Is Jesus Historical? What Do The Romans Say About Him?
While surfing around YouTube a month or two ago I came across a You-Tuber called Metatron (I’m probably the last person on Earth to have heard of him…). He has a really interesting channel where he discusses languages and history among other things, and he does it in a very entertaining way. I think he’s been asked to address this question and some other related ones like what would Jesus have looked like. Anyway, the video is well worth watching all the way through to the end.
Per his introduction:
“The video will not be about doctrine or beliefs as I would never use my platform as a way to push my personal beliefs onto my subscribers. I respect you and your personal beliefs. At the end, having examined all evidence fairly, I will draw my conclusions, but feel free to let me know if you agree or disagree in the comments below”.
His sources are:
Publius Cornelius Tacitus
Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus
Titus Flavius Josephus
Gaius Plinius Caecilius Secundus
Lucian Of Samosata
He also spends time establishing the most historically plausible date of birth and most historically plausible date of death of Jesus. This is necessary in order to give context and perspective to the above sources.
At around 15:40 or so he talks about something interesting pertaining to how the Romans would have taken reports of Jesus preaching and doing miracles in Judea at the time, which is basically so what, and what it would have taken for them to pay attention, which is basically if it started affecting Rome. We know that, of course, but it’s very interesting and entertaining the way he communicates it.
Question: What do you think of his evidence and conclusions?