How Did Jesus Die?

The statement "Jesus died on the cross" may seem simple and straightforward, but the historical realities surrounding crucifixion in the Roman world—and the details preserved in the canonical Gospels—point to a far more complex and brutal process leading to Jesus' death.

We begin in the Garden of Gethsemane, where the Gospel of Luke records that Jesus, in deep distress, experienced a phenomenon described as sweating blood: “And being in anguish, he prayed more earnestly, and his sweat was like drops of blood falling to the ground” (Luke 22:44, NIV). While there is scholarly debate about the textual authenticity of this verse (as some early manuscripts omit it), the description has often been linked to a rare but documented medical condition called "hematohidrosis," in which extreme stress causes capillaries to rupture in the sweat glands, producing a bloody sweat. As one Christian apologetic work conveys, "What this did was set up the skin to be extremely fragile so that when Jesus was flogged by the Roman soldier the next day, his skin would be very, very sensitive."[1] By this time, Jesus may have likely been in danger of going into shock, and could die unless given fluids, which he clearly was not. 

Following his arrest, Jesus was subjected to physical abuse both by members of the Jewish leadership and by Roman soldiers (Mark 14:65; Matthew 26:67–68; John 19:1–3). The Roman flogging (Latin flagellatio) was particularly brutal. The typical instrument was a flagrum—a short whip with multiple leather thongs, often embedded with bits of bone or metal designed to tear flesh.[2] Roman scourging was intended to weaken the victim to the point of near-death prior to crucifixion, with no legal limit to the number of lashes administered. Historical records such as those from Josephus and Seneca the Younger attest to the brutality of Roman floggings and their capacity to cause massive blood loss, shock, and sometimes death even before crucifixion.[3]

Jesus was also mocked with a crown of thorns (Matthew 27:29; Mark 15:17; John 19:2), a gesture with both physical and symbolic cruelty. Scholars have suggested that the plant used could have been the Ziziphus spina-christi (nabk), common in the area around Jerusalem and known for its long, sharp thorns.[4] The Gospel narratives note that after these abuses, Jesus was forced to carry his own cross—or more likely, the horizontal beam (patibulum)—to the execution site at Golgotha, before being assisted by Simon of Cyrene (Mark 15:21; Matthew 27:32; Luke 23:26).

Crucifixion itself was a method designed for maximum pain and public humiliation. It was reserved primarily for slaves, rebels, and criminals who posed a threat to Roman order. Victims were typically stripped naked, affixed to the cross with ropes or nails, and left to die slowly over hours or even days. Archaeological evidence—such as the remains of a first-century crucified man named Yehohanan found near Jerusalem—confirms the historical practice of nailing victims through the wrists or forearms and the feet.[5]

The Gospels describe Jesus' crucifixion in terms consistent with known Roman practices: he was nailed to the cross, mocked by passersby, and offered sour wine to drink (Mark 15:23, 36; Matthew 27:34, 48; John 19:28–30). The physical cause of death in crucifixion is still a matter of some medical debate. Suggested mechanisms include asphyxiation due to impaired respiration, hypovolemic shock from blood loss, cardiac arrhythmia, or heart failure brought on by physical trauma and exhaustion.[6] John’s Gospel adds a detail of post-mortem piercing with a spear, with blood and water flowing from the wound (John 19:34). This has been interpreted variously—both in ancient and modern sources—as potential evidence for cardiac rupture or fluid buildup in the pleural cavity (pericardial effusion).[7]

Roman authorities were known to leave crucifixion victims on display for days as a deterrent, as famously happened to the followers of Spartacus along the Appian Way in 71 BCE.[8] The Gospels, however, record that Jesus’ body was removed the same day, in accordance with Jewish burial customs and laws concerning the defilement of the land (Deuteronomy 21:22–23; John 19:31).

