top of page
Search

Could the Gospel Writers Withstand the Scrutiny of a Lawyer?

The Prosecution's Case


In a hypothetical courtroom trial, where the Bible critics play the role of the prosecution and Christian apologists the defense attorneys, the Gospels often come under intense scrutiny.


The prosecution contends:




Were the Gospels Written Long After Jesus' Death?


Matthew: Authorship and Dating


Matthew, also known as Levi, wrote his Gospel primarily for a Jewish audience, aiming to show Jesus as the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies. According to early church tradition and historical evidence, Matthew initially composed his Gospel in Hebrew around 40 C.E., later translating it into Greek around 45 C.E. Jerome, in his work "De viris inlustribus," states: "Matthew, who is also Levi, and who from a publican came to be an apostle, first of all composed a Gospel of Christ in Judaea in the Hebrew language and characters for the benefit of those of the circumcision who had believed." Jerome further notes that the Hebrew text was preserved in his day in the library collected by Pamphilus at Caesarea.


Origen, an early church father, also attested to the Hebrew origin of Matthew's Gospel, as quoted by Eusebius: "The first was written . . . according to Matthew, . . . who published it for those who from Judaism came to believe, composed as it was in the Hebrew language." This strong historical testimony supports the early composition date of Matthew's Gospel.


Matthew’s Gospel contains several internal clues suggesting its early date. For example, the phrase "to this day" (Matthew 27:8; 28:15) indicates it was written some years after the events it describes, yet before the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 C.E. Jesus' prophecy about the destruction of the temple (Matthew 24:1-2) and the fact that Jerusalem was still standing when Matthew wrote (Matthew 24:15; 27:53) further confirm this.


The early church unanimously supported the precedence of Matthew’s Gospel over Mark’s. Early church fathers such as Papias and Irenaeus, closer to the sources, placed Matthew before Mark. Luke’s Gospel, written around 60 C.E., references "many" earlier accounts (Luke 1:1), likely including Matthew and Mark. This situates Matthew’s Gospel in the range of 40-45 C.E.


Mark: Authorship and Dating


Mark, traditionally understood to be Peter’s interpreter, wrote his Gospel for a Roman audience. This is supported by internal evidence, such as his explanations of Jewish customs (Mark 7:3-4) and his use of Latin terms. Early church traditions, including those from Papias, Irenaeus, and Clement of Alexandria, confirm Mark's authorship and his connection to Peter. They attest that Mark wrote down Peter’s recollections and teachings, forming the basis of his Gospel.


Mark likely wrote his Gospel during Paul's imprisonment in Rome, around 60-65 C.E. This period aligns with Mark’s presence in Rome, as confirmed by Paul’s letters (Colossians 4:10; Philemon 24). Early manuscripts and church catalogs from the second century include Mark’s Gospel, reinforcing its early circulation and acceptance among Christians.


Luke: Authorship and Dating


Luke, a physician and companion of Paul, wrote both the Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles. Acts 1:1 mentions "the first account," referring to the Gospel, indicating that Luke’s Gospel predates Acts. Acts concludes with Paul under house arrest in Rome, around 61 C.E., suggesting that Luke wrote his Gospel around 56-58 C.E. during Paul’s imprisonment in Caesarea (Acts 24:27).


Luke’s meticulous historical approach is evident in his introduction: "Since many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word, it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus" (Luke 1:1-3). This indicates that Luke conducted thorough research, likely consulting eyewitnesses and written sources, including Matthew’s Gospel.


John: Authorship and Dating


John, the beloved disciple, wrote his Gospel after his exile on Patmos, during the reign of Emperor Nerva (96-98 C.E.). Irenaeus, an early church father, records that John wrote his Gospel while living in Ephesus. John’s distinct perspective focuses on Jesus’ divine nature and complements the Synoptic Gospels.


Evidence for John’s authorship and the late first-century date includes internal textual features and early manuscript finds. The Papyrus Rylands 457 (P52), a fragment of John’s Gospel dating to 130-150 C.E., supports the early circulation of John’s Gospel. Frederic Kenyon noted that this fragment "suffices to prove that a manuscript of this Gospel was circulating, presumably in provincial Egypt where it was found, about the period A.D. 130-150. Allowing even a minimum time for the circulation of the work from its place of origin, this would throw back the date of composition so near to the traditional date in the last decade of the first century that there is no longer any reason to question the validity of the tradition."


