Skip to content
Christians of the Middle East
العربية

Who Jesus was

Jesus: what history attests, and what the Church confesses

What the ancient sources say about Jesus of Nazareth, what the Church reads in the prophecies of the Old Testament, and why he came and died on the Cross — and how that connects to the Passover and the Temple.

This page holds two kinds of claim and keeps them clearly apart: what historians of any faith or none accept, and what the Church confesses in faith. The boundary between them is stated openly rather than blurred.

General further reading, not citations to specific pages.

Ancient testimony from outside the Church

Texts not written by Christians — some by writers openly hostile to Christianity — which nonetheless mention Christ or his followers.

Tacitus, Roman historian

c. AD 116

What it attests

Recounting the fire of Rome in 64 and Nero's blaming of the Christians, he says their name comes from “Christus”, who “suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of the procurator Pontius Pilate”. This is non-Christian Roman testimony to the execution itself, from a historian who makes no secret of his contempt for the “superstition”.

What to be careful of

Tacitus calls Pilate procurator, which is an anachronism: the Pilate Stone, found at Caesarea in 1961, gives his title as praefectus, prefect. The likeliest explanation is that Tacitus used the term current in his own day, rather than that the passage is an interpolation.

Josephus, Jewish historian

c. AD 93–94

What it attests

He mentions Jesus twice: in book 20 he names “James, the brother of Jesus who was called Christ” in recounting his execution in 62, and in book 18 there is a longer passage about Jesus himself.

What to be careful of

The longer passage (18.63–64) is agreed to carry Christian scribal additions, and scholars differ over how much; the mention of James in book 20 is generally accepted as original.

Pliny the Younger, Roman governor

c. AD 112

What it attests

Writing to the Emperor Trajan to ask how to deal with Christians in Bithynia, he describes them meeting before dawn and “singing hymns to Christ as to a god”. This is administrative testimony to communities worshipping Christ in Asia Minor at that early date.

Mara bar Serapion, Syriac writer

1st–3rd century

What it attests

A Syriac letter from a prisoner to his son, referring to the “wise king” whom the Jews executed, and noting that his kingdom endured. It is testimony from within the very Syriac world this site covers — though its date is not settled.

What to be careful of

It does not name Jesus explicitly, and its date is widely disputed, so it is supporting testimony rather than an argument on its own.

Suetonius, Roman writer

c. AD 121

What it attests

He mentions Claudius expelling Jews from Rome over disturbances stirred by “Chrestus”, and Nero's punishment of Christians. His value is stronger as testimony to the movement than to the person of Jesus.

What historians accept

These are points not disputed by scholars of the period, including non-religious ones.

  • That Jesus of Nazareth was a real historical person, a Galilean Jew who lived in the first half of the first century. Outside a very small fringe, this is not disputed by scholars of the period at all — including non-religious ones.

  • That he was baptised by John the Baptist, taught in Galilee, and gathered disciples.

  • That he was crucified in Jerusalem under the Roman governor Pontius Pilate, around AD 30–33. Crucifixion was a Roman penalty, not a Jewish one, which fits what the non-Christian sources say.

  • That his brother James led the community in Jerusalem, and that the Jewish historian Josephus names him.

  • That within roughly twenty years of his death his followers were proclaiming his resurrection in a fixed formula, which Paul quotes in 1 Corinthians 15:3–8 and says he received from those before him — meaning the proclamation is older than the earliest text recording it.

  • That crucifixion was, in Roman culture, an absolute disgrace reserved for slaves and rebels — so a message built on a crucified man is the last thing anyone would invent in order to win converts.

Where history stops and faith begins

The crucifixion is a historical event to which non-Christians testify. The empty tomb and the Resurrection are not in that category: a historian cannot demonstrate a resurrection, and anyone who tells you it is “historically proven” in the way the execution is has conflated two different things. What historical work does reach is this:

  • That the proclamation of the resurrection is very early, and not a late development that grew up over generations.
  • That those who proclaimed it suffered and died for it, which shows the sincerity of their conviction — not the truth of what they were convinced of. The distinction matters.
  • That the movement began in the same city as the tomb, within weeks or months, not far away and long after.
  • That the earliest accounts place the first testimony with women. It is usually said that women’s testimony was inadmissible, and that is overstated: the legal picture of the period is less uniform than the claim suggests, and much of the material cited for it postdates the event. Still, choosing women as the first witnesses is not the obvious move for someone constructing a case to persuade.
  • And as for the tomb — whether it was empty, and why — that is what the Church confesses in faith, not what history establishes as proof. This page states what the Church believes, and states equally plainly the limit of what can be shown.

