In our introduction one of the historical evidences was said to be the history of the Bible which included the way it came into the world, its acceptance by men of all classes and the maintainance and growth of its influence insipte of obstacles.
In pursuing this line of evidence we might limit ourselves to the New Testament for if that be true it carries with it the truth of the Old Testament because it is the fruit of which the Old Testament is the seed. (cf. Mt 5:17; Lk 24:44; Jn 10:35; Rm 3:21; Hb 1:1,2.)
But to prove the truth of the New Testament we might limit ourselves to the gospels for if they be true, there is nothing elsewhere in the New Testament to cause doubt.
The historical exitence of the gospels, however, is presumptive evidence of their truth as seen in four ways:
As to their publication, the synoptics were published within 30 or 35 years after the resurrection of our Lord which was the period in which the events are said to have occurred. Moreover, they were published in the locality where the events transpired and among a people with every facility as well as every reason to inquire into their truthfulness. Therefore, the question is whether sane men of either good or bad character would have published such books under such circumstances expecting them to be accepted as true if they were false.
As to the details of their records, false witnesses commonly avoid them [details] because they increase opportunities for detection, but the gospels are full of details. cf. Luke 7:11,16; John 11 for particulars as to time, place, persons. Notice also that no astonishment is shown in the statement of the most miraculous events and that even the greatest mysteries are not sought to be explained. The inference form this is that the events were too well known for contradiction.
The testimony of their opponents is seen in this - that many who rejected the claims of the gospel itself admitted the facts on which they were based. The Pharisees did this in the time of our Lord. Mt. 12:24; 13:54; Jn 3:1,2; 7:31-46. Infidels of the post apostolic age did this, as for example, Celsus in the second century; Porphyry in the third; Julian, the apostate emperor of Rome, in the fourth century.
As to the testimony of contemporaneous writings both Jews and pagans of the first and second centuries corroborate the gospels so far as it comes within their purpose to speak of them. For example, Josephus, the Jewish historian (37-93) Tacitus, the Roman historian (100); Pliny, the Roman governor of Bithynia (103) Suetonius, a writer of biographical sketches (117); Juvenile, a writer of satires (128).
To this list might be added the later historian of Rome, Edward Gibbon (1737-1794.) He was an unbeliever and unfair in his treatment of Christianity, but he records enough to establish the fact that the gospels were received with confidence at the date of publication and thus to support the claims that the simple historical existence is a proof of their truth.
The URL of this page is https://www.angelfire.com/in3/missgreen/gospelevidences.html