Historically, what can be said with relative certainty—based on both Roman historical practice and the canonical texts—is that Jesus of Nazareth was executed by crucifixion under the Roman prefect Pontius Pilate, at the instigation of local authorities in Jerusalem. This is corroborated not only by the Gospels but also by early non-Christian sources like Tacitus (Annals 15.44) and Josephus (Antiquities 18.3.3), making the crucifixion one of the most firmly established events in the life of Jesus from a historical standpoint.[9]

Notes
[1] Alexander Metherell, M.D., Ph.D., in Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998), 195. See also William D. Edwards et al., “On the Physical Death of Jesus Christ,” JAMA 255, no. 11 (1986): 1455–1463.
[2] John P. Mattingly, Crucifixion: Its Origin and Application to Christ (Unpublished Th.M. Thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1961).
[3] Josephus, Jewish War 6.5.3; Seneca the Younger, De Consolatione ad Marciam, 20.3.
[4] J.H. Bernard, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to St. John, ICC (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1928), 2:629.
[5] Vassilios Tzaferis, “Crucifixion—The Archaeological Evidence,” Biblical Archaeology Review 11, no. 1 (1985): 44–53.
[6] Edwards et al., “On the Physical Death of Jesus Christ,” JAMA (1986).
[7] James Thompson, cited in Paul S. Taylor, "How Did Jesus Christ Die?," Christian Answers Network, 2003; Samuel Houghton, “What Was the Physical Cause of the Death of Jesus?” British Medical Journal (1903): 556–557.
[8] Appian, Civil Wars 1.120.
[9] Tacitus, Annals 15.44; Josephus, Antiquities 18.3.3.

The Power of Forgiveness

Here is a scenario: you and a friend are walking along a trail, and you drop your cell phone. Not a moment later, that friend, too quick to react, accidentally steps on - and breaks - your cell phone. Your friend apologizes and asks for forgiveness. You essentially have two choices: you can either react in anger toward them, perhaps attempt to break their phone, or: you could forgive them, a cell is replaceable. How would you feel, if you were the friend?

Everyone wants forgiveness. Perhaps you've broken a friend's cell phone, perhaps you've broken someone's heart. Perhaps you want forgiveness for the actions you have taken in life. Or perhaps you want forgiveness for something you have said. The possibilities go on and on. Perhaps you are dating someone, and a friend of yours will not forgive you regarding the person you are dating. Don't we all need forgiveness for something?

It was ca.4 BC, in Bethlehem in Judea. A young couple, to be married, were in Bethlehem for a Census. While they were staying in Bethlehem, the time came for the woman's baby to be born. After centuries of prophecies concerning a Savior for mankind, a Messiah, the seed promised to Adam and Eve and dreaded by Satan (Genesis 3:15), was finally born. His mother, Mary, named Him what the angel Gabriel had told her to call Him: Jesus, which means "The Lord saves." (Matthew 1:21)

The Creator loved His creation, and knew that without a plan of salvation, without forgiveness, there would be no hope for any of us. So The Creator entered into His creation, and "He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to death - even death on a cross!" (Philippians 2:8b) Jesus gave up His spirit, after several torturous hours, through lashes, carrying a cross, intense stress, and having been hung on a cross. God the Son have up His spirit, and at that moment, ca.30-33 AD, God's plan for mankind's salvation came to fruition.

In marriage, in dating, in friendship, in many aspects of life, we need forgiveness. In regard to marriage and relationships, understand that you may not find the "perfect one," however, you may find the "right one." Each of us have some kind of a past, but if we are willing to forgive, it may not make us truly liberated, however, it is difficult to be in a relationship without forgiveness. By putting faith in Christ, and asking for forgiveness, we are forgiven. In the same way, we are to forgive others.

Ephesians 4:32 conveys, "Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as Christ forgave you." That was not a suggestion, but a direct command. We are to forgive, for forgiveness brings hope, it brings relief, it brings love. Just as Colossians 3:13 says, "Bear with each other and forgive one another if any of you has a grievance against someone. Forgive as the Lord forgave you."

