Are the NT Gospels Reliable? (1/5)
Have you ever wondered about whether we can actually know anything about the historical Jesus? Sure, we know the stories we learned about him in Sunday School; but those all came out the New Testament Gospels. Are the NT Gospels reliable? What about the other gospels we sometimes hear about? These are common questions many ask when it comes to Jesus and the Gospels. Many attempts have been made to provide answers to these questions, but in the next several posts I want to interact with some of the claims made by Bart Ehrman regarding these issues.
EHRMAN’S THESIS IN JESUS BEFORE THE GOSPELS
Dr. Bart Ehrman of UNC, Chapel Hill, is a critical New Testament Scholar well-known for producing popular level books that introduce the everyday reader to some of the most important discussions being had within New Testament studies. In Jesus Before the Gospels, Ehrman tackles the issue of whether the NT Gospels are historically reliable given the gap of years between the events of Jesus’ life and their writing. Erhman’s basic conclusion is that the NT Gospels are more useful as a window into the beliefs and practices of the early church than they are as a source to learn about the historical Jesus.
To support his argument, Ehrman makes the following claims:
“The gospels were written decades after Jesus’ death by people who were not eyewitnesses and had probably never laid eyes on an eyewitness.” [1]
The NT Gospel writers were not Jesus’ personal companions. Neither were they from Palestine. They were unknown Greek-speaking individuals living outside of Palestine who received stories about Jesus from people far removed from the historical Jesus. [2]
The NT Gospel writers—as well as the many tellers of the stories of Jesus before them—reshaped the stories they heard about Jesus to suit the present needs of their Christian communities. Early Christians were more interested in the usefulness of these stories than they were in preserving a historically accurate account of Jesus’ life and ministry. [3]
We can summarize Ehrman’s thesis in this way:
The NT Gospels are the products of stories and memories of Jesus freely and frequently shaped by early Christians far removed from those who knew Jesus personally. They were used to meet the immediate needs of their Christian communities rather than preserve a historical record about Jesus.
AN ALTERNATE THESIS
On one level, I am grateful to Ehrman for bringing the public’s attention to these very important issues in a way that is accessible to the common person. On another level, I believe the conclusions he offers are based on false premises that go counter to the evidence we have. For this reason, I would like to spend several posts countering Ehrman’s claims with the following alternate thesis:
Rather than being the products of stories and memories of Jesus freely and frequently reshaped to meet the immediate needs of different early Christian communities, the NT Gospels are the reports of carefully preserved eyewitness testimony written down within the lifetimes of those who would have been able to and would have desired to safeguard their historical accuracy.
To support this thesis I hope to spend the next four posts discussing:
Internal evidence within the NT Gospels that suggest that they are the product of eyewitness testimony from first century Palestine.
External evidence suggesting that the NT Gospels are the product of eyewitness testimony of those who walked with Jesus.
Evidence suggesting that the stories of Jesus behind the NT Gospels were preserved in a way that safeguarded their historical accuracy.
Embarrassing elements in the NT Gospels that suggest they are historically reliable accounts.
DOES THE HISTORICAL RELIABILITY OF THE NT GOSPELS MATTER?
Perhaps the most surprising assertion Ehrman makes in Jesus Before the Gospels comes near the end of the book. It has to do with whether or not it really matters if we can trust the historical reliability of what is recorded of Jesus in the NT Gospels. On this, Ehrman writes:
“Does it matter if Jesus really healed the sick, cast out demons, and raised the dead? Does it matter if he himself was raised from the dead? To me as a historian it does. But if these stories are not historically accurate, does that rob them of their literary power? Not in my books. They are terrifically moving accounts. Understanding what they are trying to say means understanding some of the most uplifting and influential literature the world has ever seen.” [4]
As a follower of Jesus reading Ehrman, I find myself troubled by these words. What could be more central to the Christian faith than whether or not Jesus actually did and said what he has been reported to have said and done in the NT Gospels? I don’t think I am alone in this either. For example, regarding the historical reality of Jesus’ resurrection, Paul wrote the following in 1 Corinthians 15:17: “...if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins.” I think Paul could have written similar statements about other aspects of Jesus’ life & ministry as well.
CONCLUSION
The truth of the human condition dictates that we need more than a powerful and moving piece of historical fiction. To truly have hope for a better future, we need a Jesus who demonstrated that he actually has power over sickness and evil because he has conquered sin, death, and the devil.
It really does matter if Jesus healed the sick, cast out demons, and was raised from the dead. But the reality of our need does not require us to accept these things on the basis of blind faith. There are good reasons to believe that the NT Gospels are the product of faithfully preserved eyewitness accounts of Jesus’ life and ministry and I hope to spend the next several blog posts showing how that is.
——————
[1] Bart D. Ehrman, Jesus Before the Gospels : How the Earliest Christians Remembered, Changed, and Invented Their Stories of the Savior (New York: HarperOne, 2016), 289.
[2] Ehrman, Jesus Before the Gospels, 65, 101-102.
[3] Ehrman, Jesus Before the Gospels, 64, 185.
[4] Ehrman, Jesus Before the Gospels, 294.