Opponents of Christianity commonly say that the New Testament resulted from the disciples missing Jesus so much that they made up the resurrection and fabricated a record of His words and deeds. Everyday acts of kindness became astounding miracles. Sermons were sprinkled with references to His coming from heaven and being the Son of God. A good life became a sinless life.
Many who say such things have not read the Bible; they parrot what they have heard or read from other nonbelievers. Rarely have they carefully studied the details of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. The average church member knows far more about the Bible, but that does not mean they are ready to meet the questions of a child or grandchild who doubts the Bible (1 Peter 3:15).
A commonsense approach involves carefully examining the content of the gospel. The New Testament has the ring of authenticity. If the gospel story were fabricated, it would read differently. What internal factors show that the disciples did not invent the gospel?
THE PRESENCE OF UNFLATTERING MATERIAL
Historians use this rule: If a document contains features embarrassing to those who wrote it, it has a high probability of being historical (also referred to as the criterion of embarrassment).1
The disciples did not change the story, even when it would have made them look better. Collectively, they wrote that, as a group, they were
- slow to understand (Mark 8:17–18; 9:19),
- vainly ambitious (Mark 9:33–37; Luke 9:46; 22:24),
- uncaring (Mark 10:13–16; 14:32–42),
- unbelieving (Mark 16:14),
- unintelligent and timid (Luke 18:31–34; Mark 9:32),
- uneducated and disrespected (Acts 4:13),
- cowardly (Matthew 26:33–35; Mark 14:50–52), and
- filled with doubt (Matthew 28:17; Luke 24:25).
Individually, Zebedee’s sons had their mother request exalted positions for them, which showed an embarrassing lack of maturity, a misunderstanding of the kingdom, and a violation of Jesus’ specific teaching (Matthew 20:20–23; Mark 10:45; Luke 22:24–27). Peter insulted Jesus by putting Him on the level with Moses and Elijah (Matthew 17:4–5), denied Him three times (Matthew 26:69–75), and was called “Satan” by Jesus in the biography that he likely helped author (Mark 8:33). Thomas doubted (John 20:24–28).
Culturally, we find an odd occurrence. Women—not the disciples—were the first eyewitnesses of the empty tomb at a time when women were second-class citizens and unable to testify in court.2
THE PRESENCE OF COUNTERPRODUCTIVE FEATURES
A second rule of historians is this: If a document contains features counterproductive to the purpose for which it was written, then it is likely to be historical.
If the disciples were trying to convince the world that Jesus was the holy Son of God (John 20:30–31), why include multiple accusations against Him that showed people denying that premise? Jesus Himself denied being good if He were not God (Matthew 19:17). The biographies show Jesus being accused by both His family and His enemies of being
- deranged (Mark 3:21; cf. John 7:20; 8:48, 52; 10:20),
- deceitful (John 7:12, 47; cf. Matthew 27:63),
- drunk (Matthew 11:19), and
- demon-possessed (Mark 3:22; Matthew 9:34; 10:25; 12:24; Luke 11:15).
If trying to gain followers for Jesus, why admit that many of His followers deserted Him (John 6:66) and that His own family opposed Him? (Mark 3:21; John 7:5).
If trying to impress people with His greatness, why include unflattering facts such as
- His occupation as a poor carpenter in Nazareth (Mark 6:3),
- displays of His anger (Mark 3:5; John 2:13–17),
- John baptizing Him (Matthew 3:13–17). Critic Bart Ehrman, using the criterion of dissimilarity to judge the historical reliability of the claim Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist, notes that “it is hard to imagine a Christian inventing the story of Jesus’ baptism since this could be taken to mean that he was John’s subordinate.”3
- His arrest and conviction (Matthew 26:47–56; 27:15–31),
- and His shameful execution by crucifixion (Matthew 27:32–56).
It would have been easy for the disciples to leave out these details; by including them, they show a commitment to truth.
Further, the disciples did not construct the new religion to appeal to people who are mostly proud, worldly-minded, sensual, and profane. Jesus’ teachings were radical, and, to that culture, embarrassing. His views were unorthodox on
- fasting (Matthew 6:16),
- divorce (Matthew 19:1–12),
- religious titles (Matthew 23:8, 10),
- legalism (Matthew 23:23),
- sinners (Luke 7:34), and
- women (John 4:1–9).
The dissimilarity criterion suggests that a saying or an action can be more confidently considered authentic to Jesus if it differs from or contradicts the perspectives of Judaism at the time of Jesus or the early church’s views.
