Ero sivun ”Jeesuksen historiallisuus” versioiden välillä

ApoWikistä
Rivi 41: Rivi 41:
===== Uuden testamentin kirjeet =====
===== Uuden testamentin kirjeet =====


{{Pääartikkeli|[[Paavalin kirjeet]]}}
Jesus is also the subject of the writings of [[Paul of Tarsus]], a [[Hellenistic Judaism|Hellenistic Jew]] who presented himself as Jesus' "Apostle to the Gentiles" and who dictated<ref>[[Joseph Barber Lightfoot]] in his ''Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians'' writes: "At this point [[{{bibleverse||Gal|6:11}}]] the apostle takes the pen from his [[amanuensis]], and the concluding paragraph is written with his own hand. From the time when letters began to be forged in his name ({{bibleverse|2|Thess|2:2}}; {{bibleverse-nb|2|Thess|3:17}}) it seems to have been his practice to close with a few words in his own handwriting, as a precaution against such forgeries… In the present case he writes a whole paragraph, summing up the main lessons of the epistle in terse, eager, disjointed sentences. He writes it, too, in large, bold characters (Gr. ''pelikois grammasin''), that his handwriting may reflect the energy and determination of his soul."</ref> letters to various churches and individuals from ''c''. 48-68. There are traditionally fourteen letters attributed to Paul, thirteen of which claim to be written by Paul, with one anonymous letter. Current scholarship is in a general consensus in considering at least seven of the letters to be authored by Paul, with views varying concerning the remaining works. Paul seems to nowhere report his own eyewitness account of [[Ministry of Jesus|Jesus' life]], but did claim [[Resurrection appearances of Jesus|knowledge of Jesus through visions]]<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians%201:11-12;&version=31; Gal 1:11-12]</ref> and 1 Cor 11:23.<ref>{{bibleverse-nb||1Corinthians|11:23|31}}</ref>
In addition, Paul certainly was personally acquainted with people who had known Jesus: the apostle Peter/Cephas (Gal 1:18-19; Gal 2:7-14; 1 Cor 9:5; 1 Cor 15:5), the apostles John and James (Gal 2:9), and [[Desposyni|Jesus' brothers]].<ref> {{bibleverse||Gal|1:19}}</ref><ref> {{bibleverse|1|Cor|9:5}}</ref> In his letters, Paul often refers to [[Law of Christ|commands of Jesus]] or events in his life that seem consistent with the Gospel accounts. Paul in many places and in a combative way relates other preachers' differing view of Jesus, suggesting that even as early as 20 years after his crucifixion Jesus was a very strong interest of Jewish moral teachers preaching to Gentiles{{Fact|date=June 2008}}, see also [[Paul of Tarsus and Judaism]].


Apostoli Paavali ei ollut ''[[Apostolien teot|Apostolien tekojen]]'' eikä hänen omien kirjeidensä perusteella koskaan tavannut Jeesusta henkilökohtaisesti. Hän tunsi Jeesuksen ainoastaan näkemiensä näkyjen ja Jeesuksen opetuslapsien kanssa käymiensä keskustelujen kautta. Paavalin vuosien [[55]] ja [[65]] välillä kirjoitettuja kirjeitä käytetään kuitenkin usein todisteena Jeesuksen historiallisuuden puolesta. Kaikki nykytutkijat eivät kuitenkaan ole sitä mieltä, että kaikki Paavalin nimiin laitetut kirjeet olisivat hänen kirjoittamiaan.
In his [[First Epistle to the Thessalonians]] Paul writes in chapter 2:14-15,<ref>{{bibleverse-nb||1Thessalonians|2:14-15|31}}</ref> referring to his fellow Jews, that they "...killed the Lord Jesus..." (although the word used can be translated as "Judaeans" rather than "Jews," and the authenticity of this passage has been doubted by some<ref>1 Thessalonians 2:13-16: A Deutero-Pauline Interpolation, Birger A. Pearson, The Harvard Theological Review, Vol. 64, No. 1 (Jan., 1971), pp. 79-94</ref><ref> 1 Thess 2:13-16: Linguistic Evidence for an Interpolation, Daryl Schmidt, Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 102, No. 2 (Jun., 1983), pp. 269-279</ref>, see also [[Responsibility for the death of Jesus]]). He also refers to the "Lord's own word" in chapter 4:15<ref>{{bibleverse-nb||1Thessalonians|4:15|31}}</ref> discussing the [[Parousia|future coming of the Lord]].


[[Kirje galatalaisille|Galatalaiskirjeessä]] Paavali sanoo käyneensä [[Jerusalem]]issa kolme vuotta sen jälkeen, kun oli nähnyt Jeesuksen näyssä [[Damasko]]n tiellä. Hän oli matkustanut [[Arabian niemimaa|Arabia]]ssa ja jälleen Damaskossa, ennen kuin matkusti [[Pietari (apostoli)|Pietarin]], jota hän kutsuu Jeesuksen apostoliksi, ja [[Jaakob (Jeesuksen veli)|Jaakobin]], jota hän kutsuu "Herran veljeksi", luokse (''Gal.'' 1:18–20 [http://raamattu.uskonkirjat.net/servlet/biblesite.Bible?formname=search&formrnd=1148324607367&search=&rng=0&submit1=Hae&ref=Gal.+1%3A18-20&ctx=0&mod1=FinRaam&mod2=FinPR&mod3=WHNU]).
In his [[Epistle to the Galatians]], Paul writes that after God "revealed his Son in" him,<ref> ({{bibleverse||Gal|1}})</ref> he did not discuss it with those who had been Apostles before him, but traveled to [[Arabia]] then back to [[Damascus]]. It was three years later that he went to [[Jerusalem in Christianity|Jerusalem]] where he saw the Apostle [[Saint Peter|Cephas/Peter]], and James, "the Lord's brother" (or "the brother of the Lord", [http://cf.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G80&Version=kjv αδελΦος] του [http://cf.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G2962&Version=kjv κυρίоς] [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians%201:18-20;&version=31; 1:18–20]), believed by most scholars to be [[James the Just]]. Paul some years later had a meeting with Peter, James, and [[John the Apostle|John]], the [[Council of Jerusalem]] (circa AD 51).
Paavali kertoo käyneensä Jerusalemissa myös neljätoista vuotta myöhemmin, jolloin hän osallistui kaupungissa pidettyyn [[Jerusalemin kokous|apostolien kokoukseeen]]. Kokouksessa väiteltiin muun muassa [[ympärileikkaus|ympärileikkauksen]] tarpeellisuudesta [[pakanuus|pakanuudesta]] kääntyneiden kristittyjen parissa.  
<!--
Paul says he won the argument and that Peter, James, and [[John the Apostle|John]] agreed that he should be the preacher to the [[Gentiles]]. Peter later visited Paul at [[Antioch]] and associated with the Gentiles, but when certain friends of James showed up they seem to have discouraged Peter from associating with the Gentiles, and Paul rebuked Peter for this. ([http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=55&chapter=2&version=31 2]) Galatians is one of the undisputed letters of Paul, so if one believes him and accepts these events as historical, then this is the earliest textual evidence for the existence of Jesus. Having a "brother" and "apostles" who are arguing with Paul over what Jesus' real intentions were during his life is impossible if he never existed.  Acts of the Apostles, written at least twenty but probably thirty or forty years after Galatians, gives a more detailed account of the Council. 
 
The significance of non-Pauline authorship varies depending on which epistle is considered, but it is notable that the 7 uncontested epistles appear to some scholars to present a more [[docetic]] and [[gnosticism|gnostic]] view than the far more orthodox epistles which constitute those in dispute, particularly more so than the pastorals. [[Princeton University]]'s Professor of Religion, [[Elaine Pagels]], a specialist in the study of gnosticism has in consequence proposed that Paul was in fact a gnostic, in her book ''[[The Gnostic Paul]]''; a view which implies that the Pastorals, and the other disputed Pauline epistles, were created by the church to bring Paul's followers into the fold and to simultaneously subtly counter his arguments. Pagels' arguments have not found widespread acceptance in academia.
 
The epistles that the Bible itself attributes to other individuals (Peter, James, John, and Jude) are generally considered to be written at a much later date, and hence are rarely considered in this context.
-->


==== Kaanonin ulkopuoliset kirjoitukset ====
In Paul's [[First Epistle to the Corinthians]] he says in chapter 2:8<ref> {{bibleverse-nb||1Corinthians|2:8|31}} </ref> that the "... rulers of this age&nbsp;... crucified the Lord of glory ...". In 1 Corinthians 7:10-11 <ref>{{bibleverse-nb||1Corinthians|7:10-11|31}}</ref> he gives what he says are commands of "the Lord" regarding [[Expounding of the Law#Divorce|divorce]]. In 1 Corinthians 9:5<ref>{{bibleverse-nb||1Corinthians|9:5|31}}</ref> he refers to "the Lord's brothers" (or "the brethren of the Lord", [[αδελφοι του κυριου]]) and refers to what "the Lord has commanded" in 1 Corinthians 9:14.<ref>{{bibleverse-nb||1Corinthians|9:14|31}}</ref> Paul gives a description of the [[Last Supper]] in 1 Corinthians 11:23-26,<ref>{{bibleverse-nb||1Corinthians|11:23-26|31}}</ref> which he says he received from "the Lord". In 15:3-8<ref> {{bibleverse-nb||1Corinthians|15:3-8|31}}</ref> he talks of the death and resurrection of Christ and [[Resurrection appearances of Jesus|witnesses to resurrection appearances]], including Peter, whom he knew.
====== Tuomaan evankeliumi ======


{{Pääartikkeli|[[Tuomaan evankeliumi]]}}
In his letter to the [[Epistle to the Philippians|Philippians]],<ref> {{bibleverse-nb||Philippians|2:5-11|31|}}</ref> Paul writes that Christ Jesus had the form of God, and speaks of his "appearance as a man" and his "human likeness". In his letter to the [[Epistle to the Romans|Romans]] 1:1-4,<ref>{{bibleverse-nb||Romans|1:1-4|31}}</ref> Paul describes "Christ Jesus", as the "[[Son of God]]" and says that Christ Jesus was from the seed of David, "according to the flesh".  He says that he was a minister to the Jews in Romans 15:8.<ref>{{bibleverse-nb||Romans|15:8|}}</ref><ref>Murphy p.69</ref>


Tuomaan evankeliumi on kokoelma Jeesuksen nimiin laitettuja sanontoja (''logia''). Näin se vastaa teoreettista [[Q-lähde|Q-evankeliumia]], johon se saattaakin liittyä. Jotkut tutkijat katsovat, että evankeliumi olisi jopa muita vanhempi, mutta toiset taas ajoittavat sen niinkin myöhään kuin vuoteen 150, perustaen ajoituksensa evankeliumissa oleviin gnostilaisiin vaikutteisiin ja siihen, ettei evankeliumia mainita aikalaislähteissä ennen toisen vuosisadan jälkimmäistä puoliskoa. Evankeliumi kärsii myös siitä, ettei siitä ole säilynyt kovin montaa kopiota [http://answers.org/bible/gospelofthomas.html][http://www.ntcanon.org/table.shtml].
====The Acts of the Apostles====
{{main|Historical reliability of the Acts of the Apostles}}


Evankeliumi ei myöskään mainitse [[Jeesuksen ylösnousemus]]ta, minkä jotkut tutkijat näkevät merkittävänä puutteena. Toisaalta monet tutkijat ovat katsoneet, että Markuksen evankeliumi on saattanut päättyä alun perin ilman mainintaa Jeesuksen ilmestymisistä kuolemansa jälkeen, erityisesti koska kaikkein vanhimmat Markuksen evankeliumin luvun 16 käsikirjoitukset eivät sisällä samaa loppua kuin myöhemmät käsikirjoitukset, joita on käytetty nykyisten raamatunkäännösten pohjana [http://www.equip.org/free/DG040-2.pdf]
The book of the [[Acts of the Apostles]], written at least twenty but probably thirty or forty years after Galatians, gives a more detailed account of the Council of Jerusalem in chapter 15.<ref>{{bibleverse-nb||Acts|15|31}}</ref> Acts also claims [[Desposyni|Jesus' family]] , including his [[Mary (mother of Jesus)|mother]], were members of the early church.<ref>{{bibleverse-nb||Acts|1:12-14|31}}</ref>


====== Gnostilaiset kirjoitukset ======
====Ancient Creeds====
 
{{main|Creed}}
Myös jotkut gnostilaiset kirjoitukset tarjoavat suhteellisen varhaisia kuvauksia Jeesuksen elämästä. Ne ovat arvokkaita siksi, ettei niistä koskaan tullut osa Raamatun kaanonia, joten niiden ei tarvinnut koskaan noudattaa muodostunutta kristillistä oikeaoppisuutta. Gnostilaisilla kirjoituksilla on kuitenkin taipumusta olla enemmän vertauskuvallisia kuin historiallisia, ja ne ajoittuvat enimmäkseen vuosiin 150–300. Tämän vuoksi niitä ei voida pitää luotettavina lähteinä koskien historiallista Jeesusta. Gnostilaiset mielipiteet Jeesuksesta vaihtelivat [[doketismi]]sta täydelliseen myyttiin ja hänen henkilöään käytettiin lähes aina vertauskuvana, jonka suuhun gnostilaiset opetukset sijoitettiin. Jeesuksen ylösnousemus nähtiin vertauskuvana valaistumiselle, jonka jokainen voi saavuttaa.
 
==== Ei-kristilliset kirjoitukset ====
 
Ei-kristityistä historiankirjoittajista vain harvojen tiedetään kirjoittaneen mitään Jeesuksesta tai varhaiskristityistä. Jeesuksesta ei ole arkisto- tai arkeologista todistusaineistoa siltä ajalta, jolloin hänen sanotaan eläneen, vaikka tuolta ajalta on säilynyt useiden kirjoittajien tekstejä.
 