Forgiveness is powerful. We know that words have power: by the command of the Creator, the universe came into being. "For He spoke, and it came to be; He commanded, and it stood firm." (Psalms 33:9) Bear in mind that when God forgives us of our sins, and all have sinned, (Romans 3:23) and are in need of forgiveness, the sins removed "as far as the east is from the west, so far has He removed our transgressions from us." (Psalm 103:12)

Isaiah tells us in Isaiah 38:17 that God has "put all [our sins] behind [His] back." Forgiveness is important, without forgiveness we cannot truly push forward in life. Try as we might, unforgiveness holds us back to a great extent. As for God, "[He] will again have compassion on us; [He] will tread our sins underfoot and hurl all our iniquities into the depths of the sea." (Micah 7:19) God is not lacking keeping His promises. Everything He promises comes to pass.

If we ask God for forgiveness, we need to leave it there, and count it settled. God the Spirit tells us in Hebrews 10:17, "Their sins and lawless acts I will remember no more." It is not that He has forgotten and does not know everything in the Universe, it is that he has chosen not to remember our sins, because He has forgiven us of them. During His ministry, Jesus made a statement about forgiveness that we need to keep in mind in all situations.

He says in Matthew 6:14-15, "For if you forgive others when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins." This statement is hard for some to accept and put into practice. Some simply refuse to forgive a friend, a relative, a brother or sister, a neighbor, what have you, in certain situations. However, God has conveyed that if we do not forgive others, He will not forgive us - and this is certainly an eternally serious consequence. Unforgiveness can also affect your health, according to medical practitioners. Be sure to forgive others.

In Genesis 37-50 we read the account of Joseph son of Jacob. Joseph was one of twelve brothers, and the favorite of their Father. His brothers sold him, and he was consequently sold in Egypt to Potiphar. He was given charge of the household as slave, a high privilege, yet Potiphar's wife tried to seduce Joseph. When he continually refused, eventually she falsely accused him to Potiphar, and Joseph was thrown in prison. For several years Joseph was in prison, and in one instance, he interpreted Pharaoh's Baker and Cupbearer's dreams. Both came true: the Baker was executed, and the Cupbearer was restored to his position.

The Cupbearer never told Pharaoh about Joseph until one day, Pharaoh had two dreams that none could interpret, and Joseph was remembered and called upon. God revealed through Joseph that there would be seven years of good harvest followed by seven years of famine. Joseph was given charge of Egypt, second only to Pharaoh, and was called by a new name. During the famine, Joseph's brothers came to Egypt seeking grain, and after a serious of events, Joseph revealed himself as their brother, and had all of his family, including his father, who had thought for years that Joseph was dead, move to Egypt.

If Joseph was never sold into slavery, none of us may be alive today. Reason being: the famine was not just in Egypt, people came from all over for grain. Had no one prepared for the seven-year famine, at least many of us would not be here today, because our ancestors would not have survived. After the death of their father, Joseph's brothers were worried that he would take revenge on them, but instead he said to them, "You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives." (Genesis 50:20) Joseph had forgiven his brothers.

Likewise, forgive others, and do unto other as you would have done unto you. What you put into your spirit affects what comes out. To exert a spirit of forgiveness, ask God for forgiveness, forgive yourself, and forgive others. Do not hold a grudge, it will lead ruin. Forgive everybody of their offenses against you. Forgiveness is powerful, it is not simply something we read about and then do not act upon, it is a force, it has substance. This is true with God, this is true in relationships, and this is true in marriage.

Troy Hillman

Did Jesus Really Exist? Is There Any Historical Evidence?