John’s Gospel emphasizes the divinity of Christ, with unique theological insights and events not found in the Synoptics, such as the prologue (John 1:1-18) and the raising of Lazarus (John 11:1-44). These aspects highlight John’s unique contribution to the New Testament canon.


The Gospels were not written long after the death of Jesus, as some critics claim. The early composition dates, supported by historical and internal evidence, affirm the reliability and authenticity of these accounts. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John each provide a unique perspective on the life and ministry of Jesus, contributing to a comprehensive understanding of the Gospel message. The historical testimony of early church fathers, manuscript evidence, and the content of the Gospels themselves collectively support the traditional dating and authorship of these foundational Christian texts. This examination reveals the careful preservation and transmission of the Gospel message, ensuring that the teachings of Jesus were accurately recorded and faithfully passed down to subsequent generations.



How Can We Determine the Dates of the Gospel Compositions?


Introduction to the Dating of the Gospels


The composition dates of the Gospels have been a subject of intense scholarly debate, particularly among Bible critics who claim that we lack real knowledge regarding when these texts were written. However, a thorough examination of historical, textual, and internal evidence reveals that the Gospels were composed much closer to the events they describe than critics assert. This exploration into the dates of the Gospel writings is rooted in the Historical-Grammatical Method, examining the text and historical context without the influence of modern critical biases.


Matthew: Establishing Early Composition


Historical Evidence and Early Church Testimonies


Matthew, also known as Levi, was a tax collector turned apostle. According to early church tradition, he wrote his Gospel primarily for a Jewish audience. The early church fathers, including Papias and Irenaeus, consistently attribute the first Gospel to Matthew. Jerome, in "De viris inlustribus," states: "Matthew, who is also Levi, and who from a publican came to be an apostle, first of all composed a Gospel of Christ in Judaea in the Hebrew language and characters for the benefit of those of the circumcision who had believed." This account is supported by Origen, who is quoted by Eusebius: "The first was written . . . according to Matthew, . . . who published it for those who from Judaism came to believe, composed as it was in the Hebrew language."


Internal Clues from the Text


Matthew’s Gospel contains several indications of an early date. For example, the use of the phrase "to this day" (Matthew 27:8; 28:15) suggests it was written some years after the described events. Additionally, Matthew’s Gospel predicts the destruction of Jerusalem (Matthew 24:1-2), which occurred in 70 C.E., implying the Gospel was written before this event. The continuity of Jerusalem's standing is mentioned in passages like Matthew 24:15 and 27:53, further supporting an early composition date.


Initially Written In Hebrew Origin and Then In Greek


It is generally accepted that Matthew initially wrote his Gospel in Hebrew around 40 C.E., later writing it again in Greek around 45 C.E. This dual composition is significant, as it illustrates the Gospel's early circulation among Jewish Christians before being made accessible to a broader audience through Greek.


Mark: The Earliest Gospel?


Peter's Interpreter and Roman Audience


Mark, traditionally regarded as Peter’s interpreter, composed his Gospel for a Roman audience. This is evident from the explanations of Jewish customs (Mark 7:3-4) and the use of Latin terms. Papias records that Mark accurately wrote down Peter’s recollections, indicating a close connection to an eyewitness of Jesus' ministry.


Composition During Paul's Imprisonment


Mark likely wrote his Gospel during Paul's imprisonment in Rome, around 60-65 C.E. This dating is supported by the mention of Mark’s presence in Rome in Paul’s letters (Colossians 4:10; Philemon 24). The early acceptance of Mark’s Gospel is demonstrated by its inclusion in second-century manuscripts and church catalogs, affirming its early composition and authenticity.


Luke: Thorough Investigation and Historical Precision


Connection to Acts and Paul’s Imprisonment


Luke, a physician and companion of Paul, wrote both the Gospel of Luke and Acts. The opening verses of Acts (Acts 1:1) refer to "the first account," indicating that the Gospel was written prior to Acts. Since Acts ends with Paul’s imprisonment in Rome around 61 C.E., Luke's Gospel can be dated to approximately 56-58 C.E., during Paul’s two-year imprisonment in Caesarea (Acts 24:27).


