Unbelievers, Inquirers, and Persecutors:

How Non-Christian Responses Affirm the Miracles

Ian Huyett
Christians believe that a historical person, Jesus of Nazareth,
vindicated his claim to be the Christ [meaning Anointed One], the Son of
the living God1 with a series of miraculous demonstrations culminating in
his public resurrection from the dead. More than any other, it is this
aspect of Christianity the worlds largest religion at the time of this
writing that makes it comparatively unique.
To be sure, other faiths have involved stories of persons rising from
the dead perhaps most famously that of the ancient Egyptians, who
believed that Osiris was restored to life after his wife Isis reassembled his
dismembered body.2 None of these other persons, however, are regarded
by scholarly consensus as historical individuals.
Perhaps the closest story offered by a major world religion is AlMiraj: a journey to and from heaven which Muslims believe to have been
undertaken by their prophet Muhammad: doubtless a historical person.
Notably, after returning from Al-Miraj, Muhammad is said to have
accurately described a distant caravan: something he could not have seen
except from the sky.3 While this report lends some credibility to Al-Miraj,
however, Muslims do not claim that persons other than Muhammad
witnessed his ascent to or return from heaven as such. In contrast, Christ
was executed in public his death was attested to in the Annals of the
Roman historian Tacitus4 and elsewhere5 and was then allegedly seen
alive by more than 500 of his followers.6

Matthew 16:16
See also Dionysus. Encyclopdia Britannica. 2015. (At the direction of Hera, the infant Zagreus/Dionysus was
torn to pieces, cooked, and eaten by the evil Titans. But his heart was saved by Athena, and he, now Dionysus, was
resurrected by Zeus through Semele.).
3
Ibn Ishaq, Muhammad. The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah. Ed. Ibn Hisham Abd AlMalik. London: Oxford UP, 1955. 184. See also Rippin, Andrew. Muslims: Their Religious Beliefs and Practices.
London: Routledge, 2001. 52 (Such miraculous stories are not abundant in the popular life accounts of
Muhammad, as compared to Jesuss for example, but they do tend to play an important role both in providing a
guarantee of Muhammads status and in supplying a focal point for popular belief.).
4
Annals 15.44.
5
e.g. Celsus, and R. Joseph Hoffman. On the True Doctrine: A Discourse against the Christians. Oxford: Oxford UP,
1987. 72 [hereinafter Hoffman]. (I emphasize that the Christians worship a man who was arrested and died.).
6
1 Cor. 15:6
2

1 Corinthians the source for this latter claim, widely dated by

scholars to the 50s AD was circulated among the church which
reportedly experienced this event.7 Offering the reader personal
immortality, the document goes on to say Behold! I tell you a mystery. We
shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the
twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and
the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed.8 It is plain
that, if we wish to know whether a personal God has revealed himself in
history, the alleged miracles of Christ cannot be safely ignored.
Texts and History
It should be noted at the outset that many attacks on documents
like the Annals and 1 Corinthians, though intended as attacks on these
documents in particular, are in effect attacks on the whole of history. Socalled Jesus mythicists seek to obliterate these texts by noting that they
depict events which occurred a long time ago, that some time passed
between their writing and the events they describe, and/or that the texts
are old. Yet human history includes many events which occurred long ago,
stands largely upon texts written after the deaths of the persons they
describe, and is often studied through texts thousands of years old.
Applied consistently, the mythicists skepticism would lead us to
speculate that George Washington fabricated the Battle of Trenton, to
relegate Alexander the Great to the historical status of Zeus, and to
dismiss the idea that there ever was a Peloponnesian War. Mythicists,
needless to say, rarely apply their skepticism consistently. To throw out
mankinds history to escape one man from Nazareth is an exercise so
desperate as to ironically glorify the object of the mythicists resentment.
The structure of mythicism is, in this way, similar to that of conspiracy
theories which involve secret cabals of lizard people. In fact, Joseph Atwill
the most recent mythicist to gain widespread public attention claims
that Christ was the elaborate contrivance of Roman officials. Mythicism is,
for this reason, held in contempt even by secular New Testament scholars
like Bart Ehrman a fact which many secular people, and even many
Christians, do not fully appreciate.

Kummel, Werner Georg, Paul Feine, and Johannes Behm. Introduction to the New Testament. Nashville:
Abingdon, 1966. 202 [hereinafter Kummel]. (The authenticity of 1 Corinthians is not disputed. The Epistle was
already clearly known in I Clem. 37:5; 47:1-3; 49:5; Ign., Eph 16:1; 18:1; Rom 5:1; Phila 3:3.).
8
1 Cor. 15:51-52.