You may have heard it said before, "There is no evidence, apart from the Bible, that Jesus of Nazareth ever existed." The majority consensus among most scholars and historians, however, is that there was a historical figure - it is merely what He actually did in His lifetime, what He thought about Himself, and His death and subsequent resurrection that stirs debate. Is there any evidence for the existence of Jesus? (Photo credit: Museo Epigrafico and Terme di Diocleziano, Wikimedia, Newmarket Films and Icon Productions  - Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ starring James Caviezel)

A few days ago, I had turned on the National Geographic channel, having seen that there was something on about "Who Really Killed Jesus?" Not ten minutes in, I heard the claim, "there's no historical evidence for Jesus." (paraphrased) This caught me by surprise. If the History Channel or National Geographic ever has something on about the Bible, I take it with a grain of salt. The fact that they claimed there was no evidence, however, caught me by surprise because no serious scholar I have ever read or met has questioned the existence of Jesus.

In this entry, we will examine the evidence for Jesus. According to Otto Betz, "no serious has ventured to postulate the non-historicity of Jesus."[1] Before we examine the non-biblical evidence for Jesus, we need to first look at God's Word. There are twenty seven different New Testament documents, from letters to Gospels. In past entries, we have given a case for the historicity, truth, and reliability of the Bible. Regardless of one's opinions, it does not change that the Bible is evidence for the existence of Jesus.

The church fathers Polycarp, Eusebius, Irenaeus, Justin, Origin, and others mentioned Jesus as a historical figure as well. However, we will investigate non-biblical sources for the historicity of Jesus, and attempt to build a Case for Christ from these sources. It is important to keep in mind that much of what may have been evidence for Jesus could have been lost when Jerusalem was burned or when Rome was burned. First off, we have Cornelius Tacitus. (born ca. 52-54 AD) In 112 AD, Tacitus wrote on the reign of Nero, and alludes to the death of Jesus and the residence of Christians in Rome.[2]

"But not all the relief that could come from man, not all the bounties that the prince could bestow, nor all the atonements which could be presented to the gods, availed to relieve Nero from the infamy of being believed to have ordered the conflagration, the fire of Rome. Hence to suppress the rumor, he falsely charged with the guilt, and punished with the most exquisite tortures, the persons commonly called Christians, who were hatred for their enormities. Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius: but the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief originated, but through the city of Rome also."[3]

Tacitus also references Christians in his Histories, preserved by Sulpicius Severus, dealing with the burning of The Temple in Jerusalem in 70 AD. Without using the Bible, from this reference alone we can determine that there was a man called Christus (Latin for Christ), that His followers were called Christians, that they existed in the 1st Century, that Christ was put to death by Pontius Pilate during the reign of Tiberius, and that Christians were charged with the burning of Rome by Nero.

In the second century, a satirist named Lucian spoke scornfully of Christ and of Christians. Lucian conveys that Christ was "...the man crucified in Palestine because he introduced this new cult into the world... Furthermore, their first lawgiver persuaded them that they were all brothers one of another after they have transgressed once for all by denying the Greek gods and by worshiping that crucified sophist himself and living under his laws."[4] From this, we can glean that this man was crucified in Palestine, that Christians worshiped Jesus as God, and that they lived under the New Covenant found in the Bible.

In 120 AD, Seutonius, another Roman historian and court official under Hadrian, wrote, "As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus [another spelling of Christus], he expelled them from Rome."[5] In Lives of the Caesars, he records, "Punishment by Nero was inflicted on the Christians, a class of men given to a new and mischievous superstition."[6] While we cannot glean much from this passage, we can determine that Christians were around, followers of Chrestus (Christ), and that Nero tried to punish Christians.

4th Century Depiction of the "Good Shepherd"

Plinius Secundus, (also called Pliny the Younger, ca. 112 AD), wrote to Emperor Trajan regarding how to treat Christians. He conveyed that he tried to have them worship statues of Trajan, and made them "curse Christ, which a genuine Christian cannot be induced to do." He also says that "They affirmed, however, that 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 verse a hymn to Christ as to a god, and bound themselves to a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft, adultery, never to satisfy their word, not to deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up."[7]

