A Simple Way to Check Integrity of the Gospels

 

Integrity of the Gospels, for many, is the first step in accepting its believability. Checking the integrity of the Gospels and its accounts can be as simple as comparing one Gospel account to another, a process known as “literary analysis.”[1]

Sounding complicated and boring, even intimidating – it is not! Chances are, literary analysis in its simplest form, is part of a normal routine personal activity. It happens naturally when reading a text such as books, magazine articles, Internet blogs, marketing ads, instructions, maps, etc. and mentally breaking it down to understand it better.[2] Almost anyone can do it at a basic level…and it can be fascinating.

In the case of the Gospels, literary analysis can be as simple as comparing two or more Gospels for such things as word usage, meaning, consistency, historical accuracy, theme, etc.[3] Performing any type of comparisons or cross references is a basic literary analysis technique.

A very close cousin to literary analysis is known as “textual criticism,” another term that seems intimidating and boring…and it probably is for most people. This technique is probably best reserved only for literary experts who are so inclined.

Understanding the theme is a key component by determining the central idea of the writing.[4] For the Gospels, is the theme intended to chronicle the birth, life, trial and execution of Jesus in the Judean Roman province – historical? Is the theme intended to teach a message of love and forgiveness – philosophical? Or perhaps, is the theme intended to convey a belief in Jesus as the promised Messiah exemplified by fulfillment of prophecies and Resurrection – salvation?

Determining the genre of the Gospels is key – are the Gospels fiction or non-fiction? Consider if the content is about real people, places and events (non-fiction) vs. content that is an invented story (fiction) written often for philosophical or entertainment purposes. To help figure this out, a reader can rely on some commonly recognized literary characteristic guidelines.

Fictions involve characters who are not real although they could believably be real people with resemblances to real persons. As a setting, the work may include real places, periods and events, but the story is always imaginary, artificial, not real. A big clue is the purpose of the author – was the intent to be entertaining, amusing, or enjoyable reading?[5]

Non-fictions, on the other hand, are written with the intention to be informative about real people, places or events based on historical, geographical or biographical facts. The central figure of the Gospels is Jesus – was he a real historical person? Non-fictions may also reflect the author’s recollection of witnessing events or facts often influenced by personal experiences.[6]

Characters in the story:  who are they – their gender, background, age, personalities, strengths and weaknesses, etc.? What did these characters say or how did they behave in various situations such as adversity, conflict, competition, challenges, interaction with others, etc.? Does it ring true – are their behaviors under the various circumstances what is to be expected by a normal person?

By now, natural investigative curiosity has kicked in…that urge to verify historical, geographical and biographical information to see if it is historically accurate.[7] In the case of the Gospels, was there a conspiratorial effort requiring coordination between four authors, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John? Gospels works of antiquity are multiplied by a factor of four authors written under varying times, places and circumstances thus setting direct answerability to the highest level.

Fact checking is very simple today using topical searches on the Internet to find reliable, unbiased secondary sources such as encyclopedias, historical websites, university library websites, etc. Texts of antiquity can even be referenced via the Internet such as by Jewish historian JosephusCaesar Augustus , and Roman historians Suetonius and Tacitus. The more knowledgeable about the subject matter, the better the analysis.

Performing literary analysis and literary criticism of the Gospels are a form of the scientific methodology. First, reading what has been written (observation); then gathering information (evidence, research, intuitive analysis) to identify the premise, determining the theme (hypothesis); and finally performing an assessment to see if it all stands up to scrutiny (testing, retesting).[8]

Using a scientific methodology approach allows for repeating the process to gain confidence in the outcome or conclusion. For some, a conclusion one way or the other about the integrity of the Gospels may come quickly; for many it will likely take longer.

In the end, the conclusion will be one reached on a personal level perhaps influenced by opinions, even biases weighed against observations, evaluation and factual accuracy.[9] Are the Gospels fictional or non-fictional? If they are found to be non-fictional, then the bigger question becomes:  is the central message of the Gospels believable?