A comparison with other texts may here be illustrative. The earliest

manuscripts of Herodotus, Thucydides, Plato, and Demosthenes date from
1,300 years after their writing.9 The earliest manuscripts of Julius
Caesars Gallic Wars, Livys History of Rome, and also Tacitus Annals
date to 1,000 years after their writing.10 Of the New Testament, in
contrast, there exist 114 manuscript fragments dated to 50 years from
their writing as well as 200 manuscripts of books dated to 100 years
from their writing.11
The general reliability of the New Testament is further bolstered by
archaeological evidence. As philosophers Timothy and Lydia McGrew have
noted, Archaeology has not been kind to literary criticism of the Gospels
and Acts. Defying the predictions of critics, these texts have been
corroborated by the discovery of an inscription concerning Pontius Pilate,
a boundary stone bearing the name of Sergius Paulus, the Pool of Siloam
depicted in John 9, and other evidence indicating that John was familiar
with Jerusalem prior to its destruction in AD 70.12 More recently, a
structure at Nazareth was dated to the time of Christ.13 An obscure town
mentioned in no Jewish sources prior to AD 300, Nazareth had long been
thought by critics to be a Christian invention.
While such discoveries do not prove that the Gospels are true in
every particular, the McGrews concede, authors who are accurate in
matters that we can check against existing independent evidence deserve
the benefit of the doubt within reasonable bounds.14 The fact that all
authors have biases far from rendering all texts unreliable is merely
one factor to be considered in their analysis. After all: bias afflicts not only
dead persons and their writing, but living ones and their speech. If all
biased communication is unreliable, then all human relationships, and the
whole enterprise of learning, become impossible.
In his Confessions, Augustine wrote of his realization that while
an anti-Christian he had been irrationally skeptical in his dismissal of
9

McDowell, Josh. Evidence for Christianity. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2006. 65. Thanks to Andrew Rogers for
pointing me towards this source.
10
Id.
11
Id.
12
McGrew, Timothy, and Lydia McGrew. "The Argument from Miracles." Eds. William Lane Craig, and James Porter
Moreland. The Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology. Chichester, U.K.: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009. 600 [hereinafter
McGrew].
13
"Nazareth Dwelling Discovery May Shed Light on Boyhood of Jesus." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media,
21 Dec. 2009.
14
McGrew at 600.

the Bibles reliability. I began to realize that I believed countless things

which I had never seen, he wrote, including facts about history, about
current events elsewhere in the world, and about medicine and other
matters. Unless we took these things on trust, we should accomplish
absolutely nothing in this life.
Appealing to ancient texts, then, I will now consider reports of the
resurrection and argue for their reliability, endeavoring to focus primarily
upon independent sources. I will then advance the historicity of the
works, or other miracles, by demonstrating that a variety of early nonChristian sources attest to them.
Witnesses to the Resurrection
Christ was a polarizing figure; reports of his resurrection are
relayed through Christian and anti-Christian sources. Temporarily
excluding martyrdom from consideration, perhaps the most impressive
extant Christian report is that of Christs posthumous appearance to the
500.
As already noted, it is well-established that 1 Corinthians which
tells us about this appearance was circulated among the early church.15
Paul, moreover, tells us that most of the 500 who saw Christ are still
alive, though some have fallen asleep.16 This report is congruent with
modern scholarly dating of the letter to the 50s AD. Together, these facts
make it highly improbable that this appearance was an invention of
Pauls own. The early church, though dispersed, was a small community;
Pauls letters themselves are evidence that its branches routinely wrote
to one another. If hundreds of living Christians did not claim to have seen
the risen Christ, Pauls readers would likely have recognized this
statement as a lie.
Historical apologists often focus on such reports: that is, reports
written by Christians which the authors could not plausibly have
invented. Yet, while there are good reasons to regard many such
statements as reliable, early anti-Christian sources can be even more
helpful to the Christian position. When the anti-Christian sources make
statements which advance the Christian narrative, we can trust them to
be relatively free from bias. For the same reason, a word of praise from

15
16

Kummel at 202.
1 Cor. 15:6

ones sworn enemy is often a source of greater pride than a compliment

from a friend.
Perhaps the most interesting of these sources is the philosopher
Celsus book On the True Doctrine. The work survives because the church
father Origen quoted it extensively in a response entitled Contra Celsus.
Celsus polemic was widely circulated enough for Origens friend,
Ambrose of Alexandria, to urge Origen to refute it.17 The credibility of
Origens answer would therefore have been dependent upon his relaying
the texts content accurately.
Origen dates On the True Doctrine to the 130s AD.18 Based almost
singularly upon one use of the word those, however, many scholars have
advanced a later date. This has been convincingly shown to be an error.19
There seems to be no compelling reason not to take Origen at his word.20
Often identified simply as a pagan philosopher, Celsus religious
views are nuanced. He identifies his own view of God with that of
Platos,21 criticizing the doctrine of the incarnation as anathema to the
purity of the underivable, the unamenable God, who does not even
participate in being.22 He is also, however, a fervent defender of
polytheistic worship, concluding his treatise by recommending that
Christians be systematically killed if they persist in refusing to worship
the various gods who preside over the day-to-day activities of life.23 He
believes that the emperor, also, is a god;24 many years after Celsus
writing, the emperor Diocletian embarked on the very program of
extermination that Celsus desired.25
17

