Were the Gospel Writers Biased?

Summary

In this discourse, the reliability of the gospels is examined through their early authorship, corroboration, consistency over time, and the absence of bias. The speaker explores the motivations behind lying, identifying financial gain, lust, and the pursuit of power as the primary reasons. They argue that the authors of the gospels, having nothing to gain in these areas, were not biased. The speaker also addresses the skepticism around trusting Christian sources, using an analogy to demonstrate the absurdity of dismissing eyewitness accounts due to belief. Concluding that the gospels meet all criteria for reliability, the speaker shares their conversion to Christianity based on the robust evidence presented.

Takeaways

• 🕵️‍♂️ The reliability of the gospels is examined based on four criteria: early authorship, corroboration, consistency over time, and absence of bias.
• ✍️ The authors of the gospels wrote their accounts early enough for their testimonies to be considered credible.
• 🔗 The gospels are corroborated by other historical documents and writings of the time.
• 🔄 The content of the gospels has remained consistent over time, indicating honesty and accuracy.
• 🤔 The concept of bias is discussed, with a focus on whether the authors had motives such as financial gain, sexual or relational reasons, or the pursuit of power.
• 💰 The idea that the authors of the gospels could have been motivated by financial gain is deemed unlikely.
• ❤️ The possibility of the authors being driven by sexual or relational desires is also considered an improbable motive for their writings.
• ⚖️ The pursuit of power is presented as a potential bias, but the speaker argues that it is unreasonable to believe the authors would have sacrificed their positions for such a motive.
• 🗣️ The speaker emphasizes the importance of considering the martyrdom of the gospel authors as evidence of their commitment to the truth of their accounts.
• 👀 The speaker refutes the notion that non-Christian sources are more reliable, using the analogy of a bank robbery witness to illustrate that belief does not invalidate eyewitness testimony.

Q & A

What are the three main factors that can cause someone to lie according to the speaker?

The speaker identifies three main factors that can cause someone to lie: financial gain, sexual or relational lust, and the pursuit of power, respect, authority, position, or influence.

How does the speaker suggest evaluating the reliability of the Gospels?

The speaker suggests evaluating the reliability of the Gospels by considering if they were written early enough, if they have been corroborated, if they have remained unchanged over time, and if the authors show any bias that would motivate them to lie.

What is the speaker's stance on the idea that the Gospels are not reliable because they were written by Christians?

The speaker argues against the notion that the Gospels are not reliable because they were written by Christians, using the analogy of a bank robbery witness who becomes a believer in the guilt of the robber after witnessing the crime.

Why does the speaker believe that the martyrdom of the Gospel authors supports their reliability?

The speaker believes that the martyrdom of the Gospel authors supports their reliability because they were willing to die for their claims, indicating that they knew their testimonies were true since they had experienced the events themselves.

What is the speaker's view on the necessity of having a non-Christian source to validate the story of Jesus?

The speaker rejects the idea that a non-Christian source is necessary to validate the story of Jesus, arguing that a witness's belief in the events they witnessed does not invalidate their testimony.

How does the speaker use the analogy of a bar fight to illustrate the difficulty in determining truth?

The speaker uses the analogy of a bar fight where two drunk individuals are accusing each other of starting the fight to illustrate how difficult it can be to determine who is telling the truth, and how this scenario can be a learning exercise for new officers in discerning truth-telling.

What does the speaker imply about the motivations of the Gospel authors in terms of financial gain?

The speaker implies that it is unlikely that the Gospel authors were motivated by financial gain, as they did not receive money from their stories and in fact faced persecution and death.

What is the speaker's opinion on the possibility of the Gospel authors lying for the sake of power?

The speaker finds it unreasonable to believe that the Gospel authors lied for the sake of power, as their actions, including their martyrdom, suggest they sacrificed positions of authority for their beliefs.

Why does the speaker consider the Gospel of Matthew as a significant account?

The speaker considers the Gospel of Matthew significant because Matthew was a skeptic before becoming a believer, similar to the bank robbery witness who did not expect the robbery but witnessed it and became convinced of the truth.

What does the speaker mean when he says that the Gospels 'measure up' in terms of reliability?

When the speaker says the Gospels 'measure up' in terms of reliability, he means that they pass the tests for early authorship, corroboration, consistency over time, and lack of bias that would lead to lying, thus supporting their reliability.

