THE CRITERION OF EMBARRASSMENT AUTHENTICATES THE GOSPEL ACCOUNTS
Do the New Testament documents tell the truth about what really happened in the first century? Authors claiming to record and write history are unlikely to invent embarrassing details about themselves or their heroes. Since the New Testament documents are filled with embarrassing details, we can reasonably infer that they are telling the truth.
There are many examples. The disciples allow themselves to be humbled as equal brothers and disabused of any pretensions to self importance or self aggrandizement, such as any false storyteller would be motivated by.
“But as for you, do not be called ‘Rabbi,’ because you have one Teacher, and you are all brothers. Do not call anyone on earth your father, because you have one Father, who is in heaven. And do not be called masters either, because you have one Master, the Messiah.” (Matthew 23:8-10)
Notice that the disciples frequently depict themselves as dim wits. They often fail to understand what Jesus is saying, and don’t understand what his mission is about until after the resurrection. Their thick-headedness even earns their leader, Peter, the sternest rebuke from Jesus: “Get behind me Satan!” (What great press the disciples provided for their leader and first Pope! Also “Do not be called Father!” Contrary to popular opinion, it seems the church really didn’t have editorial control of the scriptures after all.)
After Jesus asks them to stay up and pray with him during his greatest hour of need, the disciples fall asleep on Jesus not once, not twice but three times! Then, after pledging to be faithful to the end, Peter denies Christ three times, and they all abandoned Him to His captors by fleeing the scene of His arrest..
The scared, scattered, skeptical disciples make no effort to give Jesus a proper burial. Instead they say a member of the Jewish ruling body that sentenced Jesus to die is the noble one — Joseph of Arimathea buries Jesus in a Jewish tomb (which would have been easy for the Jews to refute if it wasn’t true). Two days later, while the men are still hiding, the women go down and discover the empty tomb and the risen Jesus.
Who wrote all that down? Men — some of the men who were characters in the story. Now if you were part of a group of men trying to pass off a false resurrection story as the truth, would you depict yourselves as dim-witted, bumbling, rebuked, lazy, skeptical sissies, who ran away at the first sign of trouble, while the women were the brave ones who discovered the empty tomb and the risen Jesus?
If men were inventing the resurrection story, it would go more like this:
*** ‘Jesus came to save the world, and he needed our help. That’s why we were there for him every step of the way. When he was in need, we prayed with him. When he wept, we wept with him (and told him to toughen up!). When he fell, we carried his cross. The gates of Hell could not prevent us from seeing his mission through!
So when that turncoat Judas brought the Romans by (we always suspected Judas), and they began to nail Jesus to the cross, we laughed at them. “He’s God you idiots! The grave will never keep him! You think you’re solving a problem, but you’re really creating a much bigger one!”
While we assured the women that everything would turn out all right, they couldn’t handle the crucifixion. Squeamish and afraid, they ran to their homes screaming and hid behind locked doors.
But we men stood steadfast at the foot of the cross, praying for hours until the very end. When Jesus finally took his last breath and the Roman Centurion confessed that Jesus was God, Peter blasted him, “That’s what we told you before you nailed him up there!” (Through this whole thing, the Romans and the Jews just wouldn’t listen!)
Never doubting that Jesus would rise on the third day, Peter announced to the Centurion, “We’ll bury him and be back on Sunday. Now go tell Pilate to put some of your ‘elite’ Roman guards at the tomb to see if you can prevent him from rising from the dead!” We all laughed and began to dream about Sunday.
That Sunday morning we marched right down to the tomb and tossed those elite Roman guards aside. Then the stone (that took eleven us to roll into place) rolled away by itself. A glowing Jesus emerged from tomb, and said, “I knew you’d come! My mission is accomplished.” He praised Peter for his brave leadership and congratulated us on our great faith. Then we went home and comforted the trembling women.’ ***
So much for the fictional narration theory!
There are other events in the New Testament documents concerning Jesus that are also unlikely to be made up. For example, Jesus:
■ Is baptised by John. Jesus was “supposedly superior and sinless,” yet he was baptized “by his supposed inferior who proclaimed ‘a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.’” Jesus’ followers, therefore, struggled to narrate Jesus’ baptism without undermining belief in his sinlessness or his superiority vis-à-vis John. (Matthew 3:13-17, Mark 1:9-11, Luke 3:21-22)
■ Is considered “out of his mind” by his own family who come to seize him to take him home (Mark 3:21 & 31).
■ Is deserted by many of his followers after he says that followers must eat his flesh and drink his blood. (John 6:66).
■ Is not believed by his own brothers (John 7:5). (Disbelief turned to belief after the resurrection—ancient historians tell us that Jesus’ brother James died a martyr as the leader of the church in Jerusalem in A.D. 62).
■ Is thought to be a deceiver (John 7:12).
