004. Chapter 2 - Pagan Sources: The Roman Historians

Chapter 2 - Pagan Sources: The Roman Historians The scanty mention which the world-famous authors and historians of the early Christian era make of the greatest figure in human history is characteristic of the way in which “the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them that believe not.” Jesus sought not the praise of men, but the will of God. The worldly-minded scorned His way of life. He avoided the spectacular. He did not use His power for self-aggrandizement in the earthly sense. And so the historians of the day passed Him by as insignificant. “Hath not God made foolish the way of this world?” Verily “God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise, and the weak things to confound the mighty.” But “the foolishness of preaching” began to “turn the world upside down,” and the historians were compelled to notice the fact of Christianity, and explain its nature and origin, even though with a gesture of scorn. The extant writings of the Roman historians of the first century are very fragmentary. Only from the pens of Tacitus and Suetonius are there any considerable remains. But even if our possession were abundant instead of scanty, it is doubtful if it would yield extensive references to Jesus of Nazareth, a citizen of a remote province of the empire, a popular leader among a turbulent people, whose brief and tragic life was spent among the poor and unfortunate, and who was repudiated and slain by His own people. In such fashion would a Roman historian of the first century scorn the reports which came to him of Jesus. From Rome it would be natural to sweep aside the accounts of the miracles of Jesus as part of the current frauds. “Can any good come out of Nazareth?” would state the case against Jesus, a member of the hated race of Jews.

Tacitus

One of the most noted of Roman historians is Publius Cornelius Tacitus (a.d. 55?-117?). In his Annales — written in the early years of the second century, he describes the burning of Rome in a.d. 64, tells how Nero was accused of having started the fire, and says, “In order to suppress the rumor, Nero falsely accused and punished, with the most acute tortures, persons who, already hated for their shameful deeds, were commonly called Christians. The founder of that name, Christus, had been put to death by the procurator, Pontius Pilate, in the reign of Tiberius; but the deadly superstition, though repressed for a time, broke out again, not only through Judaea where this evil had its origin, but also through the city (Rome) whither all things horrible and vile flow from all quarters, and are encouraged. Accordingly, first those were arrested who confessed, then on their own information a great multitude were convicted, not so much of the crime of incendiarism as of hatred of the human race” (Annales 15:44). The strength of the prejudice of Tacitus against the Christians, as well as his lack of accurate information, is witnessed in this paragraph: “their shameful deeds,” “the deadly superstition,” “hatred of the human race.” So speaks the supercilious Roman. But his clear-cut testimony as to the death of Jesus in Judaea, under Pontius Pilate, has value he little dreamed when he wrote.

It may be an occasion for amazement how Tacitus, a capable historian, could possibly have lived in the same city with thousands of Christians and yet have been so ignorant of their noble character as to have accused them of “shameful deeds” and have regarded them as being an important part of “all things horrible and vile” that infested Rome. We need to remind ourselves of what happens to the church because of “hypocrites in the church.” It would not require many instances such as the case of incest at Corinth to bring the church into disrepute among those seeking some evidence against the Christians. Paul describes the dreadful sin of incest in the strongest language: “Such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles” (1 Corinthians 5:1). Both the pride of Tacitus and his regard for his social standing and personal safety would have been obstacles in the way of an approach to Christians to secure firsthand information. Some Roman friend may have reported to him what he had heard in a secret meeting of the Christians which he had attended. If the preacher had strongly condemned current sins, the perverse and unrepentant Roman may have regarded this as an effort to deprive mankind of his cherished pleasures, and this may have led to the charge that the Christians were guilty of “hatred of the human race.” Although Tacitus says the Christians were horribly wicked people, he does not specify any crime except this charge that they were guilty of the crime of hating the human race. How strange a charge against those who preached the gospel of God’s love and man’s redemption from sin by the death of Christ! And yet an unrepentant pagan might have been perverse enough to spread abroad such a charge after he had heard a Christian preacher proclaim the doctrine of hell.

