Did Jesus exist at all?

The Gospel of John tells us that Jesus believed he had eternal life and a bond with God from the beginning of Creation until the end of time. Christians and Muslims expect him to return. Even though Muslims don’t believe Jesus is the Son of God, they also think he will return and that his mother was a virgin. Remarkably, Muhammad and the Jewish prophets didn’t view themselves as the eternally living Son of God, nor do Muslims believe that Jesus is. They both consider that thought a form of idolatry. And so Islam and Judaism have more in common with each other than with Christianity. That makes Jesus the most enigmatic individual in the history of humankind. Some people claim that there is no evidence that Jesus was a real person and that he is a fantasy figure like Spike and Suzy. So, let’s first address the argument that Jesus is a fictional person.

Sources from his era don’t mention him. There is hardly any evidence of Jesus outside the Bible. Jesus was the leader of a small sect, so that is not particularly surprising. The problem with the idea that there never was a Jesus is that it leaves us without a compelling explanation for the existence of Christianity, so that we must seek refuge in more bizarre explanations, like Christianity being a Roman conspiracy to replace Judaism with the Roman emperor cult. The supposed proof is that Jesus Christ shares the initials JC with Julius Caesar and that both died because of a betrayal. That can’t be a coincidence, so the Christ story is just a refurbished Caesar story, the proponents of this ‘theory’ argue.

They are right that it isn’t a coincidence. However, as an explanation for Christianity, it is pretty imaginative. And it fails to explain nearly everything we can read about Jesus in the Gospels. And so, Jesus did live. But what made him unique? Jesus started a religion that has over two billion followers today. Apart from a historical account, an explanation of his beliefs may help us understand him. That includes his relationship with God, the supposed guy in the sky who is far more powerful than Superman, can do more tricks, and is allegedly all-knowing. But Jesus changed world history more than anyone else, so did that sky dude have a hand in that? It would be strange not to ask that question.

What can we know?

Historians and biblical scholars try to reconstruct what Jesus taught and did. They use historical sources such as the Gospels. In many ways, Jesus was a typical first-century Jewish end-time prophet, a product of the culture he lived in, first-century Judaism. Yet, they never ask the question that would be strange not to ask: what made Jesus think he was the Son of God? And so, they fail to clarify Jesus’ supposed close relationship with God or why God was his Father. Decades after Jesus allegedly went missing, a few anonymous authors wrote the Gospels. Mark, Matthew and John haven’t written the Gospels attributed to them. The Gospels provide no clue as to who wrote them. Mark, Matthew and John were peasants who spoke Aramaic, while the authors of the Gospels were educated and spoke Greek. Some scholars argue that Christians initially relied on oral traditions and utilised writings that are no longer extant. Oral recounting is notoriously inaccurate. Stories change when retold. Details get lost, and new details get added. They had good reason to think so. Luke begins, stating precisely that (Luke 1:1-4),

Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. With this in mind, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I too decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.

Luke was not one of the original Apostles, but a companion of Paul (Philemon 24), who was a physician (Colossians 4:14). And so, he could have written the Gospel attributed to him. But we don’t know. Church tradition also holds that the author of Mark wrote down a testimony of Peter. Peter died years before the author of Mark penned the text, but there are reasons to believe that a testimony of Peter was a source the author used, most notably because Peter has a prominent role in the text. Much of this Gospel is plausible given the time and place in which Jesus lived. Mark also discloses things about Jesus that Christians wouldn’t make up because it is embarrassing, such as Jesus’ family claiming he was insane (Mark 3:21). Mark seems to have had access to a reliable source.