■ Turns off Jewish believers to the point that they want to stone him (John 8:30-59).
■ Is called a “madman” (John 10:20).
■ Is called a “drunkard” (Matthew 11:19).
■ Is accused of being “demon-possessed” (Mark 3:22, John 7:20, 8:48).
■ Has his feet wiped with hair of a prostitute which easily could have been seen as a sexual advance (Luke 7:36-39).
■ Is crucified despite the fact that “anyone who is hung on a tree is under God’s curse” (Deuteronomy 21:23).
If you’re inventing a Messiah to the Jews, you don’t say such things about him. You also don’t admit that some of you “still doubted” Jesus had really risen from the dead, especially while he’s standing right in front of you giving the great commission (Matthew 28:17-19).
Finally, anyone trying to pass off a false resurrection story as the truth would never say the women were the first witnesses at the tomb. In the first century, a woman’s testimony was not considered on par with that of a man. An invented story would say that the men—the brave men—had discovered the empty tomb. Yet all four gospels say the women were the first witnesses – all this while the sissy-pants men had their doors locked for fear of the Jews.
In light of these embarrassing details—along with the fact that the New Testament documents contain early, eyewitness testimony for which the writers gave their lives—it takes more faith to believe that the New Testament writers were not telling the truth.
# Footnotes:
1). Instructions to Jurists:
“Do not automatically reject testimony just because of inconsistencies or conflicts. Consider whether the differences are important or not. People sometimes honestly forget things or make mistakes about what they remember. Also, two people may witness the same event yet see or hear it differently” (Section 105, Judicial Council of California Criminal Jury Instructions, 2006).
2). The related “Criterion of Disimmilarity”
Cold case detective J Warner Wallace says this about the gospel differences:
“I can deal with the inconsistencies; I expect them. But when witnesses are allowed to sit together (prior to being interviewed) and compare notes and observations, I’m likely to get one harmonized version of the event. Everyone will offer the same story. While this may be tidier, it will come at the sacrifice of some important detail that a witness is willing to forfeit in order to align his or her story with the other witnesses. I’m not willing to pay that price. I would far rather have three messy, apparently contradictory versions of the event than one harmonized version that has eliminated some important detail. I know in the end I’ll be able to determine the truth of the matter by examining all three stories. The apparent contradictions are usually easy to explain once I learn something about the witnesses and their perspectives (both visually and personally) at the time of the crime.”
Inconsistencies far from bringing the gospels into disrepute are a sign of authenticity. Any concerted fabrication would have harmonised the narrative.
Do the New Testament documents tell the truth about what really happened in the first century? Authors claiming to record and write history are unlikely to invent embarrassing details about themselves or their heroes. Since the New Testament documents are filled with embarrassing details, we can reasonably infer that they are telling the truth.
There are many examples. The disciples allow themselves to be humbled as equal brothers and disabused of any pretensions to self importance or self aggrandizement, such as any false storyteller would be motivated by.
“But as for you, do not be called ‘Rabbi,’ because you have one Teacher, and you are all brothers. Do not call anyone on earth your father, because you have one Father, who is in heaven. And do not be called masters either, because you have one Master, the Messiah.” (Matthew 23:8-10)
Notice that the disciples frequently depict themselves as dim wits. They often fail to understand what Jesus is saying, and don’t understand what his mission is about until after the resurrection. Their thick-headedness even earns their leader, Peter, the sternest rebuke from Jesus: “Get behind me Satan!” (What great press the disciples provided for their leader and first Pope! Also “Do not be called Father!” Contrary to popular opinion, it seems the church really didn’t have editorial control of the scriptures after all.)
After Jesus asks them to stay up and pray with him during his greatest hour of need, the disciples fall asleep on Jesus not once, not twice but three times! Then, after pledging to be faithful to the end, Peter denies Christ three times, and they all abandoned Him to His captors by fleeing the scene of His arrest..
The scared, scattered, skeptical disciples make no effort to give Jesus a proper burial. Instead they say a member of the Jewish ruling body that sentenced Jesus to die is the noble one — Joseph of Arimathea buries Jesus in a Jewish tomb (which would have been easy for the Jews to refute if it wasn’t true). Two days later, while the men are still hiding, the women go down and discover the empty tomb and the risen Jesus.
Who wrote all that down? Men — some of the men who were characters in the story. Now if you were part of a group of men trying to pass off a false resurrection story as the truth, would you depict yourselves as dim-witted, bumbling, rebuked, lazy, skeptical sissies, who ran away at the first sign of trouble, while the women were the brave ones who discovered the empty tomb and the risen Jesus?
If men were inventing the resurrection story, it would go more like this:
*** ‘Jesus came to save the world, and he needed our help. That’s why we were there for him every step of the way. When he was in need, we prayed with him. When he wept, we wept with him (and told him to toughen up!). When he fell, we carried his cross. The gates of Hell could not prevent us from seeing his mission through!