Outlines

00:00

🕵️‍♂️ Assessing Gospel Reliability and Motivations for Deception

The paragraph discusses the examination of the reliability of the gospels based on four criteria: timeliness, corroboration, consistency over time, and the absence of bias. It introduces the concept of bias as a factor that can affect the truthfulness of eyewitness accounts. The speaker uses the analogy of a bar fight to illustrate how difficult it can be to discern the truth when there is a potential for bias. The paragraph then delves into the reasons why people might lie, categorizing them into three main motivations: financial gain, lust (sexual or relational), and the pursuit of power. The speaker argues that if the authors of the gospels were lying, it would be for one of these reasons. The paragraph concludes by questioning whether it's reasonable to believe that the gospel authors were motivated by a desire for power, given their ultimate sacrifices, and suggests that their willingness to die for their beliefs speaks to the reliability of their accounts.

05:00

📜 The Credibility of Christian and Non-Christian Testimonies

This paragraph addresses the objection that testimonies about Jesus should come from non-Christian sources to be considered reliable, as Christian authors might be biased. The speaker counters this argument by using a bank robbery analogy, where an unexpected witness provides a credible account of the crime despite being personally acquainted with the perpetrator. The speaker argues that personal belief does not necessarily invalidate the credibility of an eyewitness. The paragraph then draws a parallel between this scenario and the Gospel of Matthew, suggesting that Matthew, who was initially a skeptic, wrote his gospel because of his firsthand experiences with Jesus, not because of a preconceived bias. The speaker concludes by emphasizing that the gospels meet the criteria for reliable eyewitness accounts, and that their authors' sincerity is demonstrated by their willingness to face martyrdom for their beliefs.

Keywords

💡Reliable

In the context of the video, 'reliable' refers to the trustworthiness and accuracy of the Gospels as historical documents. The speaker discusses various criteria such as early authorship, corroboration, consistency over time, and absence of bias that contribute to the reliability of the Gospels. The video argues that the Gospels meet these criteria, suggesting they are reliable sources of information about Jesus.

💡Early Authorship

Early authorship is a criterion used to evaluate the reliability of historical documents. The video suggests that the Gospels were written close to the time of the events they describe, enhancing their credibility. The speaker implies that if the Gospels were written early enough, they would be less likely to have been influenced by later fabrications or alterations.

💡Corroboration

Corroboration in the video refers to the process of confirming the truth of a statement by comparing it with other evidence. The speaker argues that the Gospels are corroborated by other historical sources, which strengthens their reliability. This concept is used to show that the accounts in the Gospels are not isolated but are supported by other records.

💡Consistency

Consistency over time is another factor discussed in the video that affects the reliability of the Gospels. The speaker asserts that the Gospels have remained consistent in their message and content throughout history, indicating that they have not been significantly altered or tampered with, which is important for maintaining their historical accuracy.

💡Bias

Bias is a concept used to describe a predisposition or inclination that can influence the presentation of information. The video discusses the potential bias of the Gospel authors and argues that there is no significant bias that would lead them to lie about the events they describe. The speaker uses the example of a bar fight to illustrate how bias can affect the reliability of eyewitness accounts.

💡Financial Gain

Financial gain is one of the motivations the speaker lists that could potentially lead someone to lie. In the context of the Gospels, the speaker questions whether the authors could have been motivated by financial gain to write their accounts, suggesting that this is not a reasonable explanation for their actions.

💡Sexual or Relational Lust

Sexual or relational lust is another potential motivation for lying, as mentioned by the speaker. He uses this concept to explore whether the authors of the Gospels could have been driven by such motivations, ultimately concluding that it is unlikely based on the context of their lives and the nature of their writings.

💡Power

Power, as a motivation for lying, is discussed in the video as a possible reason why the Gospel authors might have written their accounts. The speaker argues that while it is possible that the authors sought power or authority, it is not a reasonable explanation given their backgrounds and the circumstances under which they wrote.

💡Martyrdom

Martyrdom refers to the act of suffering persecution and death for one's beliefs. The video uses the concept of martyrdom to argue for the reliability of the Gospels, noting that the authors and eyewitnesses were willing to die for their testimonies, which suggests a strong conviction in the truth of their accounts.

💡Non-Christian Source

A non-Christian source is mentioned in the video as a type of evidence that some might require to believe in the historical accounts of Jesus. The speaker counters this by arguing that a witness's belief or bias does not automatically discredit their testimony, using the analogy of a bank robbery witness who accurately identifies a perpetrator despite being personally acquainted with them.

Highlights

The reliability of the gospels is examined through three criteria: early authorship, corroboration, and consistency over time.

The concept of eyewitness reliability is discussed, focusing on the potential for bias and dishonesty in accounts.

A real-life analogy of a bar fight is used to illustrate the difficulty in discerning truth from biased accounts.