Contra Celsus I (my pious Ambrosius, why you wished me to write a reply to the false charges brought by
Celsus against the Christians).
18
Hoffman at 30.
19
Hargis, Jeffrey W. Against the Christians: The Rise of Early Anti-Christian Polemic. New York: Peter Lang, 1999. 22
[hereinafter Hargis] (explaining that, when Celsus imagines what would happen if those who now reign over us
became Christians, his argument involves a hypothetical sequence of rulers; his use of those therefore does
not mean that co-emperors reigned when he wrote).
20
Plinys systematic killing of Christians in 111-113 shows that the persecution to which Celsus refers was well
underway before the 130s. The sophistication of Celsus arguments, used to promote a late date, is not dispositive.
Nor is the fact that Celsus felt the need to write the work at all.
21
Hoffman at 103.
22
Id.
23
Hoffman at 122. Christians, moreover, should not even be permitted to live until marriageable age.
24
Id. at 124. (You are swearing by the man to whom all earthly power has been given: what you receive in life,
you receive from him. And this is what it means to be a god.).
25
Fears, J. Rufus. "Christianity." 2007. Lecture. (The very suspicion of being a Christian was enough to bring you
before a tribunal and with the prospect of death. But instead of breaking Christianity, it only seemed to

Like Tacitus,26 Celsus affirms that Christ was crucified: I

emphasize that the Christians worship a man who was arrested and
died.27 While he demonstrates some familiarity with Christian accounts
of Christs life, moreover, he purports to have access to historical
information about Christ from non-Christian sources. For example, he
wrote: I would call your attention to the well-known fact that the men
who tortured your god in person suffered nothing in return; not then, nor
as long as they lived.28 This statement is likely reliable for much the
same reasons as Pauls report on the appearance to the 500.
It is unclear how many witnesses to the resurrection Celsus
believed there were; it is possible he was unfamiliar with the appearance
to the 500. Speaking through a Jewish character, he initially suggests
that the only witnesses to the resurrection were deluded women who
hallucinated the event29 or else were deluded by his [Christs] sorcery.30
Contradicting himself, however, the Jewish character later refers to the
disciples account of the resurrection in order to accuse Christ of being a
sorcerer.31
What is clear, however, is that Celsus himself is weary of hearing
continuous reports of Christs resurrection. Speaking in his own voice, he
grumbles that More and more the myths put about by these Christians
are better known than the doctrines of the philosophers. He further
complains: Who has not heard the fable of Jesus birth from a virgin or
the stories of his crucifixion and resurrection? And for these fables the
Christians are ready to dieindeed do die.32 Celsus complaint suggests
that reports of Christs resurrection were persuasive enough to circulate
widely and rapidly. This phenomenon is best explained by Pauls claim
that these reports came, not from a few, but from hundreds of Christians.

strengthen it. And non-Christians who watched these men and women these girls, even, and boys who were
Christians stand up to the Roman bureaucracy and say No, I will not worship your gods: put me to death. There
must be something in this idea that gave it power.).
26
Annals 15.44.
27
Hoffman at 72.
28
Id. at 119.
29
Id. at 68.
30
Id. at 67.
31
Id. at 60. (One wonders why a god should need to resort to your kind of persuasioneven eating a fish after
your resurrection. I should rather think that your actions are those of one hated by God, the actions of a sorcerer.
So says our Jew to Jesus.). Cf. Luke 24:36-42
32
Hoffman at 54.

