Monday 2 September 2013

Did any sceptics ever consider Pilate a myth?

Believers sometimes claim that sceptics thought Pilate was a myth, up until an inscription naming him was found in 1961. There are numerous examples of this,

e.g. -

John Warwick Montgomery in "The Jury Returns: A Juridical Defense of Christianity"

' Modern archaeological research has confirmed again and again the reliability of New Testament geography, chronology, and general history. To take but a single, striking example: After the rise of liberal biblical criticism, doubt was expressed as to the historicity of Pontius Pilate, since he is mentioned even by pagan historians only in connection with Jesus' death. Then, in 1961, came the discovery at Caesarea of the now famous "Pilate inscription," definitely showing that, as usual, the New Testament writers were engaged in accurate historiography. '





or -
"For years, skeptics have claimed that Pontius Pilate, the one responsible for Jesus' execution, was nothing more than a mythical figure."

http://defendchristianfaith.blogspot.com/2009/02/did-pontius-pilate-actually-exist.html



or -
"How can atheists deny that Herod and Pontius Pilate existed when there are coins that were issued by them ? I have seen them. When they say the Bible is fiction, they would have to also deny numismatic evidence. "

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080209071413AAd4maf



or -
"When critics of the Passion of the Christ argue about Pilate not being historical and Caiaphas being too rabid, they are ignoring Biblical accounts and secular history because they don’t like the Biblical story."

http://www.bible-sermons.org/classes/Passion2.doc



So, what does the record of history actually show ?

Here I list the references to Pilate through the centuries - I have included all the main cites I could find - Christian writers as well as sceptics. If any sceptic had claimed Pilate did not exist, some Christian would surely mention that - in the same way that when early sceptics denied Jesus came in the flesh, we see various Christians insisting he DID so.


Contemporary, early 1st century
Philo Judaeus was a direct contemporary of Pilate, and he refers to Pilate twice in his historical work "On the Embassy to Gaius" :
"Pilate was one of the emperor's lieutenants, having been appointed governor of Judaea."
Clearly Philo thought Pilate was historical.


Late 1st century
Josephus in late 1st century records Pilate numerous times in his two historical books (Wars and Antiquities), e.g. :
"When Gratus had done those things, he went back to Rome, after he had tarried in Judea eleven years, when Pontius Pilate came as his successor."
Clearly Josephus thought Pilate was historical.


Early 2nd century
Tacitus refers to Pilate in his Annals 15.44 around 116 CE :

"Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus,"


Clearly, Tacitus thought Pilate was historical, (although he does get his title wrong.)

 
Late 1st and 2nd century

Many early Christian books mention Pilate for his part in Jesus' story :
Mark, Matthew, Luke, John, Acts, The Epistle of the Apostles, The Gospel of Peter, Ignatius, Justin Martyr, Acts of Peter and Paul, the various Pilate forgeries, Irenaeus, Melito of Sardis, Clement of Alexandria.

Every single one of these books cites Pilate as a historical figure. No mention of sceptics who thought otherwise.



3rd century

Porphyry's fragments mentioned Pilate as historical.

Many Christian works and writers mention Pilate :
Acts of Andrew, Acts of Peter and Andrew, Acts of Thadeus, Acts of Thomas, Against Novatian, Acta Pilati, The Teaching of Simon Cephas in Rome, The Clementina, Cyprian of Carthage, Hippolytus, Origen, Peter of Alexandria, Tertullian.

Every single one of these books cites Pilate as a historical figure. No mention of sceptics who thought otherwise.


4th century

Many Christian works and writers mention Pilate :
The Constitution of the Holy Apostles, The Doctrine of Addai, The Gospel of Nicodemus, Ambrose, Aphrahat, Athanasius, Augustine, Basil the Great, Cyril of Jerusalem, Ephraim of Syria, Eusebius of Caesarea, Gennadius, Gregory Nazianzen, Gregory of Nyssa, Hilary of Poitiers, Jerome, John Chrysostom, Lactantius, Macarius Magnes, Optatus of Miletus, Palladius of Helenopolis, Rufins.
Every single one of these books cites Pilate as a historical figure. No mention of sceptics who thought otherwise.

5th century

Many Christian works and writers mention Pilate :
Aurelius Prudentius, Cyril of Alexandria, John Cassian, Leo the Great, Moses of Chorene, Philoxenus, Socrates Scholasticus, Sozomenus, Theodoret.
Every single one of these books cites Pilate as a historical figure. No mention of sceptics who thought otherwise.

6th and 7th century

Several Christian works and writers mention Pilate :
Aurelius Prudentius, Cyril of Alexandria, John Cassian, Leo the Great, Moses of Chorene, Philoxenus, Socrates Scholasticus, Sozomenus, Theodoret, Antiochus Strategos, John Nikiu.
Every single one of these books cites Pilate as a historical figure. No mention of sceptics who thought otherwise.

~9th century

The Anglo Saxon Chronicle mentions Pilate as historical :
 
"A.D. 26. This year Pilate began to reign over the Jews."


10th century

Various forged books about Pilate appear (e.g. The Death of Pilate) - all based on him being historical. No mention of any sceptics who claim he was a myth.


11th, 12th, 13th centuries

Various Christian books mention Pilate :
St Anselm, Giraldus Cambrensis, Barlaam and Ioasaph, Thomas Aquinas,.
Each of these books cites Pilate as a historical figure. No mention of sceptics who thought otherwise.