Methodical Research and Eyewitness Accounts


Luke’s introduction highlights his careful research and use of eyewitness accounts (Luke 1:1-4). His proximity to the events and individuals involved in Jesus' ministry enabled him to provide a detailed and accurate account. This thorough investigation is a hallmark of Luke’s Gospel, reflecting his commitment to historical accuracy.


John: The Beloved Disciple’s Unique Perspective


Post-Exile Composition


John, the beloved disciple, is traditionally believed to have written his Gospel after his return from exile on Patmos, during the reign of Emperor Nerva (96-98 C.E.). Irenaeus, an early church father, affirms that John wrote his Gospel while living in Ephesus, providing a distinct theological perspective that complements the Synoptic Gospels.


Manuscript Evidence and Early Circulation


The discovery of Papyrus Rylands 457 (P52), a fragment of John’s Gospel dating to 130-150 C.E., supports the early circulation of John’s Gospel. Frederic Kenyon noted, "Small therefore as it is, it suffices to prove that a manuscript of this Gospel was circulating, presumably in provincial Egypt where it was found, about the period A.D. 130-150. Allowing even a minimum time for the circulation of the work from its place of origin, this would throw back the date of composition so near to the traditional date in the last decade of the first century that there is no longer any reason to question the validity of the tradition."


Distinctive Theological Contributions


John’s Gospel provides unique theological insights, such as the prologue (John 1:1-18) and the detailed account of the raising of Lazarus (John 11:1-44). These elements highlight John’s emphasis on Jesus’ divine nature and his contribution to the broader understanding of the Gospel message.


The Authenticity and Early Dating of the Gospels


The examination of historical testimonies, internal textual evidence, and manuscript discoveries robustly supports the early dating of the Gospels. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John each provide a distinct yet harmonious account of Jesus’ life and ministry, rooted in eyewitness testimony and careful historical documentation. This evidence affirms the reliability and authenticity of the Gospel accounts, demonstrating their early composition and faithful transmission.



Who Are the True Authors of the Gospels?


Introduction to the Authorship of the Gospels


The question of who authored the Gospels has long been debated by scholars and critics alike. Some claim that the true authors are unknown, while traditional Christian belief holds that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John each wrote their respective Gospels. This analysis aims to provide a comprehensive examination of the internal and external evidence supporting the traditional authorship of the Gospels, firmly grounded in the Historical-Grammatical method of interpretation.


The Gospel of Matthew: Authorship and Evidence


Who Wrote It?


The Gospel of Matthew is traditionally attributed to Matthew, one of the twelve apostles of Jesus Christ (Matthew 10:1-3). Matthew, also known as Levi, was a tax collector (Matthew 9:9), a profession looked down upon in Jewish society.


Internal Evidence


The internal evidence within the Gospel of Matthew strongly supports Matthew’s authorship:


  1. References to Money: Given his background as a tax collector, it is unsurprising that Matthew frequently mentions money. For instance, in Matthew 17:24-27, Jesus instructs Peter to find a coin in a fish's mouth to pay the temple tax.

  2. Self-References: Matthew refers to himself as “Matthew the tax collector” (Matthew 10:3), which fits with his Christian humility.

  3. Detailed Records: Matthew’s Gospel includes detailed records of Jesus’ teachings and discourses, such as the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7) and the Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24-25), reflecting his meticulous nature.

  4. Omissions in Deference to Profession: Matthew omits parables and stories involving tax collectors, such as the parable of the tax collector in Luke 18:9-14 and the story of Zacchaeus in Luke 19:1-10.

  5. Apostolic Witness: As an apostle, Matthew had direct access to the events and teachings of Jesus, guided by the Holy Spirit (John 14:26; 16:13).


External Evidence


External evidence also strongly supports Matthew’s authorship:


  1. Early Church Acceptance: The early church universally accepted Matthew as the author. Papias, a disciple of Polycarp (who was a disciple of John), stated, "So then, Matthew, indeed, in the Hebrew language put together the Logia in writing; but as to their interpretation, each man dealt with it as he was able."

  2. Church Fathers: Prominent church fathers such as Clement of Rome, Polycarp, Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, and Origen all ascribed the Gospel to Matthew. Origen noted, "As I have learned by tradition concerning the Four Gospels... the first was written by St. Matthew, once a tax-gatherer, afterwards an Apostle of Jesus Christ, who published it for the benefit of the Jewish converts, composed in the Hebrew language."


The Gospel of Mark: Authorship and Evidence


Who Wrote It?