Here, Pliny affirms that Christians worshiped Christ as God, that they praised and worshiped, that they tried to live by the Ten Commandments, the like. Another writer is Tertullian, (197 AD) a Jurist-theologian of Carthage who wrote mentioning an exchange between Pontius Pilate and Tiberius, "Tiberius accordingly, in those days the Christian name made its entry into the world, having himself received intelligence from the truth of Christ's divinity, brought the matter before the senate, with his own decision in favor of Christ. The senate, because it had not given the approval itself, rejected his proposal. Caesar held to his opinion, threatening wrath against all the accusers of the Christians."[8]

While some historians doubt the historicity of this passage, if it is true, it indicates that even in the early days of Christianity, Jesus was worshiped as God, which is important. The reason this passage is disputed is merely because it was written by Tertullian - who wrote in defense of Christianity. Had he not been Christian, perhaps the passage would not be so question. Regardless of religion, however, the passage is still regarded by others as historical. Thallus, a Samaritan-born historian, mentions Christ, writing in 52 AD.

Thallus' writings can no longer be found, and what we know of his works we find in other sources. Thallus had written a history of the Mediterranean world since the Trojan War. In 221 AD, Julius Africanus made reference to the work of Thallus. "'Thallus, in the third book of his histories, explains away this darkness as an eclipse of the sun - unreasonably, as it seems to me' (unreasonably, of course, because a solar eclipse could not take place at the time of the full moon, and it was at the season of the Paschal full moon that Christ died)."[9, 10] From this and other historical sources (Phlegon, Tertullian) we can determine that the darkness which came across the world during the Crucifixion was an actual event.

Yet another source is a letter of someone named Mara Bar-Serapion. In The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?, F.F. Bruce notes that in the "...British Museum [there is] an interesting manuscript preserving the text of a letter written some time later than A.D. 73, but how much later we cannot be sure. This letter was sent by a Syrian named Mara Bar-Serapion to his son Serapion. Mara Bar-Serapion was in prison at the time, but he wrote to encourage his son in the pursuit of wisdom, and pointed out that those who persecuted wise men were overtaken by misfortune. He instances the deaths of Socrates, Pythagoras and Christ:"[11]

"'What advantage did the Athenians gain from putting Socrates to death? Famine and plague came upon them as a judgment for their crime. What advantage did the men of Samos gain from burning Pythagoras? In a moment their land was covered with sand. What advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise King? It was just after that that their kingdom was abolished. God justly avenged these three wise men: the Athenians died of hunger; the Samians were overwhelmed by the sea; the Jews, ruined and driven from their land, live in complete dispersion. But Socrates did not die for good; he lived on in the teaching of Plato. Pythagoras did not die for good; he lived on in the statue of Hera. Nor did the wise King die for good; He lived on in the teaching which He had given.'"[12]

The Jewish Talmuds refer to Jesus in several places. The Babylonian Talmud writes that Jesus was "...hanged on the eve of Passover." He is referred to as "Ben Pandera" often (also Ben Pantere), or "Jeshu ben Pandera." Many believe that "Pandera" is a play on words, "a travesty on the Greek word for virgin 'parthenos,' calling him a 'son of a virgin.' Joseph Klausner, a Jew, says 'the illegitimate birth of Jesus was a current idea among the Jews..." The Sanhedrin 43a refers to the disciples of Jesus.[13] The Baraila contains the following insightful comments:

"On the eve of Passover they hanged Yeshu (of Nazareth) and the herald went before him for forty days saying (Yeshu of Nazareth) is going forth to be stoned in that he hath practiced sorcery and beguiled and led astray Israel. Let everyone knowing aught in his defence come and plead for him. But they found naught in his defence and hanged him on the eve of Passover." Elsewhere in the Jewish Talmuds, it is clarified that he was killed via crucifixion.  Paul himself applies "hanging" in reference to Jesus, citing Deuteronomy 21:23. (See Galatians 3:13)[14]