The prophecies of the Old Testament

These are the Church's readings of the Hebrew scriptures. Jewish tradition reads several of these texts differently, and that is noted wherever it matters.

ميخا 5:2 · Micah 5:2

“But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah… out of you shall come forth for me one who is to rule in Israel”

How the Church reads it

The Church reads here the place of birth — which the Gospels place at Bethlehem, not the Nazareth where he grew up.

In the New Testament: متى 2:1–6 · Matthew 2:1–6

إشعياء 7:14 · Isaiah 7:14

“Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Emmanuel”

How the Church reads it

The Church reads this in the birth from the Virgin Mary; “Emmanuel” means “God with us”.

In the New Testament: متى 1:22–23 · Matthew 1:22–23

Note

The Hebrew word here is *almah*, a young woman; the Greek Septuagint renders it *parthenos*, virgin — and the Septuagint is what the New Testament writers were reading. Jewish tradition reads the verse within its own historical setting in Isaiah's day.

إشعياء 53 · Isaiah 53

“He was pierced for our transgressions, crushed for our iniquities… and by his wounds we are healed”

How the Church reads it

This is the text in which the Church reads the mystery of the Cross most fully: an innocent one bearing what is not his, numbered with transgressors, buried with the rich, not opening his mouth. It is the passage the Ethiopian official is reading in Acts when Philip explains it to him.

In the New Testament: أعمال 8:26–35، 1 بطرس 2:24 · Acts 8:26–35, 1 Peter 2:24

Note

Jewish tradition generally reads the Suffering Servant as Israel itself, collectively, rather than as an individual to come. Both readings are ancient.

مزمور 22 · Psalm 22

“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?… they pierced my hands and my feet… they divide my garments among them”

How the Church reads it

The words Christ speaks on the Cross are this psalm's opening line, and its details — the divided garments, the pierced hands — the Church reads in the hour of the crucifixion.

In the New Testament: متى 27:46، يوحنا 19:23–24 · Matthew 27:46, John 19:23–24

Note

The Masoretic Hebrew at this point reads *ka’ari*, “like a lion”; “they pierced” follows a different reading, carried by the Septuagint and the old versions. This is a well-known textual crux, noted here because the argument from the verse turns on which reading is taken.

زكريا 9:9 · Zechariah 9:9

“Behold, your king comes to you… humble, and riding on a donkey”

How the Church reads it

The Church reads this in the entry on Palm Sunday: a king entering his city not on a warhorse but on a donkey.

In the New Testament: متى 21:1–11 · Matthew 21:1–11

زكريا 12:10 · Zechariah 12:10

“And they shall look on me, on him whom they have pierced”

How the Church reads it

John cites this at the piercing of the side with a spear on the Cross.

In the New Testament: يوحنا 19:37 · John 19:37

مزمور 16:10 · Psalm 16:10

“You will not let your holy one see corruption”

How the Church reads it

Peter reads this at Pentecost of the Resurrection: that the body did not remain in the tomb to decay.

In the New Testament: أعمال 2:25–32 · Acts 2:25–32

خروج 12:46، مزمور 34:20 · Exodus 12:46, Psalm 34:20

“You shall not break any of its bones” — in the Passover command

How the Church reads it

This is a command about the Passover lamb, and John cites it explicitly at the Cross when Christ's legs are not broken. It is the link that ties the Cross directly to the Passover.

In the New Testament: يوحنا 19:33–36 · John 19:33–36

Why he came, and why he died

From here to the end of the page the register is catechesis — the Church teaching its own faith, not a historical description.

Why he came

The Church teaches that humanity became separated from God — not merely by a legal debt, but by a wound in its nature: death became its end and corruption its portion. Healing could not come from outside, for what God did not take up, he did not heal.