There is also evidence of redactions in the New Testament. What to think of Jesus being the bridegroom and the Bride having gone missing? Jesus was married, but we are not supposed to know that. As a result of the confusion, scholars agree on very little about Jesus of Nazareth, except that he lived and preached shortly after 26 AD. His ministry started after John the Baptist had baptised him. Then there was a lot of action, with mystical and sensational statements, including miracles such as healing the sick and multiplying bread and fish, followed by a betrayal, crucifixion, and resurrection from the dead, and finally, his disappearance. The Gospels agree on a few things:

• Jesus performed miracles, such as walking over water, healing the sick, multiplying bread and fish, and raising the dead.
• Jesus made controversial statements that baffled the Pharisees, so they schemed against him, which eventually led to his crucifixion.
• Jesus did not take Jewish religious law as seriously as other religious zealots. He had a different message of forgiveness of sins.
• Jesus did not like hypocrites, for who is without sin? He forgave sinners who repented. Still, he claimed there would be judgment.
• Jesus was respectful of women. And he held unconventional views on marriage. Few men were up to that task. That goes unexplained.
• Oh yes, and he called God his Father, and he was God’s son. It was a close and loving relationship. Other prophets weren’t like that.

Who was Jesus, what did he do, and what were his teachings? Scholars and historians seek to reconstruct what happened and the beliefs of the earliest Christians by examining the oldest texts and earliest controversies. They have analysed the scriptures for centuries and concluded that you can’t establish much with certainty about Jesus except that he lived and preached. Some things are more plausible than others. And some things are nearly certain. The virgin birth didn’t happen, while the crucifixion did. Some of Jesus’ disciples likely saw him after he died, perhaps in a psychosis. Otherwise, you lack a compelling explanation for the origins of Christianity. Thoughts that scholars dared not entertain were that some of the miracles did happen, or that Jesus did have the gift of prophecy. If you have witnessed paranormal events, which scientists seem to call metanormal events, or know people who have, you may have second thoughts about the scholarly consensus on miracles. The scholar Dale Allison wrote in his book Interpreting Jesus,

What if a historian of the early Jesus movement decides, on empirical, not theological grounds, that sometimes people see the future, that clairvoyance is not uncommon, that additional metanormal claims should be seriously entertained, and even that enigmatic capacities sometimes congregate in exceptional or charismatically gifted individuals, in what Max Weber termed ‘religious virtuosi’?

Allison produces a long list of examples in the Gospels and concludes that his fellow scholars who reject the historicity of Jesus’ clairvoyance suffer from dogmatic incredulity. In other words, the Gospels could be more historically accurate than most scholars claim because their assumptions about the possibility of miracles and clairvoyance are incorrect. Hence, the confidence they have in their claims is unjustified. And the original written sources are older than the Gospels, so oral recounting probably hasn’t affected them. Earlier written records have existed, scholars argue, and they give these supposed writings mysterious names, such as Q and ‘The Signs Gospel’. Mark, Matthew, and Luke are very similar and primarily draw on the same sources. The Gospel of John stands apart. The Gospel of John notes that an eyewitness, the Beloved Disciple, wrote it. And so, an eyewitness account by a disciple could be the basis for this text. Now, John 5:1-3 reads,

Some time later, Jesus went up to Jerusalem for one of the Jewish festivals. Now there is in Jerusalem near the Sheep Gate a pool, which in Aramaic is called Bethesda and which is surrounded by five covered colonnades. Here, a great number of disabled people used to lie — the blind, the lame, the paralysed.

The use of the word ‘is’ implies that the text dates from before the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, thus from before the writing of the Gospel of Mark. The Sheep Gate was still there at the time of writing, the wording suggests. Now it gets more interesting. Peter was Jesus’ favourite disciple, and John may contain his testimony. There is little doubt that the Gospels contain historical evidence, but they also claim that miracles and the resurrection have happened. And so, you have some additional explaining to do, as these events defy the laws of nature, which is impossible had this world been real.

This universe is a virtual reality, so these miracles are possible. On the Holodeck, I can slay platoons of ferocious Klingon warriors alone with my bare hands and some magical powers. At the same time, in real life, elderly ladies overtake me in the swimming pool even when I am giving my best. Conjuring fish out of thin air, reviving the dead, walking on water, and turning water into wine should also be no problem. The same goes for a virgin birth. Whatever you imagine can become true. But it is not proof that it happened because Christians may have invented stories. For the virgin birth at least, that applies.