Moreover, Celsus bemoans that even people for whom he has a

modicum of respect have come to believe in the resurrection, writing The
Christians base their faith on one who rose from a tomb. Even the more
intelligent Christians preach these absurdities.33 If people whom a
Platonist philosopher is willing to label as more intelligent affirmed the
resurrection a century after its alleged occurrence, this too is best
explained by proliferating firsthand reports of the event. The early
emergence of a class of more intelligent Christians will be discussed in
greater detail shortly.
Interestingly, if less significantly, there is some recent evidence of a
Jewish tradition attesting to the resurrection and associating it with
sorcery. Christs name has been discovered in a late antique curse,
inscribed in Jewish Babylonian Aramaic by the name of Jesus, who
conquered the height and the depth by his cross, and by the name of his
exalted father, and by the name of the holy spirits forever and in eternity.
Amen, amen, selah.34 Shaul Shaked, a scholar of religion at the Hebrew
University of Jerusalem, has concluded that the inscription was written
by a Jew.35 According to Peter Schfer, director of the Jewish Museum of
Berlin, This does not imply, of course, that the Jewish writer believed in
Jesus and the Trinity, but it certainly means that he knew the name of
Jesus and believed in its magical power.36
As an aside, this inscription is congruent with the story of Acts
19:11-15, which states that the miracles performed by Paul became so
renowned that a group of Jewish exorcists though they did not believe
in Christ themselves attempted to exorcise by the Jesus whom Paul
proclaims. Acts continues: But the evil spirit answered them, Jesus I
know, and Paul I recognize, but who are you?
Independent Inquirers
In 1627, the Dutch jurist Hugo Grotius wrote De veritae religionis
christianae, a systematic defense of the Christian faith. One of Grotius
most interesting arguments is his appeal to the conversions of many of
the early church fathers. There were always very many amongst the
worshippers of Christ who were men of good judgment, and of no small

33

Id. at 72.
Schfer, Peter. Jesus in the Talmud. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP, 2007. 38 [hereinafter Schafer].
35
Id.
36
Id. at 39.
34

learning, he notes.37 Grotius points out that many of these men were
brought up in other religions. Why, he asks, should they be worshippers
of a man that was put to an ignominious death?38 He concludes that the
best explanation for their conversions is that, after a diligent inquiry,
each concluded that the reports about Christ were reliable.
Grotius begins his list with Sergius Paulus, the proconsul of Cyprus.
Paul of Tarsus, a Jewish lawyer familiar with Greek philosophy, might
also warrant inclusion in such a list. Both, however, are said to have
converted upon witnessing miraculous events themselves. As we now
wish to focus on diligent inquiry into reports of miraculous events, let us
exclude them from consideration. We might nonetheless assemble a list of
educated converts to the early church which includes Luke,39 Justin
Martyr, Athenagoras, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian.
Each of these men was a trained physician, philosopher, or lawyer.
Justin Martyr alone had studied under Stoic, Aristotelian, Pythagorean,
and Platonic philosophers prior to his conversion. Critically, none saw the
resurrection or other miracles of Christ firsthand and none claimed to
have converted on the basis of a miraculous sight.
Luke, a physician,40 corroborates Grotius theory at the beginning of
his eponymous text: he has undertaken, he says, to compile a narrative
of the things that have been accomplished among us, just as those who
from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have
delivered them to us.41 In other words, though Luke did not personally
witness the events he is relaying, the eyewitnesses were there for him to
interview. As Paul says in 1 Corinthians, most of [the witnesses] are still
alive.42 Luke writes that he has compiled this evidence so that
Theophilius, to whom he dedicated his text, may have certainty

37

Grotius, Hugo, and Jean Le Clerc. The Truth of the Christian Religion in Six Books. London: William Baynes, 1829.
101 [hereinafter Grotius].
38
Id.
39
Paul, Lukes teacher, is said in Acts 19:11-12 to have performed several miracles: indeed, he performed the
miracle that converted Sergius Paulus in Acts 13:6-12. It is possible that Luke converted because he experienced
one of these miracles. That we are never told as much, however, distinguishes Luke from Paul and Sergius Paulus
and warrants his inclusion in this list.
40
Colossians 4:14
41
Luke 1:1-2
42
1 Cor. 15:6

concerning the things you have been taught.43 It is precisely this

certainty that many early converts to Christianity enjoyed.
Christian apologists rarely make Grotius argument perhaps
because of its air of intellectual elitism. Christianity has long been hostile
to elitism of any kind, instead appealing in Celsus words to whoever
is a wretch.44 Gods wisdom, writes Paul, is not a wisdom of this age or
of the rulers of this age, who are doomed to pass away.45 Likewise, Paul
advises let him become a fool that he may become wise.46
Even independently, Pauls admonitions are commendable: the
massacres of the Jacobins and Marxists were the result, not of
simplemindedness, but of the mental gymnastics of intellectuals. Where
exceptional testimony is concerned, however, education seems to be
associated with skepticism not with credulity. That men of good
judgment, and of no small learning quickly found reports concerning
Christ credible, therefore, is evidence both of their frequency and of their
having the ring of veracity.
Martyrdom
It should be noted that, as so far presented, Grotius argument is as
much evidence for the other miracles as for the resurrection. It can be
particularly helpful to the resurrection, however, for one reason: while
belief in miracles is a good explanation for conversion, belief in the
resurrection is the best explanation for martyrdom.
Importantly, Grotius argument does not mention Paul not
because of the miraculous nature of Pauls conversion, but because Paul
was a Jew.47 Jewish monotheists, Grotius seems to have assumed, would
naturally have been more receptive to Christianity than non-Jews. This
assumption, however, is dubious. Jewish law states that whoever is hung

