Internal Evidence Pt 2

If you are a Christian, I pray this note will strengthen your faith.  If you are an atheist or a Muslim, or just simply not a believer in Christ, I pray this note will stir some curiosity in you.  The important thing is getting at the truth.  If we don't know the truth and live by the truth, our lives are a colossal waste.

In my previous note about internal evidence I shared some details in the gospels and Acts that verify the authenticity of the accounts.  In this note I will focus on just the gospel accounts, because they are parallel accounts, and because they deal with the most central facet of the Christian faith: the ministry of Christ.  The fact that the gospels are parallel accounts gives us a unique opportunity to test their veracity.  We should expect that they are consistent.  If there are four different witnesses of a crime, you would expect their testimonies to be consistent.  Yet if their testimonies are exactly the same, word for word, you would know something is fishy.  So we should expect the gospels to have slight variations, proving that they did not conspire together.

To prove that the gospels are complexly consistent, I am going to use an argument made by John James Blunt, who wrote a book titled 'Undesigned Coincidences in the writings of the Old and New Testament'.  John wrote the book in the nineteenth century, and it must have been largely forgotten.  From everything I know, this argument has been revived thanks to apologist Tim McGrew (if there are others that deserve credit, I'll let Tim make mention of it).  The undesigned coincidences are bits of information that one gospel writer leaves out but another gospel writer fills us in on.  So in one account some question might naturally arise, and that evangelist doesn't answer the question for us, but another of the four evangelists will.  Its probably easier for me to show you what I mean with examples than it is to explain.

The ascension
If you read the gospel of John, you will get some idea or allusion to the ascension of Jesus (see John 3:13, 6:62, 20:17).  But the actual event is not recorded.  Since John was the last to write a gospel, the ascension was probably so axiomatic it didn't need to be mentioned.  But John mentions the words spoken by Jesus which allude to the ascension.  To see the ascension actually recorded you have to go to Luke's gospel (see Luke 24:51).

Peter's reinstatement
In Luke 22:32 Jesus predicts that Peter would turn back again after he had denied Jesus three times.  If you read on in Luke's gospel, there is no definitive record of this happening.  But if you go to John 21:15-19 you see Jesus reinstating Peter.  The fulfillment of the prediction that Jesus made in Luke's gospel is found in John's gospel. 

Boats from Tiberias
This one might be a little complicated, but follow me carefully.  The story is Jesus walking on water; its found in John 6:16-24.  There was only one boat on the side where they took off, and the disciples used this boat to cross the lake to Capernaum.  There was a storm, and the disciples saw Jesus out there walking on the water.  After this had happened, John's gospel says that some boats came from Tiberias and landed on the shore where the disciples had taken off.  The crowd used these boats to follow Jesus to Capernaum.  John doesn't tell us how these boats arrived; there's many different possibilities.  But Matthew's gospel gives us a very likely answer for how these boats arrived from Tiberias.  Matthew states that the winds were against the disciples (see Matthew 14:24).  So if there were some boats that were not secured at Tiberias, the wind would have driven them to the opposite shore, which is where the disciples had taken off from. 

Great crowds
In the story of Jesus feeding the 5000 Mark tells us that many people were coming and going (see Mark 6:31).  We also know that this was a remote area with only towns and villages nearby (see Mark 6:35-36).  So why was there such a great crowd of people?  Mark doesn't give us any reason for it, but John does.  John tells us that the Passover Feast was near (see John 6:4).  That means people from all over would be making a journey to Jerusalem, which explains the many people coming and going.

Blindfolded
Matthew tells us that Jesus was spat on and hit when He was before the Sanhedrin (see Matthew 26:67-68).  And in verse 68 they said to Him, "Prophesy to us, Christ. Who hit you?"  Now that is rather odd that they would say that.  If whoever was hitting Jesus was standing right in front of Him, it would be nothing for Him to identify the person.  But Mark and Luke fill us in on a little piece of information that Matthew leaves out.  They let us know that Jesus was blindfolded when they were doing this (see Mark 14:65, Luke 22:64). 

Three days
Jesus is accused of saying that He can destroy the temple and rebuild it in three days in Matthew 26:61.  No where in Matthew's gospel does Jesus say this or anything like this.  But we find out where it comes from by reading John's gospel (see John 2:19).

King of the Jews
In John 18:33 Pilate asks Jesus, "Are you the king of the Jews?"  If you read the previous verses in John, you'll see no where that the Jews or anyone is accusing Him of claiming to be a king.  So why does Pilate ask Jesus this question?  Well, we find out from reading Luke's gospel that they did accuse Him of being a king (see Luke 23:2).

Found no guilt
In Luke's gospel, right after Jesus is accused of claiming to be a king, Pilate asks Him if He is a king, Jesus says yes, and then Pilate says, "I find no basis for a charge against this man."  Now isn't that odd?  Jesus just admitted to claiming to be a king and Pilate finds no guilt.  But if we read John's gospel, we get the missing part of the conversation (see John 18:33-38).  We find out that Jesus said His kingdom was from another place, so Him claiming to be a king was no threat to Caesar or the Roman Empire.  That's how Pilate could say that he found no basis for a charge against Him.

When evening came
In Matthew 8:14-17 Jesus is at Peter's house and He heals Peter's mother-in-law.  Right after that it says that when evening came the demon-possessed and sick were brought to Jesus to heal.  Why would they wait until evening?  We find the answer to that in Mark and Luke.  It was the Sabbath, and it was unlawful to heal on the Sabbath, so the people had to wait until evening (sunset is the end of each day in Jewish culture) for the Sabbath to be over (see Mark 1:21, Luke 4:31).

Following Jesus
In Matthew's gospel and in Mark's gospel, when Jesus calls Simon (Peter) and his brother Andrew, they leave everything and follow Him.  It seems really odd: Would you leave everything at once when someone comes to you and says, "follow me"?  But we find the reason in Luke's gospel (see Luke 5).  Luke gives us the rest of the story, which Matthew and Mark left out.  He tells us of this miraculous catch (see Luke 5:6).  This explains why Simon and Andrew were willing to leave everything they had and follow Jesus. 

Remaining silent
In Luke's gospel, right after the transfiguration, Luke tells us that the disciples (Peter, James and John) kept it to themselves; they didn't tell anyone (see Luke 9:36).  Why would they keep something like that to themselves?  We find the answer in Mark 9:9.  Jesus told them not to tell anyone about it.  A little detail that Luke left out, but Mark included.

So what do these examples show us?  They show us how the gospels compliment each other.  They show us how the gospels are consistent.  And its pretty obvious that this was not designed by men.  How would someone think to intentionally have such coincidental and complimentary details in four different accounts?  And the fact that the four accounts are so complexly interwoven.  We can only expect this kind of evidence from four independent accounts of actual events.  So in that way they are signs of authenticity.