Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence (Studying the Historical Jesus (SHJ))

Robert van Voorst's book Jesus Outside the New Testament is one of the most scholarly looks at ancient evidence about the life of Jesus. He systematically probes every reference to Jesus from outside the New Testament, and then subjects them to a thorough analysis from every angle. Watching him at work is a true guide for any scholar.In the classical area, Van Voorst examines the traditional Pliny, Suetonius, Tacitus, and Celsus writings, but he also includes such lesser known authors such as Thallos, Serapion, and Lucian of Samosata. In the Jewish writings he covers just about every reference there is to Yeshu, ben Stada, Balaam, and "the certain one". It's a tour d'force.Curiously enough, while Van Voorst is unsurpassed in his presentation and interpretation of material, it's his conclusions that I find wanting. For example, he discusses all the reasons why the mention of Jesus in Josephus is regarded as a later addition, then concludes that he "present(s) an independent account of Jesus" (p. 103). His main reason for discarding all the contrary evidence is his disbelief that the later interpolators could describe Jesus in less than glowing terms. Hardly convincing for me. Similarly, he concludes that references to Balaam cannot be references to Jesus because Balaam was traditionally the "prototype of the deceitful prophet from outside Israel" (p. 116) and Jesus, after all, was a Jew. True, but to the people who wrote the Talmud, even in Tannaitic times, Jesus was accused of being deceitful and was then outside Israel. So the use of Balaam can be accepted as referring to Jesus.My disagreemeents with Van Voorst's conclusions notwithstanding, this is an excellent book and belongs on the shelf of any scholar. Much of the material is generally unavailable elsewhere, and Van Vorost scholarship is exceptional.

This is your one-stop shopping place for reviewing the modern status of the historical Jesus discussion outside of the Bible. Areas covered include possible mentions of Jesus in contemporary classical authors (Thallos, Pliny, Seutonius, Tacitus, etc.) and Jewish writings (including Josephus and the Talmud). Each piece of evidence is offered and evaluated pro and con.I used this book to clarify some points regarding the so-called "Testimonium" in Josephus' Antiquities. I found the information to be absolutely up-to-date and referencing the best scholarly arguments.I've used Herford's "Christianity in Talmud and Midrash" as a source and found Van Voorst was able to assist me in coming to more sound conclusions about the many references Herford offered. If anything, I believe Van Voorst is a just a little too cautious. Still, a recommended book.

I would recommend this book to anyone interested in the extra-canonical sources for the historical Jesus and I gave it a 3-star rating because though I thought it was very valuable and interesting, the author does present the evidence of the chronicler Thallos in such a way so that an uninformed reader might think that a mid-first century date for Thallos,and his knowledge of the Christian passion tradition,are quite probable. But attempts to extend Thallos' chronicle down to 52 C.E. are completely conjectural,and a date of 92 is just as likely.But this Thallos is apparently the same Thallos referred to by the Christian writer Theophilus c.180,so that even Craig Evans,one of Van Voorst's secondary sources,acknowledges that certain dates for the Thallos' allusion to the crucifixion darkness range anywhere from 29 C.E.to 221 C.E. For the assessment of Evans,who tends to exude the same atmosphere of plausibility regarding a mid-first century date for Thallos,see "Studying The Historical Jesus",edited by Craig Evans and Bruce Chilton,p.454-5.For a more sober evaluation,see the revised Schurer:"History Of The Jewish People In The Age Of Jesus Christ",vol.3,p.543-4.  Man Of Blood: On The Last Days At Jerusalem

The first two chapters do a great job sticking to the point of the topic-Jesus outside of the New Testament. I will refer back to these two chapters often.Chapter 3 is a waste of time since it is all hypothetical. I understand and even appreciate the fact there are some whom are able to spend time on identifying a possible Q, L & M source, but it is all based on speculation and doesn’t seem to fit here.Chapter 4, although interesting and somewhat connected, doesn’t contribute much.I come away confident that there are enough sources outside of the New Testament to answer the skeptics about the reality of the Historical Jesus. I would just stop reading after chapter 2.

This is perhaps the best introduction to the evidence for the history Jesus outside the New Testament. Scholarly and easy to follow.