There are several other interesting references to Jesus in the Talmud. The Jewish Authorities never denied that Jesus performed miracles and signs, but they attributed those miracles and signs to acts of sorcery. (See Matthew 9:34; 12:24; Mark 3:22) Lastly, we will examine Josephus, though there are a few other historical references to Jesus. Josephus was a 1st century historian born ca.37 AD. He became a Pharisee at age 19, and in 66 AD, he was the commander of the Jewish forces in Galilee. Josephus was captured by the Romans. Josephus wrote several works, much of which historians, scholars, and archaeologists have been able to investigate, leading to important finds, both Biblical and non-Biblical.[15] Josephus mentions Jesus in The Antiquities of the Jews 18.3.33:

"Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works - a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct to this day."[16]

This passage is one of the most hotly debated passages in the works of Josephus. Before we further examine the passage, let us look at another reference Josephus makes to Jesus. In The Antiquities of the Jews 20.9.1 we read, "when, therefore, Ananus was of this disposition, he thought he had now a proper opportunity [to exercise his authority.] Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the Sanhedrin of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned."[17]

Roman portrait bust allegedly of Josephus

In the second passage from Josephus, concerning James brother of Jesus, it has been argued that Jesus was referred to as Christ merely so that the reader could understand which James he was talking about. Scholars hotly dispute that Josephus actually wrote part of the first text (often referred to as the Testimonium Flavianum), with the knowledge that Josephus was a dedicated Jew, certainly not Christian. Had he been Christian, he likely would have added more about Jesus or other figures of the day, though several places he does mention Emperor Tiberius and Pilate. He also mentions John the Baptist, though at greater length than Jesus, suggested that if a Christian interloper modified Josephus' text concerning Christ, adding phrases such as "...if it be lawful to call him a man," "He was the Christ," "he appeared to them alive again the third day...," etc. 

It is generally accepted that what Josephus likely wrote was as follows: “About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man. For he was one who wrought surprising feats and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. When Pilate, upon hearing him accused by men of the highest standing among us, had condemned him to be crucified, those who had in the first place come to love him did not give up their affection for him. And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared.”[18]

There are a few points to bear in mind when examining this "reconstructed text." First of all, Josephus would have had no issue with calling Jesus a wise man, or a doer of surprising feats. Jesus was well known as a miracle-worker, this was likely accepted by him. Also, this passage contains things that a Christian interloper likely would not have said, such as Jesus having "won over" many people. The Gospels never indicate that Jesus preached to the Gentiles. He did visit Gentile territory when he came upon the two demon possessed men (one of them Legion), but He did not stay long enough.

Also, when we look at the reconstructed text, it seems to paint Christians and Christianity in a bit of a negative light. Josephus seems surprised that there are still Christians around, illustrating a bit of a hostile tone in this line. This is also why early Christian Apologists did not cite this passage, and likely why Origen mentions that Josephus did not believe Jesus to be the Messiah.[19]. If Christians wrote the entire passage, Josephus writes not long after about John the Baptist - and at greater length. Had Christians edited this passage in a major way, they likely would have added more, but it seems as if not much was "tweaked." One last consideration: 

Jim Caviezel as Jesus (From Passion of the Christ)

"a 10th century Arabic translation of the Testimonium has been discovered and it is quite close to the reconstructed passage... A good number of reputable scholars believe the author of the Arabic version of the Testimonium had access to a version of Antiquities whose textual tradition pre-dated the Christian interpolation. Thus, the Arabic text likely helps confirm the reconstructed version of the Testimonium..."[20] There are other writers that refer to Jesus, both Christian and non-Christian, such as Justin Martyr and others. Celsus, a critic of Christianity, wrote a attack on Christianity, titled True Doctrine. In it, he argues that Jesus was a magician and a sorcerer.