THE PRESENCE OF IRRELEVANT MATERIAL
After Jesus was arrested, an unknown young man was there, wearing only a linen cloth (perhaps a bed sheet) (Mark 14:43–52). When someone tried to grab him in the melee, he left his covering behind and ran off naked. The young man is not named. Why include this? It has no connection to the event except as a detail an eyewitness would remember—especially if that young man grew up to be the book’s author (as scholars believe Mark did).
After a crowd asked Jesus what should be done with an adulterous woman, he wrote in the dirt as if stalling for time (John 8:1–10). John does not say what He wrote. It is not even clear how the writing is connected to the event. The only reason to include this is that it happened.
Some material in the gospel accounts was irrelevant to the church’s issues when these books were thought to be written (AD 50–90). Consider these incidents:
- Jesus’ prediction of Jerusalem’s destruction when it was already destroyed (Matthew 24:1–34);
- Jesus’ controversy with the Pharisees on Corban practices when there was no temple or priests to make the practice possible (Mark 7:10–13; cf. Matthew 15:4–6).
- Jesus’ teaching about the altar when it was gone (Matthew 23:18–20).
- Why did the disciples include these? The most reasonable explanation is that Jesus said them.
THE ABSENCE OF RELEVANT MATERIAL
Early Christians had several disputes. They disagreed about
- circumcision as a religious requirement (Acts 15:1–2),
- keeping the Law of Moses (Galatians 5:3–4),
- questions about marriage practices (1 Corinthians 7),
- miraculous gifts/tongues (1 Corinthians 12–14),
- laws regarding dietary practice (Romans 14),
- Jews and Gentiles in the church (Ephesians 2:11–22).
When a question came up, the first practice was to see what Jesus said about it (1 Corinthians 7:6, 12, 25; 2 Corinthians 11:17). Yet Jesus did not say much about any of these issues in His recorded sermons. If the disciples had made up the gospel, imagine how tempting it would have been to add a verse to settle these controversies.
Another significant omission is the absence of statements from Paul. Imagine having a man as well-educated, polished as a writer, prominent as a leader, and well-traveled as a preacher, yet not include any of his material in writing the gospel. T. W. Manson wrote the following:
The Pauline letters abound in utterances which could easily be transferred to Jesus and presented to the world as oracles of the Lord. How many are? None. It seems a little odd that, if the story of Jesus was the creation of the Christian community, no use should have been made of the admirable materials offered by one of the most able, active, and influential members of the community.4
THE PRESENCE OF UNITY WITH DIFFERENCES
When collaborating to perpetrate a deception, participants get their stories straight so they do not contradict each other before law enforcement or others (depending on the deception). They give uniform answers. Experts are suspicious if independent testimony is too similar. If multiple eyewitnesses describe a situation by essentially repeating the same details, it is rejected. On the other hand, if witnesses give the same key facts but vary in details, the case is compelling (this is called the criterion of multiple attestation).5
The first thing that strikes one who reads the eighty-nine chapters written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John is the variation in the record of the same life. These men write of the same sermons, actions, conversations, interactions, and events, but each gives different details. Although Matthew, Mark, and Luke are called the Synoptic Gospels, meaning “from the same view,” they differ significantly. Alleged controversies are even argued by Bible critics (and answered by Bible believers).
Yet the whole story agrees. The material shows the same view of God, the same claims of the Savior, the same general opinions of ethics and morals. Followers and enemies have meticulously compared Jesus’ biographies for nearly two thousand years, yet the gospel accounts have passed the tests and analyses. How could each writer write separately, and each for his purpose, but when taken together, their writings form a well-adjusted whole?
Did the disciples invent the gospel? The evidence says that it is the work of God (2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:20–21).
Endnotes
1The criterion of embarrassment is one point listed in the “Criteria of Authenticity” used by academics, the others being the criterion of dissimilarity, criterion of language and environment, criterion of coherence, and criterion of multiple attestation (John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus, vol. 1 [New York: Doubleday, 1991], 168–171.).
2Josephus wrote, “Let not the testimony of women be admitted, on account of the levity and boldness of their sex, nor let servants be admitted to give testimony on account of the ignobility of their soul; since it is probable that they may not speak truth, either out of hope of gain, or fear of punishment” (Flavius Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews 4.8.15).
3Bart D. Ehrman, The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings, 7th ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2019), 194–195.
4Ben Witherington III, The Christology of Jesus, (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990), 4.
5The criterion of multiple (or independent) attestation is a tool used by biblical scholars to determine whether certain actions or sayings by Jesus in the New Testament are from the “historical” Jesus.