43

Luke 1:4
Hoffman at 74. (But the call to membership in the cult of Christ is this: Whoever is a sinner, whoever is unwise,
whoever is childishyea, whoever is a wretchhis is the kingdom of God. And so they invite into membership
those who by their own account are sinners: the dishonest, thieves, burglars, poisoners, blasphemers of all
descriptions, grave robbers. I meanwhat other cult actually invites robbers to become members! Their excuse
for all of it is that their god was sent to call sinners: well, fair enough. But what about the righteous? How do they
account for the fact that their appeal is to the lowest sort of person? Why was their Christ not sent to those who
has not sinnedis it any disgrace not to have sinned?).
45
1 Cor. 2:6
46
1 Cor. 3:18
47
Grotius at 101.
44

on a tree is cursed.48 As the great Christian apologist William Lane Craig

often states, Jews had no expectation of a Messiah who, instead of
triumphing over Israels enemies, would be shamefully executed as a
criminal. The disciples therefore came to believe in the resurrection
despite their having every predisposition to the contrary.49 It is
especially striking, then, that both Jewish and non-Jewish Christians
gave their lives rather than deny it.
The martyrdom of Christians likely began with the judicial murder
of Stephen in about AD 34: an atrocity in which Paul then still a
militant anti-Christian was a participant.50 Paul then led a ravaging
[of] the church, and entering house after house, he dragged off men and
women and committed them to prison.51 James bar Zebedee, the first
apostle to be martyred, was put to death on the order of Herod,52 likely in
AD 44. According to the McGrews, his murder is not in any real
historical doubt.53 Likewise, the subsequent slayings of Peter and Paul
in Rome are attested to by multiple early Christian sources.54 In terms of
the historical value of early martyrdoms, however, Christs brother James
outdoes all of his predecessors.
During Christs ministry, it must be noted, James did not believe
that his brother was the son of God or apparently that he could even
work miracles.55 Yet, after James reportedly saw the resurrected Christ,56
we learn not from the New Testament, but from the Jewish historian
Josephus that James was martyred for his Christian faith.57 James, it
must be emphasized, would have been even more predisposed to disbelieve
Christianity than other Jewish Christians. In Jewish eyes, Christs
crucifixion proved that he was not the Messiah; in James case, this defeat
should also have confirmed a preexisting assessment of his brother. If
James, against all odds, instead came to believe that Christ had been right
after all, it stands to reason that some overwhelming personal experience
changed his mind.
48

Deuteronomy 21:23
Craig, William Lane, and Shabir Ally. "Who Is the Real Jesus?" University of Western Ontario. Mar. 2002. Debate.
50
Acts 7-8
51
Acts 8:3
52
Acts 12:2
53
McGrew at 614.
54
Id. at 615.
55
John 7:1-5
56
1 Cor. 15:7, Acts 1:14
57
Antiquities 20.200
49

The McGrews note the objection that kamikaze pilots, suicide

bombers, and Nazis were willing to give their lives for what they believed
was true.58 In response, they point out that this argument fails to
distinguish between the willingness to die for an ideology and the
willingness to die in attestation of an empirical fact.59 While this answer
is a powerful one, there is at least one additional distinction: in each of the
three aforementioned groups, martyrdom was proportionally more
common among lower- than higher-ranking members.60 Among early
Christians leaders, however, it seems to have been a rite of passage to
saunter boldly into the arms of death, asking as Paul did O death,
where is your victory? O death, where is your sting?61 Other early matyrfathers include Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp, and the aforementioned
Justin Martyr.
The practice of martyrdom was, nonetheless, far from confined to
church leaders. The killing of obstinate Christians soon blossomed into a
Roman routine, and the churchs explosion onto the world stage occurred
amidst unearthly cycles of bloodletting. This fact is extraordinarily wellestablished by the extant writings of Roman persecutors and their
supporters who, after all, had little incentive to exaggerate Christian
bravery.
Writing between AD 111 and 113, Roman governor Pliny the
Younger reported to the emperor Trajan that a number of persons had
been denounced to him as Christians. While some denied being Christians
or repented of their faith They all worshipped your image and the
statues of the gods, and cursed Christ those who persisted I ordered
executed There were others possessed of the same folly; but because
they were Roman citizens, I signed an order for them to be transferred to
Rome.62 In his short response, also extant, Trajan agrees that if they are
denounced and proved guilty, they are to be punished.63
Decades after Plinys letter, Celsus mocked Christians by arguing
that, though Christians purported to be able to blaspheme the pagan gods
without consequence, those who do stand next to your little god are
58