Highly in-depth survey and very honest and straightforward. For believers in Jesus it is important for contesting the infamous opinions that He never existed. To the ones holding to such pitiful opinion, it is always time to change and this is the smoking gun.

fascinating and informative, not much biased material; a thorough overview.

Jesus Outside the New Testament is a scholar's discussion for the generally-informed reader of all the extant non-New Testament texts which are, or have widely been claimed to be, historically relevant to the first century Jesus. If that sounds a qualified introductory sentence, it is: Van Voorst is a careful sifter and has drawn lines judiciously about what he covers, but these lines differ for different kinds of text.He is relatively strict in regard to classical Roman sources. Pliny, Suetonius and Tacitus will probably be known to most readers, though Mara bar Serapion, Lucian of Samosta and the reconstructed Celsus are less known. He quotes the last three extensively, since their works are comparatively less available, and subjects all to textual interrogation. Nothing later than the second century is considered.His defining lines are loosest in his discussion of Rabbinic references, largely because some critics have been willing to see a wide range of references as codes for Christ. Subjecting them to the same kind of interrogation as the classical authors, he dismisses essentially all of the non-explicit references, though not without argumentation. He reprints samples of the kind he dismisses, and reprints extensively those he accepts.His discussion of Josephus is relatively complete. Rejecting the extreme theories at either end (accepting the entire disputed passage / dismissing it entirely as an interpolation / replacing it with a reconstruction not based on the text), he considers the neutral and negative reconstructions, before settling on the neutral reconstruction. There is a slight element of theatre here, because he only introduces the crucial evidence for the neutral reconstruction, which is the quotation of an otherwise non-extant Josephan textual tradition in Agapius, after he has more or less completed the discussion — this despite an earlier extensive treatment of the spurious Slavonic interpolations.Additionally, he surveys source criticism of the canonical Gospels, and concludes with Christian agrapha and a review of non-canonical Christian writings, giving extensive space to the Nag Hammadi Codices, as well as the earliest apocryphal gospels.In the main, this is a book which covers its scope well, reviewing text, source, authenticity and implication for each fragment that he treats, and reprinting those which are generally hard to find. He does not give extensive consideration to non-Gospel Christian writings, both canonical and non-canonical, though he does mention some in passing.It is hard to fault Van Voorst's judicious discussion. His conclusions are not revolutionary: his view is that it is hard to seriously doubt the historicity of Christ, but, at the same time, the non-New Testament sources tell us very little about him. What might perhaps have improved this book, for a modest increase in length, would be to included appendices printing all of the sources in original and in translation. This would make his book the definitive reference work on the subject, and give it a longevity beyond his discussion of the theories current at the time of writing.

This book explores and assesses the evidence for Jesus as found in written sources outside the New Testament. Well written and accessible, it brings to readers' attention additional evidence for the impact of Jesus on his contemporary world and the immediately following generations. And some of the ways in which a varied group of people responded to him in ways outside the pages of the New Testament. This in no way challenges the outlook of the New Testament, but it simply explores evidence outside of the New Testament canon.

This is a good scholarly look at the evidence for Jesus outside of the New Testament. As an introduction, van Voorst gives a brief history of the Christ-myth theory, stemming from the Enlightenment to modern times. This is not quite up to date, however, as van Voorst ends this history with the theories of G. A. Wells. Unfortunately it does not include the views or works of Robert M. Price or Earl Doherty, considered to be the most prominent Jesus-as-myth theorists. This is not van Voorst's fault however, as this book was published before price and Doherty's prominence. Van Voorst also gives a brief account as to why the mythicist theory (or theories) has not been widely accepted in scholarly circles.Subsequent chapters look at the witnesses to Jesus in Roman, pagan and Jewish writings, such as Pliny, Suetonius, Tacitus, Thallos etc. Given Jesus' latter fame, this is not surprisingly few and far between, at best Jesus has one, or two, paragraphs, in Josephus' works, and at worst possibly a few cryptic mentions in the Talmud. None of the witnesses can be termed contemporary.Later chapters deal with the sources of the New Testament Gospels, such as the Q source, the M sources and the Signs source. Some of the Gnostic texts, such as the Gospels of Thomas and Peter, are also examined, as are the 'agrapha' (unwritten sayings of Jesus).In short, this is a recommended reading for anybody interested in the question of Jesus' historicity.