“The question of the historicity of Jesus is part of the study of the historical Jesus as undertaken in the quest for the historical Jesus and the scholarly reconstructions of the life of Jesus. Virtually all scholars of antiquity accept that Jesus was a historical figure, although not all events mentioned in the gospels (most notably his miracles) are accepted universally. Standard historical criteria have aided in evaluating the historicity of the gospel-narratives, and two events subject to “almost universal assent” are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate.”
Here are the three sources of historical evidence that I find the most compelling:
3. The Sayings Gospel Q (pdf)
…………
Related Links:
• The Historical Jesus and the Criteria of Authenticity
There is consensus among historians that… several events and sayings in the ministry of Christ can be said to be historical. These would include, but are not limited to, his baptism, unique personal claims (such as the “Son of Man“, which is a claim to divinity and equal authority with God, also the Parable of the Tenant), several miracle stories and exorcisms, the crucifixion under Pontius Pilate, the burial in the tomb, the discovery of the empty tomb, and the resurrection appearances to several people and groups…
• What Archaeology Is Telling Us About the Real Jesus
Might it be possible that Jesus Christ never even existed, that the whole stained glass story is pure invention? It’s an assertion that’s championed by some outspoken skeptics — but not, I discovered, by scholars, particularly archaeologists, whose work tends to bring flights of fancy down to literal earth. “I don’t know any mainstream scholar who doubts the historicity of Jesus,” said Eric Meyers, an archaeologist and emeritus professor in Judaic studies at Duke University. “The details have been debated for centuries, but no one who is serious doubts that he’s a historical figure.”
