The Evidence for Jesus, Part 1: Did Jesus Actually Exist?

This is Part 1 of a 3-part series examining the historical evidence for Jesus. Part 2 examines whether we can trust the Gospel accounts. Part 3 evaluates the evidence for the resurrection.

You've probably encountered the claim online: Jesus never existed. He's a myth, a legend, a composite of dying-and-rising gods from ancient religions. The whole thing was invented decades or centuries after the supposed events.

It's a confident claim. It sounds edgy and scholarly. There's just one problem.

Almost no professional historians believe it.

What Historians Actually Think

Let's be clear from the start: the question of whether Jesus existed is different from whether he was divine, performed miracles, or rose from the dead. Those are theological claims requiring different kinds of evidence.

The historical question is simpler: Was there a Jewish teacher named Jesus who lived in first-century Palestine, gathered followers, and was crucified under Pontius Pilate?

On this question, the scholarly consensus is overwhelming.

Bart Ehrman, an agnostic New Testament scholar at the University of North Carolina who is no friend to evangelical Christianity, wrote an entire book (Did Jesus Exist?) debunking the "mythicist" position:¹

The view that Jesus existed is held by virtually every expert on the planet.

He's not exaggerating. A handful of academics have argued for the "mythicist" position — most notably Richard Carrier and the late Robert Price — but they represent a tiny fringe. The overwhelming majority of scholars who specialise in this period, across the theological spectrum, consider Jesus' existence as secure as virtually any fact from the ancient world.

Even Michael Grant, a classical historian with no theological agenda, concluded:²

If we apply to the New Testament, as we should, the same sort of criteria as we should apply to other ancient writings containing historical material, we can no more reject Jesus' existence than we can reject the existence of a mass of pagan personages whose reality as historical figures is never questioned.

So why are historians so confident? Let's look at the evidence.

Evidence Outside the Bible

One of the most persuasive categories of evidence comes from non-Christian sources who had no interest in promoting Christianity — and often actively opposed it.

Tacitus (c. 116 AD)

Tacitus was a Roman senator and historian, considered one of antiquity's greatest. In his Annals, while describing Nero's persecution of Christians after the Great Fire of Rome in 64 AD, he writes:³

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.

Notice what Tacitus confirms:

A historical figure called "Christus" (Christ)
Executed under Pontius Pilate
During the reign of Tiberius (14–37 AD)
In Judaea
His followers spread despite his death

Tacitus had access to Roman records and no motive to confirm Christian claims. If anything, he's hostile — calling Christianity a "mischievous superstition" and an "evil."

Josephus (c. 93–94 AD)

Josephus was a Jewish historian who lived through the Jewish-Roman War and wrote extensive histories of the Jewish people for Roman audiences. He mentions Jesus twice.

The first reference, known as the Testimonium Flavianum, has been debated because the text we have appears to contain Christian additions. However, scholars have reconstructed a likely original version, and most agree Josephus wrote something about Jesus. A reconstruction by scholar John Meier removes obvious Christian insertions:⁴

At this time there appeared Jesus, a wise man. For he was a doer of startling deeds, a teacher of people who receive the truth with pleasure. And he gained a following both among many Jews and among many of Greek origin. And when Pilate, because of an accusation made by the leading men among us, condemned him to the cross, those who had loved him previously did not cease to do so. And up until this very day the tribe of Christians, named after him, has not died out.

Even in this conservative reconstruction, Josephus confirms:

Jesus' existence
His reputation as a teacher and wonder-worker
His crucifixion under Pilate
The continuation of his movement

The second reference in Josephus is less disputed. Describing events in 62 AD, he writes:⁵

He convened a meeting of the Sanhedrin and brought before them a man named James, the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, and certain others.

This casual reference — mentioning Jesus only to identify which James is being executed — suggests Jesus was a known historical figure Josephus' readers would recognize.

Pliny the Younger (c. 112 AD)

Pliny was a Roman governor who wrote to Emperor Trajan asking how to handle Christians in his province. He describes their practices:⁶

They were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up.

Pliny confirms Christians were worshipping Christ "as to a god" within decades of the supposed events — far too early for the movement to be based on a non-existent figure.

The Talmud

Jewish rabbinic sources, compiled later but containing older traditions, also reference Jesus — and not favorably. The Babylonian Talmud states:⁷

On the eve of Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, "He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy."

The Jewish leaders didn't deny Jesus existed. They denied his claims while acknowledging his deeds — attributing them to "sorcery" rather than divine power. This is actually strong evidence: if Jesus were mythical, why would his opponents acknowledge he did remarkable things?

Other Sources

Additional ancient references include:

Lucian of Samosata (c. 165 AD): A satirist who mocked Christians for worshipping "the man who was crucified in Palestine"⁸
Mara bar Serapion (c. 73 AD or later): A Syrian philosopher who mentions "the wise king" of the Jews being executed⁹
Celsus (c. 175 AD): A critic of Christianity who argued against Jesus' claims but never questioned his existence¹⁰

Why the "Myth" Theory Fails

If Jesus didn't exist, we'd need to explain several puzzling facts.

The Movement Started Too Early

Within 20 years of Jesus' supposed death, we have Paul writing letters to established churches across the Mediterranean. In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul quotes a creed that scholars date to within 1–5 years of the crucifixion (we'll examine this in Part 2).

