Historical reliability of the Gospels-External Criteria
EXTERNAL EVIDENCE:
1.) Would the authors of the document have a motive for fabricating what they wrote? Obviously, if a motive can be established for the author fabricating an account, the trustworthiness of the document is diminished. On the other hand, if the author had nothing to gain, or even something to lose, by writing the account, the document's trustworthiness is increased.
2.) Are there any other sources which confirm material in the document and which substantiate the Ghanaians of the document? If a document's account can be, to any extent, confirmed by sources outside the document itself, this increases the document's credibility. The same criteria must be applied to these outside sources as well. And if the authorship of a document can be, to any extend, attested by outside sources, this enhances the document's credibility also.
3.) Does archeology support or go against material in the document? If archeological findings can substantiate any material found in a document, the document's trustworthiness is increased. Conversely, if archeological findings stand in tension with the document, its credibility is damaged.
4.) Could contemporaries of the document falsify the document's account, and would they have a motive for doing so? If there existed persons who could have exposed the document's account as a
fabrication, and had a motive for doing so, but nevertheless did not--so far as history tells-this increases the trustworthiness of the document.
These criteria are standard historiographical tools. I believe the historical documents contained in the New Testament stand up well to these criteria. If we have the patience to carefully go through each one, I also believe honest minds and hungry hearts will be edified. |
