Archaeological Discoveries Prove Jesus Existed, Disprove Atheist 'Mythicist' Scholarship, Book Claims (Interview)
Also in the book, Hutchinson touched on excavations in Israel that occurred in 2009 that led to other key archaeological finds that disprove other arguments used by scholars to theorize that Jesus never existed.
Some scholars have argued that Jesus can't be real because the town of Nazareth didn't actually exist when the Romans ruled in the first century.
"In 2008, [Rene Salm] actually wrote a book, something called The Myth of Nazareth: The Invented Town of Jesus, that said that 'we know that the Wizard of Oz didn't exist because there never was the Land of Oz, so too we know Jesus of Nazareth didn't exist because there was never a Nazareth,'" Hutchinson explained. "In 2009, they uncovered a stone house in Nazareth. I have seen it myself."
Get Our Latest News for FREE
"Evidence has a way of popping up at the most inconvenient time. And the very next year, they were digging up the foundation of a new evangelism center in Nazareth, a few hundred yards from the basilica there, and sure enough, they uncover the foundation of a first century stone house that dates back to the time of the Romans, and they are sure that this was a first century stone house," Hutchinson continued. "That proves that Nazareth was settled in the time of the Romans. That kind of knocks out one of the primary arguments that the atheist crusaders have used."
Also in 2009, a first century synagogue was discovered a few miles south of Capernaum on the Sea of Galilee in the town of Magdala, the hometown of Mary Magdalene, that is believed to be a synagogue where Jesus once preached.
"For a long time, they used to say that the synagogue didn't exist until years later after the fall of Rome," Hutchinson said. "We now know that isn't true because we have uncovered synagogues and one of the earliest ones they have discovered in 2009 on the Sea of Galilee."
While the New Testament teaches Christians that Jesus was crucified for their sins, taken off the cross, buried in a tomb and rose again three days later, many naysayers like Ehrman argue that could not have happened because the Romans always left their crucified prisoners on the crosses to rot after they died as a way of intimidating others to follow the law.
Hutchinson explained that such an argument is invalid because the Roman authorities in Jerusalem honored the request of Jewish families to take their loved ones off the cross for a proper burial.
Hutchinson also noted that the only archaeological proof of first century Roman crucifixion that has been discovered is the skeleton of a crucified man who was found in a burial chamber with a piece of wood still nailed to his ankle bone.
"We have evidence that the Romans did grant permission to bury people who were crucified to accommodate Jewish sensibilities, especially about the sabbath and the upcoming Passover," Hutchinson asserted. "That is why many top scholars reject this notion that Jesus was left on the cross. That is important because that is what the gospel says."
