Jesus outside the NT

This post is a new way of making an old point. Unbelievers often ask if there's any evidence for Jesus outside the NT. There are standard monographs on that topic, like F. F. Bruce's classic Jesus and Christian Origins Outside the New Testament.

The assumption behind the question is that we should discount the witness of the NT because that's Christian, so that's a biased source. That, however, is confused. It's not surprising if eyewitnesses to the miracles of Jesus become Christian. So the question amounts to the demand for witnesses who saw Jesus perform miracles and rise from the dead, but refuse to believe in Jesus! 

However, I'd like to make a different point. The unstated assumption in demanding evidence for Jesus outside the NT is independent documentary evidence.

But that's not the only kind of evidence for Jesus outside the OT. Jesus isn't just a figure from the past. According to the NT, he is God Incarnate, with an immortal body. 

So there's evidence for Jesus outside the NT throughout church history. For instance, when Christians pray to Jesus, and their prayers are answered, that's evidence for Jesus outside the NT. That's evidence that Jesus is the living Lord. Jesus granted their prayer request. 

A more dramatic example concerns Christophanies. Revelatory dreams and visions of Jesus during the course of church history. I'm certainly not suggesting that we should credit every reported Christophany. But if enough individuals, in a sober state of mind, with no incentive to deceive, report the same sort of experience, that's prima facie evidence for the reality of what they report. We should sift their reports, the same way we evaluate testimonial evidence generally, but credible reports of Christophanies up to our own time constitute evidence for Jesus outside the NT. 

So the actual evidence for Jesus outside the NT is far broader than the handful of ancient documents which are constantly cited. This is a neglected line of evidence because Christian apologetics can get stuck in the rut of stereotypical arguments. Christian apologists influence each other, which leads to an insular, formulaic set of endlessly repeated arguments. They may be good arguments as they go, but it can have a blinkering effect on the apologetic imagination.