 

Updated November 12, 2022.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

REFERENCES:

[1] Jenkins, Rob. “Literary Analysis as Scientific Method.”  The Chronicles of Higher Education. 2012. <http://www.chronicle.com/blogs/onhiring/literary-analysis-as-scientific-method/30565>  Godin, Katherine. “How to Analyze a Literary Passage: A Step-by-Step Guide.” Study.com. 2019. <http://study.com/academy/lesson/how-to-analyze-a-literary-passage-a-step-by-step-guide.html>
[2] Godin. “How to Analyze a Literary Passage: A Step-by-Step Guide.”
[3] Cherran.  “What is Literary Analysis?” Infomory.com.  August 21, 2011 <http://infomory.com/what-is/what-is-literary-analysis>   Ramlawi, Aisha. “Literary Analysis: Genre/Tone/Mood/Theme.”
[4] Reade, Dan.  “Selecting topics for literary analysis.” Sophia.org. 2017. <https://www.sophia.org/tutorials/selecting-topics-for-literary-analysis>   Ramlawi,. “Literary Analysis: Genre/Tone/Mood/Theme.”
[5] Ramlawi. “Literary Analysis: Genre/Tone/Mood/Theme.”  Prabhat S. “Difference Between Fiction and Non fiction.” 2011. DifferenceBetween.net. <http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/difference-between-fiction-and-non-fiction>   Cherran.  “What is Literary Analysis?”
[6] “Introduction to Literary Criticism and Analysis.” National Endowment for the Humanities | EDSITEment. <http://edsitement.neh.gov/sites/edsitement.neh.gov/files/worksheets/Critical%20Ways%20of%20Seeing%20The%20Adventures%20of%20Huckleberry%20Finn%20in%20Context%20-%20Introduction%20to%20Literary%20Criticism%20and%20Analysis.pdf> Cherran. “What is Literary Analysis?”
[7] “Introduction to Literary Criticism and Analysis.” National Endowment for the Humanities | EDSITEment.
[8] Reade.  “Selecting topics for literary analysis.”   Jenkins. “Literary Analysis as Scientific Method.”  “Introduction to Literary Criticism and Analysis.” National Endowment for the Humanities | EDSITEment.
[9] Cherran. “What is Literary Analysis?”

The Gospels – Just Recycled Material?

Similarities between certain passages of one Gospel found in another, sometimes word for word, are eyebrow-raising characteristics. These characteristics fuel conspiracy theories saying this is evidence of Christian collaborators making up a Messiah story.

Matthew, Mark and Luke – called the Synoptic Gospels – contain “parallel passages” where content similarities typically appear.[1] On full display in the synoptic Gospels is the distinctive Jewish literary practice of grouping content by topic instead of chronologically.[2]

In literary circles of Antiquity, written materials were considered communal property available to be freely used by other literati with or without citations.[3] The Synoptics use of a common source or sources is actually a reflection of legitimate writing protocol of the times.[4] An excellent point of comparison are the major Jewish works written during the same era – Josephus, the Talmud Mishnah, and other New Testament books.[5]

Most authorities agree the Gospel of John is an authentic eyewitness account written independently of the Synoptic Gospels and as such serves as a calibration source.[6] Writing he did not intend to cover all the things Jesus had done, still some critics use John’s omission of events found in the other three Gospels to challenge its credibility.[7]

Luke’s author openly acknowledged using “handed down” information, a practice common to Jewish and other cultures. Rabbi sages “handed down” oral interpretations of the Law over many generations until committed to writing in the Talmud.[8] Josephus wrote that he used expert sources “for the proof of what I say” in support of his writings.[9]

Jewish literary works used quotations as a means to cite sources in a time before footnotes or endnotes came into existence.[10] Throughout the New Testament quotations of the Jewish Scripture Septuagint translation can be seen preceded by the phrase “it is written.” Quoting was a practice also used in the Talmud and by Josephus.[11]

Literary authenticity and integrity, Josephus wrote, could be achieved by following the role model of Moses who took unexciting legal topics and made them meaningful and understandable while not adding or taking anything away.[12]  Moses took the source material of God’s Law handed down to him at Mt. Sinai and committed it to writing while interweaving it with factual, interesting Hebrew stories thereby producing a distinct literary work.[13]

Unique qualities found through simple literary analysis are obvious at the beginning of each Gospel.[14] Matthew, written for a Jewish audience, starts the genealogy of Jesus with Abraham. Luke, written to a Gentile audience, worked the genealogy of Jesus backward to Adam.[15]

Mark begins by immediately declaring Jesus to be the Son of God, then ties a prophecy to his introduction of John the Baptist. John’s well-known opening says “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”[16]

Quantifying the differences through deeper literary analysis, over 35% of the content of Matthew is unique to the Synoptics – not found in Mark or Luke.[17] Nearly 50% of the verses in Luke are not common to either Matthew or Mark.[18] Slightly less than 40% of the content of Mark is not shared by Matthew and Luke while nearly 8% of Mark is completely unique content.[19]

A fascinating characteristic of authenticity is demonstrated through miracles and parables. Contrary to popular perceptions, they have less in common among the Gospels than they have in common.