Explaining the differences

Mark and John are so different because they come from two very different traditions. Jesus had Jewish and Gentile followers. In the Jewish tradition, he was a prophet, and ‘Son of God’ meant ‘King of the Jews.’ To Gentiles, the Son of God had a literal meaning as God’s firstborn child. The Jewish Jesus was a human prophet and perhaps a resistance leader, while the Gentile Jesus was an eternal godlike being, the Firstborn of Creation. Most of the confusion stems from these differences, which reveal a controversy in the early Church that Paul successfully resolved. Mark and John are the best historical sources about Jesus’ life, but they have different perspectives. And the final version of the Gospel of John has undergone several revisions.

Writing a Gospel was an intellectual challenge for talented writers who could combine scraps of information, symbols and signs to compose high-level literature. Without social media, scribes could dedicate their entire lives to such a project. And others could dedicate lifetimes to finding out what those writers meant, so, if we wish to do so, we can read countless commentaries by experts. The Jews and the Muslims also have them. Jesus also contributed to the confusion. Well-known are the parables, stories that Jesus told to convey an underlying message. By saying one thing and meaning another, Jesus often left his audience, including his disciples, confused. Even today, the central question remains: was Jesus merely human, or godlike? In either case, he is enigmatic.

Jesus’ deeds had religious significance, which is why we read that he had twelve disciples. Twelve stands for perfection or authority in government. Jacob had twelve sons who represented the twelve tribes of Israel. Jesus likely didn’t have twelve disciples. And Jesus supposedly spent forty days in the desert. The number forty signifies new life, growth and transformation. The rain of the Great Flood lasted forty days and nights. If Jesus went to the desert, then it was probably not for forty days. According to the Bible, God created the world in six days and rested on the seventh. The number seven also signifies completion and perfection. And Jesus said ‘I am’ seven times in the Gospel of John, supposedly implying he was godlike. If he said it, then he probably didn’t say it seven times. And the scripture tells us that Jesus rose from the dead after three days. This number represents divine wholeness, completeness and perfection. If Jesus had returned from the dead, it would probably not have been after three days.

The biblical authors tweaked and rearranged the facts to fit the religiously significant numbers. Eight disciples would have made a dud. What kind of prophet has eight disciples? That is not a powerful number. You can’t take such a prophet seriously. Paul claimed that Jesus appeared to ‘The Twelve’ (1 Corinthians 15:5) after Judas had already volunteered for meeting the Grim Reaper and had not hesitated to act. That is fishy. The Church wants us to believe that they found another disciple within three days, for that was the available timeframe. Mark, Matthew, and Luke list the names of ‘The Twelve,’ but John does not. He only calls them ‘The Twelve’ like Paul did. If that is indeed the case, Mark must already have seen significant editing, including Jesus predicting his resurrection after three days (Mark 8:31), which might explain why the sources have disappeared and why the latter part of Mark has gone missing, for it didn’t fit the three-day narrative.

Talking about fishy, the experts are still baffled about those 153 fish Simon Peter dragged ashore without tearing his net (John 21:11). What does that number signify? Experts agree that it is not merely a fact. They have written voluminous tracts on the matter. A Wikipedia page deals with this question. There, you find links to the relevant literature. But we still await the book title ‘The Ultimate Guide on the 153 Fishes’ that explains it all. The experts don’t mention that 153 = (12 * 12) + (3 * 3). Both three and twelve have special meanings. It can’t be that simple. Or can it?