Suurimmalla osalla niistä kirjoittajista, joiden kirjoituksia on säilynyt, eivät kuitenkaan kiinnittäneet juurikaan huomiota [[Lähi-itä|Lähi-idän]] tapahtumiin saati sitten nimenomaisesti [[Juudea]]an muutenkaan. Näin heillä ei olisi välttämättä ollut juurikaan syytä mainita paikallista saarnaajaa, joka toimi julkisesti noin kolmen vuoden ajan. Jeesus ei esiinny [[Filon Aleksandrialainen|Filon Aleksandrialaisen]], [[Seneca vanhempi|Seneca vanhemman]] eikä [[Plutarkhos|Plutarkhoksen]] kirjoituksissa, mikä saattaa viitata siihen, että jos Jeesus oli olemassa, hän ei ole herättänyt juurikaan huomiota, koska nämä kirjoittajat mainitsevat useita henkilöitä, joiden historiallinen arvo oli paljon pienempi.
 
Neljän ei-kristillisen historioitsijan kirjoituksissa on kuitenkin kohtia, jotka saattavat mahdollisesti viitata Jeesukseen. Nämä ovat [[Plinius nuorempi]], [[Josephus]], [[Suetonius]] ja [[Tacitus]]. Nämä kohdat viittaavat kuitenkin yleensä enemmän varhaiskristittyihin yleensä kuin Jeesukseen. Plinius nuorempi tuomitsi kristityt helposti harhaanjohdettavina hölmöinä, samoin kuin [[Lukianos]] muutamaa vuotta myöhemmin. Suetonius tekee epäselvän viittauksen henkilöön nimeltä "Chrestus". Tacitus (''Annaalit'') antaa yhteenvedon Jeesukseen liittyvistä yleisistä mielipiteistä, mutta ei osoita, että hänellä olisi ollut käytettävissään riippumattomia lähteitä. Mainitusta neljästä historioitsijasta Josephuksen kirjoitukset ovat kaikkein mielenkiintoisimpia Jeesuksen historiallisuuden tutkijoiden kannalta.
 
Varhaiskristilliset kirjoittajat eivät kuitenkaan viittaa mainittuihin kohtiin, ja Tacituksen tapauksessa hänen kirjoituksensa eivät mainitse kristittyjä ennen [[Sulpicius Severus|Sulpicius Severuksen]] tekemää käännöstä. Merkittävin ei-kristillinen todistus tulee Josephukselta. Jeesuksen lisäksi hänen kirjoituksensa mainitsevat myös [[Johannes Kastaja]]n ja [[Jaakob (Jeesuksen veli)|Jaakob Vanhurskaan]], tosin jotkut ovat kyseenalaistaneet sen, onko Jaakobin yhteydessä oleva viittaus "Kristuksen veljeen" alkuperäinen vai myöhempi lisäys. Ainut selonteko, joka mainitsee Jeesuksen kiistämättömästi, on Josephuksen nimellä [[Testimonium Flavianum]] tunnettu kohta. Sen aitoudesta on kuitenkin myös käyty paljon väittelyitä, koska vaikuttaa oudolta, että Josephus olisi elinikäisenä juutalaisena kutsunut Jeesusta [[messias|messiaaksi]]. Monet tutkijat katsovat, että Josephuksen todistuksen runkoteksti olisi aito, mutta kristityt olisivat myöhemmin tehneet siihen lisäyksiä.
 
===== Josephus =====
<!--
{{Pääartikkeli|[[Josephus Jeesuksesta]]}}
-->
Tärkein juutalainen lähde on [[Josephus|Flavius Josephuksen]] (n. [[37]]-[[100|100 jaa]].) (37–100 jaa.), ensimmäisen vuosisadan merkittävä historioitsija. Hänen yksi tunnetuimmista teoksistaan on kaksikymmentäyksiosainen juutalaisten historiaa käsittelevä ''Antiquities'' (''Juutalaisten muinaisajat''), jonka hän sai valmiiksi vuosien [[93]] ja [[94]] välillä. Tästä teoksesta löytyy kaksi selvää viittausta Jeesukseen.


Merkittävin maininta on katkelma, jota kutsutaan nimellä [[Testimonium Flavianum]]:
The authors whose works are contained in the New Testament sometimes quote from creeds, or confessions of faith, that obviously predate their writings. Scholars suppose that some of these creeds date to within a few years of Jesus' death, and were developed within the Christian community in Jerusalem.<ref>A basic text is that of Oscar Cullmann, available in English in a translation by J. K. S. Reid titled, ''The Earliest Christian Confessions'' (London: Lutterworth, 1949)</ref> Though embedded within the texts of the New Testament, these creeds are a distinct source for [[Early Christianity]].


::"Niihin aikoihin siellä eli Jeesus, viisas ihminen, jos häntä voi nimittää ihmiseksi. Sillä hän oli henkilö, joka teki yllättäviä sankaritekoja ja oli sellaisten ihmisten opettaja, jotka iloiten ottivat vastaan totuuden. Hän voitti puolelleen monia juutalaisia ja monia kreikkalaisia. Hän oli Kristus. Kun Pilatus, kuultuaan että häntä syyttivät keskuudessamme korkeimmassa asemassa olevat miehet, oli tuominnut hänet ristiinnaulittavaksi, ne, jotka olivat ensin oppineet rakastamaan häntä, eivät luopuneet kiintymyksestään häntä kohtaan. Kolmantena päivänä hän ilmestyi heille herättynä takaisin henkiin, sillä Jumalan profeetat olivat profetoineet tämän ja lukemattomia muita hämmästyttäviä asioita hänestä. Ja kristittyjen heimo, jota hänen mukaansa sillä nimellä kutsutaan, ei tähän päivään mennessä ole kadonnut." (Josephus. ''Antiquitates Judaicae'' 18.63-64)
1 Corinthians 15:3-4<ref>{{bibleverse||1Corinthians|15:3-4}}</ref> reads: "For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the [[Tanakh|Scriptures]], that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures." This contains a Christian creed of pre-Pauline origin.<ref>Neufeld, ''The Earliest Christian Confessions'' (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964) p. 47</ref><ref>Reginald H. Fuller, ''The Formation of the Resurrection Narratives'' (New York: Macmillan, 1971) p. 10</ref><ref>Wolfhart Pannenberg, ''Jesus – God and Man'' translated Lewis Wilkins and Duane Pribe (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1968) p. 90</ref><ref>Oscar Cullmann, ''The Earlychurch: Studies in Early Christian History and Theology'', ed. A. J. B. Higgins (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1966) p. 64</ref><ref>Hans Conzelmann, ''1 Corinthians'', translated James W. Leitch (Philadelphia: Fortress 1969) p. 251</ref><ref>Bultmann, ''Theology of the New Testament'' vol. 1 pp. 45, 80-82, 293</ref><ref>R. E. Brown, ''The Virginal Conception and Bodily Resurrection of Jesus'' (New York: Paulist Press, 1973) pp. 81, 92</ref> The antiquity of the creed has been located by many Biblical scholars to less than a decade after Jesus' death, originating from the Jerusalem apostolic community.<ref>see Wolfhart Pannenberg, ''Jesus – God and Man'' translated Lewis Wilkins and Duane Pribe (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1968)p. 90; Oscar Cullmann, ''The Early church: Studies in Early Christian History and Theology'', ed. A. J. B. Higgins (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1966) p. 66-66; R. E. Brown, ''The Virginal Conception and Bodily Resurrection of Jesus'' (New York: Paulist Press, 1973) pp. 81; Thomas Sheehan, ''First Coming: How the Kingdom of God Became Christianity'' (New York: Random House, 1986 pp. 110, 118; Ulrich Wilckens, ''Resurrection'' translated A. M. Stewart (Edinburgh: Saint Andrew, 1977) p. 2; Hans Grass, ''Ostergeschen und Osterberichte'', Second Edition (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1962) p96; Grass favors the origin in Damascus.</ref> Concerning this creed, Campenhausen wrote, "This account meets all the demands of historical reliability that could possibly be made of such a text,"<ref>Hans von Campenhausen, "The Events of Easter and the Empty Tomb," in ''Tradition and Life in the Church'' (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1968) p. 44</ref> whilst A. M. Hunter said, "The passage therefore preserves uniquely early and verifiable testimony. It meets every reasonable demand of historical reliability."<ref>Archibald Hunter, ''Works and Words of Jesus'' (1973) p. 100</ref>


Testimonium Flavianum on tunnetusti ristiriitainen ja kyseenalainen. Muiden muassa [[John Dominic Crossan]] ja [[K. H. Rengstorff]] ovat huomauttaneet, että nämä kohdat vaikuttavat sisäisen todistusaineiston perusteella olevan epäyhteensopivia muiden Josephuksen kirjoitusten ja Josephuksesta tunnettujen asioiden kanssa, mikä on johtanut heidät ajattelemaan, että nämä kohdat on lisätty myöhemmin joko kokonaisuudessaan tai osaksi.
Other relevant creeds which predate the texts wherein they are found{{Fact|date=February 2008}} that have been identified are 1 John 4:2:<ref>{{bibleverse||1John|4:2}}</ref> "This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God",<ref>Cullmann, ''Confessions'' p. 32</ref><ref> {{bibleverse||2Timothy|2:8}}</ref>  "Remember Jesus Christ, raised from the dead, this is my Gospel",<ref>Bultmann, ''Theology of the New Testament'' vol 1, pp. 49, 81; Joachim Jeremias, ''The Eucharistic Words of Jesus'' translated Norman Perrin (London: SCM Press, 1966) p. 102</ref> Romans|1:3-4:<ref>{{bibleverse||Romans|1:3-4}}</ref> "regarding his Son, who as to his human nature was a descendant of David, and who through the spirit of holiness was declared with power to be the [[Son of God]] by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord.",<ref>Wolfhart Pannenberg, ''Jesus – God and Man'' translated Lewis Wilkins and Duane Pribe (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1968) pp. 118, 283, 367; Neufeld, ''The Earliest Christian Confessions'' (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964) pp. 7, 50; C. H. Dodd, ''The Apostolic Preaching and its Developments'' (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1980) p. 14</ref> and 1 Timothy 3:16:<ref>{{bibleverse||1Timothy|3:16}}</ref> "He appeared in a body, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory," an early creedal hymn.<ref>Reginald Fuller, ''[[Reginald H. Fuller#The Foundations of New Testament Christology (1965)|The Foundations of New Testament Christology]]'' (New York: Scriner's, 1965) pp. 214, 216, 227, 239; Joachim Jeremias, ''The Eucharistic Words of Jesus'' translated Norman Perrin (London: SCM Press, 1966) p. 102; Neufeld, ''The Earliest Christian Confessions'' (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964) pp. 7, 9, 128</ref>


Onkin erittäin todennäköistä että varhaiset kristityt kopioijat ovat muokanneet Josephuksen alkuperäistä tekstiä, koska sen sisältö on liian kristillistä ollakseen juutalaisen kirjoittama. Tekstissä annetaan ymmärtää, että Jeesus oli enemmän kuin ihminen, että hän oli Kristus ja että hän nousi kuolleista kolmantena päivänä. Kirkkoisä [[Origenes|Origeneen]] mukaan Josephus ei uskonut Jeesuksen olevan Messias eli Kristus (''Contra Celsum'' 1.47). Mutta puoltaviakin argumentteja on olemassa: katkelma löytyy kaikista säilyneistä käsikirjoituksista, ja toisaalta mitään muuta kohtaa Josephuksen teoksessa ''Antiquities'' ei ole kyseenalaistettu. Katkelma on kuitenkin joissakin käsikirjoituksissa, esimerkiksi eräässä 900-luvulta peräisin olevassa vaihtoehtoista käsikirjoitustraditiota edustavassa käsikirjoituksessa, erilainen. Jotkut tutkijat katsovat kuitenkin myös tämän version olevan virheellinen, sillä sen kirjoittaja [[Agapios Hierapolislainen]] vaikuttaa lainanneen kohtaa ulkomuistista. {{Lähde||15. syyskuuta 2008}}
====New Testament apocrypha====
Jesus is a large factor in New Testament apocrypha, works excluded from the [[Biblical canon|canon]] as it developed because they were judged not to be [[Biblical inspiration|inspired]]. These texts are almost entirely dated to the mid second century or later, though a few texts, such as the [[Didache]], may be first century in origin. Some of these works are discussed below:


Jonkinlaisena tutkijoiden konsensuksena Josephuksen todistuksen suhteen voidaan pitää [[John Meier]]in näkemystä, jonka mukaan Josephuksen todistus on kolmea lisäystä lukuun ottamatta aito. Näitä ovat edellä mainitut: "jos häntä voi nimittää ihmiseksi", "Hän oli Kristus" ja maininta ylösnousemuksesta. [[Ohio]]laisen [[Miami University]] -yliopiston muinaishistorian professori [[Edwin M. Yamauchi]] mainitsee, että nykyään juutalaisten ja kristittyjen kesken vallitsee huomattava yksimielisyys siitä, että kyseinen kohta on autenttinen, vaikka siinä saattaa olla joitakin lisäyksiä. Josephuksen maininta Jeesuksesta ei siis ole kokonaisuudessaan väärennetty, mutta on vaikea sanoa, mitä alkuperäinen teksi on sanonut.
=====Gnostic texts=====
Certain Gnostic texts mention Jesus in the context of his earthly existence, and some scholars have argued that Gnostic texts could contain plausible traditions.<ref>James M. Robinson, ed., ''The Nag Hammadi Library in English'' (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1977) and especially his essay in Hedrick and Hodgson, ''Nag Hammadi, Gnosticism, and Early Christianity'' (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1986)</ref><ref>[[Elaine Pagels]], ''The Gnostic Gospels'' (New York: Random House, 1979)</ref><ref>R. E. Brown, "The Christians Who Lost Out" in ''The New York Times Book Review'', 20 January 1980 p. 3; Koester in Robinson, ''Nag Hammadi in English'', vol. 2 pp. 4, 47, 68, 150-154, 180. It is important to stress that all these scholars, with perhaps the exception of Pagels (whom the rest were critical of on this point) distanced themselves from using the texts as historical sources for the most part, and only proceeded to consider information therein with great caution.</ref> Examples of such texts include the ''[[Gospel of Truth]]'', ''Treatise on Resurrection'', and the ''[[Apocryphon of John]]'', the latter of which opens with the following:
<blockquote>It happened one day when John, the brother of James &mdash; who are sons of Zebedee &mdash; went up and came to the temple, that a Pharisee named Arimanius approached him and said to him: "Where is your master whom you followed?" And he said to them: "He has gone to the place from which he came." The Pharisee said to him: "This Nazarene deceived you all with deception and filled your ears with lies and closed your hearts and turned you from the traditions of your fathers."<ref>''Apocryphon of John'' 1:5-17</ref></blockquote>
Of all the Gnostic texts, however, the ''[[Gospel of Thomas]]'' had drawn the most attention. It contains a list of sayings attributed to Jesus. It lacks a narrative of Jesus treating his deeds in a historical sense. The majority of scholars date it to the early-mid second century,<ref>{{cite book
  | last = Ehrman
  | first = Bart
  | authorlink = Bart Ehrman
  | title = Lost Christianities
  | publisher = Oxford University Press
  | location = New York
  | date = 2003
  | pages = xi-xii
  | doi =
  | isbn = }}</ref>
while a minority view contends for an early date of perhaps 50, citing a relationship to the hypothetical [[Q document]] among other reasons.<ref>{{citation
|contribution-url=http://books.google.com/books?id=UiSFUJ6al1IC&pg=PA125&vq=%22it+may+well+date+from+the+first+century&dq=%22gospel+of+thomas%22+helmut&as_brr=3&sig=fcJmRiRQXLTb_0u6fAs7xDfDpMA
|page=125
|first=Helmut
|last=Koester
|first2=Thomas O.
|last2=Lambdin (translator)
|contribution=The Gospel of Thomas
|editor-first=James MacConkey
|editor-last=Robinson
|title=The Nag Hammadi Library in English
|publisher=E. J. Brill
|location=Leiden, New York, Cologne
|date=1996
|isbn=9004088563
|edition=Revised
}}</ref><ref>Miller 6; it also is not quoted in any contemporary writings, and suffers from a paucity of manuscripts, see these articles at [http://answers.org/bible/gospelofthomas.html answers.org] and [http://www.ntcanon.org/table.shtml ntcanon.org]</ref>


Toinen Josephuksen teoksen kohta joka mainitsee Jeesuksen, on vähemmän kyseenalainen.
===Early Church fathers===
Early Christian sources outside the New Testament also mention Jesus and details of his life. Important texts from the Apostolic Fathers are, to name just the most significant and ancient, [[Pope Clement I|Clement of Rome]] (''c.'' 96),<ref>Clement, ''Corinthians'' 42</ref> [[Ignatius of Antioch]] (''c.'' 107-110),<ref>Ignatius, ''[[Letter to the Trallians]]'' 9, ''[[Letter to the Smyrneans]]'' 1, 3</ref> and [[Justin Martyr]].<ref>Justin ''First Apology'' 30, 32, 34-35, 47-48, 50; ''Dialogue with Trypho'' 12, 77, 97, 107-108, &c.</ref>


::"Hän kutsui koolle Sanhedrinin ja toi heidän eteensä miehen nimeltä Jaakob, sen Jeesuksen veli, jota kutsuttiin Kristuksesi, ja jotakin muita. Hän syytti heitä lain rikkomisesta ja lähetti heidät kivitettäviksi." (Josephus. ''Antiquitates Judaicae'' 20.200)
Perhaps the most significant Patristic sources are the early references of [[Papias]] and [[Quadratus of Athens|Quadratus]] (d. 124), mostly reported by [[Eusebius of Caesarea|Eusebius]] in the fourth century, which both mention eyewitnesses of Jesus’ ministry and healings who were still alive in their own time (the late first century). Papias, in giving his sources for the information contained in his (largely lost) commentaries, stated (according to [[Eusebius of Caesarea|Eusebius]]):
: ''…if by chance anyone who had been in attendance on the elders should come my way, I inquired about the words of the elders &mdash; that is, what according to the elders Andrew or Peter said, or Philip, or Thomas or James, or John or Matthew or any other of the Lord’s disciples, and whatever Aristion and the elder John, the Lord’s disciples, were saying.''<ref>translation by Richard Bauckham in his ''Jesus and the Eyewitnesses'' (Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2006), pp. 15-16.</ref>
Thus, while Papias was collecting his information (''c''. 90), Aristion and the elder John (who were Jesus’ disciples) were still alive and teaching in Asia minor, and Papias gathered information from people who had known them.<ref>Richard Bauckham, ''Jesus and the Eyewitnesses'' (Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2006), pp. 15-21.</ref> Another Father, Quadratus, who wrote an apology to the emperor [[Hadrian]], was reported by [[Eusebius of Caesarea|Eusebius]] to have stated:
: ''The words of our Savior were always present, for they were true: those who were healed, those who rose from the dead, those who were not only seen in the act of being healed or raised, but were also always present, not merely when the Savior was living on earth, but also for a considerable time after his departure, so that some of them survived even to our own times.''<ref>Quoted in Eusebius, ''Ecclesiastical History'' 4.3.2, translation by Richard Bauckham in his ''Jesus and the Eyewitnesses'' (Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2006), p. 53.</ref>
By “our Savior” Quadratus means Jesus, and by “our times” it has been argued that he may refer to his early life, rather than when he wrote (117-124), which would be a reference contemporary with Papias.<ref>Richard Bauckham, ''Jesus and the Eyewitnesses'' (Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2006), pp. 53l.</ref>


Kuuluisan Josephus-tutkijan [[Louis Feldman]]in mukaan tämän katkelman aitous on lähes yleisesti hyväksytty. Ne tutkijat jotka kieltävät tekstin aitouden muodostavat pienen vähemmistön. [[Scott Oser]] toteaa artikkelissaan [http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/scott_oser/hojfaq.html Historicity Of Jesus FAQ]: "While there is some reason to believe that this second passage is a fabrication, there is not enough evidence to definitely conclude this." Yamauchi toteaa, ettei hän tunne ainuttakaan tutkijaa, joka olisi onnistuneesti kumonnut tämän kohdan.
===Greco-Roman sources===


===== Plinius nuorempi =====
There are passages relevant to Christianity in the works of four major non-Christian writers of the late 1st and early 2nd centuries &ndash; [[Josephus]], [[Tacitus]], [[Suetonius]], and [[Pliny the Younger]]. However, these are generally references to early ''Christians'' rather than a historical Jesus. Of the four, Josephus' writings, which document [[John the Baptist]], [[James the Just]], and possibly also Jesus, are of the most interest to scholars dealing with the historicity of Jesus (see below). Tacitus, in his [[Annals (Tacitus)|''Annals'']] written ''c''. 115, mentions popular opinion about ''Christus'', without historical details (see also: [[Tacitus on Jesus]]). There is an obscure reference to a Jewish leader called "Chrestus" in Suetonius. (According to Suetonius, chapter 25, there occurred in Rome, during the reign of emperor Claudius (circa AD 50), "persistent disturbances ... at the instigation of Chrestus".<ref>G. R. S. Mead : ''Did Jesus Live 100 B.C.?'' pp. 50-51</ref> [http://www.gnosis.org/library/grs-mead/jesus_live_100/ch3.html] Mention in Acts of "After this, Paul left Athens and went to Corinth. There he met a Jew named Aquila, a native of Pontus, who had recently come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had ordered all the Jews to leave Rome." (''Acts of the Apostles'' 18:1-2) has been conjectured<ref>[]</ref><ref>[http://firstnewtestament.netfirms.com/origin_name_christian.htm origin of the name "christian"<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> to refer to the expulsion at the times of these "persistent disturbances". {{Fact|date=July 2008}}


[[Plinius nuorempi]] viittaa kristittyihin noin vuonna [[112]] keisari [[Trajanus|Trajanuksen]] sekä [[Pontus|Pontuksen]] ja [[Bithynia]]n kuvernöörin kanssa käydyssä kirjeenvaihdossa. Siinä Plinius pyytää neuvoa, kuinka hänen tulisi käsitellä kristittyjä, jotka kieltäytyvät palvomasta keisaria jumalana ja palvovat sen sijaan "Kristusta" jumalana. Plinius kuitenkin ainoastaan kertoo, mihin pidätetyt uskoivat, eikä mainitse nimeä Jeesus.
====Josephus====
{{Main|Josephus on Jesus}}


Plinius kirjoitti muun muassa:
[[Flavius Josephus]] (c. [[37]]&ndash;c. [[100]]), a Jew and Roman citizen who worked under the patronage of the [[Flavian dynasty|Flavians]], wrote the ''[[Antiquities of the Jews]]'' in 93 AD. In these works, Jesus is mentioned twice. The one directly concerning Jesus has come to be known as the ''[[Josephus on Jesus#Testimonium Flavianum|Testimonium Flavianum]]''.


::"Katsoin oikeaksi vapauttaa ne, jotka kielsivät olevansa tai olleensa kristittyjä ja minun saneluni mukaan kutsuivat avukseen jumalia ja uhrasivat suitsuketta ja viiniä kuvallesi, jonka olin käskenyt yhdessä jumalien kuvien kanssa tuoda tätä varten paikalle, ja tämän lisäksi herjasivat Kristusta ­­­– kaikki sellaista, johon todellista kristittyä sanotaan olevan mahdoton pakottaa. Monet, joita tällä syytöksellä haastetut (kristittynä oleminen) heti myönsivät olleensa kristittyjä, mutta jo hylänneensä sen; he olivat todellakin olleet kristittyjä, mutta luopuneet siitä pois, jotkut kolme vuotta sitten, jotkut aiemmin, jotkut niinkin kauan kuin kaksikymmentäviisi vuotta sitten. Kaikki nämä palvoivat kuvaasi ja jumalten patsaita, ja kirosivat Kristuksen". (Pliniuksen kirje Trajanukselle 10.96) [http://www.helsinki.fi/teol/hyel/opiskelu/justinosmarttyyri/apologia2kommentaari.htm] [http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/jod/texts/pliny.html]
In the first passage, called the ''Testimonium Flavianum'', it is written:


===== Suetonius =====
<blockquote>About this time came Jesus, a wise man, if indeed it is appropriate to call him a man. For he was a performer of paradoxical feats, a teacher of people who accept the unusual with pleasure, and he won over many of the Jews and also many Greeks. He was the Christ. When Pilate, upon the accusation of the first men amongst us, condemned him to be crucified, those who had formerly loved him did not cease to follow him, for he appeared to them on the third day, living again, as the divine prophets foretold, along with a myriad of other marvellous things concerning him. And the tribe of the Christians, so named after him, has not disappeared to this day.<ref>Josephus ''[http://www.ccel.org/j/josephus/works/ant-18.htm Antiquities 18.3.3]''</ref></blockquote>


[[Suetonius|Gaius Suetonius]] (n. [[69]]-[[140]]) kirjoitti vuonna [[112]] seuraavaa keisari [[Claudius|Claudiuksen]] elämäkerrassaan teoksessa ''Kahdentoista keisarin elämä'':
Concerns have been raised about the authenticity of the passage, and it is widely held by scholars that at least part of the passage has been altered by a later scribe. The ''Testimonium'''s authenticity has attracted much scholarly discussion and controversy of [[Interpolation (manuscripts)|interpolation]]. [[Louis H. Feldman]] counts 87 articles published during the period of 1937-1980, "the overwhelming majority of which question its authenticity in whole or in part."<ref>Feldman (1989), p. 430</ref>  Judging from Alice Whealey's 2003 survey of the historiography, it seems that the majority of modern scholars consider that Josephus really did write something here about Jesus, but that the text that has reached us is corrupt.<ref> Alice Whealey, Josephus on Jesus (New York, 2003) p.194.</ref> However, there has been no consensus on which portions have been altered, or to what degree.