So the Son of God came and took our nature whole, entering the entirety of our life, death included, in order to carry it through from within. This is why the Fathers of the East say salvation is not an acquittal in a court but the healing of a sick nature, and a share in the life of God.

The Cross and the Passover

Christ did not die at any time of year, but at Passover. That is not a detail of timing; it is the meaning.

In Exodus a lamb is slaughtered for each household and its blood put on the doorposts, and death passes over that house. Hence the name of the feast: *Pesach*, a passing over. And it is a feast of liberation: by blood death passed by, and by that passing the people came out of slavery.

The New Testament reads the Cross in exactly this frame. John the Baptist says, “Behold the Lamb of God.” Paul says, “Christ our Passover has been sacrificed for us.” And John places the crucifixion at the hour the Passover lambs were being slaughtered in the Temple, citing the Passover command itself: “You shall not break any of its bones.”

The sense is one and the same: blood by which death passes over, and a passing out of slavery into freedom — and out of death into life.

Note

It should be said that the Gospels do not agree on the timing: John places the crucifixion on the day of Preparation, before the Passover meal, while the other three make the Last Supper the Passover meal itself. The difficulty is old and much discussed, with several proposed resolutions. The link to the Passover lamb as set out above rests on John's sequence.

The Temple and the sacrifice

Sacrifice in the Temple was by its nature repeated: daily, and yearly, with the high priest entering the Holy of Holies once a year carrying blood that was not his own.

The whole argument of the Letter to the Hebrews rests on this: what must be repeated is not yet complete, and Christ entered “once for all” with his own blood, being both priest and sacrifice. This is why his sacrifice is not repeated — in the Eastern tradition the Eucharist is not a new sacrifice but the presence of the one sacrifice.

The Gospels record that the veil of the Temple was torn from top to bottom at the hour of his death. The Church reads in this that the way into the Holy of Holies is no longer curtained off, nor confined to one priest on one day.

The year 70, and after

In AD 70 the Romans destroyed the Temple; the sacrificial system stopped and has never resumed. The date of the Letter to the Hebrews is disputed — many place it before 70, since it speaks of the sacrifices as though they were still being offered — and Christian tradition reads in the proximity that what the Temple signified had reached its fulfilment in Christ, leaving the sign no further work to do.

And why the Cross alone is not enough

Had it ended in death, the Cross would be sad news, not good news. The Church does not preach a death only, but a death in which death itself was defeated.

This is why Christian Pascha — the feast of the Resurrection — is the greatest feast of the year in all the churches of the East, not Good Friday. What the East sings on the night of the Resurrection is not “we are forgiven” but “Christ is risen from the dead, and by death he has trampled down death.”

References

Primary sources

  • Tacitus. Annals, book 15.44, c. 116
  • Flavius Josephus. Antiquities of the Jews, 18.63–64 and 20.200, c. 93–94
  • Pliny the Younger. Letters, 10.96 (to the Emperor Trajan), c. 112
  • Mara bar Serapion. Letter to his son (Syriac), 1st–3rd century
  • Suetonius. Lives of the Caesars (Claudius 25, Nero 16), c. 121
  • The Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, 325, completed 381
  • Cyril of Jerusalem. Catechetical Lectures, c. 350

Further reading

  • E. P. Sanders. The Historical Figure of Jesus. Penguin, 1993
  • Bart D. Ehrman. Did Jesus Exist? The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth. HarperOne, 2012
  • John P. Meier. A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus. Doubleday, 1991
  • Géza Vermes. Jesus the Jew: A Historian's Reading of the Gospels. Collins, 1973
  • Henry Chadwick. The Early Church. Penguin, 1967
  • Sebastian P. Brock. An Introduction to Syriac Studies. Gorgias Press, 2006
  • Vladimir Lossky. The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church, 1944
  • Timothy (Kallistos) Ware. The Orthodox Church. Penguin, 1963
  • J. N. D. Kelly. Early Christian Doctrines. A. & C. Black, 1958
  • Robert Louis Wilken. The First Thousand Years: A Global History of Christianity. Yale University Press, 2012
  • N. T. Wright. The Resurrection of the Son of God. SPCK, 2003