The speaker identifies three primary motivations for lying: financial gain, lust, and the pursuit of power.

The speaker argues that the authors of the gospels did not stand to gain from lying in any of the three identified areas.

The speaker challenges the idea that the gospels are unreliable because they were written by Christians.

The speaker uses the example of a bank robbery witness to argue that a believer's testimony can still be credible.

Matthew, a tax collector and skeptic, is highlighted as an example of an unbiased gospel writer.

The speaker emphasizes the importance of the gospels being written by eyewitnesses who would know if their accounts were true.

The willingness of the gospel authors to die for their beliefs is presented as evidence of the reliability of their accounts.

The speaker refutes the objection that non-Christian sources are necessary for a reliable account of Jesus.

The speaker concludes that the gospels meet all four criteria for evaluating eyewitness reliability.

The speaker's personal conversion to Christianity is attributed to the evidential reliability of the gospels.

The importance of mastering the cumulative case for the reliability of the gospels is emphasized for communication to others.

The speaker asserts that the evidence for the gospels' reliability is robust and worth the time to understand and share.

Transcripts

well we're just about ready to wrap up

an examination of whether the gospels

are reliable we looked at three things

so far right are they written early

enough have they uh going to be

corroborated in some way have they

changed over time uh they've been honest

and accurate over time the last aspect

of eyewitness reliability is a bias if

you find bias if you find that if

something is motivating people to lie

then you shouldn't trust at least you

should be skeptical or suspicious about

what they tell you especially they've

got good gain they can gain something

important by their lie look we have a

bar in our town and every new uh trainee

every new patrol officer is going to get

dispatched to a bar fight if it occurs

at this bar because it's notorious for

bar fights on the weekend and we want to

see if our new guys can actually do the

job so if you're a trainee and you've

got a field training officer and there's

a bar fight at this bar you're going to

get dispatched to have to deal with the

bar fight well why because it's a great

exercise in learning about truth-telling

because when you get there there's going

to be two drunk Fighters and one's going

to say that the other person started it

and he should go to jail and that guy's

gonna say oh that guy started he should

go to jail

and trying to figure out who you should

trust in this and who's motivated to lie

to you it's it's a nice little exercise

for trainees

well why do we do that why do we want

trainees to learn about what motivates

people to lie because it'll help you

determine if a statement is reliable

something similar happens here yeah I've

learned a long time ago that there are

only three reasons why anyone lies

they're the same three reasons why

anyone commits a murder you might think

oh I can think about 100 reasons why

somebody would come no there's only

three reasons why someone commits a

murder only three reasons why someone

commits a theft only three reasons why

you've ever done anything you as a

matter of fact all sin comes back to

only one of three motivations and once

you know what those three motivations

are you can actually test

to see if someone is lying to you let me

explain them to you maybe you're already

thinking this way the first is simple

financial gain people do a lot of crazy

things for money a lot of stupid occurs

because of the pursuit of money the

second one you might also kind of get

easily and that is either sexual or

relational lust those kinds of

motivations also will drive people to do

things they shouldn't do so we've got so

far money and sex

the third thing is a little more nuanced

it is the pursuit of power

of respect authority position influence

these are things that are in the power

category that motivate people to do

things they shouldn't do when someone's

lying to me

I always know that they're biased or

their motivation lies in one of those

three areas it makes it very easy to

assess a lie if we think that the claims

made in the gospels by the original

authors are lies okay we could test that

because if there are lies if they're

lying to us it's only for one of those

three reasons those are the only three

reasons why anyone ever lies

so the question then is what did these

writers have to gain in those three

areas do they get a lot of money on the

basis of their story

did they develop girlfriends or social

relation I mean seriously is that what

drove them to say these things

most people who are skeptical about the

gospels don't think it's those two

things that are driving the authors they

think it's in the third category it's

power it's influence

now remember earlier we talked about the

difference between possible and

reasonable I think it's quite possible

people could have written the gospels in

the pursuit of power or authority or

respect right at least they would be

popular within their little religious

community but if that's what's driving

them is that reasonable it might be

possible but is it reasonable think

about it Paul wrote most of the New

Testament right so you're saying he's

motivated by what why is he lying it's

not about money or sex you save it's

about Power Authority really so Paul

started off as a religious Jew in a

position of religious Authority and

respect in his local community in fact

he had enough Authority and respect to

draw the papers to execute Christians so

now you're telling me that Paul says I'm

going to jump out of my position of

authority and respect in my religious

community and jump in with these

Christians and get beat up all over the

