A question about Roman Scholars and their records, Regarding Jesus?

Question

I am looking for any links and information in Roman records regarding Jesus, I know that the Romans did record the Crucifixions and Jesus name is on those records. Can anyone help me find more information on this please also there was a Roman Scholar I do not know his name is wasn't a Christian but he did record the miracles of Jesus of Nazareth, any information or links to this would be most appreciated.

Thank you for your replies and help!.

Answer 1

muinghan did a good job describing the Roman sources, but I just want to add a few things.

There are no Roman records of Jesus or his crucifixion. The only thing even close to that is a obscure reference in Jewish records. The Sanhedrin 43a says: "On the eve of the Passover, Yeshu was hanged. Forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried: 'He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy. Any one who can say anything in his favor, let him come forward and plead on his behalf.' But since nothing was brought forward in his favor he was hanged on the eve of the Passover."

This Yeshu MIGHT be Jesus, but it is uncertain. The situation bears some similarity to the accounts of Jesus, and comes frmo the time Jesus lived, but there are obviously also major differences. The text also goes on to say that Yeshu had five disciples, and they too were all stoned and hanged, so again, you have some similarities but also major differences.

As for Roman writers, as has already been stated, very few of them talk about Jesus, but instead focus on his followers, whom they generally see as easily manipulated troublemakers.

However, there are some exceptions to this, but they are all problematic.

There is Joesphus, whose Antiquities of the Jews includes the famous Testimonium Flavianum. The Testimonium Flavianum has already been provided so I won't repeat it, but it deserves some analysis. Josephus was a Jew, and he remained so his entire life. For him to say that Jesus was the Christ (i.e. Jesus was the Messiah, and thus that the Messiah was executed) goes against all Judaism, and this passage deviates greatly from Josephus' writing style. What's more, all copies we have of Josephus come from after Christianity was widely accepted in the Roman Empire. Thus, it is pretty much agreed that the passage was at some point changed to make a case that Jesus was the Messiah (in the ancient world, new books were copied by hand from old copies, so the copier could change whatever he wanted in the text). However, it is up for debate how much of the passage is actually Josephus: some claim the entire passage was made up, others that only a few words were added by someone else to make it more aligned with Christianity.

The other source is Tacitus. Tacitus, writing in his Annals, talks briefly about Christians and adds: "Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilate, 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."

The problem with this, though, is that Tacitus is writing about 100 years after when the Crucifixion would have taken place. 100 years is a long time, and hardly makes him a direct source. So again, its an open question. Did Tacitus have direct records of the Crucifixion, or did he just hear about it from Christians he had talked to?

And that's what makes this such a messy and contentious issue: it's hard to prove or disprove anything from the contemporary sources about Jesus because there is just not enough information, and what we do have is by no means clear or necessarily accurate.  

Answer 2

You "know" wrong.  There are no detailed crucifixion records; at best, there is only information about how many people were crucified on a particular occasion (usually, after the suppression of a major uprising).  

The Roman scholar you refer to is probably Yosef Ben Matityahu, also known as Titus Flavius Josephus (the name he adopted after he was granted Roman citizenship), who was born in 37 AD (meaning, he wasn't even alive at the time of Jesus).  He briefly mentions Jesus in his book "Antiquities of the Jews" completed around 94 AD:  

Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.

[End of quote]

Another circumstantial mention is found in "Annals" by Tacitus (written around 117 AD).  He tells of Rome after a devastating fire of 64 AD:

But neither the aid of man, nor the liberality of the prince, nor the propitiations of the gods, succeeded in destroying the belief that the fire had been purposely lit. In order to put an end to this rumor, therefore, Nero laid the blame on and visited with severe punishment those men, hateful for their crimes, whom the people called Christians. He from whom the name was derived, Christus, was put to death by the procurator Pontius Pilatus in the reign of Tiberius. But the pernicious superstition, checked for a moment, broke out again, not only in Judaea, the native land of the monstrosity, but also in Rome, to which all conceivable horrors and abominations flow from every side, and find supporters.

[End of quote]

While we are on the subject, you might find it curious that many Romans who lived in the times of Jesus and were familiar with Jewish writings thought that Isaiah's prophecy that modern Christians interpret as the foretelling of Jesus' coming actually referred to Roman emperor Vespasian...

Answer 3

I suspect you are doomed to disappointment.  There are few records of Joshua ben Joseph made by witnesses.

The Gospels are, in fact, not eyewitness accounts.  They were written up to two hundred years after the events based on oral traditions.  The single actual eyewitness account is a passage in the historian Josephus, which contains a physical description of Joshua (Jesus) but not much else.

Aside from Josephus there is not a single independent record.  Everything else was written by believers, or after the believers had enough influence to matter.

Answer 4

Can you share that crucifixion source? Because I would be quite surprised to see the name of Jesus on it. The number of sources that proof Jesus' existence are about as close to zero as one can get: zero.

Nazareth, by the way, did not exist in Jesus' days. It disappeared during the Diodochi wars after the death of Alexander, and was again resettled around the Jewish war, around 70 CE.

The Roman scholar was Tacitus. He didn't record the miracles of Jesus, as he was born afterwards. He wrote that a sect existed who worshiped a certain Crestos of Chrestus.

Answer 5

I am most sorry to disappoint you but there are not many. I've been an avid student of historical theology for 30 years.

The ONLY Greco-Roman sources pertaining to Jesus and Christains in general were.....

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 (there is only one small entry mentioning Jesus, saying he did great miracles, and it's viladity has been questioned), are of the most interest to scholars dealing with the historicity of Jesus. Tacitus, in his Annals written c. 115, mentions popular opinion about Christus, without historical details . There is an obscure reference to a Jewish leader called "Chrestus" in Suetonius. Pliny actually condemned Christians as easily-led fools.

See below for the most famous entry by 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 C.E.. In these works, Jesus is mentioned twice. The one directly concerning Jesus has come to be known as the Testimonium Flavianum.

The Testimonium's authenticity has attracted much scholarly discussion and controversy of interpolation.

In 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.

The second entry was very brief mentioning, Josephus calls James "the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ". For this shorter passage, most scholars consider it to be substantially authentic, while other raise doubts.

This is THE most information we have from Greco-Roman sources. There is nothing else but minor mentions like the second entry by Josephus.

Answer 6

Most were written scriptures from Paul and Peter, the original disciples. Most written accounts on the Roman were from a scholar named Nicodemus. There was a jewish record as well, from the scrolls of Caiaphas, the high priest of Judea in that period.