::''"Iudaeos, impulsore Chresto, assidue tumultuantes Roma expulit"'' ("Hän karkotti juutalaiset Roomasta, koska nämä kapinoivat jatkuvasti Chrestuksen aloitteesta", vertaa [[Apostolien teot]] 18:2).
In the second, very brief mention, Josephus calls James "the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ."<ref>Josephus ''[http://www.ccel.org/ccel/josephus/works/files/ant-20.htm Antiquities 20:9.1]''</ref> The great majority of scholars consider this shorter reference to Jesus to be substantially authentic,<ref>Louis H. Feldman, "Josephus" Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 3, pp. 990–91</ref> although a minority has raised doubts.<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/testimonium.html#reference | title=Testimonium Flavianum | publisher= EarlyChristanWritings.com | accessdate=2006-10-07 }}</ref>


Hän mainitsi kristityt jo aiemmin keisari [[Nero]]n elämäkerran yhteydessä:
In antiquity, [[Origen]] recorded that Josephus did not believe Jesus was the Christ,<ref>Origin ''[http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf09.xvi.ii.iii.xvii.html Commentary on Matthew 10.17]; ''[[Against Celsus]]'' [http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf04.vi.ix.i.xlviii.html 1.47]</ref> as it seems to suggest in the quote above. Dr. [[L. Michael White]] argued against authenticity, citing that parallel sections of Josephus's ''Jewish War'' do not mention Jesus, and that some Christian writers as late as the third century, who quoted from Josephus's ''Antiquities'', do not mention this passage.<ref name=multiple2> L. Michael White, ''From Jesus to Christianity.'' HarperCollinsPublishers, 2004. P. 97–98 </ref> However, Alice Whealey has shown that it is far from clear that any third century Christians other than Origen quoted from or even directly knew ''Antiquities.''<ref>Josephus on Jesus,p. 8, p. 11.</ref>  While very few scholars believe the whole Testimonium is genuine,<ref>i.e. Daniel-Rops, ''Silence of Jesus' Contemporaries'' p. 21 and G. R. Habermas, ''The Historical Jesus'' p. 193</ref> most scholars have found at least some authentic words of Josephus in the passage,<ref>John Drane ''Introducing the New Testament'' (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1986) p. 138; John P. Meier. ''A Marginal Jew'' (Anchor Bible Reference Library, 1991) v.1; also, James H. Charlesworth, ''Jesus Within Judaism'' (Garden City: Doubleday, 1988) p. 96</ref> since some portions are written in his style.<ref>Henri Daniel-Rops, ''Silence of Jesus' Contemporaries'' p. 21; J.N.D. Anderson, ''Christianity: The Witness of History'' (London: Tyndale, 1969)p. 20; F.F. Bruce, ''New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?'' (Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1967) p. 108</ref>


::"Rangaistuksen kohteena olivat kristityt, jotka olivat uuteen paheelliseen kulttiin kuuluvia ihmisiä." [http://www.sro.fi/loytoretki/luennot/tekstit/tj_mitatiedammejeesuksesta.htm]
The main reason to believe Josephus did originally mention Jesus is the fact that the majority of scholars accept the authenticity of his passage on Jesus' brother James. Arguably the main reason to accept that Josephus also wrote a version of the Testimonium Flavianum is the fact that Jerome and Michael the Syrian quote literal translations of the text in a form reading, more skeptically than the textus receptus, that "he was thought to be the Christ" rather than "he was the Christ." The identical wording of Jerome and Michael the Syrian proves the existence of an originally Greek Testimonium reading this, since Latin Christian scholars and Syriac scholars did not read each others' works, but both commonly translated Greek Christian works.


Jotkut ovat katsoneet Suetoniuksen mainitseman "Chrestuksen" olevan väärä kirjoitusmuoto "Christuksesta" ("Kristus") ja siten mahdollinen viittaus Jeesukseen. Suetonius kuitenkin antaa ymmärtää, että kyseessä ollut henkilö olisi ollut Roomassa vuonna [[54]], jolloin hän ei voisi viitata Jeesukseen.
[[Shlomo Pines]] and a few other scholars have argued that the version of the Testimonium written by the 10th century Arab historian named Agapius of Manbij is closer to what one would expect Josephus to have written, and the similarities between the two passages imply a Christian author later removed Josephus' conservative tone and added interpolations.<ref>F.E Peters, ''Judaism, Christianity, and Islam'' Vol.1 p. 149 </ref>
Pines cites Josephus as having written:


Suetonius on kuitenkin saattanut käsittää Kristuksen henkilöyden ja hänen merkityksensä kristityille väärin. Termi "Chrestus" esiintyy myös muissa teksteissä Jeesukseen viitateen, mikä osoittaa, että ajatus kirjoitusvirheestä ei ole mahdoton. Chrestus oli kuitenkin myös yleinen nimi Roomassa, se tarkoitti "hyvää" tai "hyödyllistä", ollen erityisen yleinen nimi [[orjuus|orjilla]], ja Suetoniuksen kuvaamat levottomuudet käsittelevät juuri orjien kapinaa. Tämän vuoksi suurin osa tutkijoista ei katso, että kohta viittaisi Jeesukseen.
<blockquote>At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus. And 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 desert 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.<ref>Agapius ''Kitab al-'Unwan, 239-240''</ref></blockquote>


===== Tacitus =====
However, it has been argued that Agapius' text is almost surely a paraphrase of the  Testimonium from the Syriac translation of Eusebius of Caesarea's ''Historia Ecclesiastica'', and that it is Michael the Syrian's Syriac Testimonium, which also derives from the Syriac ''Historia Ecclesiastica'',along with the Latin translation of Jerome that are the most important witnesses to Josephus' original passage on Jesus.<ref>Alice Whealey, "The Testimonium Flavianum in Syriac and Arabic" ''New Testament Studies'' 54.4 (2008).</ref>
<!--
{{Pääartikkeli|[[Tacitus Jeesuksesta]]}}
-->
[[Tacitus]] kirjoitti kaksi tekstikappaletta Jeesuksesta ja kristinuskosta vuonna [[116]]. Ensimmäinen sanoo, että kristittyjä oli Roomassa keisari [[Nero]]n aikana ([[54]]-[[68]]). Toinen sanoo, että kristinusko nousi Roomassa ja Juudeassa, ja että prokuraattori [[Pontius Pilatus]] oli lähettänyt "Kristuksen" kuolemaan:


::"Pysyvä huhu arveli keisari Neroa tämän tulipalon sytyttäjäksi. Voidakseen tukahduttaa huhun, hän syytti rikoksesta lahkoa, jota yleisesti vieroksuttiin sen jumalanpalvelustapojen vuoksi ja jonka jäseniä kutsuttiin kristityiksi. Nimi oli annettu heille erään Kristuksen mukaan, jonka prokuraattori Pontius Pilatus tuomitsi ja naulitsi ristille Tiberiuksen hallitusajalla. Tämä vaarallinen lahko, jota olen kuvannut aikaisemmin, ei ole juurtunut vain Juudeaan, josta se on kotoisin, vaan myös itse Roomaan, jonne kaikki pelättävät ja häpeälliset asiat kerääntyvät ja löytävät sieltä kotinsa" (Tacitus, ''Annaalit'' 15, 44.) [http://www.nic.fi/~vlahsrk/tekstit/jeesushi.html]
====Pliny the Younger====
[[Pliny the Younger]], the provincial governor of [[Pontus]] and [[Bithynia]], wrote to [[Trajan|Emperor Trajan]] ''c''. 112 concerning how to deal with Christians, who refused to [[Imperial cult (Ancient Rome)|worship the emperor]], and instead worshiped "Christus".


Tacituksen kuvaus kristityistä on hyvin negatiivinen, hän kutsuu kristinuskoa "vaaralliseksi taikauskoksi" ja "joksikin raa'aksi ja häpeälliseksi", minkä johdosta teksti ei todennäköisesti ole myöhempi kristittyjen tekemä lisäys.
<blockquote>Those who denied that they were or had been Christians, when they invoked the gods in words dictated by me, offered prayer with incense and wine to your image, which I had ordered to be brought for this purpose together with statues of the gods, and moreover cursed Christ &mdash; none of which those who are really Christians, it is said, can be forced to do &mdash; these I thought should be discharged. Others named by the informer declared that they were Christians, but then denied it, asserting that they had been but had ceased to be, some three years before, others many years, some as much as twenty-five years. They all worshiped your image and the statues of the gods, and cursed Christ.<ref>Pliny to Trajan, ''Letters'' 10.96&ndash;97</ref></blockquote>


Tacitus viittaa kirjoituksessaan pelkästään "Kristukseen", hepreankielisen sanan "messias" kreikankieliseen käännökseen, eikä nimeen "Jeesus". Pontius Pilatukseen hän viittaa "[[prokuraattori]]na", joka on eri virka kuin evankeliumien Pontius Pilatukselle mainitsema prefekti tai kuvernööri. Tässä tapauksessa arkeologia tukee evankeliumeja, koska on löydetty kirjoitus, jonka mukaan Pilatus oli prefekti.
Charles Guignebert, who does not doubt that Jesus of the Gospels lived in Gallilee in the first century, nevertheless dismisses this letter as acceptable historical evidence: "Only the most robust credulity could reckon this assertion as admissible evidence for the historicity of Jesus"<ref>Jesus, by Ch. Gugnebert, Professor of History of Christianity in the Sorbonne, Translated from the French by S. H. Hooke, Samuel Davidson Professor of Old Testament Studies in the University of London, University Book, New York, 1956, p. 14</ref>


Jotkut tutkijat katsovat, että toinen teksti kuvaa pelkästään kristillisiä uskomuksia, jotka eivät olleet kiistanalaisia (eli että kultin johtaja oli tuomittu kuolemaan), ja että Tacituksella ei siten ollut syytä tarkistaa tietojaan, vaikka hän käytti vain uskonnollisia lähteitä. Toiset tutkijat, kuten [[Karl Adam (teologi)|Karl Adam]], ovat katsoneet, että historioitsijana ja kristinuskon vihollisena Tacitus olisi tutkinut väitteet Jeesuksen teloituksesta ennen kuin kirjoitti niistä.
{{Disputed|date=February 2009}}
====Tacitus====
{{Main|Tacitus on Christ}}


===== Rabbiiniset merkinnät =====
[[Tacitus]] (c. 56–c. 117), writing c. [[116]], included in his ''[[Annals (Tacitus)|Annals]]'' a mention of Christianity and "Christus", the Latinized Greek translation of the Hebrew word "Messiah".  In describing Nero's persecution of this group following the [[Great Fire of Rome]] ''c''. 64, he wrote:
<blockquote>Nero fastened the guilt of starting the blaze and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians [Chrestians] by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of [[Tiberius]] 14-37 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 [[Iudaea Province|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.<ref>Tacitus, ''Annals'' 15.44 ([http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus:text:1999.02.0077&loc=15.44 Latin], [http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus:text:1999.02.0078&loc=15.44 English] and also here [http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/tacitus-annals.txt])</ref></blockquote>
There have been suggestions that this was a Christian interpolation but the vast majority of scholars conclude that the passage was written by Tacitus.<ref>[http://web.archive.org/web/20080209231807/http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/tacitus.html Robert Van Voorst, Jesus Outside the New Testament, pp. 42-43 as quoted at earlychristianwritings.com]</ref> For example,
[[Robert E. Van Voorst|R. E. Van Voorst]] noted the improbability that later Christians would have interpolated "such disparaging remarks about Christianity".<ref>{{cite book|author=Robert E. Van Voorst|title=Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence|year=2000|publisher=Wm. B. Eerdmans|page=43}} See also the [[criterion of embarrassment]].</ref>


[[Jerusalemin toinen temppeli|Jerusalemin toisen temppelin]] loppuajoilta on säilynyt vain vähän juutalaisia historiallisia asiakirjoja. Josephuksen teoksia lukuun ottamatta varhaisin lähde tuolta ajalta on [[Mishnah]], joka on juutalainen lakikokoelma, ei oikeudenkäyntipöytäkirja tai yleinen historiateos.
There is disagreement about what this passage proves, since Tacitus does not reveal the source of his information.<ref>F.F. Bruce,''Jesus and Christian Origins Outside the New Testament'', (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974) p. 23</ref> Biblical scholar [[Bart D. Ehrman]] wrote that: "Tacitus's report confirms what we know from other sources, that Jesus was executed by order of the Roman governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate, sometime during Tiberius's reign."
<ref name = "Ehrman-212">Ehrman p 212</ref>


Tuon ajan juutalaiset muistiinmerkinnät, sekä suulliset että kirjalliset, koottiin yhteen [[Talmud]]iin, joka on kokoelma lakiin liittyviä väittelyitä ja kertomuksia. Se on laaja, yli kolmestakymmenestä osasta koostuva teos. Talmud ei mainitse ketään "Jeesus"-nimistä (hepreaksi ''Yehoshuah''). Lähin nimi on babylonialaisessa Talmudissa esiintyvä "Yeshu". Tämän henkilön tiedot eivät kuitenkaan sovi Raamatun Jeesukseen, ja nimi saattaa olla halventava lyhenne kaikille (mahdollisesti, mutta ei välttämättä, myös kristityille) jotka pyrkivät käännyttämään juutalaisia pois juutalaisuudesta: ''yemach shemo vezichro'' ("pyyhitty olkoon hänen nimensä ja muistonsa"). Termi ei myöskään esiinny jerusalemilaisessa Talmudissa, jonka olettaisi mainitsevan Jeesuksen mieluummin babylonialaista versiota useammin kuin harvemmin.
Tacitus may have used official sources from a Roman archive.  Tacitus drew on many earlier historical works now lost to us in the Annals. The description of the suppression of Christianity, calling it a superstition for instance, is not based on any statements Christians may have made to Tacitus. However if Tacitus was copying from an official source some would expect him to not incorrectly label Pilate a procurator, as he was a prefect.<ref>Theissen and Merz p.83</ref>


Jeesuksen nimen puuttuminen Talmudista saattaa kuitenkin johtua yksinkertaisesti siitä, että kristinusko on ollut Talmudin kirjoittamisen aikaan vähäpätöinen liike ja siitä, että Talmud on keskittynyt enemmän lain tulkintoihin kuin historiankirjoitukseen.
Historian [[Richard Carrier]] speculates:
<!--
=== Jeesus historiallisena henkilönä ===


{{Pääartikkeli|[[Historiallinen Jeesus]]}}
''"it is inconceivable that there were any records of Jesus for Tacitus to consult in Rome (for many reasons, not the least of which being that Rome's capitol had burned to the ground more than once in the interim), and even less conceivable that he would have dug through them even if they existed&nbsp;… It would simply be too easy to just ask a Christian—or a colleague who had done so&nbsp;… there can be no doubt that what Pliny discovered from Christians he had interrogated was passed on to [[Tacitus]]."''<ref>Did Jesus exist? Earl Doherty and the argument to ahistoricity, by Richard Carrier. http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/jesuspuzzle.html</ref>


While some historians consider Jesus to largely be a mythological and legendary entity, others&mdash;generally, though not always, Christians&mdash;consider accounts of Jesus' life to be largely, or even entirely, historical and factual in nature. Some of these historians have also suggested that one treat the existence of Jesus and the accuracy of the New Testament as distinct questions.
Charles Guignebert argued "So long as there is that possibility [that Tacitus is merely echoing what Christians themselves were saying], the passage remains quite worthless". <ref>''Jesus'', University Books, New York, 1956, p.13</ref>


