The Bible as History

The early Christians would rather be fed to lions in the Roman Colosseum than deny their faith. Faith in what? In the person and teachings of Jesus Christ. What a bizarre and radical concept! Today, Christianity is the world’s largest religion; although it now appears in many different forms, it all stems back to the events and people of that first century. Whether you are a Christian, skeptic, a Muslim, or any number of other things, you can only understand this worldwide phenomenon (the Jesus movement or Christianity) by reading the documents important to its early adherents: the New Testament. YOU should read the Bible.

As a recent B.A. History graduate, I am aware of the challenges and strengths of particular kinds of primary sources. I cannot comment too extensively on the historicity of the Bible (I’m more of a modern history guy – first century and earlier is not my expertise at all), but I do have a few thoughts to share.

The earliest of the gospels is generally thought to be The Gospel of Mark in the 60s A.D. The disadvantage of this document is that we are clearly not dealing with in-the-moment documentary evidence of Jesus’ life – then again, we don’t have much of that kind of evidence from that era at all, so it’s not too discouraging. The advantage is that the source was still written within the lifetime of Jesus’ contemporaries, such as his early disciples who likely dictated the document.

What does this mean? It means the written accounts in the gospels may not be as exact as video footage, but they can still be reliable re-tellings of what happened only a few decades earlier. I deal with challenges like this as a modern historian to some extent: for example, a memoir written in the 1860s about events that occurred in the 1830s could be partially influenced by hazy memory or values shaped by later contexts. Although it is appropriate to have some reservations, the document can still provide insight into the past with proper analysis.

The gospels are not the earliest New Testament documents. Most of the Epistles of Paul were written in the 50s A.D. and The Book of James was written in the 40s A.D., merely a decade after Jesus walked the earth! Some anti-Christians have attempted to argue that Jesus did not even exist, suggesting that stories of this mythical figure were invented as late as the 300s A.D. These notions are completely absurd; the early dating of the texts should put such theories to rest. Regardless of whether you are willing to accept the miraculous events described in the books, you must at least acknowledge that Jesus existed as a historical figure and that the virulent Jesus movement (which began in the first century) was based on his life and teachings.

Skeptics (and others), I encourage you to pick up the New Testament and read it. At least look at it as a fascinating set of historical documents which describe the thoughts and actions of this radical first-century group of people… and the Lord they served and followed.

As the book of 2 Peter says (likely written in the 60s A.D.), “For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.” (2 Peter 1:16)

Thanks for reading! This article is the start of a short series on the importance of the Bible. I intend to pitch the Bible to a number of specific groups, and conclude by explaining what the Bible means to me. Happy reading!