No historical reference denied the existence of Jesus let alone that He performed miracles, simply that they changed the source of His miracles. However, from the above texts (and others), we can conclude: "This evidence arguably confirms that Jesus existed (Pliny, Tacitus, Josephus) and had a brother named James who was killed when Ananus was high priest (Josephus). Jesus was known to be a wonder worker (Josephus, Celsus), a wise man and a teacher (Josephus) and was regarded by his followers as divine (Pliny). He was crucified (Tacitus, Lucian, Josephus) under Pontius Pilate, during the reign of Tiberius (Tacitus, Josephus) and his crucifixion seems to have been accompanied by a very long darkness (Thallus). This crucifixion, far from squelching the movement, seems to have been a catalyst for its growth (Tacitus). By 49 CE it was large enough to have incited a riot, resulting in Claudius kicking all Jews out of Rome for awhile, thus confirming Luke’s report in Acts (Suetonius). By the early sixties CE the movement had become so widespread that Jesus’ disciples could be plausibly blamed by Nero for a city-wide fire (Tacitus). And by the turn of the century it had spread all the way to Bythnia where it was large enough to cause problems for the governor (Pliny)."[21]

There is a general consensus among scholars, historians, and archaeologists that Jesus existed. Something to consider: if Jesus did not exist, how did a myth create such a worldwide impact as to radically change the course of history of 2000 years? Why did no one of Jesus' day question his historicity if they knew him to be pure myth? According to F.F. Bruce, "Some writers may toy with the fancy of a 'Christ-myth,' but they do not do so on the ground of historical evidence. The historicity of Christ is as axiomatic for an unbiased historian as the historicity of Julius Caesar. It is not historians who propagate the 'Christ-myth' theories."[22]

Troy Hillman

Sources

[1] Betz, Otto. What Do We Know About Jesus? SCM Press, 1968. Print.

[2] McDowell, Josh. Evidence That Demands A Verdict. 1st ed. Arrowhead Springs, San Bernardino, CA: Campus Crusade for Christ International, 1972. 84. Print.

[3] Tacitus, Cornelius. Annals XV.44. Print.

[4] Lucian. The Passing Peregruis.

[5] Seutonius. Life of Claudius, 25.4.

[6] Seutonius. Life of the Caesars, 26.2.

[7] Secundus, Plinius. Epistles X.96.

[8] Tertullian. Apology V.2.

[9] Bruce, F.F. The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? 5th revised ed. Downers Grove, III. 60515: Inter-Varsity Press, 1972. Print.

[10] Strobel, Lee. The Case For Christ. 1st ed. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1998. 82-84. Print.

[11] Ibid, [9].

[12] Ibid.

[13] Klausner, Joseph. Jesus of Nazareth. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1925. Print.

[14] Ibid.

[15] Ibid, [2]. pp. 88.

[16] Josephus (Translated by William Whiston, A.M.). Josephus: The Complete Works. Nashville, Tennesse: Thomas Nelson, 1998. 576. Print.

[17] Ibid. pp. 645.

[18] Boyd, Greg. "Corroborating Historical Evidence of the New Testament." Christus Victor Ministries. Christus Victor Ministries & Greg Boyd, 2008. Web. 8 Apr 2011. .

[19] Origen. Against Celsus, 1.45; Commentary on Matthew, 10.17.

[20] Ibid, [18].

[21] Ibid, [18].

[22] Ibid, [9].

INRI: What Was Written Over Jesus On The Cross?

It is Passover season, around 30–33 CE. Three men hang on crosses at Golgotha, just outside Jerusalem. According to the Gospel narratives, the man in the middle, Jesus of Nazareth, has an inscription posted above his head. But exactly what did the inscription say? The Gospels offer slightly different versions:

• Matthew 27:37: "This is Jesus, the King of the Jews."
• Mark 15:26: "The King of the Jews."
• Luke 23:38: "This is the King of the Jews."
• John 19:19: "Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews."

At first glance, this raises a well-known question often discussed in both theological and historical circles: Do these differences represent a contradiction?

Historically, it was Roman custom to post a placard, or titulus, above a crucifixion victim, stating the crime or charge. This served as a public deterrent and a declaration of Roman authority. The Gospels seem to agree on two essential points: the inscription identified Jesus as "King of the Jews," and it was placed prominently above him during the crucifixion.