Of the 35 miracles recorded in the Gospels, only one is common to all four – the feeding of the 5000. One of the most, if not the most, famous miracle is Jesus walking on water and it does not appear in Luke![20]

Only 10 miracles, less than a third, are common to all three Synoptics. Almost half, 16 in all, are uniquely reported by a given author – 3 by Matthew, 2 by Mark, 5 by Luke and 6 by John.

Parables can be tricky to quantify (was it an illustration or a parable?) so the lists vary somewhere in the range of 30.[21] Only 5-7 of the parables are common to all three Synoptics.[22] Instead, about 70% of the parables are unique to either Matthew or Luke alone –  Matthew with 10-12 and 15-17 by Luke. One parable is exclusive to Mark while John does not recount any.[23]

Gospel authors produced literary works about Jesus of Nazareth that are distinctive yet corroborating. Are the Gospels no more than recycled information or do they meet the standard of literary authenticity?

 

Updated August 17, 2022.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

REFERENCES:

[1] Smith, Ben C. “Gospel manuscripts.” <http://www.textexcavation.com/gospelmanuscripts.html> Gloag, Paton J.  Introduction to the Synoptic Gospels. Page 5. <http://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/008728595 “Synoptic Gospels.” Theopedia.com. <http://www.theopedia.com/Synoptic_Gospels “The Book of Matthew.” Quartz Hill School of Theology. http://www.theology.edu/biblesurvey/matthew.htm Mareghni, Pamela. “Different Approaches to Literary Criticism.” <http://web.archive.org/web/20140628042039/http://www.ehow.com/about_5385205_different-approaches-literary-criticism.html >
[2] Reed, Annette Yoshiko.  Pseudepigraphy, Authorship, and ‘The Bible’ in Late Antiquity. Pages 478 – 489. <http://www.academia.edu/1610659/_Pseudepigraphy_Authorship_and_the_Reception_of_the_Bible_in_Late_Antiquity>  Last accessed 9 May 2014.  Gloag, Introduction to the Synoptic Gospels.  Pages 9, 23-38. <http://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/008728595>
[3] Josephus, Flavius.  Against Apion.  Book I. <http://books.google.com/books?id=e0dAAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false>   “Custom Cheating and Plagiarism essay paper writing service.” <http://exclusivepapers.com/essays/Informative/cheating-and-plagiarism.php>  Cummings, Michael J. “Did Shakespeare Plagiarize?” <http://cummingsstudyguides.net/xPlagiarism.html>
[4] Gloag, Introduction to the Synoptic Gospels. Pages 50-51.
[5] “Josephus, Flavius.” JewishEncylopedia.com.  <http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/8905-josephus-flavius>  Maimonides, Moses.  Mishneh Torah. “Introduction to Mishneh Torah.”  <http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/682956/jewish/Mishneh-Torah.htm>   A Translation of the Treatise Chagigah from the Babylonian Talmud.  Glossary:  “Mishnah.:  Ed. A. W. Streane.  <http://www.archive.org/stream/translationoftre00streuoft/translationoftre00streuoft_djvu.txt>  Segal, Eliezer.  A Page from the Babylonian Talmud.  “The Mishnah” and “The Gemara (Talmud).” <http://people.ucalgary.ca/~elsegal/TalmudPage.html#Page>  Spiro, Ken.  “History Crash Course #39: The Talmud.” Aish.com. 4 Aug. 2001.<http://www.aish.com/jl/h/cc/48948646.html>   Valentine, Carol A. “The Structure of the Talmud Files.” <http://come-and-hear.com/structure.html>  Chase, Jeffrey S. “The Gutenberg Printing Press.” <http://www.cs.duke.edu/~chase/cps49s/press-summary.html>
[6] “Gospel of John.”  Theopedia.com.  <http://www.theopedia.com/Gospel_of_John>  “The Book of John.” Quartz Hill School of Theology. http://www.theology.edu/biblesurvey/john.htm> Smith, Barry D. “The Gospel of John.”  <http://www.mycrandall.ca/courses/NTIntro/John.htm>
[7] John 20:30.
[8] Maimonides, Moses.  Mishneh Torah.  <http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/682956/jewish/Mishneh-Torah.htm>   Chase. “The Gutenberg Printing Press.”  Josephus.  Against Apion. Book I, #6-7.
[9] Josephus. Against Apion. Book I.