In ''The Historical Figure of Jesus'', [[E.P. Sanders]] presents [[Alexander the Great]] as paradigmatic&mdash;the available sources tell us much about his deeds, but nothing about his thoughts. Sanders considers the quest for the "[[historical Jesus]]" to be much closer to a search for historical details on Alexander than to those historical figures with adequate documentation. For this reason, he concludes, "the sources for Jesus are better, however, than those that deal with Alexander" and "the superiority of evidence for Jesus is seen when we ask what he thought" (1993:3).  
R. T. France concludes that the Tacitus passage is at best just Tacitus repeating what he has heard through Christians. <ref>{{cite book|authorlink=RT France|last=France|first=RT|title=Evidence for Jesus (Jesus Library)|publisher=Trafalgar Square Publishing|year=1986|isbn=0340381728|pages=19–20}}</ref><ref>For example R. T. France, writes "The brief notice in Tacitus Annals xv.44 mentions only his title, Christus, and his execution in Judea by order of Pontius Pilatus. Nor is there any reason to believe that Tacitus bases this on independent information-it is what Christians would be saying in Rome in the early second century ... No other clear pagan references to Jesus can be dated before AD 150, by which time the source of any information is more likely to be Christian propaganda than an independent record." The Gospels As Historical Sources For Jesus, The Founder Of Christianity, ''Truth Journal'' [http://www.leaderu.com/truth/1truth21.html]</ref>


[[Paul Barnett]] has also pointed out that "scholars of [[ancient history]] have always recognized the "[[subjectivity]]" factor in their available sources" and that "they have so few sources available compared to their modern counterparts that they will gladly seize whatever scraps of information that are at hand". He notes that [[modern history]] and [[ancient history]] are two separate disciplines, with differing methods of analysis and interpretation. {{ref|BarnettAncientHistory}}.
[[Gerd Theissen]] and [[Annette Merz]] conclude that Tacitus gives us a description of widespread prejudices about Christianity and a few precise details about "Christus" and Christianity, the source of which remains unclear.  Christus was a Jew and a criminal who Pontius Pilate had executed. He authored a new religious movement that began in Judea and was called Christianity which was widespread around the city of Rome during Nero's reign.<ref>{{Cite book | author=Theissen, Gerd; Merz, Annette | authorlink= | coauthors= | title=The historical Jesus: a comprehensive guide |url = http://books.google.com/books?id=3ZU97DQMH6UC&pg=PA83| date=1998 | publisher=Fortress Press | location=Minneapolis  | isbn=9780800631222 | pages=83}}</ref>


Consequently, scholars like Sanders, [[Geza Vermes]], [[Paula Fredriksen]], [[John Dominic Crossan]] and John Meier argue that although many readers are accustomed to thinking of Jesus solely as a theological figure, whose existence is a matter only of religious debate, the source documents on which several modern source hypotheses argue the four canonical Gospel accounts are based were written within living memory of Jesus' lifetime, and therefore provide a basis for the study of the "historical" Jesus. These historians draw on the canonical Gospel accounts, but also on other historical sources and archaeological evidence, to reconstruct as best they can the life of Jesus in his historical and cultural context.


[[Image:Pilate-inscription 03.jpg|thumb|160px|Limstone block discovered in 1961 with Pilate's tribute in Latin to [[Tiberius]]. The word "Pilatus" can be clearly seen. Click for more info]]
-->


=== Arkeologiset todisteet ===
=== Arkeologiset todisteet ===
Rivi 193: Rivi 205:


[[Luigi Cascioli]] meni Italiassa niin pitkälle, että yritti haastaa katolisen kirkon oikeuteen Jeesuksen keksimisestä ja laajamittaisesta ihmisten pettämisestä.  
[[Luigi Cascioli]] meni Italiassa niin pitkälle, että yritti haastaa katolisen kirkon oikeuteen Jeesuksen keksimisestä ja laajamittaisesta ihmisten pettämisestä.  
<!--
==== Jeesus ja synkretismi ====
The existence of Gnosticism and various [[mystery religion]]s with similarities to Christianity has led the [[mythological school]] to suggest that Christianity was strongly influenced by these, essentially building a mystery religion on the foundation of a Judaic tradition ([[syncretism]]). This would have included linking the two through Jesus' attempts to fulfill [[Old Testament]] prophecies. More generally, it would have included mythologizing a Jewish leader into a Son of God, and a representative of wisdom and knowledge.
[[Image:ChristAsSol.jpg|thumb|left|Jesus as [[Sol Invictus|Sol-Invictus]], the image is found in the oldest parts of the centre of Roman catholicism - the grottoes of the [[Vatican City|Vatican]]]]
Some of the most well-known early adherents of the mythological school include [[Voltaire]], [[Friedrich Engels]], [[Karl Kautsky]] (Whose 1908 work 'Foundations of Christianity' [http://www.marxists.org/archive/kautsky/1908/christ/ch01.htm] remains one of the important works in this respect) and [[David Strauss]] ([[1808]]-[[1874]]), who was the most intellectually influential early mythologist. Many of these authors did not absolutely deny Jesus's existence, but they believed the miraculous aspects of the Gospel accounts to be mythical and that Jesus' life story had been heavily manipulated to fit Messianic prophesy. Both Strauss and Kautsky argue that very little can be deduced from the surviving documents concerning the historical Jesus. According to the Slovenian scholar [[Anton Strle]], [[Nietzsche]] lost his faith in Christianity as a result of reading Strauss' book ''Leben Jesu''. Another important mythologist was [[Paul-Louis Couchoud]] ([[1879]]-[[1959]]), a philosopher and a consistent defender of the thesis that Jesus did not exist.
Another integral part of this view is the idea the early Christians were [[docetism|docetic]] - that Christ was a ''spiritual being'' rather than ''flesh and blood''.  Professor of German [[G.A. Wells]] says regarding the New Testament:
:"It is not just that the early documents are silent about so much of Jesus that came to be recorded in the gospels, but that they view him in a substantially different way&mdash;as a basically supernatural personage only obscurely on Earth as a man at some unspecified period in the past, 'emptied' then of all his supernatural attributes ({{bibleref|Phillipians|2:7}}), and certainly not a worker of prodigious miracles which made him famous throughout 'all Syria' ({{bibleref|Matthew|4:24}}). I have argued that there is good reason to believe that the Jesus of Paul was constructed largely from musing and reflecting on a supernatural 'Wisdom' figure, amply documented in the earlier Jewish literature, who sought an abode on Earth, but was there rejected, rather than from information concerning a recently deceased historical individual. The influence of the Wisdom literature is undeniable; only assessment of what it amounted to still divides opinion."
During the first and second centuries BC, Hellenic philosophy merged with various minor deities to produce [[mystery religion]]s, in which a [[Life-death-rebirth deity]] was used as an allegory for the search for [[wisdom]]. Such religions quickly replaced or absorbed local religions and became the dominant beliefs in many places throughout the [[Mediterranean Sea|Mediterranean]], with the resulting variations of the central god-man figure becoming known as [[Osiris-Dionysus]].
Some scholars, notably [[Martin A. Larson]], believe that Jesus existed, but that Christianity is based on the [[soteriology]] of [[Osiris]] and the [[ethics]] and [[eschatology]] of other beliefs, while the [[Messianic]] concept is a uniquely Jewish addition to the development of Christianity. More recently, writer [[Timothy Freke]] and scholar of mystery religions [[Peter Gandy]], who wrote ''[[The Jesus Mysteries]]'', think that Jesus did not exist as a historical figure but was in fact one of the forms of [[Osiris-Dionysus]]. [[CNN]]'s David Dodson, in a review of their book, however, noted that "while the authors discuss many examples of elements of Osiris/Dionysus in the Jesus story, they virtually ignore the more direct ties to Jewish tradition and prophecy. This oversight undermines the credibility of many of their arguments, and could have the tendency to mislead the novice reader in this subject" [http://archives.cnn.com/2000/books/reviews/09/21/review.jesus.mysteries/]. On the other hand, the [[Canberra Times]] said
:''"The theory is not new. For two centuries at least, scholars have been aware of the intriguing parallels between the accounts of Jesus' life and that of preceding and contemporaneous figures such as [[Osiris]], [[Dionysus]], and [[Mithras]]. What is new is the powerful scholarship brought to the issue by authors Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy in The Jesus Mysteries, just published in Australia. The result, which draws strongly on the Gnostic gospels discovered at Nag Hammadi in 1945, is so persuasive that it is doubtful whether theological scholarship will ever be the same.''"
A recent book, ''The Pagan Christ: Recovering the Lost Light'' ([[2004]]), by journalist-priest [[Tom Harpur]], discusses another possible origin, based partly on the writings of Alvin Boyd Kuhn and Egyptologist [[Gerald Massey]]. Massey's ''The Historical Jesus and Mythical Christ: A Lecture'', published in [[1880]], explores the similarity between what has been written about Jesus and what has been written about [[Jehoshua Ben-Pandira]], who "may have been born about the year [[120 BC|120 B.C.]]" From page 2 of the lecture: "... according to the Babylonian Gemara to the Mishna of Tract 'Shabbath', this Jehoshua, the son of Pandira and Stada, was stoned to death as a wizard, in the city of Lud, or Lydda, and afterwards crucified by being hanged on a tree, on the eve of the Passover. ..."  See [[Yeshu]].-->




[[Luokka:Jeesus]]
[[Luokka:Jeesus]]
[[Luokka:Historia]]
[[Luokka:Historia]]

Versio 27. joulukuuta 2009 kello 13.53

Se, että Jeesus todella eli vuoden 0 tienoilla, on erittäin olennaista kristinuskon kannalta, sillä sen mielekkyys on vahvasti riippuvainen Uuden testamentin kuvaaman Jeesuksen pääpiirteittäisestä historiallisuudesta.1 Useimmat historian- ja raamatuntutkijat pitävät Jeesusta juutalaisena, Galileassa syntyneenä opettajana, jota pidettiin yleisesti parantajana, sai kasteen Johannes Kastajalta ja tuomittiin Pontius Pilatuksen käskystä kuolemaan ristiinnaulitsemalla syytettynä kansan kiihotuksesta Rooman valtakuntaa vastaan.2 Kuolema ja oikeudenkäynti ovat kiistattomimpia historiallisia tietoja Jeesuksen elämästä.3

Tuskin kukaan vakavasti otettava tutkija kiistää Jeesuksen olleen olemassa noin 2000 vuotta sitten.4 Kuitenkin häviävän pieni tutkijoiden vähemmistö5 kieltää Jeesuksen koskaan olleen olemassa ja väittävät hänen olleen epäaabrahamilaisten uskontojen jumalista ja sankareista ominaisuuksia yhdistelemällä luotu myyttinen tai symbolinen hahmo.6 Vuonna 1994 tehdyn tutkimuksen mukaan suomalaisista 67&nbps;% oli sitä mieltä, että Jeesus oli todellinen henkilö. Vakuuttuneimpia tästä olivat korkeakoulututkinnon suorittaneet ja ylemmät toimihenkilöt (80 %). 10 % ei pitänyt Jeesusta todellisena henkilönä. 66 % uskoi että Jeesus on Jumalan poika, ja 12 % oli toista mieltä.7

Yleisesti

Jeesuksen elämästä ei tunneta hänen elinaikanaan kirjoitettuja asiakirjoja. Varhaisimmat hänen elämästään todistavat kirjoitukset, Uuden testamentin kirjeet ja evankeliumit, on kirjoitettu joitakin kymmeniä vuosia hänen sanotun kuolemansa jälkeen. Monet tutkijat katsovat Raamatun kertomusten Jeesuksesta olevan osittain teologisoituja tai mytologisoituja kuvauksia historiallisen henkilön elämästä. Heidän mukaansa niiden tarkoituksena on ollut ennemmin uusien käännynnäisten voittaminen kuin puolueettoman historiallisen totuuden esittäminen. Yksi raamatuntutkimuksen suurimpia kysymyksiä on sen erottaminen, mikä osa Jeesuksen elämän kuvauksista on historiallista aineistoa ja mikä ei. Jopa tarkat kuvaukset Jeesuksen elämästä ovat saattaneet muuttua suullisessa perimätiedossa ja mahdollisen Raamatun kirjojen toimitustyön aikana. Toisia on saatettu liioitella tarkoituksella, ja joitakin seikkoja on saatettu keksiä kokonaan mahdollisesti vanhempien tekstien (kuten Vanhan testamentin kirjoitusten) tai legendojen perusteella.

Jeesus-myyttiin uskova koulukunta näkee Jeesuksen olleen uusi versio vanhempien mysteeriuskontojen kuolevasta ja ylösnousevasta jumalihmisestä. Tällainen oli muun muassa Osiris-Dionysos. Toiset taas katsovat, että gnostilaisuuden ja kristinuskon yhtämäkohdat perustuvat historialliseen henkilöön, joka toimi keskeisenä henkilönä juutalaisen perinteen ja mysteeriuskontojen yhteensulauttamisessa. Tämän teorian mukaan tämä synkretistinen uskonto osoittautui lopulta suositummaksi pakanoiden kuin juutalaisten parissa, ja kehittyi myöhemmin kristinuskoksi.?

Historiallisten todisteiden ristiriitaisuus ja puuttellisuus eivät tarkoita, etteikö itse kertomus olisi tosi. Esimerkiksi Aleksanteri Suuren kaksi kokonaista elämäkertaa, kirjoittajina Arrianos ja Plutarkhos, laadittiin yli neljäsataa vuotta Aleksanterin kuoleman jälkeen ja kuitenkin näitä kirjoituksia pidetään luotettavina. Toisaalta kukaan ei olekkaan kyseenalaistanut Aleksanterin olemassaoloa sillä hänestä jäi jälkeen fyysisiä todisteita kuten kolikkoja. Samaten Hannibalin Alppien ylityksestä on kaksi täysin erilaista versiota, mutta silti kukaan ei ole kyseenalaistanut itse tapahtuman historiallisuutta.8

Jeesuksen historiallisuuteen liittyvä aineisto

Tutkijoiden yleinen mielipide ei tietenkään todista Jeesuksen historiallisuutta. Seuraavaksi artikkelissa käsitellään pintapuolisesti aineistoa, jonka perusteella useimmat tutkijat muodostavat näkemyksensä.