Suetonius

Suetonius (a.d. 65-135), a Roman historian of less ability, but contemporary with Tacitus, also gives important testimony. He tells of a Messianic movement during the reign of Claudius (a.d. 41-54). In his Lives of the Twelve Caesars (Claudius 25), he says: “He (Claudius) expelled from Rome the Jews because they were constantly raising a tumult at the instigation of Chrestus.” Acts 18:2 tells of Aquila and Priscilla coming from Italy “because of the decree of Claudius that all Jews should leave Rome.” The two statements agree as to the expulsion of the Jews. This seems to have occurred in a.d. 49. In other words, this evidence proves that within twenty years after the death of Jesus a strong movement of His followers was in evidence in Rome. Graetz holds that “Chrestus” does not mean Christ, but the name of a Christian teacher. Some radical scholars hold that “Chrestus” refers to some unknown Jewish Messiah in the city of Rome. Bousset and Klausner show that this is untenable since it is without historical support. The Jews in Rome evidently were torn by dissension over the preaching of the gospel of Jesus. Suetonius makes the mistake of supposing that the Messianic figure responsible for the commotion and expulsion was actually present in Rome at the time. He doubtless spelled the name “Chrestus” because of confusing “Christus” with the Greek adjective “Chrestos.”

Suetonius was not nearly so good a historian as Tacitus, but his mistake in supposing that Christ was in Rome at the time stirring up trouble among the Jews may have a comparatively simple explanation. Being without firsthand information just as Tacitus was, and for the same reasons, Suetonius could have heard the report of some Roman friend who told him: “I was once in one of their underground meetings. One of their number arose and affirmed that Christ was in the midst. I did not see this person they call the Christ. No one pointed Him out to me. But this speaker said that Christ was always in the midst even if only two or three were gathered together in His name. Several other speakers said the same thing. Evidently this person they call Christ is keeping under cover, but is visiting all of the meetings.”

Pliny

Pliny the Younger, Roman author and orator (a.d. 62?-114?), governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor about a.d. 112, wrote to the Roman emperor, Trajan, asking advice as to what he should do with the Christians in his province. He gives a valuable picture of the Christians in the opening of the second century. The most significant statement from his letter follows: “They affirmed that the sum of their guilt or error was to assemble on a fixed day before daybreak, and sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to God, and to bind themselves with an oath not to enter into any wickedness, or to commit thefts, robberies or adulteries, or falsify their work or repudiate trusts committed to them: when these things were ended, it was their custom to depart, and, on coming together again, to take food, men and women together, yet innocently.”

Lucian

Lucian (a.d. 125?-180?), rhetorician, lecturer, author, master of wit and biting sarcasm — Mark Twain of his day — says that the founder of the Christian religion was a man who had been fixed to a stake in Palestine, and was still worshiped because he had established a new code of morals.

Value of the Testimony And what is the value of this scanty evidence — casual statements of famous men of the Roman world? Just this: it establishes absolutely Jesus of Nazareth as a historical figure. This evidence is not necessary to one who accepts the Bible as historically true. But a school of radical critics has arisen who insist on calling themselves “Christians,” but who deny that such a man as Jesus ever lived. The question has been hotly debated in Holland, Germany, England, and in radical educational institutions in America.

Professor Macintosh, of the Yale School of Religion, published in 1926 a book entitled, The Reasonableness of Christianity, in which he argues at great length that “Belief in the historicity of Jesus is not indispensable, logically, to the exercise of an essentially Christian faith or to the living of an essentially Christian life” (pp. 138-139). In other words, if Jesus never lived at all, we could still maintain “Christian faith.” His argument brilliantly illustrates “The Unreasonableness of the Modernist.” The Jews have likewise leaped at the chance to join hands with these modernists in denying that Jesus ever lived. Moffatt, in his Everyman’s Life of Christ, says: “An American rabbi spoke the other day of Jesus as a ‘man whose very existence is denied by many Gentile scholars.” Rabbi Wise raised a raging storm among his learned Jewish friends when he declared that he could no longer hold to the view that Jesus had never lived. A heated discussion followed over the orthodox Jewish view that such a person as Jesus never lived. Like arrows shot at random, but leaping to an unseen mark, the casual and contemptuous references of these hostile Roman writers to Jesus and His followers pierce the shallow skepticism and stupid prejudice of this modernistic denial of the existence of Jesus.

Although Tacitus and Suetonius wrote some seventy-five years after Jesus’ death, they must have had access to many earlier documents, and their discussion of the Christians, who run in unbroken current straight back to Jesus, furnishes the evidence that Christ lived in Palestine in the reign of Tiberius, and that He was executed by Pontius Pilate; that a great movement of His followers grew up which spread with power even to Rome within two decades; that His followers worshiped Him “as a God”; that they maintained regular meetings and faithful adherence to His teachings, which include high moral standards; that they were so devoted to their Christ that they would endure torture and death rather than disown Him and their faith.