The Historical Reliability of the New Testament Gospels

Presented by Edmond Chen10/18/2009

Presentation Overview What are the Gospels of the New Testament? Why should we care about the historical reliability of the Gospels? How do we evaluate their historical reliability? Our case for the historical reliability of the Gospels

Accurate copies

Very early testimonies

Trustworthy eyewitnesses and accounts

Substantial corroborating evidence

Bibliography / resources for further information Open Q&A session

What are the Gospels? First four books in the New Testament Testimonies of Jesus’ life, teachings, miraculous powers,

death, and resurrection Written by four different authors

Matthew: One of Jesus' Twelve Apostles Mark: The disciple and interpreter of Peter the

Apostle Luke: A physician and companion of the Twelve

Apostles John: One of Jesus' Twelve Apostles

Why Should We Care About the Historical Reliability of the Gospels?

Christianity is founded upon the belief that the resurrection of Jesus was an actual event in history.

As the Apostle Paul wrote, “And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God... If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men.” (1 Cor. 15:14-19)

However, if Jesus' resurrection was a real event, there are great implications for all of us!

A personal God exists who is good, just, and loving A solution to the brokenness of the world exists Our life has greater significance than we once thought

How Do We Evaluate the Historical Reliability of the Gospels?

We assess the historical reliability of the Gospels by evaluating the following criterion:

Do we have accurate copies of the original documents?

Were the original documents written within a reasonable time frame of the events in question?

Do the documents contain eyewitness testimony from multiple sources?

Are the eyewitnesses and their testimonies trustworthy?

Do we have corroborating evidence from other sources?

Our Case for the Historical Reliability of the Gospels We think the Gospels meet all the criterion for historical reliability:

Today's copies of the Gospels are accurate transmissions of the original documents.

The original documents were all written within 40-70 years of Jesus’ death, possibly earlier.

The Gospels contain first-hand eyewitness testimony and carefully compiled second-hand eyewitness testimony of the events from multiple sources.

The eyewitnesses seem trustworthy based on their intent, incentives, and character.

The testimonies appear to be truthful based on the details included, corroboration with history and other documents, etc.

We have an overwhelming amount of corroborating evidence.

If we do not automatically assume the impossibility of miracles, we have very strong reasons to believe that the Gospels are historically reliable.

The Original Gospels are Well-Preserved in Today's Copies

Most New Testament scholars agree that the original Gospels are well-preserved in today's copies because we have a combination of the following:

An overwhelming number of copies which have staggeringly few variants Over 5,700 handwritten Greek manuscripts (original language of the NT) of the NT and 9,000

handwritten manuscripts written in other languages

An estimated 98% of the textual variation between manuscripts is due to misspellings and insignificant differences in word order (word order generally does not matter in Greek)

Very early manuscripts dating back to within 20-170 years of Jesus' death AD 50-70 (disputed): Magdalene Papyrus and 7Q5 containing small fragments of Matthew and Mark

AD 117-138 (not disputed): John Rylands Papyrus P52 containing portions of John 18:31-33, 37-38

AD 150-200 (not disputed): Bodmer Papyrus II, a nearly complete copy of John's Gospel

AD ~200 (not disputed): Chester Beatty Papyri containing nearly the entire New Testament

Frequent quotations: Early church fathers living between AD 100-300 quoted the NT so often (over 36,000 times) that all but eleven verses of the NT can be reconstructed from the quotations.

Scholars agree that no other ancient text in history is as well-preserved as the New Testament

New Testament Vs. Other Ancient Documents

New Testament Vs. Other Ancient Documents (cont.)

The Original Gospels Were Written Within a Generation or Two of the Events Described

Early church fathers Clement of Rome, Ignatius, and Polycarp quoted passages out of 25 of the 27 books in the NT including all the Gospels between AD 95-110, within 65-85 years of Jesus' death

Can we do better? Yes! The Gospels of Luke was most likely written before AD 70, within 40 years of Jesus’ death!