The Gospel of Mark is traditionally attributed to John Mark, a companion of Peter and Paul. His dual names, John (Hebrew) and Mark (Latin), reflect his Jewish and Roman connections.


Internal Evidence


Several internal factors support Mark’s authorship:


  1. Geographical Knowledge: Mark displays familiarity with the geography of Israel, particularly Jerusalem (Mark 5:1; 6:53; 8:10; 11:1; 13:3).

  2. Aramaic Terms: Mark includes Aramaic terms, reflecting his knowledge of the common language of Jesus’ time (Mark 5:41; 7:11, 34; 14:36).

  3. Jewish Customs: He accurately describes Jewish customs and institutions (Mark 1:21; 2:14, 16, 18; 7:2-4).

  4. Vivid Details: Mark’s account is vivid and detailed, suggesting eyewitness testimony. He often includes specific details about Jesus’ interactions with His inner circle—Peter, James, and John (Mark 1:16-20; 5:21-24; 9:14-15).

  5. Peter’s Influence: Mark’s Gospel reflects Peter’s influence, using his words and deeds (Mark 8:29, 32-33; 9:5-6; 14:29-31). He uniquely adds “and Peter” in the resurrection account (Mark 16:7), consistent with Peter’s sermon outline in Acts 10:34-43.


External Evidence


External evidence further corroborates Mark’s authorship:


  1. Early Manuscripts: Early manuscripts bear Mark’s name. Papias (110 C.E.) recorded that Mark, Peter’s interpreter, accurately documented Peter’s teachings, albeit not in chronological order.

  2. Church Fathers: Early church fathers, including Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Justin Martyr, Tatian, Tertullian, Origen, Jerome, and Eusebius, unanimously attributed the Gospel to Mark. Irenaeus noted that Mark wrote down Peter’s recollections accurately.


The Gospel of Luke: Authorship and Evidence


Who Wrote It?


The Gospel of Luke is attributed to Luke the physician, a companion of Paul (Colossians 4:14; 2 Timothy 4:11; Philemon 24). Luke is believed to be a Gentile, as he is not listed among the circumcised (Colossians 4:10-14).


Internal Evidence


The internal evidence supporting Luke’s authorship is extensive:


  1. Paul’s Companion: The author often uses the first person in Acts, indicating his presence with Paul (Acts 16:10, 17; 20:6; 27:1). Timothy and Mark are mentioned in the third person, ruling them out as the author.

  2. Medical Terminology: Luke’s Gospel includes over 300 medical terms or phrases used with specific medical meaning, aligning with his background as a physician (Luke 5:12; 16:20; 4:38).

  3. Greek Influence: Luke’s interest in Greek culture and his literary style indicate his Gentile background and education.

  4. Detail-Oriented: Luke’s Gospel provides detailed accounts of events, such as the birth narratives (Luke 1-2) and the healing of the high priest’s servant (Luke 22:51).


External Evidence


External evidence strongly supports Luke’s authorship:


  1. Manuscript Evidence: Early manuscripts attribute the Gospel to Luke. The early church universally accepted Luke as the author, including Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Gregory of Nazianzus, Jerome, and Eusebius.

  2. Archaeological Support: Sir William Ramsay and other scholars have confirmed Luke’s historical accuracy. Even liberal scholars like Adolf Harnack acknowledged Luke’s authorship.

  3. Historians' Confirmation: Roman historian Colin Hemer also affirmed Luke’s authorship, highlighting his detailed and accurate historical records.


The Gospel of John: Authorship and Evidence


Who Wrote It?


The Gospel of John is traditionally attributed to John the apostle, “the beloved disciple” (John 21:20-24). Alternative theories propose another John known as John “the elder” or a disciple of John the apostle, but strong evidence supports the traditional view.


Internal Evidence


Internal evidence within the Gospel supports John the apostle’s authorship:


  1. Jewish Background: The author demonstrates a deep understanding of Jewish customs, language, and Old Testament scriptures (John 2:6; 4:5; 5:2; 10:22-23).

  2. Eyewitness Details: The Gospel includes specific details indicating an eyewitness account, such as descriptions of time, place, and numbers (John 21:24).

  3. Inner Circle: The author was one of Jesus’ inner circle (Peter, James, and John), as evidenced by his presence at significant events (John 20:2-10; Mark 5:37; 9:2-3; 14:33).

