In my previous article, I addressed the subject of Jesus’ existence. While a full and robust case can be made by appealing to the New Testament (NT) documents (see Evidence Unseen “Part Four,” 2013), here we will only appeal to the hostile witnesses of history from outside of the NT. In this article, we will consider the evidence from the Roman governor Pliny the Younger and the Romans historian Suetonius.
Pliny the Younger (Roman governor)
Pliny the Younger (AD 62-113) served as the Roman governor of Bithynia, and he corresponded with his friend Tacitus in his letters.[1] In his 10th book and 96th letter (AD 110), he wrote to the Roman Emperor Trajan, questioning him on how to handle the burgeoning Christian population.
The whole of their guilt, or their error, was, that they were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft, or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food but food of an ordinary and innocent kind. Even this practice, however, they had abandoned after the publication of my edict, by which, according to your orders, I had forbidden political associations. I judged it so much the more necessary to extract the real truth, with the assistance of torture, from two female slaves, who were styled deaconesses: but I could discover nothing more than depraved and excessive superstition. I therefore adjourned the proceedings, and betook myself at once to your counsel. For the matter seemed to me well worth referring to you, especially considering the numbers endangered. Persons of all ranks and ages, and of both sexes are, and will be, involved in the prosecution. For this contagious superstition is not confined to the cities only, but has spread through the villages and rural districts; it seems possible, however, to check and cure it.[2]
Could this be a forgery? Van Voorst writes, “The text of these two letters is well-attested and stable, and their authenticity is not seriously disputed. Their style matches that of the other letters of Book 10, and they were known already by the time of Tertullian (fl. 196–212). Sherwin-White disposes of the few suggestions, none of which have gained credence, that the letters are whole-cloth forgeries or have key parts interpolated.”[3] Moreover, a Christian forger wouldn’t call Christianity a “contagious superstition.”
What do we learn about Christianity from this passage? (1) The early Christians met under the cover of darkness. (2) They sang to Christ as if he was still alive. (3) They believed Jesus was God. (4) Even enemies of Christianity viewed them as morally distinct people. (5) They would regularly eat meals together. (6) Rome tortured some of the early Christians for their faith. (7) Christianity reached all classes of society, both sexes, and many territories in the Roman Empire (Gal. 3:28).
Suetonius (Roman historian)
Gaius Suetonius Tranquillas (AD 69-160) wrote under the Roman emperor Hadrian, and he was a friend of Pliny the Younger.[4]
Because the Jews at Rome caused continuous disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he [Emperor Claudius] expelled them from the city.[5]
Could this be a forgery? This isn’t likely because elsewhere Suetonius refers to Christianity as “a sect professing a new and mischievous religious belief.”[6] Moreover, it isn’t likely that a Christian interpolator would misspell Christ’s name as “Chrestus.” Van Voorst writes, “We conclude with the overwhelming majority of modern scholarship that this sentence is genuine.”[7]
Why does Suetonius call him “Chrestus” instead of “Christ”? The Latin spelling of “Christ” (Christus) is only one letter away from “Chrestus.”[8] Most historians believe that this spelling variation was a common mistake to refer to Christ.[9] Van Voorst writes of the “near-unanimous identification of him with Christ.”[10] A.N. Wilson states, “Only the most perverse scholars have doubted that ‘Chrestus’ is Christ.”<[11] Even critic Bart Ehrman explains that “this kind of spelling mistake was common.”[12] Van Voorst writes, “They were pronounced so similarly that they were often confused by the uneducated and educated alike, in speech and in writing.”[13] He cites several NT manuscripts and church fathers that substitute “Chrestus” for “Christus.”[14] By contrast, the name “‘Chrestus’ does not appear among the hundreds of names of Jews known to us from Roman catacomb inscriptions and other sources.”[15] If another historical figure was causing upheaval in Rome, no other historical source mentions him.
What does this passage tell us? (1) A massive population Christians existed in Rome by AD 49 (Rom. 1:8; 1:13; 15:22-24).[16] (2) Christ was such a popular figure that the Jewish population in Rome rioted over him. Van Voorst notes that the Jews were expelled twice from Rome for seeking non-Jewish converts (AD 19 and AD 139).[17]
[1] Pliny the Younger, Letters, 1.7, 6.16.
[2] Pliny the Younger, Letters, 10:96.
[3] Van Voorst, Robert. Jesus outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence. Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, UK: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 2000. 27.
[4] Pliny, Letters 1.18.
[5] Suetonius, Life of Claudius, 25:4.
[6] Suetonius, Life of Nero, Paragraph 16.
[7] Van Voorst, Robert. Jesus outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence. Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, UK: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 2000. 30-31.
[8] Blomberg, Craig. From Pentecost to Patmos: an Introduction to Acts through Revelation. Nashville, TN: B & H Academic, 2006. 234.
[9] For instance, Craig Evans writes, “The variation in spelling was common enough and is even documented in the best of the New Testament manuscripts.” Evans, Craig. The Historical Jesus: Critical Concepts in Religious Studies. Volume 4. London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. 2004. 383. Historian Craig Blomberg writes, “Most historians think that Suetonius’s statement reflects a garbled reference to Christian and non-Christian Jews squabbling over the truth of the gospel.” Blomberg, Craig. From Pentecost to Patmos: an Introduction to Acts through Revelation. Nashville, TN: B & H Academic, 2006. 234-235.
[10] Van Voorst, Robert. Jesus outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence. Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, UK: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 2000. 32.
[11] A. N. Wilson, Paul: The Mind of the Apostle (London: Norton, 1997) 104. Cited in Van Voorst, Robert. Jesus outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence. Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, UK: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 2000. 32.
[12] Ehrman, Bart D. Did Jesus Exist?: The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth. New York: HarperOne, 2012. 53.
[13] Van Voorst, Robert. Jesus outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence. Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, UK: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 2000. 34.
[14] Van Voorst, Robert. Jesus outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence. Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, UK: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 2000. 35-36.
[15] Van Voorst, Robert. Jesus outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence. Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, UK: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 2000. 33.
[16] It is also interesting to note how this reference to Claudius’ decree lines up with the biblical account of Priscilla and Aquila—two early Christian leaders. Luke recorded that Priscilla and Aquila were kicked out of Rome in 49 C.E., because of Claudius’ decree (Acts 18:2). However, when Paul writes his letter to the Romans in 56-57 C.E., Priscilla and Aquila were back in their home (Rom. 16:3-5). How did they get back in, if Claudius had kicked all of the Jews out in 49 C.E.? This account makes sense, when we realize that Claudius died in 54 C.E. After his death, the decree was rescinded, and the Jews were allowed back into the city. Priscilla and Aquila arrived just in time for Paul to address his letter to them and the church in their house (Rom. 16:5). This is a small point, which corroborates the biblical account in many ways.
[17] Van Voorst, Robert. Jesus outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence. Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, UK: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 2000. 37.