Luke's Gospel was written before the NT book of Acts (also by Luke): We know this because Luke mentions refers to this Gospel in Acts (Acts 1:1)

Acts, an account of early church history after Jesus' death, can be conservatively dated before AD 70 because it does not mention the following EXTREMELY important events

The execution of Jesus’ brother, James, in AD 62

The execution of Paul the Apostle, the main character in the book, in AD 68

The Jewish-Roman war and the destruction of the Jewish Temple in AD 70

Mark and Matthew's Gospels were likely written before AD 70 as well

Early dating of the manuscript fragments (AD 50-70)

Most scholars believe Luke's account drew from Mark and Matthew's accounts because they are similar. Luke specifically writes that his Gospel is based upon carefully selected eyewitnesses and investigation (Luke 1:1-4).

The early dating of the Gospels preclude legendary altercations which take multiple generations to develop.

The Gospels Contain Eyewitness Testimony From Multiple Sources

Mark's Gospel is Peter's account of Jesus' life translated into Greek. One of the Twelve Apostles, Peter was constantly by Jesus' side, but he did not know how to write Greek.

In a letter to the church, Peter states “We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty.” (2 Pet. 1:16)

Matthew's Gospel provides the eyewitness account of Matthew, a.k.a. Levi the Tax Collector, another one of Jesus' Twelve Apostles.

Luke prefaces his Gospel as a historical/biographical work containing eyewitness testimony:

“Many have undertaken to draw up an account... just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses...Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus...” (Luke 1:1-4)

John's Gospel provides the eyewitness account of John, another one of Jesus' Twelve Apostles

“The man (John) who saw it has given testimony, and his testimony is true. He knows that he tells the truth, and he testifies so that you also may believe.” (John 19:35)

“This is the disciple (John) who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true.” (John 21:24)

Archaeology has revealed that all four authors possessed intimate knowledge of exact locations, customs, and key people in and around the events prior to the Jewish Roman war of AD 66-73.

The Eyewitnesses and Their Testimonies are Trustworthy (Part 1)

The multiple eyewitness accounts exhibit the major consistency and minor divergence of authentic testimonies

Largely consistent in describing Jesus' life, miracles, teachings, death, and resurrection

Divergent on minute details, showing that they did not fictitiously harmonize their accounts

They constantly portray themselves as dim-witted, uncaring, sinful and cowardly:

“...'Stay here and keep watch with me.' … Then he returned to his disciples and found them sleeping … 'Could you men not keep watch with me for one hour?' … He went away a second time and prayed … When he came back, he again found them sleeping...” (Matt. 26:38-43)

“...But when Jesus turned and looked at his disciples, he rebuked Peter. 'Get behind me, Satan!' he said. 'You do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men.'”

Peter denies knowing Jesus three times despite saying “I will never disown you.” (Matt. 26:33-35). All but one of the disciples hide when Jesus gets crucified.

They gave the names of many real people (archaeologically proven) in their accounts, allowing anyone at the time to fact-check their testimonies. (Pilate, Mary, Joseph of Arimethea, etc.)

The Eyewitnesses and Their Testimonies are Trustworthy (Part 2)

Their testimonies included inconveniently challenging and/or confusing teachings of Jesus that they should have left out if they were attempting to spread a hoax.

“But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart... But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress...” (Matt. 5:28-32)

“...If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me and for the gospel will save it.” (Mark 8:34-35)

“...My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Mark 15:34)

“...I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” (John 6:53-55)

The authors had little to gain from their testimonies except criticism and ostracism from the Jewish Pharisees and murderous persecution by the Romans within 30 years of Jesus' death.

Without dispute, Apostles Peter, James, and Paul died martyrs' deaths, refusing to recant their testimonies under threat of execution by the Romans. According to the early church fathers, eleven of the twelve Apostles were were martyred for their refusal to deny Christ.

While some may die for what they believe to be true, who would choose to die for what they KNOW is FALSE?

