8. Despite the New Testament gospels lacking in historical validity, the existence of Jesus, if not his divinity, can be confirmed via concurrent non-Christian historical sources
Before the Enlightenment, without facing genuine historical critique the biblical narrative of the life of Jesus was simply accepted as historically accurate. In the centuries since, increased examination of the history presented rendered many prior assumptions incorrect. Offering unreliable, even conflicting narratives, the gospels are not, nor were they intended to be biographical accounts of the life of Jesus, but instead were written to explain his theology and the alleged significance of his ministry. This unreliability, if only for a time, even resulted in speculation surrounding the question of whether or not such a person indeed existed at all.
However, where the canonical Christian sources falter, non-Christian sources, viewed as more impartial than early Christian writings, serve to provide independent certification of at least the core elements of the biblical narrative. Corroborating many of the most important moments, including Josephus’ recollection of Jesus serving as a priest and Tacitus’ account of the execution of Jesus by crucifixion at the orders of Pontius Pilate, these writings provide independent Roman concurrence to Jesus’ existence. Today, the question of whether or not Jesus existed has become settled, with historical attention focusing on more particular details concerning his life.