Varhaisimmat tunnetut kirjoitukset

Kristilliset kirjoitukset

Jeesus on useiden Uuden testamentin kirjojen ja muiden varhaiskristillisten kirjoitusten päähenkilö. Yksityiskohtaisimmat kuvaukset Jeesuksen elämästä sijoittuvat evankeliumeihin, jotka on nykyisen tutkimuksen mukaan kirjoitettu noin vuosien 60-100 välillä. Jotkut katsovat, että myös Uuden testamentin kirjeet, erityisesti apostoli Paavalin ensimmäisen vuosisadan puolen välin jälkeen kirjoittamat kirjeet, tarjoavat tietoja historiallisesta Jeesuksesta.

Jeesus on keskeinen henkilö myös Uuden testamentin apokryfikirjoissa, joita ei ole koskaan laajassa mittakaavassa luettu Raamatun kirjojen kaanoniin. Näistä yksityiskohtaisimmat kuvaukset Jeesuksen elämästä ovat jälleen apokryfisissä evankeliumeissa, mutta myös muiden kirjojen sisältöä on ehdotettu todistusaineistoksi. Valtavirran kristillisyys ei kuitenkaan ole koskaan hyväksynyt näiden kirjojen todistusta laajassa mittakaavassa.

Evankeliumit

Perinteisesti hyväksyttyjä Jeesuksen elämästä kertovia lähteitä ovat kanoniset evankeliumit,9 jotka sisältävät huomattavasti narratiivista aineistoa Jeesuksen julkisesta toiminnasta. Kanoniset evankeliumit keskittyvät hänen julistukseensa, tekoihinsa, kuolemaansa ja ylösnousemukseensa.

The four canonical Gospels are anonymous. The introduction to Luke mentions accounts of what was handed down by eyewitnesses, and claims to have "diligently investigated all things from the beginning". The epilogue to John states that "these things" are testified to by the beloved disciple, whose "testimony we know ... is true".10 The authors in antiquity who discussed the authorship of the Gospels generally asserted the following:11 Matthew was supposedly written by Matthew, one of the Twelve apostles of Jesus; Mark was also supposedly written by Mark, a disciple of Simon Peter, who was one of the Twelve; Luke was supposedly written by Luke, who was a disciple of Paul, who was the Apostle to the Gentiles; John was supposedly written by John, who was one of the Twelve. In addition, the book of the Acts of the Apostles has traditionally been attributed to Luke. There is no independent evidence within the Gospels, however, as to their authorship other than those claimed within the Christian tradition12.

The first three Gospels, known as the synoptic gospels, share much material. As a result of various scholarly hypotheses attempting to explain this interdependence, the traditional association of the texts with their authors has become the subject of criticism. Though some solutions retain the traditional authorship,13 other solutions reject some or all of these claims. The solution most commonly held in academia today is the two-source hypothesis, which posits that Mark and a hypothetical 2nd source, called the Q document, were used as sources for Matthew and Luke. Other solutions, such as the Augustinian hypothesis and Griesbach hypothesis, posit that Matthew was written first and that Mark was an epitome. Scholars who accept the two-source hypothesis generally date Mark to around 70, with Matthew and Luke dating to 80-90.14 Scholars who accept Matthean priority usually date the synoptic gospels to before 70, with some arguing as early as 40.15 John is most often dated to 90-100,16 though a date as early as the 60s, and as late as the second century have been argued by a few.17

"Thus our prime sources about the life of Jesus were written within about fifty years of his death by people who perhaps knew him, but certainly by people who knew people who knew him. If this is beginning to sound slightly second hand, we may wish to consider two points. First... most ancient and medieval history was written from a much greater distance. Second, all the Gospel writers could have talked to people who were actually on the spot, and while perhaps not eyewitnesses themselves, their position is certainly the next best thing."18

The extent to which the Gospels were subject to additions, redactions, or interpolations is the subject of textual criticism, which examines the extent to which a manuscript changed from its autograph, or the work as written by the original author, through manuscript transmission. Possible alterations in the Gospels include: Mark 16:9-20, Luke 22:19b–20,43–44, John 7:53-8:11.

Other issues with the historicity of the Gospels include possible conflicts with each other, or with other historical sources. The most frequent suggestions of conflict relate to the Census of Quirinius as recounted in Luke, the two genealogies contained in Luke and Matthew, and the chronology of the Easter events.19

Uuden testamentin kirjeet

Jesus is also the subject of the writings of Paul of Tarsus, a Hellenistic Jew who presented himself as Jesus' "Apostle to the Gentiles" and who dictated20 letters to various churches and individuals from c. 48-68. There are traditionally fourteen letters attributed to Paul, thirteen of which claim to be written by Paul, with one anonymous letter. Current scholarship is in a general consensus in considering at least seven of the letters to be authored by Paul, with views varying concerning the remaining works. Paul seems to nowhere report his own eyewitness account of Jesus' life, but did claim knowledge of Jesus through visions21 and 1 Cor 11:23.22 In addition, Paul certainly was personally acquainted with people who had known Jesus: the apostle Peter/Cephas (Gal 1:18-19; Gal 2:7-14; 1 Cor 9:5; 1 Cor 15:5), the apostles John and James (Gal 2:9), and Jesus' brothers.2324 In his letters, Paul often refers to commands of Jesus or events in his life that seem consistent with the Gospel accounts. Paul in many places and in a combative way relates other preachers' differing view of Jesus, suggesting that even as early as 20 years after his crucifixion Jesus was a very strong interest of Jewish moral teachers preaching to GentilesMalline:Fact, see also Paul of Tarsus and Judaism.

In his First Epistle to the Thessalonians Paul writes in chapter 2:14-15,25 referring to his fellow Jews, that they "...killed the Lord Jesus..." (although the word used can be translated as "Judaeans" rather than "Jews," and the authenticity of this passage has been doubted by some2627, see also Responsibility for the death of Jesus). He also refers to the "Lord's own word" in chapter 4:1528 discussing the future coming of the Lord.

In his Epistle to the Galatians, Paul writes that after God "revealed his Son in" him,29 he did not discuss it with those who had been Apostles before him, but traveled to Arabia then back to Damascus. It was three years later that he went to Jerusalem where he saw the Apostle Cephas/Peter, and James, "the Lord's brother" (or "the brother of the Lord", αδελΦος του κυρίоς 1:18–20), believed by most scholars to be James the Just. Paul some years later had a meeting with Peter, James, and John, the Council of Jerusalem (circa AD 51).

In Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians he says in chapter 2:830 that the "... rulers of this age ... crucified the Lord of glory ...". In 1 Corinthians 7:10-11 31 he gives what he says are commands of "the Lord" regarding divorce. In 1 Corinthians 9:532 he refers to "the Lord's brothers" (or "the brethren of the Lord", αδελφοι του κυριου) and refers to what "the Lord has commanded" in 1 Corinthians 9:14.33 Paul gives a description of the Last Supper in 1 Corinthians 11:23-26,34 which he says he received from "the Lord". In 15:3-835 he talks of the death and resurrection of Christ and witnesses to resurrection appearances, including Peter, whom he knew.

In his letter to the Philippians,36 Paul writes that Christ Jesus had the form of God, and speaks of his "appearance as a man" and his "human likeness". In his letter to the Romans 1:1-4,37 Paul describes "Christ Jesus", as the "Son of God" and says that Christ Jesus was from the seed of David, "according to the flesh". He says that he was a minister to the Jews in Romans 15:8.3839

The Acts of the Apostles

Malline:Main

The book of the Acts of the Apostles, written at least twenty but probably thirty or forty years after Galatians, gives a more detailed account of the Council of Jerusalem in chapter 15.40 Acts also claims Jesus' family , including his mother, were members of the early church.41

Ancient Creeds

Malline:Main

The authors whose works are contained in the New Testament sometimes quote from creeds, or confessions of faith, that obviously predate their writings. Scholars suppose that some of these creeds date to within a few years of Jesus' death, and were developed within the Christian community in Jerusalem.42 Though embedded within the texts of the New Testament, these creeds are a distinct source for Early Christianity.

1 Corinthians 15:3-443 reads: "For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures." This contains a Christian creed of pre-Pauline origin.44454647484950 The antiquity of the creed has been located by many Biblical scholars to less than a decade after Jesus' death, originating from the Jerusalem apostolic community.51 Concerning this creed, Campenhausen wrote, "This account meets all the demands of historical reliability that could possibly be made of such a text,"52 whilst A. M. Hunter said, "The passage therefore preserves uniquely early and verifiable testimony. It meets every reasonable demand of historical reliability."53

Other relevant creeds which predate the texts wherein they are foundMalline:Fact that have been identified are 1 John 4:2:54 "This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God",5556 "Remember Jesus Christ, raised from the dead, this is my Gospel",57 Romans|1:3-4:58 "regarding his Son, who as to his human nature was a descendant of David, and who through the spirit of holiness was declared with power to be the Son of God by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord.",59 and 1 Timothy 3:16:60 "He appeared in a body, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory," an early creedal hymn.61

New Testament apocrypha

Jesus is a large factor in New Testament apocrypha, works excluded from the canon as it developed because they were judged not to be inspired. These texts are almost entirely dated to the mid second century or later, though a few texts, such as the Didache, may be first century in origin. Some of these works are discussed below:

Gnostic texts

Certain Gnostic texts mention Jesus in the context of his earthly existence, and some scholars have argued that Gnostic texts could contain plausible traditions.626364 Examples of such texts include the Gospel of Truth, Treatise on Resurrection, and the Apocryphon of John, the latter of which opens with the following:

It happened one day when John, the brother of James — who are sons of Zebedee — went up and came to the temple, that a Pharisee named Arimanius approached him and said to him: "Where is your master whom you followed?" And he said to them: "He has gone to the place from which he came." The Pharisee said to him: "This Nazarene deceived you all with deception and filled your ears with lies and closed your hearts and turned you from the traditions of your fathers."65

Of all the Gnostic texts, however, the Gospel of Thomas had drawn the most attention. It contains a list of sayings attributed to Jesus. It lacks a narrative of Jesus treating his deeds in a historical sense. The majority of scholars date it to the early-mid second century,66 while a minority view contends for an early date of perhaps 50, citing a relationship to the hypothetical Q document among other reasons.6768

Early Church fathers

Early Christian sources outside the New Testament also mention Jesus and details of his life. Important texts from the Apostolic Fathers are, to name just the most significant and ancient, Clement of Rome (c. 96),69 Ignatius of Antioch (c. 107-110),70 and Justin Martyr.71

Perhaps the most significant Patristic sources are the early references of Papias and Quadratus (d. 124), mostly reported by Eusebius in the fourth century, which both mention eyewitnesses of Jesus’ ministry and healings who were still alive in their own time (the late first century). Papias, in giving his sources for the information contained in his (largely lost) commentaries, stated (according to Eusebius):

…if by chance anyone who had been in attendance on the elders should come my way, I inquired about the words of the elders — that is, what according to the elders Andrew or Peter said, or Philip, or Thomas or James, or John or Matthew or any other of the Lord’s disciples, and whatever Aristion and the elder John, the Lord’s disciples, were saying.72

Thus, while Papias was collecting his information (c. 90), Aristion and the elder John (who were Jesus’ disciples) were still alive and teaching in Asia minor, and Papias gathered information from people who had known them.73 Another Father, Quadratus, who wrote an apology to the emperor Hadrian, was reported by Eusebius to have stated:

The words of our Savior were always present, for they were true: those who were healed, those who rose from the dead, those who were not only seen in the act of being healed or raised, but were also always present, not merely when the Savior was living on earth, but also for a considerable time after his departure, so that some of them survived even to our own times.74

By “our Savior” Quadratus means Jesus, and by “our times” it has been argued that he may refer to his early life, rather than when he wrote (117-124), which would be a reference contemporary with Papias.75

Greco-Roman sources

There are passages relevant to Christianity in the works of four major non-Christian writers of the late 1st and early 2nd centuries – Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius, and Pliny the Younger. However, these are generally references to early Christians rather than a historical Jesus. Of the four, Josephus' writings, which document John the Baptist, James the Just, and possibly also Jesus, are of the most interest to scholars dealing with the historicity of Jesus (see below). Tacitus, in his Annals written c. 115, mentions popular opinion about Christus, without historical details (see also: Tacitus on Jesus). There is an obscure reference to a Jewish leader called "Chrestus" in Suetonius. (According to Suetonius, chapter 25, there occurred in Rome, during the reign of emperor Claudius (circa AD 50), "persistent disturbances ... at the instigation of Chrestus".76 [1] Mention in Acts of "After this, Paul left Athens and went to Corinth. There he met a Jew named Aquila, a native of Pontus, who had recently come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had ordered all the Jews to leave Rome." (Acts of the Apostles 18:1-2) has been conjectured7778 to refer to the expulsion at the times of these "persistent disturbances". Malline:Fact

Josephus

Malline:Main

Flavius Josephus (c. 37–c. 100), a Jew and Roman citizen who worked under the patronage of the Flavians, wrote the Antiquities of the Jews in 93 AD. In these works, Jesus is mentioned twice. The one directly concerning Jesus has come to be known as the Testimonium Flavianum.

