Peter Clarke, in an article, provides a summary of Richard Carrier’s argument for Jesus not being a historical figure. I am going to respond to each part separately.
The earliest Christian literature—in particular the letters of Paul—never places Jesus in history; instead, he is only ever seen from revelation. For example, Paul has no knowledge of Jesus picking disciples; he only knows about apostles who received a revelation of Jesus. In Romans 16, Paul straight up says that the teachings of Jesus were known only from scripture and revelation.
This is a common argument for Jesus not being a historical figure. Scholars believe that Paul’s letters are our earliest Christian writings, earlier than the Gospels. It has been noticed that Paul does not seem very interested in Jesus’ earthly ministry and generally speaks of Jesus in heaven.
However, it is not true that Paul “never places Jesus in history.” I have written an article that demonstrates various ways that Paul knew of the historical Jesus, just looking at 1 Corinthians. You can find that article here.
What about the claim: “In Romans 16, Paul straight up says that the teachings of Jesus were known only from scripture and revelation.”? The passage that is being referred to is this:
Now to God who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel and the proclamation of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery that was kept secret for long ages but is now disclosed, and through the prophetic writings is made known to all the Gentiles, according to the command of the eternal God, to bring about the obedience of faith—to the only wise God, through Jesus Christ, to whom be the glory for ever! Amen. (Romans 16:25-27)
Presumably, the point that Clarke and Carrier are making is that Jesus can only be known by scripture and revelation is that there could not have been any witnesses to share their stories of Jesus’ ministry. But is that what Paul is saying?
What Paul is saying in these concluding verses of Romans is very much connected to the overall theme in Romans. Romans is dealing with how Jews and Gentiles (non-Jews) relate to God through Jesus. The mystery that Paul refers to in his letters was about how Gentiles would be brought into the story of salvation. The answer to this mystery is that Gentiles are grafted in through faith in Jesus.
Paul is not saying anything about who on earth could have or could not have seen Jesus. It is now in the prophetic writings because the inclusion of the Gentiles took place after the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus. But Paul not suggesting that no one on earth has seen Jesus.
In conclusion, Paul does speak of Jesus in a historical context, even if it is not as much as we would like. To be fair, Paul is not very forthcoming with autobiographical facts about himself, but we are not suggesting that he did not believe himself to be historical.