So when that turncoat Judas brought the Romans by (we always suspected Judas), and they began to nail Jesus to the cross, we laughed at them. “He’s God you idiots! The grave will never keep him! You think you’re solving a problem, but you’re really creating a much bigger one!”
While we assured the women that everything would turn out all right, they couldn’t handle the crucifixion. Squeamish and afraid, they ran to their homes screaming and hid behind locked doors.
But we men stood steadfast at the foot of the cross, praying for hours until the very end. When Jesus finally took his last breath and the Roman Centurion confessed that Jesus was God, Peter blasted him, “That’s what we told you before you nailed him up there!” (Through this whole thing, the Romans and the Jews just wouldn’t listen!)
Never doubting that Jesus would rise on the third day, Peter announced to the Centurion, “We’ll bury him and be back on Sunday. Now go tell Pilate to put some of your ‘elite’ Roman guards at the tomb to see if you can prevent him from rising from the dead!” We all laughed and began to dream about Sunday.
That Sunday morning we marched right down to the tomb and tossed those elite Roman guards aside. Then the stone (that took eleven us to roll into place) rolled away by itself. A glowing Jesus emerged from tomb, and said, “I knew you’d come! My mission is accomplished.” He praised Peter for his brave leadership and congratulated us on our great faith. Then we went home and comforted the trembling women.’ ***
So much for the fictional narration theory!
There are other events in the New Testament documents concerning Jesus that are also unlikely to be made up. For example, Jesus:
■ Is baptised by John. Jesus was “supposedly superior and sinless,” yet he was baptized “by his supposed inferior who proclaimed ‘a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.’” Jesus’ followers, therefore, struggled to narrate Jesus’ baptism without undermining belief in his sinlessness or his superiority vis-à-vis John. (Matthew 3:13-17, Mark 1:9-11, Luke 3:21-22)
■ Is considered “out of his mind” by his own family who come to seize him to take him home (Mark 3:21 & 31).
■ Is deserted by many of his followers after he says that followers must eat his flesh and drink his blood. (John 6:66).
■ Is not believed by his own brothers (John 7:5). (Disbelief turned to belief after the resurrection—ancient historians tell us that Jesus’ brother James died a martyr as the leader of the church in Jerusalem in A.D. 62).
■ Is thought to be a deceiver (John 7:12).
■ Turns off Jewish believers to the point that they want to stone him (John 8:30-59).
■ Is called a “madman” (John 10:20).
■ Is called a “drunkard” (Matthew 11:19).
■ Is accused of being “demon-possessed” (Mark 3:22, John 7:20, 8:48).
■ Has his feet wiped with hair of a prostitute which easily could have been seen as a sexual advance (Luke 7:36-39).
■ Is crucified despite the fact that “anyone who is hung on a tree is under God’s curse” (Deuteronomy 21:23).
If you’re inventing a Messiah to the Jews, you don’t say such things about him. You also don’t admit that some of you “still doubted” Jesus had really risen from the dead, especially while he’s standing right in front of you giving the great commission (Matthew 28:17-19).
Finally, anyone trying to pass off a false resurrection story as the truth would never say the women were the first witnesses at the tomb. In the first century, a woman’s testimony was not considered on par with that of a man. An invented story would say that the men—the brave men—had discovered the empty tomb. Yet all four gospels say the women were the first witnesses – all this while the sissy-pants men had their doors locked for fear of the Jews.
In light of these embarrassing details—along with the fact that the New Testament documents contain early, eyewitness testimony for which the writers gave their lives—it takes more faith to believe that the New Testament writers were not telling the truth.
# Footnotes:
1). Instructions to Jurists:
“Do not automatically reject testimony just because of inconsistencies or conflicts. Consider whether the differences are important or not. People sometimes honestly forget things or make mistakes about what they remember. Also, two people may witness the same event yet see or hear it differently” (Section 105, Judicial Council of California Criminal Jury Instructions, 2006).
2). The related “Criterion of Disimmilarity”
Cold case detective J Warner Wallace says this about the gospel differences:
“I can deal with the inconsistencies; I expect them. But when witnesses are allowed to sit together (prior to being interviewed) and compare notes and observations, I’m likely to get one harmonized version of the event. Everyone will offer the same story. While this may be tidier, it will come at the sacrifice of some important detail that a witness is willing to forfeit in order to align his or her story with the other witnesses. I’m not willing to pay that price. I would far rather have three messy, apparently contradictory versions of the event than one harmonized version that has eliminated some important detail. I know in the end I’ll be able to determine the truth of the matter by examining all three stories. The apparent contradictions are usually easy to explain once I learn something about the witnesses and their perspectives (both visually and personally) at the time of the crime.”
Inconsistencies far from bringing the gospels into disrepute are a sign of authenticity. Any concerted fabrication would have harmonised the narrative.