McGrew at 624.
Id.
60
Matome Ugaki, a Japanese admiral and kamikaze pilot, is one counterexample. My point is not that leaders of
these three groups have never willingly faced death for their respective causes, but that such cases are atypical.
61
1 Cor. 15:55
62
Pliny, Letters 10.96-97
63
Id.
59

hardly secure! You are banished from land and sea, bound and punished
for your devotion to [your Christian demon] and taken away to be
crucified. Where then is your Gods vengeance on his persecutors?64
Christians, he adds, offer their bodies to be tortured and killed to no
purpose when they think that in so doing they are defying the demons and
going to their eternal reward.65
Finally, Lucian an anti-Christian satirist who died in AD 180
says of Christians that The poor devils have convinced themselves that
they are all going to be immortal and live forever, which makes most of
them take death lightly and voluntarily give themselves up to it.66
Probability and Rational Response
In this context, it is ironic that Celsus felt Christians were being
tortured and killed to no purpose: Celsus himself unintentionally helped
to wreath these sacrifices with purpose. Each matyr here referenced paid
the highest price a human being can pay in attestation of an empirical
fact and it is through the testimony of Celsus and his allies that we can
be most confident they did.
Perhaps the two most common theories proffered by non-Christians
to explain the data thus far presented are a mass hallucination and an
elaborate conspiracy. Widespread early attestation to the resurrection
should reduce the probability of each, as hallucinations are often
particular and conspiracies often fragile. Affirmation by independent
inquirers, especially when those inquirers are educated, should decrease
the probability of at least the first: reports of hallucinations are more
likely to possess a vague and feverish quality than to convey an
impression of solid and veridical experience.
Finally, a pattern of martyrdom should do as much to defeat these
two theories as is possible. It helps to vindicate the findings of inquirers
like Justin Martyr, as people are unlikely to die on the basis of received
testimony unless they have good reasons not to think it is hallucinatory. It
does even more to vindicate firsthand witnesses: people are unlikely to die
for something they suspect to have been a hallucination of their own and
even more unlikely to die for something they know to be a lie.

64

Hoffman at 119.
Id. at 122.
66
Id. at 27.
65

It seems to me that the only vaguely coherent theory available to

the non-Christian is that, in first century Israel, there happened to
coalesce an utterly persuasive and very peculiar group of conmen. Besides
an incredible skill in their art, these men shared a desire to use their
talents, not to accumulate power or wealth, but to perpetrate on pain of
torture and death a lie that would reverberate through history.
The non-Christian may, of course, beg the question against
Christianity, saying that this conspiracy theory is still relatively probable
because resurrection is a priori impossible. No amount of historical
evidence could possibly convince such a person, so oriented, that a
personal God had ever made himself known in history. Yet so long as the
probability of the resurrection is at least comparable to that of my
conspiracy theory a modest suggestion, to say the least a sincere
seeker should, in William James words, meet the hypothesis halfway in
order to test Christianitys truth. He should cry out, in the words of Mark
9:24, Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief.
Critically, Celsus, speaking through his Jewish character,
complained not that the resurrection sounded like a hallucination, but of
how excessively empirical the whole thing was. The disciples had reported
that, after the resurrection, Christ proved that he was not an apparition
by inviting them to touch him and then eating a fish in front of them.67
Celsus Jew balks: One wonders why a god should need to resort to your
kind of persuasioneven eating a fish after your resurrection. I should
rather think that your actions are those of one hated by God, the actions of
a sorcerer.68
Though Celsus apparently did not regard himself as a sinner,69 I
for my part have no trouble seeing how God should need to resort to
such persuasion to turn me to him. Widespread testimony to an event, an
early group of educated inquirers, and a willingness to die rather than
recant: this is precisely the kind of evidence that I once stubbornly
demanded of God. I see, in this kind of persuasion, God in his infinite
love chasing us even the apathetic, the arrogant, and the hateful like
the hound of heaven across the universe. As we flee from God too
thoughtless to talk about religion, too independent to look above and
beyond ourselves, and too resentful that a Creator would ask us to accept
67

Luke 24:36-42
Hoffman at 60.
69
Id. at 74. See footnote 44.
68

him one can hear, in this evidence, God cry: Why will you die, O house
of Israel?70
Paganism and the Works
Christians, of course, believe that Christ died and was resurrected
only after performing a ministry of public healings and other miracles, or
works, all over Israel.71 While establishing the historicity of these miracles
bolsters the probability of the resurrection story, it also constitutes a
strong independent argument for the truth of Jesus claim to be the
Christ, the Son of the living God.72
This, in fact, appears to be the reason Christ did them. Even
though you do not believe me, he said, believe the works, that you may
know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father.73
Likewise, Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, or
else believe on account of the works themselves.74 Indeed, if the miracles
occurred, a vast majority of those who witnessed demonstrations of
Christs power during his lifetime saw one of these works rather than his
resurrection. This is precisely, as we shall see, what the historical record
reflects. Christs enemies both pagan and Jewish attested not only to
reports of the works, but to their authenticity.
Celsus acknowledges that Christ is reputed to have worked wonders
through magic.75 Unlike in the case of the resurrection, however, Celsus
does not doubt that a great many people witnessed these works. Instead,
he affirms that the works occurred and attributes them to sorcery both
through his Jewish character and in his own voice. Is it not so that you
hired yourself out as a workman in Egypt, the Jewish character demands
of Christ, learned magical crafts, and gained something of a name for
yourself which you now flaunt among your kinsmen?76 Celsus himself,
Leaving our Jew to ponder for a moment, takes up this question and
answers it in his own voice: Is this sort of thing not the very essence of
sorcery and deception? ... Even Jesus admitted there was nothing