That's extraordinarily early for a myth to develop. A.N. Sherwin-White, a classical historian at Oxford, studied the rate at which legend develops in ancient contexts and concluded:¹¹

The tests suggest that even two generations are too short a span to allow the mythical tendency to prevail over the hard historic core.

The core claims about Jesus emerged within the lifetimes of eyewitnesses — people who could have contradicted false stories.

The Movement Started in the Wrong Place

If you were inventing a religion, you wouldn't place its founding events in Jerusalem — where witnesses could immediately contradict your claims. You'd set it far away, in some obscure location.

Christianity exploded in the very city where Jesus was crucified, within weeks of his death. If the whole thing were fiction, it would have been trivially easy to disprove.

The Wrong Kind of Messiah

Jewish expectations of the Messiah centered on a conquering king who would overthrow Roman occupation and restore Israel's glory. A crucified Messiah was a contradiction in terms — crucifixion was a shameful death reserved for slaves and criminals.

If early Christians were inventing a savior figure, why choose one that contradicted every expectation? Why invent a crucified Messiah when that would make your movement immediately implausible to your target audience?

The best explanation is that they didn't invent it. They proclaimed a crucified Messiah because that's what actually happened — and then had to explain how it fit God's plan.

The Silence Argument Fails

Some mythicists argue that we don't have enough early sources. But consider: how many first-century sources do we have for any Jewish peasant preacher? Jesus wasn't a Roman emperor or military commander. He was an itinerant teacher executed as a criminal.

The fact that we have multiple independent ancient sources mentioning him — both friendly and hostile — is remarkable for a figure of his social standing.

What We Can Establish Historically

Based on the evidence, historians across the theological spectrum agree on a core set of facts about Jesus:¹²

Jesus existed — a Jewish teacher from Galilee
He was baptized by John the Baptist
He gathered disciples and taught
He had a reputation as a healer and exorcist (whether you believe the miracles actually happened, the reputation is historical)
He was crucified under Pontius Pilate around 30–33 AD
His followers claimed he rose from the dead shortly afterward
The movement spread rapidly despite every reason it should have died with its founder

These are the historical bedrock that virtually all scholars accept, regardless of their religious beliefs.

Why This Matters

If you're skeptical about Christianity, the existence of Jesus isn't where to focus your doubts. The real questions are whether he was who Christians claim — and especially whether he rose from the dead.

If you're curious about Christianity, knowing that Jesus' existence is historically secure can free you to engage the deeper questions. You're not being asked to believe in a myth. You're being asked to consider what kind of man this was and what his death and claimed resurrection mean.

And if you're already a Christian, understanding the historical evidence can deepen your confidence that your faith is grounded in real events — not wishful thinking or legend.

Questions to Consider

Does it surprise you that the existence of Jesus is virtually undisputed among historians? Why might that fact not be widely known?
What's the difference between claiming Jesus existed and claiming he was divine? Why is it important to distinguish historical questions from theological ones?
If early opponents of Christianity acknowledged Jesus existed (while disputing his claims), what does that tell us about the historical core of the story?
The movement spread in the very place where it could have been most easily disproved. What does that suggest about the early Christians' confidence in their claims?

Continue the Series

The historical Jesus existed. But can we trust what the Gospels tell us about him? In Part 2, we'll examine the manuscript evidence, the remarkable early creed, and why the Gospel writers might actually be reliable witnesses.

Read Part 2: Can We Trust the Accounts? →

Want to explore the historical evidence further? TheoGPT can help you investigate ancient sources, examine scholarly arguments, and think through the evidence at your own pace — with no pressure and no pat answers.

Start exploring →

Sources

1. Ehrman, Bart D. Did Jesus Exist? The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth. HarperOne, 2012. Ehrman is an agnostic scholar who wrote this book specifically to address mythicist claims.

2. Grant, Michael. Jesus: An Historian's Review of the Gospels. Scribner, 1977. Grant was a classical historian specializing in Roman history.

3. Tacitus, Annals 15.44. Written c. 116 AD. Tacitus had access to Roman imperial records and is considered one of antiquity's most reliable historians.

4. Meier, John P. A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus, Vol. 1. Doubleday, 1991. Meier's reconstruction of the Testimonium Flavianum is widely accepted among scholars.

5. Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews 20.200. This reference to James "the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ" is considered authentic by virtually all scholars.

6. Pliny the Younger, Letters 10.96. Written c. 112 AD to Emperor Trajan.

7. Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 43a. Though compiled later, this preserves earlier traditions about Jesus (called "Yeshu").

8. Lucian of Samosata, The Death of Peregrinus, c. 165 AD.

9. Mara bar Serapion, Letter to his son. Dating disputed (73 AD to 3rd century), but refers to the execution of "the wise king" of the Jews.

10. Celsus's arguments against Christianity are preserved in Origen's Contra Celsum (c. 248 AD). Celsus attacked Jesus' claims but accepted his existence.

11. Sherwin-White, A.N. Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament. Oxford University Press, 1963. Sherwin-White was a classical historian who examined how legend develops in ancient contexts.

12. These "minimal facts" about Jesus are accepted by the vast majority of scholars across the theological spectrum. See Habermas, Gary R. and Licona, Michael R. The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus. Kregel, 2004.