This chapter opens with a brief narrative about the importance of corroborating evidence when it comes to trials. If you have good corroborating evidence for the story someone is giving, the likelihood they are veracious is higher. Clearly, Strobel wants us to think we will be presented extra-biblical evidence of Jesus’s existence and teachings.
The rest of the chapter is an interview with Dr. Edwin M. Yamauchi. As always, Strobel spends an inordinate amount of time describing Dr. Yamauchi.
Strobel attempts to sell the narrative here through a lack of fact checking, not challenging viewpoints that are shaky, and presenting the narrative with an obvious agenda in mind. Again, this book is clearly not an objective attempt to make a Case for Christ. To be frank, I’m really starting to dislike this book, and by extension, Strobel. I’ll do my best to keep ad hominem attacks out of the critique though.
Affirming the Gospels
Interestingly, for a chapter dedicated to extra-biblical sources, Strobel has Dr. Yamauchi reaffirm that the new-testament is the best source material we have. If that’s the case, I’m surprised the chapter doesn’t just end at this point. Dr. Yamauchi mentions evidence for Jesus in the writing of Tacitus and Josephus (Strobel, CFC, P.82). There are reasons to doubt that each source is a positive affirmation for Jesus and more an affirmation that Christians were present in Rome at the time period or Christians adding to texts after the fact.
Tacitus mentions very briefly in the Annals that there is a group of people “…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”(Tacitus, Annals, 116AD). Check the quote #3 in the quotes section below to read the full quote.
Given that the writings of Tacitus are even further removed, and that Tacitus was born many years after the accepted date of Jesus’s death, it’s possible that he was drawing upon his own knowledge of Christianity. It’s also entirely possible that later Christians added to his writings.
In the works of Josephus, we get a short bit of narrative that is known to have been altered by later Christian scholars to provide a pro-Christian point of view. Given how the passage breaks the narrative and the way it is phrased, it appears to be an interpolation based off the gospel of Luke. Additionally, the lack of ancient sources citing this passage is notable in it’s silence, and the structure and details of the passage is far removed from Josephus’s writing on other would-be messiahs. Check the citations for a full quote of the section (quote #1) and a link to the chapter in question.
Testimony by a Traitor
The passage cited by Dr. Yamauchi is likely authentic. Unfortunately, probably by design, the entire passage is not included in the book. View the Citations (quote 2) for the full passage and a link to the quote. Strobel ask Dr. Yamauchi for any answers for the following questions based off the full passage.
- Why does Josephus provide such a large amount of background to what Christ means? This appears to have been written for non-Judean readers (aka: gentiles).
- Why are the Jews angered over the stoning of a Christian, who were viewed as heathens?
- The end of the passage clearly states that the Jesus referred to is Jesus of Damneus, who was made a high priest. Why does Dr. Yamauchi believe this refers to Jesus from the gospels?
- Given the points above, doesn’t it seem more likely that references to Christ are later Christian interpolations?
All references to Jesus as Christ appear to have been interpolated into the text by later Christians. There is evidence of this from manuscripts of Josephus dating to the 16th century. Within these manuscripts, there is no mention of Jesus (Drews, McCabe, The Witnesses to the Historicity of Jesus, P. 9).
There Lived Jesus
The quote from book 13 (Quote 1 in the Quotes section) can be seen in it’s entirely along with a link the the chapter it appears in. As stated earlier, there are more problems with this quote than simple interpolations which lead to the conclusion that most of it, if not all of it, is an interpolation.
- Scholarly consensus is that the section is an interpolation
- The paragraph breaks the flow of the chapter which is talking about Pilate
- Lack of ancient writers citing this passage
- The structure of the passage
- Lack of details about this person
- Similarity to the bible (Seems like the Gospel of Luke is the inspiration)
- The term “Christ” only appears here and in the passage about Ananus
Strobel does not bring up any of these points with Dr. Yamauchi. Instead, he moves on to the next section with Dr. Yamauchi’s conclusion being uncontested
The Importance of Josephus
As shown in “The Witnesses to the Historicity of Jesus”, it remains very unlikely that any references to Jesus in Josephus predate the 16th century manuscripts. As further shown, the quotes used in The Case for Christ do not give the complete context for them. Drawing the conclusion that the significance of these quotes in the works of Josephus are “[Dr. Yamauchi:] Highly significant” (Strobel, CFC, P. 87) is highly misleading.
