The life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, as told in the New Testament Gospels, form the very foundation of the Christian faith. With so much at stake, how can we be sure that the Gospels tell the truth? Along with archaeological discoveries and the bibliographical evidence from manuscripts, the Gospels themselves provide plenty of convincing arguments in favor of their trustworthiness in relaying historical facts and, by implication, spiritual truth.
Eyewitnesses: The Gospels claim to be written by eyewitnesses of the events. The author of the Gospel of John affirms, “That…which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon and our hands have handled…we declare to you.” 1 John 1:1, 3. The apostle Peter concurs: “For we did not follow cleverly devised fables when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of His majesty.” 2 Peter 1:16.
Date of writing: Most of the New Testament was written between AD 47–70, which didn't allow much time for legends about Christ to be created and spread. In 1 Cor. 15:3–8, the apostle Paul relates a creedal statement that is based on testimony from the ad 30s, very close in time to the events surrounding the Crucifixion. Legends take much longer to develop.
Narrative style: Scholars have formulated tests for determining the historicity of any ancient document, some of which are: the document being a personal letter, being written in an unpolished style, or containing trivia and details. The New Testament contains many letters intended for individuals or small audiences (e.g. the Gospel of Luke and the Pauline epistles). The narrative style of the Gospels is relaxed and unpretentious, offering many seemingly inconsequential details. Mark 14:51, 52; John 21:2, 11.1
Authenticity: The Gospels were composed by people who were intimately familiar with the Palestinian environment, its culture, language, customs, personal names, geography, and architecture. For example, Mark puts the Aramaic word “Abba,” as a reference to God, in the mouth of Jesus. Mark 14:36. This term was rarely used in that way, so Mark could not have just copied this detail. Another example is the wealth of information which the Gospel of John supplies incidentally and which has been corroborated by archaeology. For instance, John knows that the stone vessels at the wedding in Cana were used for purification. John 2:6. The other Gospels do not supply this information. However, archaeologists have found exactly those kinds of stone vessels in Palestine.2
Opponent's testimony: When enemies of a message corroborate a story even though it goes against their best interests, it provides the strongest kind of evidence. For example, when Jesus healed the blind man, if there was even the slightest doubt that the miracle took place, Jesus’ opponents would have loudly denounced it as a farce. But instead, they could only try to smear Jesus’ reputation by calling Him a sinner. John 9:24.
Objectivity: Usually, writers will depict their
friends better than they actually are. Yet, the Gospels relate several
embarrassing details regarding the positive characters in their stories: the
unbelief of Jesus’ own brothers before the Crucifixion; the unbelief of the
disciples and their argument about who is the greatest (Mark 9:32, 34); Peter
cutting off the ear of Malchus (John 18:10); Peter denying Jesus three times (Mark
14:66–72); Jesus on the cross asking God why He had forsaken Him (Mark 15:34).
This kind of negative reporting would not have happened, unless it was true.
J. P. Moreland, “The Historicity of the New Testament,” Be Thinking, bethinking.org.
J. H. Charlesworth, “The Historical Jesus in the Fourth Gospel: A Paradigm Shift?” Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus, No. 8, 2010, pp. 40–42.
