras did not die for good; he lived on in the statue of Hera. Nor did the wise King die for good; He lived on in the teaching which He had given.58

  Although Mara Bar-Serapion does not seem to place Jesus in a position of preeminence (he simply lists Him alongside other historic teachers like Socrates and Pythagoras), Mara Bar-Serapion does admit several key facts. At the very least, we can conclude that Jesus was a wise and influential man who died for His beliefs. We can also conclude that the Jews played a role in Jesus’s death and that Jesus’s followers adopted and lived lives that reflected Jesus’s beliefs.

 

‹ Prev