However, evidence for Jesus’ resurrection is actually superior to this. To be sure, as with the court case, people must make a decision about this event, but unlike the court case, their decision does not determine the issue. The historical fact is established on the evidence alone and not by any decision. And it is here that the evidence for the resurrection reveals that the earliest eyewitnesses did see the risen Jesus, as well as the literal nature of these appearances. Critical attempts fail at this point.
86It should be mentioned here that the New Testament asserts that the believer is given an assurance of this event (as well as other truths of God) by the witness of the Holy Spirit (Rom. 8:16; 1 John 5:9-13). Believers need not rely on investigations of critical hermeneutical methodology, as was done here. Such processes can confirm what is already certified, however, or answer the questions of skeptics.
87See Grant, Jesus: An Historian’s Review, for an example of a critical historical work which uncovers other such early data (in addition to the creeds) concerning the life of Jesus. Again, Grant also recognizes the four core facts (pp. 175-178). See Sherwin-White’s Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament for an instance of another ancient historian who also uses critical methodology and applies it to the trial of Jesus and of the journeys of Paul, in particular. Interestingly, Sherwin-White finds that the appropriate New Testament texts are very trustworthy at these points (see pp. 186-193), as we indicated especially in chapter 3 above.
8Archaeological Sources
As pointed out in Appendix 1, historical methodology includes the use of non-written as well as written sources. Archaeology is able to provide much information about the past, in that it can both confirm and shed new light on known data, as well as establish evidence on its own.
In this chapter we will attempt to point out some archaeological evidence that either corroborates or helps establish historical facts in the life of Jesus. To be sure, the amount of material here is not as abundant as are the other avenues in studying the life of Jesus. Still, the examples we use will continue to build a case for what can be known of Jesus from extrabiblical sources.
Luke’s Census
In Luke 2:1-5 we read that Caesar Augustus decreed that the Roman Empire should be taxed and that everyone had to return to his own city to pay taxes. So Joseph and Mary returned to Bethlehem and there Jesus was born.
Several questions have been raised in the context of this taxation.1 Even if such a taxation actually did occur, would every person have to return to his home? Was Quirinius really the governor of Syria at this time (as in v. 2)? Archaeology has had a bearing on the answers to these questions.
It has been established that the taking of a census was quite common at about the time of Christ. An ancient Latin inscription called the Titulus Venetus indicates that a census took place in Syria and Judea about AD 5-6 and that this was typical of those held throughout the Roman Empire from the time of Augustus (23 BC–AD 14) until at least the third century AD. Indications are that this census took place every fourteen years. Other such evidence indicates that these procedures were widespread.2 Concerning persons returning to their home city for the taxation-census, an Egyptian papyrus dating from AD 104 reports just such a practice. This rule was enforced, as well.3
The question concerning Quirinius also involves the date of the census described in Luke 2. It is known that Quirinius was made governor of Syria by Augustus in AD 6. Archaeologist Sir William Ramsay discovered several inscriptions that indicated that Quirinius was governor of Syria on two occasions, the first time several years prior to this date.4 Within the cycle of taxation-censuses mentioned above, an earlier taxation would be dated from 10–4 BC.5 Another possibility is Bruce’s suggestion that the Greek in Luke 2:2 is equally translatable as “This enrollment (census) was before that made when Quirinius was governor of Syria.”6 This would mean that Luke was dating the taxation-census before Quirinius took over the governorship of Syria. Either possibility answers the question raised above.7
Therefore, while some questions have been raised concerning the events recorded in Luke 2:1-5, archaeology has provided some unexpected and supportive answers. Additionally, while supplying the background behind these events, archaeology also assists us in establishing several facts. (1) A taxation-census was a fairly common procedure in the Roman Empire and it did occur in Judea, in particular. (2) Persons were required to return to their home city in order to fulfill the requirements of the process. (3) These procedures were apparently employed during the reign of Augustus (37 BC–AD 14), placing it well within the general time frame of Jesus’ birth. (4) The date of the specific taxation recounted by Luke could very possibly have been 6–5 BC, which would also be of service in attempting to find a more exact date for Jesus’ death.
Yohanan — Crucifixion Victim
Most of this chapter pertains to archaeological evidence that bears on the issues of Jesus’ death and resurrection. The first example of this concerns an important discovery made in June, 1968, that provides some important information about the nature of crucifixion as it was exercised in first century AD Palestine. While a portion of Jerusalem was being prepared for the erection of new apartment buildings, an ancient Jewish burial site was uncovered. Located about one mile north of the Old Damascus Gate, this site yielded the remains of some thirty-five Jews that were buried in fifteen stone ossuaries, used for the reburial of human skeletons some time after the original interment.
Upon investigation, archaeologist Vasilius Tzaferis found that these Jews had probably died about AD 70 in the Jewish uprising against Rome. Several of the skeletons gave evidence of having suffered violent deaths, such as being burned, starved, or beaten to death. One person had been killed by an arrow.8
In terms of our study, the most important discovery at this site was the skeleton of a man named Yohanan Ben Ha’galgol, whose name was written in Aramaic on the stone ossuary. Further study by Hebrew University pathologist Dr. N. Haas revealed some preliminary data regarding Yohanan’s skeleton. Yohanan was about five feet seven inches in height, was about twenty-four to twenty-eight years old, had a cleft palate and was a victim of crucifixion. Still piercing his feet was a large nail about seven inches long that had been driven sideways through his heel bones, which indicates the direction in which the feet and legs were twisted in order to be attached to the cross. The nail pierced an acacia beam on the cross, which was anchored in the ground. Small pieces of wood still attached to the spike indicated that the beam itself was olive wood. The end of the nail was bent backwards toward the head due either to a knot in the wood or to purposeful bending.
An examination disclosed the fact that nails had also been driven between the radius and ulna bones in the lower arm. The radius bone was both scratched and actually worn smooth. This latter result was apparently due to repeated friction caused by the crucifixion victim pulling himself upward in order to breathe, followed by sinking back down again. As the weight of the body was repeatedly moved in order to free the pectoral and intercostal muscles, which inhibit breathing in the “down” position, the radius was worn.