Dismissing claims that some scholars portray Jesus as a zealot because “[Dr. Yamauchi:] That is a position the gospels themselves do not support” (Strobel, CFC, P. 87) requires proof that the gospels themselves are historically accurate. As shown in previous chapters, we have great reason to suspect the gospels to have been based on second hand recollections, if not having been written about an entirely fabricated character or mashup of various people who were named Jesus. The name Jesus (Actually Yeshua) was not that uncommon for the time.
A Most Mischievous Superstition
Dr. Yamauchi brings up the Annals of Tacitus next, mentioning the passage I went over earlier. While many of Tacitus’s works are are fairly accurate, there is evidence against some of the things mentioned in this section. I’ll explore some of those a little further here.
Josephus, who was visiting Rome in 64CE, has no mention of Nero blaming the Christians for a fire. This omissions is significant due to Josephus chronicling Nero in addition to other historical figures. In fact, Josephus goes out of his way to mention that many things about Nero were blatant fantasies in book 20, chapter 8, section 3 of his Antiquities. The section, along with a link to the chapter, is in the quotes below.
Early Christian writers of the Apocryphal Acts of Paul and the Acts of Peter show that early Christians were unaware of any persecution by Nero in retaliation for the fire. There is some mention of potential persecution due to Paul claiming that his people would “overthrow all nations”, but the sources conflict in what actually happened.
Furthermore, the word used here is “Christus” rather than a secular name such as “Jesus of Nazareth”. While a Christian scribe would have no issue with placing “Christ” in the text, a non-Christian Pagan historian would have been far more likely to use the secular name, especially because “Christus” would mean nothing to a pagan gentile.
A large list of additional issues with this particular passage can be found in the book “The Christ: A Critical Review and Analysis of the Evidences of His Existence” starting on page 40. A list of several of these follows. A link to the book for online viewing is provided in the Citations.
- It is not quoted by christian Fathers
- It is not quoted by any Christian writer prior to the 15th century
- This story, in nearly the same words but omitting the reference to Christ, is to be found in the writings of Sulpicius Severus, in the 5th century
- At the time that the conflagration occurred, Tacitus himself declares that Nero was not in Rome, but at Antium
Chanting “as if to a god”
Dr. Yamauchi references Book 10b, letter 96 of Pliny the Younger as evidence that many Christians were not easily swayed in their beliefs. Had Strobel given more of the letter, however, it becomes clear that many who were claiming to be Christian were recanting their position and returning to Judiasm (Pliny the Younger, Book 10b, Letter 96). As always, check the citations for a link to the letter.
Whether or not someone is willing to die for a belief is no indicator whether or not that belief is true. It is very easy to be honestly deceived and believe things that are false so strongly that you are willing to go through torture or be killed for it. It’s also possible that recanting the position could also lead to the same consequence, and if so, why recant? If we are to take strength of belief and willingness to die for those beliefs as a justification for “rightness”, then there are a large class of beliefs we must consider as possibly true. To name just a few as an example, the beliefs deluded people who believe they are Jesus, Islam, and Jehovah’s Witnesses would have to be given just as much truth consideration as the beliefs of Christianity.
The Day the Earth Went Dark
Dr. Yamauchi references a historian named Thallus who lived in 100CE for evidence on an eclipse during the crucifixion of Jesus. Unfortunately, to get this conclusion requires some jumps from corrupted numerals in an Armenian text (Carrier, Thallus and the Darkness at Christ’s Death). Unsurprisingly, Strobel leaves out the corruption in text and the fact that when Thallus wrote is held to be very hotly debated. Christian scholars, with obvious bias, tend to place the date to a time convenient to themselves rather than when makes sense based on the text.
A Portrait of Pilate
Putting aside the fact that no evidence for the supposed “Release of a prisoner at Passover” exists, this chapter once again presupposes the veracity of the bible. A far more likely explanation is that the story as told in the bible is an outright fabrication. If Pilate was truly viewed as “[Strobel:] …being obstinate and inflexible…” (Strobel, CFC, P. 91, then it seems just as likely that his attitude caused him to slowly lose political support.
The tale as told in the bible would have led directly to Pilates’ head being examined after an expedient separation from his body for releasing a prisoner who was an enemy of Rome. Being “[Dr. Yamauchi:] …reluctant to offend the Jews at that time…” (Strobel, CFC, P. 91) makes no sense either. Rather than gaining support, his wavering demeanor would have shown him to be weak and vulnerable to political enemies. Pilate would have had strong motivations to simply execute Jesus without fuss because to do otherwise was suicide, both politically and literally.