70

Ezekiel 18:31
My focus on the works of Christ and of early Christians should not be taken to imply that comparable miracles do
not occur today.
72
Matthew 16:16
73
John 10:38
74
John 14:11
75
Hoffmann at 53.
76
Id. at 57.
71

exclusively divine about working these signsthat they could just as

easily be done by wicked men.77
Celsus criticisms concerning the works are twofold. In the first
place, he accuses Christians of hypocrisy for condemning sorcery, urging
that their own founder was a known sorcerer. On the idea that Satan will
perform feats of magic, Celsus complains: Is it not patently the sort of
thing one would expect to hear from a magician, a sorcerer who is out only
for his own gain, and teaching that his rival magicians are working their
wonders by the power of evil, while he and he alone represents the power
of good?78 Secondly, Celsus says that it is obviously insufficient for
Christians to appeal to the miracles, as they must still prove that this
man was not a sorcerer but the son of God.79 Indeed, says Celsus, I am
willing even to assume that he really was an angel. But in that case, can
we say he is the first of his kind ever to have come? Were there not others
before him?80
Pagan accusations of sorcery continued after Celsus. Writing in 270,
the Neoplatonist philosopher Porphyry though explicitly denying some
of the miracles called the disciples rustic men and paupers, [who]
because they had nothing, worked certain wonders with magical arts.
There is nothing to boast about in performing wonders.81
Judaism and the Works
Early Jewish criticisms of Christianity likewise proceeded by
affirming the works and attributing them to sorcery. The Talmud, a
compilation of rabbinic literature central to Judaism, contains such
criticisms. The Talmuds overall view of Christ is pronouncedly negative;
some versions of the work contain what Peter Schfer has called a most
graphic and bizarre story about Jesus descent to and punishment in
hell.82 It also contains, however, historical-sounding statements about
Christ which have no obvious anti-Christian value. It ascribes to Christ,
for example, a halakhic ruling that, while money gained from prostitution
may not be given to the temple, it may be spent on privies for the public.
Jacob of Kefar Sama, a Christian figure in the Talmud, explains the
77

Id. at 66.
Id. at 99.
79
Id. at 119.
80
Id. at 90.
81
Hargis at 69-70.
82
Schfer at 83. See also Schfer at 85.
78

ruling: From filth they came and to filth shall they go out (= on filth they
should be expended).83 According to Schfer, This is a well argued and
perfectly acceptable Halakha.84 Like Celsus, then, the Talmud claims to
have extrabiblical information about the historical Christ, making its
acceptance of the works all the more remarkable.
The Talmud says that Jesus the Nazarene practiced magic and
deceived and led Israel astray.85 Reporting on Christs execution, the
Talmud says a herald went forth before him 40 days (heralding): Jesus
the Nazarene is going forth to be stoned because he practiced sorcery and
instigated and seduced Israel. Whoever knows anything in his defense,
may come and state it. But since they did not find anything in his defense,
they hanged him on the eve of Passover.86
Like Porphyry, the Talmud also appears to affirm that Christs
followers can work miracles. On one occasion it relates A case story about
R. Eleazar b. Dama who was bitten by a snake.87 Ben Dama wishes to
accept help from the aforementioned Jacob, who has offered to heal him in
the name of Jesus. Rabbi Ishmael interferes, declaring that Ben Dama is
not permitted to accept healing from Jacob. Ben Dama sets out to prove
that he is permitted to accept the healing88 but dies of the snake bite
before he can succeed. Ishmael then declares Happy are you, Ben Dama,
for you have expired in peace and did not break down the prohibition [on
accepting healing from heretics] stablished by the Sages!89
Unlike Celsus attacks, it should be noted, the Talmudic references
to Christ were written down hundreds of years after Christs death. For
this reason, some scholars including Bart Ehrman assert that they
cannot be relied upon to convey any historical information about Christ. I
am skeptical of this assertion: as apologists often note, the earliest
biographies of Alexander the Great were written centuries after his death;
Judaism in particular has historically had a strong tradition of oral
transmission. Even if we do not accept that the Talmud intrinsically
83

