[My goal with this publication is to defend the argument that there are historical characteristic that can be confirmed about the life of Jesus Christ through the comparative analysis of literary evidence, against @Dharmi claim that everything related to Jesus's historicity is founded on especulativeness]

[The topic was inspired by the discussion established between me and Dharmi about the historicity of Jesus Christ]

First Topic: The Context of Early Christianity Theology and Dogma

Early Christianity was not monolithic in its teachings, and the New Testament's views on Jesus verge on the contradictory: some passages, such as the genealogies in Matthew and Luke, emphasize his Davidic descent and take his humanity for granted, while others, such as the prologue to John - "In the beginning was the Word" - point to his divinity. The point is that the Christian premise of the era - 1st, 2nd, and 3rd centuries - was to pre-establish its dogmatic-theological precepts, which were used as a vehicle of transmission through the Roman world, for the propagation and proletiation of its message, focusing only on its "revelational" and "divine" side, transforming the movement in an almost appealing way to the plebeian masses.

As John Anthony McGuckin, in his book The Life of Origen would state:

"Christianity was seen by many as merely a folk religion for the illiterate and uneducated. Those who would take its message as an unquestionable fact."

Its concern - that of Christianity - was, so far, to pass the image of an organization that composed only virtues and principles since its foundation, transforming its leading figure - Jesus - and his followers - family and apostles - into almost mythical beings, so that they could not be argued for having made mistakes in an eventual secular life.

The withdrawal, of its charismatic figures, of a worldly past, and the approximation of them to a "pure" present was what made the image of Christianity aesthetically attractive to the masses.

However, this detachment from the potentially negative aspects from Christian rhetoric turned out to be the perfect breach for the Roman pagan intellectuals, who, having the privilege of being able to look at the movement from the outside, together with their availability of information, were able to structure criticisms based on a historical basis of the cult.

Second Topic: The Context for the Critics

The Roman world of the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd centuries was one made up of freedom and plurality of ideas, values, principles, cultures, and most importantly, of faith. Such a society that had been established by the precepts of theological assimilation, where the Gods of conquered areas were, after a long comparative analysis, assimilated to the Roman Gods who shared their greatest characteristics - such as Apollo and Grannus and Lenus and Mars -, thus maintaining a pluralistic homogeneity of cultures and faiths.

It is not surprising that, with the birth and growth of the Christian cult, most Roman intellectuals, who were conservative and concerned with the stability of the Roman traditions, would be concerned with refuting it from the inside out; analyzing their statements and their comparisons with the facts extensively. The primary problem that most Roman intellectuals and the Imperial government had regarding the Christians was their adamant refusal to participate in the required sacrifices that were regularly made to the Emperor and the Roman state, sacrifices that were an integral part of Roman politics, religion, and culture. Most Romans could not understand the Christians's insistence on their own superiority and their insistence upon their apparently exclusive path to salvation.

They could also not understand Christianity's claims that they were a unique religion with a long history reaching back to antiquity, when the Roman philosophers knew that Christianity had broken off from Judaism relatively recently and still used ancient Jewish texts both to formulate their theology and to support their religious claims. These Roman writers, were also troubled by the seeming incoherence of the Christian position toward society and towards the recognized religion of the state.

Knowing the contradictions inherent in the cult and its history, several philosophers and intellectuals took it upon themselves to demonstrate the hypocrisy established in the Christian affirmations, which were being used to denigrate and derail Roman society. One of those intellectuals was Celsus.

Third Topic: The Evidence

Celsus was a 2nd-century Roman-Greek philosopher and opponent of early Christianity, who went on to write a complete refutation of the Christian argument and justification for its dogmas, through its historical and theological contradictions.

In his work, "Logos Alēthēs" - On The True Doctrine - Celsus brutally refutes Christian arguments and justifications for its theology and history:

"Christian theology is based on an amalgamation of false eastern philosophical ideas hastily tied together. Christians are weaving together erroneous opinions drawn from ancient sources and trumpeting them aloud."

As Stephen Benko, in his book Pagan Rome and the Early Christians would state:

"Celsus did not rely on the "rumors and hearsay evidence" that many other Christian detractors of the time period used, but rather drew upon his own observations and displayed knowledge of both the Hebrew Bible and New Testament of the Christian Bible, as well as other Jewish and Christian writings and their history."

With his textual, historical, and theological bases established, Celsus makes the following statement:

"Jesus, their "Son of God", was the result of an affair between his mother Mary and a Roman soldier called Tiberius Julius Abdes Pantera. How convenient of them - the Christians - to forget that his "holy" mother was convicted of adultery. Even so, they glorify her name in songs in those rotten and desecrated "temples of God". They are the worse of the hypocrites."