  4. The Beloved Disciple: John is referred to as “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (John 13:23; 19:26; 20:2; 21:7, 20), indicating a close relationship with Jesus.

  5. Non-Identified: By process of elimination, the author is identified as John, as he is not Peter, Thomas, Philip, Andrew, or James (who died in 44 C.E., Acts 12:2).


External Evidence


External evidence robustly supports John’s authorship:


  1. Early Manuscript Evidence: The John Rylands Fragment (P52), dating to the early second century (117-138 C.E.), confirms the Gospel's first-century composition.

  2. Early Church Testimony: Irenaeus, who knew John’s disciple Polycarp, affirmed that John the apostle wrote the Gospel. Other early sources, including Tatian, the Muratorian Canon, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, and Eusebius, also supported this view.

  3. Universal Acceptance: Christians in the early second century accepted John as the author, and his Gospel was treated as an integral part of the canon. Early church fathers, including Clement of Alexandria, Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Origen, unanimously attested to John’s authorship.


The Traditional Authorship Affirmed


The comprehensive examination of internal and external evidence robustly supports the traditional authorship of the Gospels by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Each Gospel writer provided unique and complementary accounts of Jesus’ life, teachings, and ministry, grounded in eyewitness testimony and meticulous historical documentation. This evidence affirms the reliability and authenticity of the Gospels, ensuring that the teachings of Jesus have been accurately recorded and faithfully transmitted through the ages.



Do the Gospels Hold Historical Value?


The Historical Foundation of the Gospels


The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are central to Christian belief, presenting the life, teachings, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Critics often claim that these texts lack historical value. However, a thorough examination using the Historical-Grammatical method reveals substantial evidence supporting their historical reliability. This method focuses on the literal meaning of the text, considering its historical context, literary form, and grammatical structure, which is essential for a conservative, evangelical approach to biblical interpretation.


The Gospel of Matthew: Historical Reliability


Author and Eyewitness Testimony


The Gospel of Matthew is attributed to Matthew, also known as Levi, one of Jesus' twelve apostles (Matthew 10:1-3). As a former tax collector, Matthew had the skills to document events accurately. His role as an eyewitness adds significant historical value to his account.


Historical and Geographical Details


Matthew's Gospel includes precise geographical references and cultural details, such as the use of local terminology and descriptions of Jewish customs. For example, Matthew accurately describes the temple tax (Matthew 17:24-27) and the Pharisees' traditions (Matthew 15:1-2). These details demonstrate Matthew's intimate knowledge of the time and place of Jesus' ministry.


Prophecy and Fulfillment


Matthew frequently cites Old Testament prophecies and their fulfillment in Jesus, emphasizing the continuity between Jewish scriptures and the life of Jesus. This connection to historical texts further validates the Gospel's historical reliability. For instance, Matthew 1:22-23 references Isaiah 7:14, "All this took place to fulfill what Jehovah had spoken by the prophet: 'Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel.'"


External Corroboration


Early church fathers, including Papias, Irenaeus, and Origen, affirmed Matthew's authorship and the Gospel's authenticity. Papias noted, "Matthew collected the oracles in the Hebrew language, and each interpreted them as best he could." This external testimony supports the historical credibility of Matthew's account.


The Gospel of Mark: Historical Insights


Author and Apostolic Source


Mark, a companion of Peter, is traditionally regarded as the author of the second Gospel. Mark's account is believed to be based on Peter's eyewitness testimony, lending substantial historical weight to the narrative. Peter’s influence is evident in the vivid and detailed descriptions of events.


Vivid Descriptions and Cultural Accuracy


Mark's Gospel contains detailed and vivid descriptions of events and locations, such as the healing of the blind man at Bethsaida (Mark 8:22-26) and the trial of Jesus (Mark 14:53-65). These details indicate an intimate knowledge of the events, likely derived from Peter’s first-hand accounts.


Aramaic Phrases and Jewish Customs


Mark includes several Aramaic phrases and detailed explanations of Jewish customs, demonstrating his familiarity with the cultural context of Jesus' ministry. For example, Mark 5:41 records Jesus' words in Aramaic, "Talitha koum," meaning "Little girl, I say to you, arise." These cultural insights add to the Gospel's historical credibility.


Early Church Endorsement


Early church fathers, such as Papias and Irenaeus, confirmed Mark's authorship and the Gospel’s authenticity. Papias stated, "Mark, having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately whatever he remembered of the things said and done by the Lord." This external evidence from early Christian sources supports the historical reliability of Mark's account.


