That’s been the assumption, but there’s surprisingly little actual evidence of him existing. The first bits of writing that seem to mention him are from a century after he supposedly lived. We also have no evidence that the NT contains eyewitness accounts, but we do have limited evidence that it might not be.
That’s been the assumption, but there’s surprisingly little actual evidence of him existing. The first bits of writing that seem to mention him are from a century after he supposedly lived. We also have no evidence that the NT contains eyewitness accounts, but we do have limited evidence that it might not be.
In short, we don’t really know either way.