Other Jewish Accounts
Strobel and Dr. Yamauchi agree about the Talmud that, “[Strobel:] In a negative way, these Jewish references do corroborate some things about Jesus.” (Strobel, CFC, P. 92). The fact that the Talmud, compiled around 200CE, mentions “[Dr. Yamauchi:] Jesus, calling him a false messiah who practiced magic and who was justly condemned to death…” (Strobel, CFC, P. 92) corroborates nothing.
The Talmud was written many years after Jesus is believed to have lived, and is most likely referring to the Jewish view of Jesus was based on what they know of Christianity. The fact that it refers to Jesus as a magic user who was put to death is how the Jews viewed the Christian personification of Jesus, not that Jesus actually existed or truly had any powers. The fact that it repeats a rumor about how Jesus was born sounds mostly like an attempt to explain Christain claims of virgin birth, which makes sense. Rather than taking this as proof of Jesus existing, the Talmud could be taken as proof of Jewish leaders giving an explanation for how they viewed the Christian claims of Jesus.
Evidence Apart From the Bible
Strobel reviews how impressive he finds the extra-biblical evidence for Jesus and Dr. Yamauchi outlines seven points below (Strobel, CFC, P. 93).
- Jesus was a Jewish teacher
- Many people believed he [Jesus] performed healing and exorcisms
- Some people believed he [Jesus] was the messiah
- He [Jesus] was rejected by the Jewish leaders
- He [Jesus] was crucified under Pontius Pilate
- Despite this shameful death, his [Jesus’s] followers… …spread beyond Palestine
- All kinds of people from the cities and countryside… …worshiped him[Jesus] as god
In other words, even if we were to accept the extra biblical information as true, and there is good reason to suspect most if not all of it comes from Christian interpolations, we would only know the most basic facts about the early cult of Jesus. Given that Christian interpolations in the bible exist as well, it would be interesting to analyze how much of this truly would be apparent from extra-biblical sources.
Corroborating the Early Details
Strobel claims that Paul “[Strobel:] …encounter[ed] the resurrected Christ and later consulted with some of the eyewitnesses to make sure he was preaching the same message they were…” (Strobel, CFC, P. 94). He also claims that Paul’s letters refute any “[Strobel: ] …claim that they had been seriously distorted by legendary development.” (Strobel, CFC, P. 94)
Given what we know, Paul’s personal worship of Jesus brought about more changes in the early church than the early church brought about in Paul. For example, Paul was an outspoken advocate that Christianity should be brought to those outside of the Christian/Jewish community, a stance the church still holds today. Rather the claiming that Paul corroborated with others to ensure that he was preaching the same as they were, it seems more likely that he began preaching what he believed on the assumption it was true.
Additionally, claiming that Pauls works disprove any legendary development is to ignore how Paul viewed Jesus. It could be argued that Paul was part of the push to enhance the legendary development, status, and mythologizing into godhood. Paul is often referring to Jesus as “The son of god” and being in “the image of god”. Paul never even met Jesus. Everything he wrote is based on a vision that he had one day. Paul should not be considered a reliable source.
Truly Raised From the Dead
Citing Ignatius as believing that Jesus was both Divine and Human almost a century after the fact provides us with no evidence and proves nothing. The fact that someone who is in the church could hold beliefs about Jesus that show him to be special is hardly shocking. The way Dr. Yamauchi explains it, it sounds like Ignatius was swayed by the gospels to believe what he did rather than any additional evidence. If that’s the case, then the propaganda that is the gospels accomplished their intended purpose.
If, as Dr. Yamauchi claims, evidence apart from the bible is powerful enough that it could cause someone to write what Ignatius did, then Ignatius is a terrible example. If we were to “[Dr. Yamauchi:] …pretend we didn’t have any of the new testament or other Christian writings…” (Strobel, CFC, P. 93), we would not be left with a “[Dr. Yamauchi:] …picture of Jesus that’s extremely compelling…” (Strobel, CFC, P. 93). Instead, we’d be left with rumors of a cult that probably would have dropped out of existence because it had nothing to create a solid unique identity out of.
Strobel ends the section by asking how research has affected Dr. Yamauchi’s faith. Unsurprisingly with the narrative Strobel is telling, Dr. Yamauchi has seen great strengthening of his faith. Dr. Yamauchi mentions something I’d like to touch on when he talks about it though.
