How do we know that the Gospel before, during, after Jesus's death and Resurrection weren't made up?

Question

Before you get the wrong impression, I am a Christian, but just trying to work out some doubts. Please tell me, how de we really know the early Christians didn't just make up these accounts? I would prefer logical and historical input, not so much of "Because the BIble says so" or "Because dear brother!! Jesus loves you and would never lie to you!!!". That last part was alittle painful to type. Why would the early Christians "make up" the gospel accounts? What would be their motive? Give me some sort of proof (logical, historical, archealogical, whatever) showing that we CAN trust the Gospel accounts and that they are not false.

Answer 1

I think Pew Potato hit the nail on the head, and I'll also mention that the way things turned out were not at all as the disciples had imagined. For one thing, considering that the disciples all fled when Jesus was arrested and were cowering behind locked doors, the last thing they would imagine themselves doing is proclaiming boldly and under threat of punishment or death that Jesus had risen if in fact He hadn't. It wouldn't make sense for them to even think of this possibility unless Christ actually did rise from the dead and astound His disciples with proof of His resurrection. And there were enough witnesses who could easily have refuted the account of Jesus' resurrection if in fact He hadn't risen from the dead--but the best that the chief priests and teachers of the Law could come up with was to make up the lie that Jesus' disciples had merely stolen His body while the best-trained military soldiers in the world were asleep outside Jesus' tomb. It just doesn't make sense. Check out the first link below for an article I wrote about why the only conclusion that makes any sense when looking at the Bible's account of Christ's crucifixion and resurrection is that He actually did die and did rise again. If I can help answer any other questions you may have, feel free to drop me a line at [e-mail].

Answer 2

You are getting tied up into all the different possible scenario's but forgetting to rely on your FAITH.

No one can tell you that the gospels were not made up, who for sure wrote them, etc., etc. Just as no one can tell us any of history is completely accurate...no one is still around to be a witness...and there were no computers with youtube movies or My Space to record it on.

We have to rely on what we have and what we believe is true and right. Read the history, research the documents, look at what archeologists have found. Compare it to what the gospels say. Do not get wound up in whether they all four are exactly the same or contradict each other. Remember there may be MORE than we have that was written. Remember how it was compiled. Find out what happened to it during the dark ages, look at this history of its interpretations and translations.

And go on believing by Faith, no matter what. Ask God to help you find the truth, the way and the light.

The Ol' Hippie Jesus Freak
Grace, Peace and Love in Christ
Peg

Answer 3

The account of the Gospel of Jesus Christ was written in the 4 Gospels Matthew Mark Luke and John.
2 of them were part of the 12 Apostles 2 were not
Matthew was a tax collector and had access to tax records allowing him to Write about the lineage of Christ early in his writting Luke was a Physician that received Christ thru Paul's teaching so he researched his story. Mark wrote about the miracles that he had heard about. John just wrote about the Love Jesus had. These writtings are completely diverse from each other yet they tell the same story.
This same method is used by police to figure out a crime. If the stories from two criminals match then they planned the story ahead of time. If the stories differ then someone is lying but if the stories are basically the same but told differently then the police can assume they both told the truth.
The Gospels are the same story told differently doesnt appear to be a made up story to me

Answer 4

Lee Strobel has said:

I believe that the evidence of history does point in the direction of the truth of the resurrection. Number one is the empty tomb of Jesus--everybody agreed in the ancient world that the tomb of Jesus was empty. The question is, how did it get empty? The Christians claimed that Jesus returned from the dead. The counterclaim was presented that the disciples stole the body, even though they lacked motive and an opportunity. I don't think that's credible.

Could their motive have been that they wanted people to think he had been raised?

I don't think that they would be willing to suffer deprivation and death to support a claim that they knew was false.

I don't think they had the motive or the opportunity to steal the body. Nor do I think they would make the false claim that Jesus returned from the dead because it meant that they would suffer and die for that claim. I don't think people are generally willing to knowingly and willingly die for a lie.

Also, you have the added feature of the empty tomb being discovered by women. Women in first-century Jewish culture were not given credibility in a court of law; their testimony was not considered reliable. So why [do the gospel writers] say that women discovered the tomb empty, even though it hurts their case in the view of their audience? I believe it's because they were trying to accurately record what actually took place.

He encountered 515 individuals--including people whose lives were changed 180 degrees, from being opposed to Jesus to being supporters of Jesus, because of their encounter with the resurrected Christ.

Not only the gospels and not only the Book of Acts, not only Paul's references, but even preceding that, the apostle Paul preserves for us a creed that was recited by the earliest Christians that contains the fundamentals of Christianity-that Jesus died, why? For our sin. That he was buried, that he was resurrected on the third day. This creed has been dated back by scholars from a wide range of theological beliefs to as early as 2-3 years after the life of Jesus.

Here is a creed that emerges so quickly that it couldn't have been the product of legendary development. [It's] not the product of people over long periods of time attributing things to Jesus that didn't really happen.

Finally, you have the changed lives of the disciples. You've got people who were willing to die for their conviction that Jesus returned from the dead.

Answer 5

Honestly, because there's no point in it. What would early Christains have gained besides an execution? Nothing. There is no reason why early Christians would make up the stories of Jesus.

Think: If the punishment for saying that you saw pigs fly was death, and you know that you've never seen a pig fly, would you still say that you saw a pig fly?.... Hope this makes sense

Answer 6

There are many extra-biblical accounts/mentionings/references.
The works of Josephus is a place to start.
there are books that detail evidences which are far too lengthy for this format.
there are some who won't believe no matter what they see. what is it you expect to see before you believe?
There is more evidence and documentation for the life, and resurrection for that matter, than any other historical figure in the world.
No body ever disputed that Ghengis Khan existed. But that's the point.
No force has a reason to poison man's mind against Ghengis Khan.
Satan has much to gain if no one believes he exists.

Answer 7

He used to be useless for the bigger side of 3 days. Since the Bible says that the useless are incapable of pondering, speakme, or feeling, Jesus used to be ignorant of some thing till the time that God resurrected him again to lifestyles. We are informed concerning his dying--"He seeing this earlier than spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul used to be now not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption." Acts two:31

Answer 8

The Holy Spirit and the spirit of truth bear witness that our Lord Jesus died for us and we are bound by his blood to the truth . Your walking solid ground arnt you do you really think a human with limited knowledge can make a basket out of straw but God with unlimited knowledge couldnt possibly arrange atoms into matter to make both the flowers as well as the straw to make /and to place in that basket? I think it takes more faith for the evolutionists to believe that way. Than us just to believe in a Creator God.

Answer 9

That is unbelief and it is opposite to faith

Don't let Satan deceive you he is a master of deception that is why we have the Museums and all the other religions

Why would they make up so many accounts of the same thing and why would it confirm Prophesy in the old Testament

Answer 10

You could carefully consider what's written in the gospels and Acts and imagine scenarios whereby they were fabricated. I find it difficult to imagine.

See
http://www.bcbsr.com/topics/proof.html#history
For more.