As time passed by

There are facts, early beliefs, and later beliefs. What Christians believed changed over time due to circumstances, so early beliefs are likely closer to Jesus’ teachings than later ones. Earlier sources might have fewer distortions and are thus closer to the facts than later ones. To understand Jesus, you must also become familiar with the time and place in which he lived. The Jews were a small nation crushed by major powers and could only hope for God to come to their rescue. At the time of Jesus, many believed the end was near and that God would send a Messiah to kick out the wicked Roman oppressors and restore Israel to its former glory, which it supposedly had when David was king.

Religious zealots prayed, committed terrorist acts, and revolted. Nowadays, the Palestinians follow the same recipe only to get their butts kicked time after time. And they never seem to learn. Back then, the Jews were like the Palestinians today. They were a pain for the Romans. Nowadays, the Jews run the empire in Washington, DC, and let it protect their pet project in the Holy Land. The stage was already set 2,000 years ago. The end times, the arrival of a Messiah, and a final reckoning still define Jewish, Christian, and Islamic thinking. In Jesus’ time, numerous end-time preachers proclaimed that the end was near. Jesus was one of them. He said things like (Mark 13:12-13),

Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child. Children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. Everyone will hate you because of me, but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved.

That is pretty scary already. Jesus continues (Mark 13:14-17),

When you see the abomination that causes desolation standing where it does not belong, then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let no one on the housetop go down or enter the house to take anything out. Let no one in the field go back to get their cloak. How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers!

Now comes his prediction, which the faithful still await to come true (Mark 13:23-27),

So be on your guard. I have told you everything ahead of time. But in those days, following that distress, the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light. The stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken. At that time, people will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory. And he will send his angels and gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of the heavens.

Jesus may have seen himself as a Jewish Messiah and didn’t plan to start a world religion. When a non-Jewish woman begged Jesus to drive a demon out of her daughter, he replied, ‘First let the children eat all they want, for it is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.’ He was there for the Jews, and Gentiles were on par with dogs. Only after she replied, ‘Lord, even the dogs under the table eat the children’s crumbs,’ was Jesus willing to grant her request (Mark 7:24-30, Matthew 15:21-28). It is at odds with the Parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37) and the story of the Samaritan woman, in which Jesus asked this woman to give him some water she had drawn from the well, and in which everyone can get salvation (John 4:1-26). John also notes the woman’s surprise as Jews didn’t associate with Gentiles. It was also a point of contention between Peter and Paul (Galatians 2:11-21).

Scholars explain the contradiction by assuming each of the Gospels had an intended audience. Matthew wrote for the Jews and aimed to prove that Jesus was the Jewish Messiah. Gentiles were Luke’s intended audience. John was the product of a community separate from mainstream Pauline Christianity with an anti-Jewish bias. And so, we can’t be sure whether Jesus really compared Gentiles to dogs or whether it merely reflected a widespread Jewish sentiment about Gentiles. Still, all the Gospels agree that Jesus accepted the faith of Gentiles, halfheartedly or not.

Jesus probably saw himself as the eternally living Son of God. Unlike John, Mark doesn’t say it plainly, but notes that he did see himself coming in clouds with great power and glory. Initially, Jesus’ followers expected him to return soon. Jesus may have believed that himself. However, Jesus also said that no one knows the day or hour, not even he, only God (Mark 13:32). It could be a later addition, but there is no evidence to suggest that it is. His disciples probably thought they would live to see it happen. Scholars think Paul believed it also. When things didn’t go according to plan, the Christians had to adapt to this new reality and become less specific about the date of Jesus’ return.

Jesus’ Jewish followers had hoped that he would throw out the Romans. After the Romans levelled the Jewish Temple around 70 AD, that hope crumbled to dust together with the Temple. In the end, with no return of Jesus in sight, Christians turned him into a heavenly ruler who gives you access to eternal life if you follow him. That is how the Gospel of John depicts Jesus. It was the last Gospel written around 95 AD. To understand what happened, it is crucial to view the development of early Christianity as a historical process with actors, where there was a development over time as these actors attempted to address various issues. One actor in particular is of interest, namely Paul. He, rather than Jesus, invented Christianity. The historical order of the New Testament is with approximate dates:

• Paul’s Epistles (the genuine ones), 55 AD,
• Gospel of Mark, 70 AD,
• Gospel of Matthew, 75 AD,
• Gospel of Luke, 85 AD,
• Gospel of John, 95 AD.