In the first passage, called the Testimonium Flavianum, it is written:

About this time came Jesus, a wise man, if indeed it is appropriate to call him a man. For he was a performer of paradoxical feats, a teacher of people who accept the unusual with pleasure, and he won over many of the Jews and also many Greeks. He was the Christ. When Pilate, upon the accusation of the first men amongst us, condemned him to be crucified, those who had formerly loved him did not cease to follow him, for he appeared to them on the third day, living again, as the divine prophets foretold, along with a myriad of other marvellous things concerning him. And the tribe of the Christians, so named after him, has not disappeared to this day.79

Concerns have been raised about the authenticity of the passage, and it is widely held by scholars that at least part of the passage has been altered by a later scribe. The Testimonium's authenticity has attracted much scholarly discussion and controversy of interpolation. Louis H. Feldman counts 87 articles published during the period of 1937-1980, "the overwhelming majority of which question its authenticity in whole or in part."80 Judging from Alice Whealey's 2003 survey of the historiography, it seems that the majority of modern scholars consider that Josephus really did write something here about Jesus, but that the text that has reached us is corrupt.81 However, there has been no consensus on which portions have been altered, or to what degree.

In the second, very brief mention, Josephus calls James "the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ."82 The great majority of scholars consider this shorter reference to Jesus to be substantially authentic,83 although a minority has raised doubts.84

In antiquity, Origen recorded that Josephus did not believe Jesus was the Christ,85 as it seems to suggest in the quote above. Dr. L. Michael White argued against authenticity, citing that parallel sections of Josephus's Jewish War do not mention Jesus, and that some Christian writers as late as the third century, who quoted from Josephus's Antiquities, do not mention this passage.86 However, Alice Whealey has shown that it is far from clear that any third century Christians other than Origen quoted from or even directly knew Antiquities.87 While very few scholars believe the whole Testimonium is genuine,88 most scholars have found at least some authentic words of Josephus in the passage,89 since some portions are written in his style.90

The main reason to believe Josephus did originally mention Jesus is the fact that the majority of scholars accept the authenticity of his passage on Jesus' brother James. Arguably the main reason to accept that Josephus also wrote a version of the Testimonium Flavianum is the fact that Jerome and Michael the Syrian quote literal translations of the text in a form reading, more skeptically than the textus receptus, that "he was thought to be the Christ" rather than "he was the Christ." The identical wording of Jerome and Michael the Syrian proves the existence of an originally Greek Testimonium reading this, since Latin Christian scholars and Syriac scholars did not read each others' works, but both commonly translated Greek Christian works.

Shlomo Pines and a few other scholars have argued that the version of the Testimonium written by the 10th century Arab historian named Agapius of Manbij is closer to what one would expect Josephus to have written, and the similarities between the two passages imply a Christian author later removed Josephus' conservative tone and added interpolations.91 Pines cites Josephus as having written:

At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus. And 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 desert 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.92

However, it has been argued that Agapius' text is almost surely a paraphrase of the Testimonium from the Syriac translation of Eusebius of Caesarea's Historia Ecclesiastica, and that it is Michael the Syrian's Syriac Testimonium, which also derives from the Syriac Historia Ecclesiastica,along with the Latin translation of Jerome that are the most important witnesses to Josephus' original passage on Jesus.93

Pliny the Younger

Pliny the Younger, the provincial governor of Pontus and Bithynia, wrote to Emperor Trajan c. 112 concerning how to deal with Christians, who refused to worship the emperor, and instead worshiped "Christus".

Those who denied that they were or had been Christians, when they invoked the gods in words dictated by me, offered prayer with incense and wine to your image, which I had ordered to be brought for this purpose together with statues of the gods, and moreover cursed Christ — none of which those who are really Christians, it is said, can be forced to do — these I thought should be discharged. Others named by the informer declared that they were Christians, but then denied it, asserting that they had been but had ceased to be, some three years before, others many years, some as much as twenty-five years. They all worshiped your image and the statues of the gods, and cursed Christ.94

Charles Guignebert, who does not doubt that Jesus of the Gospels lived in Gallilee in the first century, nevertheless dismisses this letter as acceptable historical evidence: "Only the most robust credulity could reckon this assertion as admissible evidence for the historicity of Jesus"95

Malline:Disputed

Tacitus

Malline:Main

Tacitus (c. 56–c. 117), writing c. 116, included in his Annals a mention of Christianity and "Christus", the Latinized Greek translation of the Hebrew word "Messiah". In describing Nero's persecution of this group following the Great Fire of Rome c. 64, he wrote:

Nero fastened the guilt of starting the blaze and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians [Chrestians] by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius 14-37 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.96

There have been suggestions that this was a Christian interpolation but the vast majority of scholars conclude that the passage was written by Tacitus.97 For example, R. E. Van Voorst noted the improbability that later Christians would have interpolated "such disparaging remarks about Christianity".98

There is disagreement about what this passage proves, since Tacitus does not reveal the source of his information.99 Biblical scholar Bart D. Ehrman wrote that: "Tacitus's report confirms what we know from other sources, that Jesus was executed by order of the Roman governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate, sometime during Tiberius's reign." 100

Tacitus may have used official sources from a Roman archive. Tacitus drew on many earlier historical works now lost to us in the Annals. The description of the suppression of Christianity, calling it a superstition for instance, is not based on any statements Christians may have made to Tacitus. However if Tacitus was copying from an official source some would expect him to not incorrectly label Pilate a procurator, as he was a prefect.101

Historian Richard Carrier speculates:

"it is inconceivable that there were any records of Jesus for Tacitus to consult in Rome (for many reasons, not the least of which being that Rome's capitol had burned to the ground more than once in the interim), and even less conceivable that he would have dug through them even if they existed … It would simply be too easy to just ask a Christian—or a colleague who had done so … there can be no doubt that what Pliny discovered from Christians he had interrogated was passed on to Tacitus."102

Charles Guignebert argued "So long as there is that possibility [that Tacitus is merely echoing what Christians themselves were saying], the passage remains quite worthless". 103

R. T. France concludes that the Tacitus passage is at best just Tacitus repeating what he has heard through Christians. 104105

Gerd Theissen and Annette Merz conclude that Tacitus gives us a description of widespread prejudices about Christianity and a few precise details about "Christus" and Christianity, the source of which remains unclear. Christus was a Jew and a criminal who Pontius Pilate had executed. He authored a new religious movement that began in Judea and was called Christianity which was widespread around the city of Rome during Nero's reign.106


Arkeologiset todisteet

Pilatus-kaiverrus

Samoin kuin Jeesuksen historiallisuudesta on ollut keskustelua, samoin jotkut ovat kyseenalaistaneet monien Jeesukseen liittyvien henkilöiden, kuten Jeesuksen äidin Marian, hänen opetuslastensa ja monien muiden Uudessa testamentissa mainittujen henkilöiden historiallisuuden. Vuosisatoja on keskusteltu muun muassa Jeesuksen ristiinnaulitsemisen määränneen Pontius Pilatuksen historiallisuudesta. Häntä ei mainita aikakauden virallisissa roomalaisissa asiakirjoissa. Jotkut ovat päätelleet tästä, että hänen olemassaolonsa on pelkkä legenda tai jopa väärennetty yksityiskohta. Samoin on keskusteltu väitetyn Pilatuksen arvonimestä: oliko hän prefekti (maaherra) vai prokuraattori?

Vuonna 1961 tilanne muuttui, kun Caesarea Palaestinassa, Juudean pääkaupungissa, sijainneen roomalaisen teatterin raunioista löytyi kalkkikivilohkare, jossa oli Pilatuksen omistuskirjoitus Tiberieumista. Kirjoituksen mukaan hän oli prefectus (yleensä kirjoitettu muodossa praefectus) eli Juudean maaherra. Sana Tiberieum on tuntematon. Jotkut tutkijat ovat arvelleet, että kyseessä on ollut rakennus, mahdollisesti temppeli, joka oli omistettu keisari Tiberiukselle. Kirjoitus on nykyään sijoitettu Jerusalemin Israel-museoon numerolla AE 1963 no. 104. Se tunnetaan nimellä Pilatus-kaiverrus. Monet Jeesuksen historiallisuuden puolestapuhujat viittaavat tähän kirjoitukseen yhtenä osana sitä historiallista todistusaineistoa, joka tukee Uuden testamentin kuvausta historiallisesta Jeesuksesta.

Jaakobin luuarkku

Pääartikkeli: Jaakobin luuarkku

Jaakobin luuarkku on kuolleen henkilön luiden hautaamiseen käytetty arkku, joka löytyi Israelista vuonna 2002. Sen väitettiin olevan Jeesuksen veljen Jaakobin arkku, ja jotkut katsoivat sen todistavan, että ajanlaskun alun tienoilla eli merkittävä Jeesus, jonka isä oli Joosef ja veli Jaakob. Arkun aitous on kuitenkin nykyään hyvin voimakkaasti kyseenalaistettu ja sitä pidetään nykyaikana tehtynä väärennöksenä.

Talpiotin hauta

Talpiotin hauta on Talpiotista, Jerusalemin läheltä Israelista vuonna 1980 löydetty hauta. Hauta sisälsi löytöhetkellä kymmenen luuarkkua, joista yksi on myöhemmin kadonnut. Hauta tuli laajempaan julkisuuteen helmikuussa 2007, kun James Cameronin ja Simcha Jacobovicin tuottama dokumenttiohjelma The Lost Tomb of Jesus ja Jacobovicin kirjoittama kirja The Jesus Family Tomb esittivät teorian, jonka mukaan hauta olisi ollut Jeesuksen ja eräiden toisten häneen liittyvien Uudessa testamentissa mainittujen henkilöiden hautapaikka.

Jeesus myyttinä

Jotkut tutkijat ovat kyseenalaistaneet Jeesuksen historiallisuuden. Heidän mukaansa Jeesusta ei ole koskaan ollut olemassa todellisena historiallisena henkilönä, vaan kyseessä on jonkinlainen myytti. Esimerkiksi Timothy Freke ja Peter Gandy ovat lainanneet todisteena Toista Johanneksen kirjettä, jossa sanotaan: "Maailmassa on nyt liikkeellä monia eksyttäjiä, niitä jotka eivät tunnusta Jeesusta Kristusta ihmiseksi, lihaan tulleeksi" (2. Joh. 1:7 [2]). Heidän mukaansa tämä viittaa siihen, että jo hyvin varhaisessa vaiheessa oli epäilyksiä Jeesuksen historiallisuudesta. Valtavirran tutkijat katsovat, että kyseinen kohta viittaa doketismiin, joka ei liity kysymykseen Jeesuksen olemassaolosta.

Jeesuksen historiallisuuden kieltävät tutkijat vetoavat yleensä seuraavanlaisiin seikkoihin:

  • varhaisimpina pidettyjen kristillisten lähteiden (mm. Paavalin ym. kirjeet) lähes täydellinen vaikeneminen Jeesuksen maallisen elämän yksityiskohdista ja harvojen mainintojenkin tulkinnanvaraisuus
  • silminnäkijätodistusten, aikalaistodistusten ja lähes aikalaistodistusten puute;
  • niiden aikalaisten ja lähes aikalaisten suuri määrä, joiden olisi pitänyt mainita tai jotka olisivat voineet mainita Jeesuksen, mutta eivät maininneet;
  • Jeesuksen elämän yksityiskohtaisten kuvausten puute myös ei-kristillisissä lähteissä;
  • fyysisen todistusaineiston puute, ja
  • varhaiskristillisten kirjoitusten ja aikakauden yleisten myyttien samankaltaisuus.

Kenties tuotteliain Jeesuksen historiallisuuden kieltävä raamatuntutkija on George Albert Wells. Myöhemmin näkemystä ovat edustaneet muiden muassa Earl Doherty, Robert M. Price ja American Atheists -järjestöä johtanut Ellen Johnson. Myös Bertrand Russell kyseenalaisti Jeesuksen historiallisuuden.107 Harva historioitsija kuitenkaan voi ajalta säilyneiden dokumenttien valossa täysin kiistää Jeesuksen historiallisuutta.108

Luigi Cascioli meni Italiassa niin pitkälle, että yritti haastaa katolisen kirkon oikeuteen Jeesuksen keksimisestä ja laajamittaisesta ihmisten pettämisestä.