The argument that Jesus was conceived of an unlawful relationship between Mary and a Roman soldier named "Pantera" is supported by the following evidence:

1 - Tiberius Julius Abdes Pantera:

In October 1859, during the construction of a railroad in Bingerbrück in Germany, tombstones for nine Roman soldiers were accidentally discovered. One of the tombstones was that of Tiberius Julius Abdes Pantera. Pantera was from Sidonia, which is identified with Sidon in Phoenicia, and joined the Cohors I Sagittariorum - first cohort of archers -.

"Pantera" was not an unusual name, and its use goes back at least to the 1st century. Prior to the end of the 19th century, at various times in history scholars had hypothesized that the name Pantera was an uncommon or even a fabricated name, but in 1891 French archaeologist C. S. Clermont-Ganneau showed that it was a name that was in use in Iudaea - Roman Province of Judea -.

The names "Tiberius Julius" are acquired names and were probably given to him in recognition of serving in the Roman army as he obtained Roman citizenship. At that time, Roman army enlistments were for 25 years and Pantera served 40 years in the army until his death at 62. The reign of emperor Tiberius was between 14 and 37 and the Cohors I Sagittariorum was stationed in Judaea and then in Bingen.

Therefore, a Tiberius Julius Abdes Pantera was living at Judea at the time of Jesus conception.

2 - Celsus:

Celsus is established by most historians of the "Principatus" - Principate - period of the Roman Empire, as being one of the most reliable and truthful sources on early Christianity.

As previously said, and I will reiterate:

"Celsus did not rely on the "rumors and hearsay evidence" that many other Christian detractors of the time period used, but rather drew upon his own observations and displayed knowledge of both the Hebrew Bible and New Testament of the Christian Bible, as well as other Jewish and Christian writings and their history."

Throughout his work, Celsus confidently attacks Christianity, putting argument after argument with confidence and even with a tone of irony - to mock Christians that he knew would try to counter him - about Christian claims.

Using the "Criterion of Embarrassment" - in which an account likely to be embarrassing to its author is presumed to be true as the author would have no reason to invent an account which might embarrass him -, the statement that "Jesus's father was a roman soldier named Pantera", could be considered true, as Celsus was a renowned intellectual. If this information had been false, he would never have put it in his work, as it would go against his principle of refuting Christianity using only the truth against their hypocrisies.

Some people will argue:

"Celsus wrote his work 150 years after Jesus' death, so his information could be wrong about his - Jesus's - conception."

Well, we live 138 years after the death of Karl Marx, and if we search through books, we will easily find information about who his parents were, even though contemporary movements elevate him to a status of "cult of personality". The common masses could easily fall into the argument that he had never had parents, however, an intellectual would know the truth, and more, would write about it.

Therefore, Jesus was conceived of an adultery between his mother- Mary - and Pantera - his father -.

3 - The Gospel of James:

The final evidence that I will present, and therefore, the most substantial, is about the "Gospel of James":

The Gospel of James is a 2nd-century infancy gospel telling of the miraculous conception of the Virgin Mary, her upbringing and marriage to Joseph, the journey of the holy couple to Bethlehem, and the birth of Jesus. It is the earliest surviving assertion of the perpetual virginity of Mary, meaning her virginity not just prior to the birth of Jesus, but during and afterwards, and it became a widely influential source for Christian doctrine regarding her.

The Gospel, which deals with the virgin birth of Jesus, was written between 180 and 185 AD, conveniently written 10 years after the publication of Celsus' book, On the True Word - written between 170 to 175 AD -. Book, in which this passage exists:

"Jesus, their "Son of God", was the result of an affair between his mother Mary and a Roman soldier called Tiberius Julius Abdes Pantera. How convenient of them - the Christians - to forget that his "holy" mother was convicted of adultery. Even so, they glorify her name in songs in those rotten and desecrated "temples of God". They are the worse of the hypocrites."

Precisely the passage that states that Jesus was not conceived by God, but by Pantera, a Roman soldier.

The movement, after the publication of the Gospel, was quick to adopt it in its collection of Canons. A movement to rewrite the mundane and"mortal" history of their savior, Jesus Christ. The Gospel of James was well known to Origen - Christian writer - in the early 3rd century.

In Conclusion:

By making a comparative analysis of both contexts, which made the criticism to exist - that of the Roman intellectuals - and the gap for the criticism to exist - early Christianity withdraw from its mundane past -, we come to the conclusion that, if the statement "Jesus was conceived of an adulterous affair between Mary, his mother, and Pantera, his father" was not true, the Roman intellectuals would not use that information to criticize Christianity, and neither would Christianity seek to refute it as quickly as it did.

Therefore, Jesus was conceived by Mary and Pantera.

And I have just proved a historical characteristic of Jesus:

"Jesus was not conceived by God in a virgin birth, but by two ordinary humans in a normal sexual act."