Id. at 44. See also Micah 1:7

Schfer at 44.
85
Id. at 35.
86
Id. at 64.
87
Id. at 54.
88
See also "Ben Dama." Jewish Encyclopedia. 1906. (It is not improbable that Ben Dama's inclination toward the
Judo-Christians was the reason that nothing written by him was transmitted either by the Halakah or by the
Haggadah, and that neither the Babylonian nor the Palestinian Talmud gives him the title Rabbi.).
89
Schfer at 54.
84

testifies to the works, however, there are at least two good reasons to
think that a very early Jewish tradition attacked the works as sorcery.
Firstly, we know from Celsus that such a Jewish tradition predated
even his writing. I do not refer here to Celsus imaginary Jewish
character. Rather, in his own voice, Celsus tells us that, on the question of
whether the Messiah has come or not, The Christians say yes, and cite
the miracles of Jesus as proof of his identity. The Jews say that any
sorcerer could put forward such proofs, and that the circumstances of
Jesus death prove him an imposter. I am slightly inclined to the latter
view myself, since miracles and wonders have indeed occurred everywhere
and in all times.90 However reliable we find the Talmuds reports, then,
the earliest known non-Christian attestations to Christs works are
Jewish. This is to be expected given the time and place in which Christ is
said to have performed the works.
Secondly, the Talmuds statements about Christ appear to draw on
the same early Jewish tradition which Celsus is relaying. In True
Doctrine, Celsus alleges that Jesus was the illegitimate son of Mary and a
Roman soldier named Panthera.91 The Talmud makes precisely the same
claim. In the story of Ben Dama and the snake, in fact, we are told that
Jacob of Kefar Sama came to heal him in the name of Jesus son of
Pantera.92
Although Celsus attacks have a number of similarities with the
Talmuds, this accusation is by far the most conspicuous. According to
Schfer, it is highly probable that both the Talmud and Celsus draw on
common sources (most likely Jewish sources).93 Not only do we know that
Jewish opponents were accusing Christ of sorcery before Celsus, then, but
there is good reason to think that these very accusations are reflected in
the Talmud.
Sorcerer or Savior
Finally, there is evidence of a third and distinct non-Christian
tradition affirming Christs works. Recall the late antique curse inscribed
by the name of Jesus, who conquered the height and the depth by his
cross, as well as Schfers conclusion that the Jewish writer certainly
90

Hoffman at 69.
Id. at 57.
92
Schfer at 54.
93
Id. at 20.
91

knew the name of Jesus and believed in its magical power.94 I do not
claim that this short curse, inscribed on a piece of pottery hundreds of
years after Christs death, is by itself credible evidence of the works. It
does, however, strengthen Acts report that Jewish magicians were
attempting to work wonders of their own by the Jesus whom Paul
proclaims.95 The author of the curse is unlikely to have been inspired by
Acts: the magicians it describes conspicuously failed. In fact, Acts goes on
to say that all the magicians of Ephesus realizing that there was more
power to be had in Christ than in their own pitiful efforts came,
confessing and divulging their practices. And a number of those who had
practiced magic arts brought their books together and burned them in the
sight of all.96
In addition to the pagan and Talmudic criticisms of Christs works,
then, there is evidence that some Jews working outside the Talmudic
tradition invoked the name of Christ, not because they accepted him as
God, but because his name was widely associated with the performance of
miracles. Acts places its report of this practice in the mid first-century. To
say nothing of Gnostics, then, there is at least reasonable evidence of
three early traditions outside Christianity attesting to the veracity of the
works.
Having already said something of the relative probabilities involved,
and the way one should rationally respond to this evidence, I will conclude
by saying something of the way Christ is treated by one particular group
of modern non-Christians. It is a curious phenomenon that those who
identify as former Christians often paint themselves into the clownish
corner of Jesus mythicism.
Though people of other religious backgrounds often affirm Christs
historicity while denying his divinity, and with little apparent trouble,
professed ex-Christians often seem unable to do so excepting, I suppose,
persons who manage to avoid thinking about Christ at all. This trend is
made all the more curious by the fact that Jesus mythicism is a position of
no scholarly credibility, better suited to a rebellious 12-year-old than an
educated adult.

94

Id. at 39.
Acts 19:11-15
96
Acts 19:18-19
95

I submit that the person of Christ, both in his dramatic personal

claims and in his historical presence, is so overwhelming as to force one
who encounters him either to embrace him or to send him away. C.S.
Lewis famously affirmed, though he was not the first to do so, that
Christs personal claims made him either a liar, a lunatic, or the lord.
Likewise, Christs actions on the world stage wondrous actions which
captured the attention of his enemies and inspired his friends to go
willingly to their deaths force upon us a similar choice: not the trilemma
of Lewis, but the dilemma of Celsus. Christ was either a sorcerer, or else
he was the savior.