Within the last few decades, several pieces of archaeological evidence have been discovered which support the biblical accounts in the New Testament. These include:
- A skeleton of a crucifixion victim with a nail still in the foot, and nail holes in the wrist/hand bones.
- A marble slab with a decree from Caesar Claudius in c.41-54 AD, found in Nazareth, declaring grave-robbing to be a capital offense.
- The pool of Bethesda.
- The pool of Siloam.
- A stone monument naming Pontius Pilate, the Roman leader who sentenced Jesus to death.
- A stone ossuary containing the skeleton of Caiaphas, the Jewish High Priest at the time of Christ.
The New Testament mentions all of these in one degree or another.
These finds by themselves are not a logical, mathematical proof for the account in the New Testament. Since nothing in history works like a math formula, these cannot be held to be “proofs” for the story of Jesus in the New Testament. But if we deny them, we make attacks at how all history is done, which is to look for multiple bits of corroborating evidence, then make a reasonable conclusion based on the evidence.
What can we conclude? We can safely say that is it is unreasonable to conclude that crucifixion never happened, the Jews never claimed Jesus body was stolen from the grave, that Bethesda, Siloam, Pilate, and Caiaphas never existed. Dismissing all of these in face of the archaeological evidence would be an unreasonable thing to conclude.
In a similar manner, a reasonable person would read the New Testament, which is supported by multiple other historical corroborations from outside the Bible, and conclude that Jesus existed, died on a cross, and that people were running around saying that they had seen Him alive after He died. To deny these minimal facts in the face of the corroborating evidence would be an unreasonable thing to do.