No one knows who wrote the Gospels. Attributing them to the Apostles was a ploy by the Church to lend them authority. The New Testament also contains epistles signed by Paul and Peter. Nobody knows who wrote them. Now, that does not need to be forgery. The writing process in Paul’s time involved co-authors. 1 Thessalonians starts with (1 Thessalonians 1:1-2),

Paul, Silas and Timothy, To the church of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ: Grace and peace to you. We always thank God for all of you, mentioning you in our prayers.

The Paul who wrote these letters was not always the individual Paul, but often a team of authors. After Paul’s death, the other team members might still have written letters in his name. They wouldn’t have thought of it as a forgery. Individualism as we know it today didn’t exist at the time, so if you were part of Team Paul, you could still write a letter and sign it in Paul’s name after his death.

The Gospel of John is the latest, so scholars have long considered it the least reliable of the four Gospels. They long held the view that Christians gradually deified Jesus, which could then explain why it is so different. However, Paul already viewed Jesus as God in nature (Philippians 2:6), and that at the name of Jesus, every knee should bow, in heaven, on earth, and under the earth (Philippians 2:10). The latter phrase originally referred to God. Paul applied it to Jesus, viewing him as godlike but not equal to God.

The mystery remains

And so, scholars’ views have shifted, and many now believe that the Gospel of John comes from a separate tradition. To Greeks and others, a human could more easily become godlike than to Jews. The Bible also testifies to this. After Paul healed a lame man in Lystra, the locals concluded that Paul and Barnabas were gods in human form (Acts 14:11). The first three Gospels emerged within Jewish Christianity. In contrast, the Gospel of John originated from a Gentile Christian community. And gradually, the scholars concluded that John could be more historically accurate than previously thought.

Hence, John may reveal details that other Gospels omit. There were disputes about the nature of Jesus and his relationship with God. Was he human or godlike? The compromise ultimately became that he was both. Paul never wrote about what transpired during Jesus’ life. Mark is the oldest Gospel, telling the story of Jesus’ life. It is brief and presents an enigmatic Jesus. Mark 1:27-28 reads,

The people were all so amazed that they asked each other, ‘What is this? A new teaching, and with authority! He even gives orders to impure spirits and they obey him.’ News about him spread quickly over the whole region of Galilee.

The Gospel of Mark initially ended with Mary Magdalene and a few other women discovering that Jesus’ tomb was empty and an angel telling them that Jesus had risen. The remainder is a later addition. Because of that, some scholars doubt the resurrection. Other scholars have suggested that it was an intentional open ending, ‘because everyone knew what happened next.’ That is a bit of a stretch, as it is attributing Hitchcock-like motives to an author who seemed keen to give testimony. Jesus probably appeared to at least some of his followers after his death. Otherwise, there would be no Christianity. And so, the premature ending of Mark raises questions.

That could be as reliable as it can get. Conviction, no matter how strong, is not a fact, but we have no accurate accounts of what had transpired. The Gospels diverge from what Paul writes, so we can’t construct a more precise picture of the events unless we can establish which accounts are the most reliable and what the falsifications are. And so, we can’t get closer to the truth unless we learn more about the relationship between God —that supposed guy in the sky— and Jesus, His alleged son.

Latest revision: 28 March 2026

Featured image: Jesus and Minas Coptic icon dating from the 6th or 7th century. Clio20 (Anonymous). Wikimedia Commons.

1. At what point were there doubts about Mark’s longer ending? r/AcademicBiblical (2025). [link]
2. Did Mark’s gospel really end on a cliffhanger, or is it unfinished? r/AcademicBiblical (2025). [link]