The Eyewitnesses and Their Testimonies are Trustworthy (Part 3)

Simon Greenleaf, a Harvard law professor who wrote the textbook on legal evidence used throughout the entire 19th century, concluded the following:

“All that Christianity asks of men on this subject, is, that they would be consistent with themselves; that they would treat its evidences as they treat the evidence of other things; and that they would try and judge its actors and witnesses, as they deal with their fellow men, when testifying to human affairs and actions, in human tribunals. Let the witnesses be compared with themselves, with each other, and with the surrounding facts and circumstances; and let their testimony be sifted, as if it were given in a court of justice, on the side of the adverse party, the witnesses being subjected to a rigorous cross-examination. The result, it is confidently believed, will be an undoubting conviction of their integrity, ability and truth ... Either the men of Galilee were men of superlative wisdom, and extensive knowledge and experience, and of deeper skill in the arts of deception, than any and all others, before or after them, or they have truly stated the astonishing things which they saw and heard.” (Greenleaf, Testimony of the Evangelist)

Overwhelming Corroborating Evidence (Part 1) Using only non-Christian sources dating from AD 0-200, Josephus,

Tacitus, Pliny the Younger, Phlegon, Thallus, Suetonius, Lucian, Celsus, Mara Bar-Serapion, and the Jewish Talmud, we are able to gather the following conclusions:

Jesus lived during the reign of Tiberius Caesar He lived a virtuous life and performed seemingly miraculous

works He had a brother named James He was acclaimed to be the Messiah He was crucified under Pontius Pilate on the eve of the

Passover His disciples were willing to die for their belief Christianity spread rapidly as far as Rome

Modified from: Geisler & Turek. I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be An Athiest.

Overwhelming Corroborating Evidence (Part 2) The testimonies explain seemingly inexplicable outcomes

Thousands of people became Christians within Jerusalem within the first five weeks of Jesus' death despite the fact that:

Many adverse eyewitnesses would have been present if the events were not real

The Jewish Pharisees' could have easily paraded Jesus' body around if He wasn't actually resurrected

Roman persecution within the first 30 years of Jesus' death was unable to prevent Christianity from spreading rapidly throughout Rome

The documented conversions of skeptics within 5 years of Jesus' death

Paul of Tarsus, A devout Jew and leading persecutor of Christians

Jesus' brother James, who only believed Jesus was the Messiah AFTER Jesus died

The immediate replacement of age-old Jewish traditions with new Christian traditions (Sunday Sabbath, communion, Trinitarian baptism, abolishment of Moses' laws)

Overwhelming Corroborating Evidence (Part 3) Evidence from the Apostle Paul's letters to the early church of Corinth

(AD 53-56, dating not in dispute)

“The things that mark an apostle – signs, wonders and miracles – were done among you with great perseverance” (2 Cor. 12:12)

“For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins... that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day... he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living... Then he appeared to James... Then to all of the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also...” (1 Cor. 3-8)

Both of these were dangerously bold statements unless they were generally accepted as true by the people of Corinth...

The last passage is a creed describing the events of the resurrection which predates the Gospels!

Our Case for the Historical Reliability of the Gospels We think the Gospels meet all the criterion for historical reliability:

Today's copies of the Gospels are accurate transmissions of the original documents.

The original documents were all written within 40-70 years of Jesus’ death, possibly earlier.

The Gospels contain first-hand eyewitness testimony and carefully compiled second-hand eyewitness testimony of the events from multiple sources.

The eyewitnesses seem trustworthy based on their intent, incentives, and character.

The testimonies appear to be truthful based on the details included, corroboration with history and other documents, etc.

We have an overwhelming amount of corroborating evidence.

If we do not automatically assume the impossibility of miracles, we have very strong reasons to believe that the Gospels are historically reliable.

Debunking Myths The Gospels were not altered over time to include miraculous elements

because we have too many early copies with minimal variance.

The Gospels were not legendary developments because they were all written within a generation of the actual events.

The Gospels were not an elaborate hoax because:

The testimonies have the perfect amount of convergence and divergence.

The testimonies contain self-deprecation, difficult teachings of Jesus, and fact-check challenges.

The authors had every incentive not to lie, and they chose to die for their alleged beliefs.

There is too much corroborating evidence.

Are there any other explanations? Mass hallucinations occurring to multiple people at the same time on multiple occasions? Not likely...

Sources This presentation relied heavily on the following works:

Geisler, Norman L., Frank Turek, and David Limbaugh. I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist. New York: Crossway Books, 2004. Print.

Strobel, Lee. The Case for Christ. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1998. Print.

The above authors present points from many world-renowned scholars, including (but not limited to): Dr. Craig Blomberg, Dr. Bruce Metzger, Dr. Gregory Boyd, Bishop N.T. Wright, Dr. William Lane Craig, Dr. J.P. Moreland, Dr. John McRay

Questions?