In the world of biblical scholarship, few names are as recognizable as Bart D. Ehrman. A former evangelical turned agnostic and a professor of religious studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Ehrman has spent decades studying the New Testament and early Christianity. His 2012 book, Did Jesus Exist? The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth, tackles a controversial and surprisingly persistent question: Did the historical figure of Jesus ever exist?
In this work, Ehrman answers with a firm yes—arguing that Jesus of Nazareth was a real historical figure, even if much of the supernatural and theological content associated with him developed later. Importantly, Ehrman is not writing as a Christian apologist but as a historian, and he challenges both mythicists (those who claim Jesus was entirely invented) and believers with the same rigorous application of historical methodology.
The Context: A Rising Wave of Mythicism
Ehrman wrote Did Jesus Exist? in response to the growing popularity of the Jesus myth theory—the idea that Jesus never existed and was instead invented by early Christians as a purely mythical figure. While this theory has existed in various forms since the 19th century, the internet age has helped it gain traction in popular circles, often appealing to atheists, skeptics, or anti-religious voices.
What troubled Ehrman, a well-known critic of biblical literalism himself, was that mythicism was often masquerading as legitimate scholarship, despite being rejected by virtually all credentialed historians of antiquity. In his book, he sets out to explain why professional historians, regardless of their personal beliefs, accept the existence of Jesus as a historical figure.
The Argument: Jesus as a Historical Man
Ehrman begins by distinguishing between the historical Jesus and the Jesus of faith. The Jesus worshipped in Christianity—miracle-working, born of a virgin, raised from the dead—is not the same as the Jesus scholars attempt to recover through historical investigation. For Ehrman, the historical Jesus was an apocalyptic Jewish preacher who lived in first-century Palestine, was baptized by John the Baptist, attracted a following, and was executed by the Romans.
He builds his argument on several pillars:
1. Independent Sources
One of Ehrman's key points is that multiple independent sources attest to the existence of Jesus. These include:
-
The Gospels, particularly Mark, Matthew, and Luke, which although written decades after Jesus’ death, contain material drawn from earlier traditions.
-
Paul’s letters, written within a generation of Jesus’ life, where Paul references Jesus as a real, recently-living person who had a brother (James) and was crucified.
-
Non-Christian sources, such as Tacitus, a Roman historian, and Josephus, a Jewish historian, both of whom mention Jesus or early Christians in ways that align with a historical figure rather than a mythological one.
Ehrman emphasizes that historical scholars evaluate these sources critically—not for theological accuracy, but for whether they reflect authentic, earlier traditions about a real individual.
2. The Criterion of Embarrassment
Ehrman points out that some of the material about Jesus would have been embarrassing or problematic for early Christians, and thus unlikely to be invented. For example:
-
Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist, implying that he was subordinate to John.
-
Jesus was crucified, a form of execution reserved for criminals and rebels—a deeply shameful death that would have been hard to explain to potential converts.
These elements, Ehrman argues, are unlikely to be fabrications. Their presence suggests that the early Christians were passing on traditions rooted in actual events.
3. Paul’s Letters and the Brother of Jesus
Ehrman places special weight on the fact that Paul mentions meeting James, “the brother of the Lord” (Galatians 1:19). This reference is brief and incidental, suggesting Paul saw James as a biological sibling of Jesus. For Ehrman, this is a powerful piece of historical evidence: it is very hard to explain a mythical Jesus having a brother known to the early Christian community.
4. The Jewish Context
Ehrman underscores that Jesus fits within the broader context of first-century Judaism. Apocalyptic prophets and messianic movements were not uncommon in the volatile atmosphere of Roman-occupied Judea. Jesus’ message about the coming Kingdom of God aligns with other known apocalyptic figures, lending further plausibility to his historicity.
Taking on the Mythicists
A large portion of Did Jesus Exist? is dedicated to refuting mythicist arguments. Ehrman critiques authors such as Richard Carrier, Robert Price, and others, arguing that their methods lack scholarly rigor. He challenges claims that the Jesus story is based on pagan mythologies or that there is a total lack of evidence for Jesus' existence.
Ehrman also tackles the “silence” of early sources, such as the fact that Paul rarely quotes Jesus’ teachings. He explains that this was not unusual given the letter-writing conventions of the time and Paul's focus on theological arguments rather than biography.
Ultimately, Ehrman accuses many mythicists of motivated reasoning—driven by a desire to undermine religion rather than uncover historical truth.
Scholarly Reception and Controversy
The book received mixed reactions. Many mainstream historians and scholars praised Ehrman for tackling a fringe theory with scholarly diligence. Others, particularly secular and atheist communities, criticized him for what they perceived as giving too much ground to religious tradition.
Some mythicist authors accused Ehrman of misrepresenting their views or ignoring parts of their work. In response, Ehrman engaged in public debates and clarified his arguments in blog posts and interviews.
Despite the pushback, most academic scholars—Christian, atheist, or otherwise—support Ehrman’s basic claim: Jesus of Nazareth, the man, did exist, even if the miraculous stories about him do not hold up to historical scrutiny.
Conclusion: A Measured Defense of History
Did Jesus Exist? is not a defense of Christianity, nor an argument for faith. Ehrman remains personally agnostic and often critiques the reliability of the New Testament as a theological document. What the book does offer is a clear, compelling case for the historical existence of Jesus, grounded in standard tools of historical investigation.
In a time when misinformation and sensational claims spread easily, Ehrman’s work serves as a reminder that not all skepticism is scholarly. By affirming Jesus’ historicity while rejecting the supernatural elements of his story, Ehrman provides a nuanced middle ground—rooted in evidence, not ideology.
For readers interested in the origins of Christianity, biblical scholarship, or the historical method, Did Jesus Exist? remains an essential and thought-provoking read.