[10] Pearse, Roger, ed. “Tacitus and his manuscripts.”  <http://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/tacitus>  “Septuagint.”  Mercer Dictionary of the Bible. <http://books.google.com/books?id=goq0VWw9rGIC&lpg=PA185&ots=D1F_d2-T6T&dq=stipes%2C%20crucifixion&pg=PA185#v=onepage&q=septuagint&f=false>
[11] Josephus.  Against Apion. Book I.  Reed.  Pseudepigraphy, Authorship, and ‘The Bible’ in Late Antiquity.  Chase. “The Gutenberg Printing Press.” Fausset, Andrew R.  “New Testament.”  Fausset Bible Dictionary. <http://classic.studylight.org/dic/fbd>  Irenaeus of Lyons.  Against Heresies. Book III. Chapter XXI.3, also XXI.2.  <http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.ix.iv.html>  “Septuagint.”  Septuagint.net. 2014.  <http://septuagint.net>  Josephus, Flavius.  Antiquities of the Jews. Book XII, Chapter II.1-6, 13-1.  <http://books.google.com/books?id=e0dAAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=falseThe Babylonian Talmud. Rodkinson translation. Book 4, Tracts Megilla Chapter I. <http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/talmud.htm>  Benner, Jeff A. “The Great Isaiah Scroll and the Masoretic Text.” <https://www.ancient-hebrew.org/dss/great-isaiah-scroll-and-the-masoretic-text.htm>  Lundberg, Marilyn J. “The Leningrad Codex. <http://www.usc.edu/dept/LAS/wsrp/educational_site/biblical_manuscripts/LeningradCodex.shtml>   “Septuagint.”  Encyclopædia Britannica. <https://www.britannica.com/topic/Septuagint>
[12] Josephus.  Antiquities of the Jew. “Preface” #3
[13] Carr, A. The Gospel According to Matthew, Volume I.  Page XIX.  <http://books.google.com/books?id=ZQAXAAAAYAAJ&dq=Swete%2C%20The%20Gospel%20According%20to%20St.%20Matthew&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q=Swete,%20The%20Gospel%20According%20to%20St.%20Matthew&f=false>
[14] “The Four Gospels.” <http://www.religionfacts.com/christianity/texts/gospels.htm>
[15] Irenaeus. Against Heresies. Book III.  Chapters I, IX, XXI.   “New Testament.” Jewish Encyclopedia.  <http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/6821-gospels-the-four>  Gloag, Introduction to the Synoptic Gospels. Pages ix, 39.
[16] NIV, NASB, NRSV, NKJV
[17] “Matthew.”  Easton’s 1897 Bible Dictionary.  <http://www.ccel.org/e/easton/ebd/ebd/T0002400.html#T0002442>  “Gospel of Matthew.”  <http://www.religionfacts.com/gospel-matthew>  Carr. The Gospel Accouding to Matthew, Volume I.  Pages XVIII – XIX.  Gloag, Introduction to the Synoptic Gospels.  Pages 32-33.
[18] “Luke, Gospel according to.”  Easton’s Bible Dictionary.  <http://www.ccel.org/e/easton/ebd/ebd/T0002300.html#T0002332>
[19] “Mark, Gospel according to.”  Easton’s Bible Dictionary.  <http://www.ccel.org/e/easton/ebd/ebd/T0002400.html#T0002421>  Swete, Henry Barclay.  The Gospel According to St. Mark, The Greek Text with Notes and Indices.  Pages XIX, LXXIV.<https://books.google.com/books?id=WcYUAAAAQAAJ&lpg=PA127&ots=f_TER300kY&dq=Seneca%20centurio%20supplicio%20pr%C3%A6positus&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=false>
[20] “Luke.”  Easton’s Bible Dictionary.   Ryrie. Charles C., ed.  Ryrie Study Bible.  “The Miracles of Jesus.” 1978. Aune, Eilif Osten. “Synoptic Gospels.” < https://web.archive.org/web/20171214110423/www.bible-basics-layers-of-understanding.com/Synoptic-Gospels.html >
[21] Sween, Don and Nancy.  “Parable.” BibleReferenceGuide.com.  n.d. <http://www.biblereferenceguide.com/keywords/parable.html>
[22] “Parables” Easton’s Bible Dictionary.  <http://www.ccel.org/e/easton/ebd/ebd/T0002800.html#T0002842> “Luke, Gospel according to.”  Easton’s Bible Dictionary.  “Parables.”  International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. <http://www.internationalstandardbible.com/P/parable.html> Ryrie. “The Miracles of Jesus.”  Aune.  “Synoptic Gospels.”
[23] Smith, B. D. “The Gospel of John”, F. 5.3.3.  Sween.  “Parable.” Swete. The Gospel According to St. Mark, The Greek Text with Notes and Indices. Pages LXXIV, 83.  “Luke, Gospel according to.”  Easton’s Bible Dictionary. “Parable.” International Standard Bible Encyclopedia.  Ryrie. “The Parables of Jesus.”