The Gospel of Luke: Historical Investigation


Author and Historical Methodology


Luke, a physician and companion of Paul, is credited with writing the third Gospel. Luke's introduction emphasizes his careful investigation and use of eyewitness accounts (Luke 1:1-4). His methodical approach is evident throughout the Gospel and the Acts of the Apostles.


Detailed Historical Context


Luke provides detailed historical and geographical information, placing the events within the broader context of Roman history. For instance, Luke 2:1-2 mentions the decree of Caesar Augustus and the census during the governorship of Quirinius, situating Jesus' birth within a specific historical framework.


Medical Terminology and Precision


As a physician, Luke's use of medical terminology and attention to detail enhances the historical reliability of his account. Luke uses more than 300 medical terms or words. For example, Luke 4:38 describes Peter’s mother-in-law suffering from a "high fever," a detail consistent with Luke’s medical background.


Archaeological Corroboration


Archaeological findings have corroborated many of Luke's historical references, further validating his account. Sir William Ramsay, a renowned archaeologist, stated, "Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy... this author should be placed along with the very greatest of historians."


Early Church Testimony


Early church fathers, including Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Origen, affirmed Luke's authorship and the historical reliability of his Gospel. Irenaeus noted, "Luke, the companion of Paul, put down in a book the Gospel preached by him."


The Gospel of John: Unique Historical Perspective


Author and Eyewitness Testimony


The Gospel of John is traditionally attributed to John, "the disciple whom Jesus loved" (John 21:20-24). As one of Jesus' closest disciples, John’s account provides a unique and intimate perspective on Jesus’ life and ministry.


Detailed Descriptions and Personal Interactions


John's Gospel includes detailed descriptions of personal interactions and events, such as the conversation with Nicodemus (John 3:1-21) and the raising of Lazarus (John 11:1-44). These narratives demonstrate John’s close proximity to the events he describes.


Theological Depth and Historical Context


John’s Gospel, while rich in theological insight, also provides historical context, such as the identification of the Pool of Bethesda (John 5:2) and the detailed description of the crucifixion (John 19:17-42). These historical details enhance the credibility of his account.


Manuscript Evidence and Early Testimony


The discovery of early manuscript fragments, such as the Rylands Library Papyrus P52, dated to the early second century, supports the early composition of John’s Gospel. Early church fathers, including Irenaeus and Clement of Alexandria, affirmed John’s authorship and the Gospel's authenticity. Irenaeus stated, "John, the disciple of the Lord, who also leaned upon His breast, himself published a Gospel during his residence at Ephesus in Asia."


Affirming the Historical Value of the Gospels


The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John provide detailed, consistent, and historically credible accounts of Jesus’ life and ministry. The internal evidence of their authorship, the detailed geographical and cultural descriptions, the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies, and the external corroboration by early church fathers and archaeological findings all contribute to their historical reliability. By examining the Gospels through the Historical-Grammatical method, we can confidently affirm their value as historical documents, faithfully preserving the teachings and events of Jesus Christ's life.



Do the Gospels Contradict Themselves?


Introduction to the Alleged Contradictions in the Gospels


Critics often claim that the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John contain contradictions that undermine their reliability and historical accuracy. However, a thorough analysis using the Historical-Grammatical method reveals that these supposed contradictions can be harmonized when understood in their proper context. This method considers the literal meaning of the text, its historical context, and the intention of the authors, providing a robust framework for resolving these issues.


The Genealogies of Jesus: Matthew and Luke


Differences in Lineage


One of the most frequently cited contradictions involves the genealogies of Jesus presented in Matthew 1:1-17 and Luke 3:23-38. Matthew traces Jesus' lineage through Joseph, highlighting His legal right to the throne of David. Luke, on the other hand, traces His lineage through Mary, emphasizing His biological descent from David.


Legal vs. Biological Descent


Matthew begins with Abraham and follows the line through David to Joseph, Jesus' legal father, underscoring Jesus' Messianic fulfillment (Matthew 1:1-17). In contrast, Luke traces Jesus' lineage backward from Mary to Adam, showcasing Jesus' connection to all humanity (Luke 3:23-38). These genealogies serve different theological purposes and do not contradict but complement each other by providing a complete picture of Jesus' heritage.