14th century

Dante mentions Pilate as historical in his Inferno.

The Travels of John Mandeville refer to Pilate as historical.

Chaucer mentions Pilate.

Henry Suso mentions Pilate as historical.

Julian of Norwich does too.

No hint of any sceptics who claimed he was a myth.


16th century

Edmund Spencer's "The Faerie Queen" mentions Pilate.

James Arminius mentions Pilate as historical.

John of the Cross mentions Pilate as historical.

Christopher Goodman's "How Superior Powers Ought To Be Obeyed" mentions Pilate as historical.

Teresa of Avila mentions Pilate as historical.

No hint of any sceptics who claimed he was a myth.


17th century

Shakespeare mentions Pilate as historical.

Blaise Pascal mentions Pilate as historical.

Francis Bacon mentions Pilate as historical.

John Locke mentions Pilate as historical.

No hint of any sceptics who claimed he was a myth.


18th century

Dupuis mentions Pilate as historical in his sceptical book which argues Christ was a myth :
' Those who have "fabricated" it, have added thereto fictitious events, not only at known places, as all the ancient poets have done in the fables of Hercules, Bacchus, Osiris, &c., but also at an epoch with well known names, such as the age of Augustus, of Tiberius, of Pontius Pilate, &c.; which does not prove the real existence of Christ, but only that the sacerdotal fiction is posterior to that epoch; and of this we have no doubt.'

Edward Gibbon mentions Pilate as historical in his "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire".

Thomas Paine mentions Pilate as historical in his sceptical book.

No hint of any sceptical claims that Pilate was a myth.



19th century

Albert Pike's "Morals and Dogma" mentions Pilate as historical.

Strauss' famous and sceptical "Life of Jesus Crtically Examined" mentions Pilate as historical.

Renan's famous and sceptical "The Life of Jesus" mentions Pilate as historical.

No hint of any sceptical claims that Pilate was a myth.


Early 20th century

Albert Schweitzer's famous and sceptical "The Quest for the Historical Jesus" mentions Pilate many times as historical.

Gerald Massey the mythicist mentions Pilate as historical.

John E. Remsberg's sceptical "The Christ" mentions Pilate as historical.

Joseph Wheless' sceptical "Forgery in Christianity" mentions Pilate as historical.

M.M. Mangasarian's sceptical "The Truth about Jesus" mentions Pilate as historical.

Marshall Gauvin's sceptical "Did Jesus Christ really Live?" mentions Pilate as historical.

Shirley Jackson Case's critical "The Historicity of Jesus" mentions Pilate as historical.

Walter Bauer's "Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity" mentions Pilate as historical.

G.R.S. Mead's "Did Jesus live 100 BC?" mentions Pilate as historical many times.

Kirsopp Lake's "Landmarks" mentions Pilate as historical.

Walter Cassels "Supernatural Religion" mentions Pilate as historical.

No hint of any sceptical claims that Pilate was a myth.
 

Mid 20th century

Alvin Boyd Kuhn's sceptical "Who is this King of Glory" mentions Pilate as historical.

Maurice Goguel's sceptical "Jesus the Nazarene - Myth or History?" has Pilate as historical.

Alfred Loisy "The Bith of the Christian Religion" has Pilate as historical.

Edgar J. Goodspeed's "An Introduction to the New Testament" has Pilate as historical.

Edward Carpenter's "Pagan and Christian Creeds : Their Origin and Meaning" has Pilate as historical.

No hint of any sceptical claims that Pilate was a myth.

 
1961

An inscription is found mentioning Pilate's name - the first archeological evidence for Pilate.



After 1961

Christian apologists start claiming that before the inscription was found Pilate was considered by sceptics to have been a myth.

 

Summary

There is NO evidence anywhere that anyone ever considered Pilate a myth.

We have dozens of references to him from almost every century, even including contemporary accounts. Every single one considers him historical.

Even the sceptics who argued Jesus was a myth agree that Pilate was historical.

Not one believer in history ever mentions anyone claiming Pilate was a myth.

 

Conclusion

The claim that any sceptics ever said Pilate was a myth is totally FALSE.


 


2 comments:

  1. The reason skeptics would not question Pilate is that when ever there was an actual person for a part needed for the story that actual person was used. Its merely logical and expected. Rome had an Emperor and it had all of the officials needed to run an empire. Judea had an aristocracy and religious leaders. The only part of the myth that needed to be invented was a messiah who fulfilled a prophesy and only those parts were invented. The entire point of the gospels were to invent a character to fulfil prophesy so they invented Nazareth because the messiah was a Nazarene mistaking the cult mentioned in the OT for the place which only became populated years after the supposed Jesus. They invented the census because Jesus had to be born in the city of David, they invented Herod's supposed massacre of the baby boys to get Jesus to Egypt, they invented the 3 wise men and the star in the east to use the very popular existing myths of a god man born of a virgin. The list of inventions go on an on and the real people such as Philo of Alexandria and Josephus never heard of Jesus.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for your comment Larry :)
      Yes, I agree with what you say, I think most of the gospels are fictional, including Jesus.
      My post was to counter the oft-made claim that sceptics had doubted Pilate's existence before the inscription was found.

      Delete