known world for the next 20 years hoping

to someday return to a position of

authority and power and respect

he started with that

that's a possible explanation but it

strikes me as an entirely unreasonable

explanation especially considering how

every one of these authors died how

every one of these eyewitnesses that

look we know the stories are always

pretty much the same they are martyred

in some horrific way and whether we

don't we trust all those Legends are 100

true or not we know one thing no one

ever ever recanted No ancient Authority

ever claims that any of these people

ever recanted their story look if you

said to me that you were willing to die

for what you believe is a Christian I

would tell you up front that has zero

evidential value

lots of people will die for what they

don't know is a lie but this is the one

group that would know if it's a lie

their testimony is very different than

mine in this century

they would know if they're telling the

truth I have to trust on the basis of

reliability that they're telling me the

truth but they would know it because

they actually experienced it if they're

willing to die for their claims that's

worth considering if it's reliable and I

think that actually demonstrates its

reliability let me go one last objection

though that's offered sometimes in this

category and that is this

Jim

I need to have a story about Jesus

written by a non-Christian in order to

believe it I I can't believe a story

that's if it's written by Christians you

can't trust it they're biased they they

like Jesus of course they're going to

say nice things about Jesus they're

Christians so if you want me to believe

something about Jesus it cannot be from

a Christian Source oh my gosh that is so

stupid let me just kind of offer for you

why that doesn't make any sense to me

uh if you're working Robbery Homicide

which I've worked for a number of years

and there's no homicide that day you're

going to work a robbery I've worked a

ton of bank robberies let me tell you a

story about a bank robbery a guy walks

into a bank does a very clever bank

robbery he comes in he's got a pistol

under his jacket he's got a demand note

he puts it on the counter the teller

sees the demand note sees the edge of

the gun and she starts giving him money

the cameras are capturing all of this

but they don't see the gun all we see is

a little note and she just starts giving

him money it's a brilliant robbery if

you think about it the only problem is

he didn't notice when he walked in the

behind the assistant manager's desk was

a girl named Kathy who had gone to high

school with him and she recognized him

immediately

he didn't see her

she thought well when he's done with

this transaction I'll say hello

but now she looks at her co-worker the

teller and the teller's gonna look on

her face like I'm being robbed push the

button push the button I'm being robbed

Kathy is shocked

she's known this young man Mark Hill for

you know years and years but she's never

known him to be the kind of person who

ever do a bank robbery as a matter of

fact of all the people she would make a

list of who were capable of doing a bank

robbery this doubt being the bottom of

the list

yet here he is before her very eyes

doing a bank robbery do you think I

should go over an interview Kathy about

this I don't think so can't trust her

and after all she she's convinced that

Mark Hill is a bank robber you might say

she's a mark hillian you can't trust

Mark hellianist to tell the truth about

Mark Hill can you okay do you see how

stupid that is the fact that she is

convinced he's a bank robber does not

exclude her

why is she convinced because she saw it

with her own eyes she didn't start off

thinking he was a bank robber she ended

up there convicted about it because she

saw it with her own eyes now she writes

a story about it why would I toss it out

as not reliable because now she's in a

position of belief that Mark Hill is a

bank robber she's still credible so now

let's compare Matthew to to Kathy

um Matthew is a guy who is not expecting

the Messiah is not part of the

discipleship of John the Baptist he's a

guy named Levi who's collecting taxes

and he spends then three years with

Jesus after being invited to join them

and after seeing all the stuff that

Jesus does all Jesus teaches and three

years later he's now a Believer and he

writes an account called The Gospel of

Matthew look if you're looking for an

account that is written by a person who

is a skeptic before the event just like

Kathy was a skeptic before the event

it's called The Gospel of Matthew he's

not in it he's not writing it because he

was hoping for it to be true or he has a

bias he's writing it because he saw it

with his own eyes so now you've got four

four good reasons the only four ways

that we typically evaluate eyewitness to

determine if they're reliable we've just

applied them to the gospels and in all

four ways they measure up they're

written early enough they're

corroborated they haven't changed over

time and the people who wrote them don't

present a bias that would cause them to

lie to us

I got to the end of that

as a non-Christian evaluating the

gospels and I said well what do I do

with this now

what do I do with it

I mean it was true I made the case as

robustly as I could it's a cumulative

case in the participants guide you will

see I've drawn out for you now the

entire cumulative case it's powerful and

that's why when people ask me Jim why

are you a Christian I don't say well you

you know you got two hours I need about

two hours to tell you why it's a robust

cumulative case and it's worth our time

we have to master it so we can

communicate it to others I'm not a

Christian because it's convenient or it

works or it solves a problem or it it

and I'm a Christian because it's true

and we've just demonstrated it

evidentially

foreign