Levirate Marriage


Another explanation involves the possibility of Levirate marriage, where a man would marry his deceased brother’s widow to raise offspring in his brother's name (Deuteronomy 25:5-10). This could explain the different names listed for Joseph’s father in Matthew (Jacob) and Luke (Heli), where Joseph might be the legal son of Heli through such a marriage.


The Birth Narratives: Matthew and Luke


The Visit of the Magi and the Shepherds


Matthew and Luke offer different details about the events surrounding Jesus' birth. Matthew describes the visit of the Magi (Matthew 2:1-12), while Luke focuses on the shepherds' visit (Luke 2:8-20).


Different Perspectives


These accounts reflect different perspectives and audiences. Matthew, writing to a Jewish audience, emphasizes the fulfillment of prophecies and the homage of the Magi, who recognize Jesus as King. Luke, addressing a broader audience, highlights the humility of Jesus' birth and the shepherds' role, symbolizing Jesus as the Savior for all people.


Timing of Events


The events described in Matthew and Luke occur at different times. The shepherds visit Jesus on the night of His birth, while the Magi visit later, possibly up to two years afterward, as suggested by Herod’s decree to kill male infants two years old and under (Matthew 2:16). This timing explains why the family is in a house by the time the Magi arrive (Matthew 2:11).


The Crucifixion Accounts


The Timing of the Crucifixion


Critics point to differences in the timing of Jesus' crucifixion in the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) and John. According to Mark, Jesus is crucified at the third hour (Mark 15:25), while John states that Jesus is sentenced at the sixth hour (John 19:14).


Different Timekeeping Methods


These differences can be explained by understanding the timekeeping methods used. The Synoptic Gospels use the Jewish method of counting hours from sunrise (approximately 6 a.m.), placing the crucifixion around 9 a.m. John, however, may use the Roman method, counting from midnight, which would place the sentencing around 6 a.m., aligning with the timeline of events leading to the crucifixion.


Harmonizing the Accounts


By recognizing these different timekeeping methods, the accounts can be harmonized. Jesus' sentencing by Pilate early in the morning, followed by His crucifixion around mid-morning, fits both descriptions without contradiction.


The Resurrection Narratives


The Women at the Tomb


The Gospels differ in the accounts of who visited Jesus' tomb and the order of events on the resurrection morning. Matthew mentions Mary Magdalene and the other Mary (Matthew 28:1), Mark adds Salome (Mark 16:1), Luke includes Joanna and other women (Luke 24:10), and John focuses on Mary Magdalene (John 20:1).


Multiple Visits and Witnesses


The varied accounts of who visited Jesus' tomb can be harmonized by considering multiple visits by different women. Mary Magdalene may have gone to the tomb first, then returned with other women. This sequence of events accounts for the different names listed in each Gospel. Each Gospel writer included details that were relevant to their audience and purpose.


Angels at the Tomb


The Gospels also differ in their accounts of the angels at the tomb. Matthew mentions one angel (Matthew 28:2), while Mark mentions a young man in white (Mark 16:5), and Luke and John mention two angels (Luke 24:4; John 20:12).


Harmonizing the Angelic Appearances


These differences can be reconciled by understanding that each Gospel writer focused on different aspects of the encounter. Matthew and Mark may have highlighted the angel who spoke, while Luke and John included the presence of both angels. The varying perspectives do not contradict but rather provide a fuller picture of the angelic presence at the resurrection.


Jesus' Appearances


The Gospels record various appearances of the resurrected Jesus to different individuals and groups. Critics claim these accounts are contradictory due to differences in the order and recipients of these appearances.


Understanding the Sequence


By examining the accounts closely, we can see a logical sequence of events. Jesus first appeared to Mary Magdalene (John 20:11-18), then to the other women (Matthew 28:9-10), followed by appearances to the disciples on the road to Emmaus (Luke 24:13-35), to Peter (Luke 24:34), and then to the gathered disciples (Luke 24:36-49; John 20:19-23). These appearances occurred over a period of time and to different individuals, providing complementary details rather than contradictions.


The Accounts of Judas' Death


Different Descriptions


Matthew and Acts provide different accounts of Judas' death. Matthew describes Judas hanging himself (Matthew 27:5), while Acts records that Judas fell and his body burst open (Acts 1:18).