Dr. Yamauchi says “[Dr. Yamauchi:] This doesn’t mean that I don’t recognize that there are some issues that still remain; within this lifetime we will not have full knowledge. But these issues don’t even begin to undermine my faith…” (Strobel, CFC, P. 96). These are the words of someone who would not be convinced of anything other than Christianity, even if evidence of Christianity being a total fabrication were to come to light. Stating that you’re putting your faith in something that you are convinced has many issues only underscores how willfully you will bend any information to fit that narrative. This is not a good academic stance to take on any subject.
Truth That Sets us Free
The chapter ends with Strobel basking in the satisfaction of his personal quest so far, clearly attempting to evoke similar feelings within the reader. He pulls in some sources about early Christianity and the divinity of Jesus to try prove that “[Habermas:] The best explanation for these creeds is that they properly represent Jesus’ own teachings…” (Strobel, CFC, P. 97). Because I’d like to bring them up, there are a couple other methods that could account for these creeds being there are
- Paul made them a thing based on his visions
- Paul believed fully in Jesus as god
- The ideas originated from a cult based around Mithras
- Or any other religion that has gods walking around in human form
Strobel also does not acknowledge the fact that the divinity of Jesus was contested heavily at the time. So heavily, in fact, that it led to the creation of several different sects (and fights among popes) later down the line.
Citations
Books Cited
Drews, Arthur; McCabe, Joseph; The Witnesses to the Historicity of Jesus, 1912.
View Online: https://archive.org/details/witnessestohisto00drewiala/page/8/mode/2up
Remsburg, John E., The Christ: A Critical Review and Analysis of the Evidences of His Existence, 1909
View online: https://archive.org/details/christcriticalre00rems/page/40/mode/2up
Pliny the Younger, book 10b, Letter 96.
View online: https://web.archive.org/web/20200625153235/http://www.attalus.org/old/pliny10b.html#96
Carrier, Richard, Thallus and the Darkness at Christ’s death
View online: https://web.archive.org/web/20190325135719/http://www.jgrchj.net/volume8/JGRChJ8-8_Carrier.pdf
Full Quotes
Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.
Josephus, Antiquities, book 13, chapter 3, section 3
The interpolated Christian reference often cited as proof of Jesus. Not accepted as authentic by modern scholars. Believed to be a Christian interpolation based off of the gospel of Luke.
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Antiquities_of_the_Jews/Book_XVIII#Chapter_3
…Festus was now dead, and Albinus was put upon the road; so he [Ananus, the Jewish high priest] assembled the [S]anhedrin of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, him called Christ, whose name was James, and some others. And when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned: but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens, and such as were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws, they disliked what was done; they also sent to the king, desiring him to send to Ananus that he should act so no more, for that what he had already done was not to be justified; nay, some of them went also to meet Albinus, as he was upon his journey from Alexandria, and informed him that it was not lawful for Ananus to assemble a sanhedrin without his consent. Whereupon Albinus complied with what they said, and wrote in anger to Ananus, and threatened that he would bring him to punishment for what he had done; on which king Agrippa took the high priesthood from him, when he had ruled but three months, and made Jesus, the son of Damneus, high priest.
Josephus, Antiquities, Book 20, Chapter 9, Section 1.
The “Jamesian” reference cited as proof for Jesus in “Testimony by a Traitor”
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Antiquities_of_the_Jews/Book_XX#Chapter_9
But I omit any further discourse about these affairs; for there have been a great many who have composed the history of Nero; some of which have departed from the truth of facts out of favor, as having received benefits from him; while others, out of hatred to him, and the great ill-will which they bare him, have so impudently raved against him with their lies, that they justly deserve to be condemned. Nor do I wonder at such as have told lies of Nero, since they have not in their writings preserved the truth of history as to those facts that were earlier than his time, even when the actors could have no way incurred their hatred, since those writers lived a long time after them. But as to those that have no regard to truth, they may write as they please; for in that they take delight: but as to ourselves, who have made truth our direct aim, we shall briefly touch upon what only belongs remotely to this undertaking, but shall relate what hath happened to us Jews with great accuracy, and shall not grudge our pains in giving an account both of the calamities we have suffered, and of the crimes we have been guilty of. I will now therefore return to the relation of our own affairs.
Josephus, Antiquities, book 20, Chapter 8, Section 3
Mentioning that many have told lies about Nero
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Antiquities_of_the_Jews/Book_XX#Chapter_8