  1. ^ Kankaanniemi, Matti: Antiikin sankaritarut eivät horjuta evankeliumien aitoutta. Ristin Voitto, 8.10.2008, nro 41, s. 10–11. Kerava: Aikamedia. (- - kristinuskon mielekkyys on lujasti sidoksissa Uuden testamentin kuvaaman Jeesus-kertomuksen pääpiirteittäiseen historiallisuuteen - -)
  2. ^ Raymond E. Brown, The Death of the Messiah: From Gethsemane to the Grave (New York: Doubleday, Anchor Bible Reference Library 1994), p. 964; D. A. Carson, et al., p. 50-56; Shaye J.D. Cohen, From the Maccabees to the Mishnah, Westminster Press, 1987, p. 78, 93, 105, 108; John Dominic Crossan, The Historical Jesus: The Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant, HarperCollins, 1991, p. xi-xiii; Michael Grant, p. 34-35, 78, 166, 200; Paula Fredriksen, Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews, Alfred A. Knopf, 1999, p. 6-7, 105-110, 232-234, 266; John P. Meier, vol. 1:68, 146, 199, 278, 386, 2:726; E.P. Sanders, pp. 12-13; Geza Vermes, Jesus the Jew (Philadelphia: Fortress Press 1973), p. 37.; Paul L. Maier, In the Fullness of Time, Kregel, 1991, pp. 1, 99, 121, 171; N. T. Wright, The Meaning of Jesus: Two Vis
  3. ^ Varmin historiallinen tieto Jeesus Nasaretilaisesta on, että roomalaiset sotilaat ristiinnaulitsivat hänet Juudean maaherran Pontius Pilatuksen käskystä. (Mika Hynninen: Pro gradu -tutkielma: Pietarin evankeliumi todistaa toisen vuosisadan juutalaisvastaisuudesta 14.12.2007. Helsingin yliopiston, Joensuun sekä Åbo akademin teologiset tiedekunnat. Viitattu 12.1.2008.
  4. ^ Tuskin kukaan vakavasti otettava tutkija tohtii väittää Jeesusta sepitetyksi hahmoksi. Historiallisten lähteiden valossa näyttää selvältä, että noin 2000 vuotta sitten eli Jeesus-niminen ihminen. Käsitystä tukevia mainintoja on useissa teksteissä. Niiden laatijat tunnetaan, eivätkä kaikki kirjoitukset liity Raamattuun. (Tieteen kuvalehti 3/2008, s. 12)
    Uro, Risto; Lehtipuu, Outi: Nasaretilaisen historia, s. 250. Kirjapaja, 1997. 951-625-457-8. (Teoriat myyttiin perustuvasta, täysin epähistoriallisesta Jeesuksesta ovat vailla tieteellistä arvoa, vaikka onkin selvää, etteivät ensimmäiset kristityt kirjoittajat pyrkineet puolueettomaan historiankirjoitukseen.)
  5. ^ "The nonhistoricity thesis has always been controversial, and it has consistently failed to convince scholars of many disciplines and religious creeds. - - Biblical scholars and classical historians now regard it as effectively refuted." - Robert E. Van Voorst, Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000), p. 16.
    "There are those who argue that Jesus is a figment of the Church’s imagination, that there never was a Jesus at all. I have to say that I do not know any respectable critical scholar who says that any more.” Burridge, R & Gould, G, Jesus Now and Then, Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2004, p.34
  6. ^ Michael Martin; John Mackinnon Robertson
  7. ^ Heino, Harri: Mihin Suomi tänään uskoo. Helsinki: WSOY, 2002. ISBN 951-0-27265-5.
  8. ^ Lee Strobel: Tapaus Kristus, s. 43,304. Jyväskylä: Aikamedia, 1998,2005. ISBN 951-606-723-9.
  9. ^ On John, see S. Byrskog, "Story as History - History as Story", in Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 123 (Tübingen: Mohr, 2000; reprinted Leiden: Brill, 2002), p. 149; Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses (Cambridge: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2006) p. 385.
  10. ^ John Malline:Bibleverse-nb.
  11. ^ See the commentary by St. Augustine on hypotyposeis.org; also see the fragments in Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 3.39.1, 3.39.15, 6.14.1, 6.25.
  12. ^ Mack, Burton L. (1996), "Who wrote the New Testament" the making of the Christian myth" (HarperOne)
  13. ^ For an overview of the synoptic problem that discusses the traditional view in detail, see Drane, Introducing the New Testament (San Francisco: Harper Row, 1986) chapter 11. Also, see Donald Guthrie, New Testament Introduction (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1990)
  14. ^ Raymond E. Brown. An Introduction to the New Testament. New York: Anchor Bible.
  15. ^ J.A.T. Robinson, Redating the New Testament. Philadelphia: Westminster Press. 1985. pp.86-92.
  16. ^ Brown 7
  17. ^ For an early date, see: J. A. T. Robinson, Redating the New Testament, and William F. Albright, Towards a More Conservative View, in Christianity Today (18 January 1963); for a late date, see R. Bultmann, Kerygma and Myth: A Theological Debate; for a brief overview, see also this article at bethinking.org
  18. ^ Jo Ann H. Moran Cruz and Richard Gerberding, Medieval Worlds: An Introduction to European History Houghton Mifflin Company 2004, pp. 44-45
  19. ^ Genealogies Brown p. 236, Ehrman, p. 121; census Brown p. 321, Ehrman, p. 118; Easter events Ehrman, p. 277 and see An Easter Challenge For Christians by Dan Barker
  20. ^ Joseph Barber Lightfoot in his Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians writes: "At this point [[Malline:Bibleverse]] the apostle takes the pen from his amanuensis, and the concluding paragraph is written with his own hand. From the time when letters began to be forged in his name (Malline:Bibleverse; Malline:Bibleverse-nb) it seems to have been his practice to close with a few words in his own handwriting, as a precaution against such forgeries… In the present case he writes a whole paragraph, summing up the main lessons of the epistle in terse, eager, disjointed sentences. He writes it, too, in large, bold characters (Gr. pelikois grammasin), that his handwriting may reflect the energy and determination of his soul."
  21. ^ Gal 1:11-12
  22. ^ Malline:Bibleverse-nb
  23. ^ Malline:Bibleverse
  24. ^ Malline:Bibleverse
  25. ^ Malline:Bibleverse-nb
  26. ^ 1 Thessalonians 2:13-16: A Deutero-Pauline Interpolation, Birger A. Pearson, The Harvard Theological Review, Vol. 64, No. 1 (Jan., 1971), pp. 79-94
  27. ^ 1 Thess 2:13-16: Linguistic Evidence for an Interpolation, Daryl Schmidt, Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 102, No. 2 (Jun., 1983), pp. 269-279
  28. ^ Malline:Bibleverse-nb
  29. ^ (Malline:Bibleverse)
  30. ^ Malline:Bibleverse-nb
  31. ^ Malline:Bibleverse-nb
  32. ^ Malline:Bibleverse-nb
  33. ^ Malline:Bibleverse-nb
  34. ^ Malline:Bibleverse-nb
  35. ^ Malline:Bibleverse-nb
  36. ^ Malline:Bibleverse-nb
  37. ^ Malline:Bibleverse-nb
  38. ^ Malline:Bibleverse-nb
  39. ^ Murphy p.69
  40. ^ Malline:Bibleverse-nb
  41. ^ Malline:Bibleverse-nb
  42. ^ A basic text is that of Oscar Cullmann, available in English in a translation by J. K. S. Reid titled, The Earliest Christian Confessions (London: Lutterworth, 1949)
  43. ^ Malline:Bibleverse
  44. ^ Neufeld, The Earliest Christian Confessions (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964) p. 47
  45. ^ Reginald H. Fuller, The Formation of the Resurrection Narratives (New York: Macmillan, 1971) p. 10
  46. ^ Wolfhart Pannenberg, Jesus – God and Man translated Lewis Wilkins and Duane Pribe (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1968) p. 90
  47. ^ Oscar Cullmann, The Earlychurch: Studies in Early Christian History and Theology, ed. A. J. B. Higgins (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1966) p. 64
  48. ^ Hans Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians, translated James W. Leitch (Philadelphia: Fortress 1969) p. 251
  49. ^ Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament vol. 1 pp. 45, 80-82, 293
  50. ^ R. E. Brown, The Virginal Conception and Bodily Resurrection of Jesus (New York: Paulist Press, 1973) pp. 81, 92
  51. ^ see Wolfhart Pannenberg, Jesus – God and Man translated Lewis Wilkins and Duane Pribe (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1968)p. 90; Oscar Cullmann, The Early church: Studies in Early Christian History and Theology, ed. A. J. B. Higgins (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1966) p. 66-66; R. E. Brown, The Virginal Conception and Bodily Resurrection of Jesus (New York: Paulist Press, 1973) pp. 81; Thomas Sheehan, First Coming: How the Kingdom of God Became Christianity (New York: Random House, 1986 pp. 110, 118; Ulrich Wilckens, Resurrection translated A. M. Stewart (Edinburgh: Saint Andrew, 1977) p. 2; Hans Grass, Ostergeschen und Osterberichte, Second Edition (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1962) p96; Grass favors the origin in Damascus.
  52. ^ Hans von Campenhausen, "The Events of Easter and the Empty Tomb," in Tradition and Life in the Church (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1968) p. 44
  53. ^ Archibald Hunter, Works and Words of Jesus (1973) p. 100
  54. ^ Malline:Bibleverse
  55. ^ Cullmann, Confessions p. 32
  56. ^ Malline:Bibleverse
  57. ^ Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament vol 1, pp. 49, 81; Joachim Jeremias, The Eucharistic Words of Jesus translated Norman Perrin (London: SCM Press, 1966) p. 102
  58. ^ Malline:Bibleverse
  59. ^ Wolfhart Pannenberg, Jesus – God and Man translated Lewis Wilkins and Duane Pribe (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1968) pp. 118, 283, 367; Neufeld, The Earliest Christian Confessions (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964) pp. 7, 50; C. H. Dodd, The Apostolic Preaching and its Developments (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1980) p. 14
  60. ^ Malline:Bibleverse
  61. ^ Reginald Fuller, The Foundations of New Testament Christology (New York: Scriner's, 1965) pp. 214, 216, 227, 239; Joachim Jeremias, The Eucharistic Words of Jesus translated Norman Perrin (London: SCM Press, 1966) p. 102; Neufeld, The Earliest Christian Confessions (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964) pp. 7, 9, 128
  62. ^ James M. Robinson, ed., The Nag Hammadi Library in English (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1977) and especially his essay in Hedrick and Hodgson, Nag Hammadi, Gnosticism, and Early Christianity (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1986)
  63. ^ Elaine Pagels, The Gnostic Gospels (New York: Random House, 1979)
  64. ^ R. E. Brown, "The Christians Who Lost Out" in The New York Times Book Review, 20 January 1980 p. 3; Koester in Robinson, Nag Hammadi in English, vol. 2 pp. 4, 47, 68, 150-154, 180. It is important to stress that all these scholars, with perhaps the exception of Pagels (whom the rest were critical of on this point) distanced themselves from using the texts as historical sources for the most part, and only proceeded to consider information therein with great caution.
  65. ^ Apocryphon of John 1:5-17
  66. ^ Ehrman, Bart (2003). Lost Christianities. New York: Oxford University Press, xi-xii. 
  67. ^ Malline:Citation
  68. ^ Miller 6; it also is not quoted in any contemporary writings, and suffers from a paucity of manuscripts, see these articles at answers.org and ntcanon.org
  69. ^ Clement, Corinthians 42
  70. ^ Ignatius, Letter to the Trallians 9, Letter to the Smyrneans 1, 3
  71. ^ Justin First Apology 30, 32, 34-35, 47-48, 50; Dialogue with Trypho 12, 77, 97, 107-108, &c.
  72. ^ translation by Richard Bauckham in his Jesus and the Eyewitnesses (Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2006), pp. 15-16.
  73. ^ Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses (Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2006), pp. 15-21.
  74. ^ Quoted in Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 4.3.2, translation by Richard Bauckham in his Jesus and the Eyewitnesses (Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2006), p. 53.
  75. ^ Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses (Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2006), pp. 53l.
  76. ^ G. R. S. Mead : Did Jesus Live 100 B.C.? pp. 50-51
  77. ^ []
  78. ^ origin of the name "christian"
  79. ^ Josephus Antiquities 18.3.3
  80. ^ Feldman (1989), p. 430
  81. ^ Alice Whealey, Josephus on Jesus (New York, 2003) p.194.
  82. ^ Josephus Antiquities 20:9.1
  83. ^ Louis H. Feldman, "Josephus" Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 3, pp. 990–91
  84. ^ "Testimonium Flavianum" . EarlyChristanWritings.com. Viitattu 2006-10-07. 
  85. ^ Origin Commentary on Matthew 10.17; Against Celsus 1.47
  86. ^ L. Michael White, From Jesus to Christianity. HarperCollinsPublishers, 2004. P. 97–98
  87. ^ Josephus on Jesus,p. 8, p. 11.
  88. ^ i.e. Daniel-Rops, Silence of Jesus' Contemporaries p. 21 and G. R. Habermas, The Historical Jesus p. 193
  89. ^ John Drane Introducing the New Testament (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1986) p. 138; John P. Meier. A Marginal Jew (Anchor Bible Reference Library, 1991) v.1; also, James H. Charlesworth, Jesus Within Judaism (Garden City: Doubleday, 1988) p. 96
  90. ^ Henri Daniel-Rops, Silence of Jesus' Contemporaries p. 21; J.N.D. Anderson, Christianity: The Witness of History (London: Tyndale, 1969)p. 20; F.F. Bruce, New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? (Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1967) p. 108
  91. ^ F.E Peters, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam Vol.1 p. 149
  92. ^ Agapius Kitab al-'Unwan, 239-240
  93. ^ Alice Whealey, "The Testimonium Flavianum in Syriac and Arabic" New Testament Studies 54.4 (2008).
  94. ^ Pliny to Trajan, Letters 10.96–97
  95. ^ Jesus, by Ch. Gugnebert, Professor of History of Christianity in the Sorbonne, Translated from the French by S. H. Hooke, Samuel Davidson Professor of Old Testament Studies in the University of London, University Book, New York, 1956, p. 14
  96. ^ Tacitus, Annals 15.44 (Latin, English and also here [3])
  97. ^ Robert Van Voorst, Jesus Outside the New Testament, pp. 42-43 as quoted at earlychristianwritings.com
  98. ^ Robert E. Van Voorst (2000). Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence. Wm. B. Eerdmans, 43.  See also the criterion of embarrassment.
  99. ^ F.F. Bruce,Jesus and Christian Origins Outside the New Testament, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974) p. 23
  100. ^ Ehrman p 212
  101. ^ Theissen and Merz p.83
  102. ^ Did Jesus exist? Earl Doherty and the argument to ahistoricity, by Richard Carrier. http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/jesuspuzzle.html
  103. ^ Jesus, University Books, New York, 1956, p.13
  104. ^ France, RT (1986). Evidence for Jesus (Jesus Library). Trafalgar Square Publishing, 19–20. ISBN 0340381728. 
  105. ^ For example R. T. France, writes "The brief notice in Tacitus Annals xv.44 mentions only his title, Christus, and his execution in Judea by order of Pontius Pilatus. Nor is there any reason to believe that Tacitus bases this on independent information-it is what Christians would be saying in Rome in the early second century ... No other clear pagan references to Jesus can be dated before AD 150, by which time the source of any information is more likely to be Christian propaganda than an independent record." The Gospels As Historical Sources For Jesus, The Founder Of Christianity, Truth Journal [4]
  106. ^ Theissen, Gerd; Merz, Annette (1998). The historical Jesus: a comprehensive guide. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 83. ISBN 9780800631222. 
  107. ^ Who is the real Jesus?
  108. ^ Scholars' Verdict
Noudettu kohteesta ”https://apowiki.fi/index.php?title=Jeesuksen_historiallisuus&oldid=5674”