According to John’s Gospel, the sign was multilingual—written in Aramaic (or Hebrew), Latin, and Greek (John 19:20). This multilingual practice fits Roman policy, especially in areas like Judea where diverse populations lived under Roman control. Latin was the official language of the Roman government, Greek served as the lingua franca of the eastern Mediterranean, and Aramaic (or Hebrew) was the local language spoken by many Jews.

The variations across the Gospels likely reflect how each writer tailored their narrative for their audience and theological purpose:

• John emphasizes Pilate’s authorship and presents the full version: "Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews." Some scholars suggest this reflects the Latin version (Iesus Nazarenus Rex Iudaeorum), often abbreviated as INRI in Christian art and iconography.
• Luke, writing for a Greek-speaking audience (possibly Theophilus, as addressed in Luke 1:3), offers: "This is the King of the Jews." Some suggest this may echo the Greek version of the inscription.
• Matthew, traditionally seen as addressing a Jewish audience, presents: "This is Jesus, the King of the Jews." Some propose this might reflect the Aramaic (or Hebrew) rendering.
• Mark, known for his shorter, action-focused style, gives the briefest form: "The King of the Jews."

Some Biblical scholars have attempted to harmonize these accounts by suggesting that each Gospel writer is quoting one language version of the sign, or selecting phrases that best suit their narrative aims. Others note that it’s equally possible that each writer simply preserved a version they were familiar with, without concern for exact word-for-word precision. After all, all four agree on the core content: Jesus was crucified under the title of "King of the Jews."

The urge to harmonize the Gospel differences is not a new one. Tatian’s Diatessaron, a 2nd-century harmony of the four canonical Gospels, weaves together Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John into a single coherent narrative. While the original Syriac version is lost, our reconstructions (via later Arabic, Latin, and Syriac translations) preserve how Tatian merged overlapping Gospel traditions. For the inscription, Tatian seems to have opted for the most inclusive, combined wording. He essentially harmonizes all four Gospel snippets into a full statement similar to: “This is Jesus the Nazarene, the King of the Jews.” This matches the long version in John, while also incorporating the "This is…" phrasing from Matthew and Luke. Tatian’s version is a clear attempt to unify differing Gospel accounts into one inscription.

Textual critics and historians often frame these kinds of Gospel variations as differences in literary reporting, not necessarily as contradictions. Ancient authors did not always share modern expectations for word-for-word accuracy across parallel reports. Instead, each Gospel preserves a version that emphasizes particular theological or narrative points.

For those interested in harmonization, one proposed reconstruction is that the full inscription was something like: "This is Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews"—a synthesis covering the elements found in all four Gospels. But it’s worth remembering that the original inscription would have existed in three languages, each with its own phrasing, alphabet, and syntax. Differences between the Gospels may simply reflect which version the writer chose to highlight.

The trilingual nature of the inscription underscores the political and cultural complexity of Jerusalem in the first century. It also highlights Pilate’s role. According to John, when Jewish authorities objected to the wording, Pilate famously replied: "What I have written, I have written" (John 19:22)—an example of Roman authority asserting itself in the face of local pressure.

The inscription’s reference to kingship, framed as an accusation or crime, points directly to the charge under which Jesus was executed: sedition against Rome under the pretense of a messianic kingship claim. This is consistent with Roman practice for dealing with perceived political threats.

In short, while the Gospels present different wordings of the inscription, all four agree on the central issue: Jesus was crucified under a public declaration that he was "King of the Jews." Whether seen as ironic mockery by Pilate, or as a theological proclamation by later Christian readers, the inscription remains one of the most historically attested features of the crucifixion narratives.

Sources:
Taylor, Paul S. "What do the letters 'INRI' on the crucifix mean?" Christian Answers Network, 1998.

Grigg, Russell M. "Why do all four Gospels contain different versions of the inscription on the Cross?" Christian Answers Network / Creation Ministries International, 1997.

Trans. Hope W. Hogg. “The Diatessaron of Tatian.” Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume IX. 1895.