Harmonizing the Events


These accounts can be harmonized by considering that both events occurred. Judas may have hanged himself, and then his body could have fallen and burst open, as described in Acts. This sequence of events explains both descriptions without contradiction.


The Trial of Jesus


Differences in Trial Details


The Gospels provide varying details about Jesus' trial before the Jewish leaders and Pilate. For instance, John's account includes an additional private conversation between Jesus and Pilate (John 18:33-38), not mentioned in the Synoptics.


Different Perspectives


These differences reflect the unique perspectives and focuses of each Gospel writer. John, for example, emphasizes the theological significance of Jesus' kingship and His dialogue with Pilate. The Synoptics focus more on the public aspects of the trial. Together, these accounts provide a comprehensive view of the events without contradicting each other.


Jesus' Last Words


Varied Sayings


The Gospels record different sayings of Jesus on the cross. Matthew and Mark mention Jesus' cry, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46; Mark 15:34), Luke records Jesus saying, "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit" (Luke 23:46), and John includes, "It is finished" (John 19:30).


Multiple Statements


These statements are not contradictory but reflect multiple sayings of Jesus on the cross. Jesus could have spoken all these words at different moments, and each Gospel writer included the sayings that were most significant to their narrative and audience.


Conclusion: Harmonizing the Gospels


The alleged contradictions in the Gospels can be harmonized when examined through the Historical-Grammatical method. By considering the context, audience, and purpose of each Gospel, we see that the differences in accounts provide complementary details rather than contradictions. This thorough analysis affirms the reliability and historical value of the Gospels, showcasing their coherence and consistency.



Conclusion: The Legal Credibility of the Gospel Accounts


Lawyers distinguish between making claims (almost anyone can file a lawsuit) and proving a case (which is possible only on the basis of good evidence). Lawyers, therefore, are in the evidence business and will not accept any claims (including religious claims) without good reason to do so. It is highly significant, then, that throughout history so many great lawyers, judges, and legal scholars have come to Christian belief.


This is due in large part to the solidity of the Gospel testimony to Jesus Christ. The Gospel records qualify under the “ancient documents rule” and would be admitted as evidence in any common law court. They assert that they are firsthand, nonhearsay testimony to Jesus Christ (1 John 1:1, etc.) or are the product of careful research concerning Him (Luke 1:1-4). Documents, like defendants, are innocent until proven guilty, and the critics have not been able to impugn the credibility of the Gospels.


The soundness of the four Gospels depends upon their early dating and their authorship by those who knew Jesus personally. Corroboration from outside the Gospels comes by way of such early writers as Papias, who was a student of the Apostle John. Papias tells us that the four Gospels were written either by an apostle (Matthew and John) or by an apostle’s associate (Mark with Peter, Luke with Paul). The Gospels were in circulation, then, while hostile witnesses of Jesus’ ministry were still alive. As F. F. Bruce has argued, these opponents were the functional equivalent of modern cross-examiners: They had the means, the motive, and the opportunity to refute the Gospel accounts of Jesus’ miraculous ministry if it had not happened just as the Gospel writers said it did. Since the opposition could not do that, the Gospel narratives stand as powerful evidence that the miraculous picture of Jesus they convey is accurate.


The fact that the first three Gospels were written prior to the fall of Jerusalem in 70 C.E., and the Gospel of John not long thereafter, makes it impossible for liberal Bible critics and secularists to argue that they are really the product of a developing oral tradition in which the early church modified Jesus’ life and teachings. There was insufficient time for doing this. A. N. Sherwin-White has pointed out that the case for accurate reporting is far better in the case of the Jesus of the Gospels than for the best-known contemporary of Christ, Tiberius Caesar, whose career is also known from just four sources.


Harvard professor Simon Greenleaf, the greatest authority on the law of evidence in the nineteenth century, wrote, “All that Christianity asks of men on this subject is [that the testimony of the Gospels] be sifted as if it were given in a court of justice.… The probability of the veracity of the witnesses and of the reality of the occurrences which they relate will increase until it acquires, for all practical purposes, the value and force of demonstration.”


About the Author

EDWARD D. ANDREWS (AS in Criminal Justice, BS in Religion, MA in Biblical Studies, and MDiv in Theology) is CEO and President of Christian Publishing House. He has authored over 220 books. In addition, Andrews is the Chief Translator of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV).


RECOMMENDED READING


70 views0 comments

Comments

bottom of page