How Can We Verify the Spiritual Claims of the Gospels?
Q&A • This article examines how the historical method applies to Scripture, demonstrating that the New Testament Gospels uniquely excel in evidence and reliability. It offers six critical criteria for verifying Christianity’s spiritual claims today.
Read time: 17 min
The Challenge of History
The article seeks to answer two important and related questions:
Can we trust the New Testament Gospels’ spiritual claims about Jesus, humanity, history, and eternal realities?
Can we verify such spiritual claims today, or are they lost to history and depend on blind faith?
Establishing the veracity of any ancient historical event is notoriously difficult, even if the event truly happened, due to limited sources, bias, time gaps, and interpretive challenges. Yet historians readily accept records of Julius Caesar’s Gallic Wars, for example, from fewer than ten manuscripts written centuries after the alleged events.
By contrast, the Gospels have many thousands of very early manuscripts, multiple accounts bearing the hallmarks of eyewitness testimony, and even corroboration from hostile contemporary sources. Given the typical scarcity of historical evidence from many events from history widely accepted as having occurred, the Gospels uniquely excel with early dating, internal consistency, and external validation through archaeology and non-Christian writings. If these biblical events truly happened, then their spiritual significance follows. That such rich evidence exists for Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection—despite history’s usual challenges—is nothing short of extraordinary, which demands serious historical investigation.
The Historical Method
Verifying or falsifying historical claims is not primarily the work of scientists in lab coats. It’s the work of historians, attorneys, and theologians. Distinct methods that rely on the careful collection, interpretation, and correlation of documentary, testimonial, and circumstantial evidence are examined. And, yes, sometimes scientific, forensic evidence may be marshaled.
A historian of ancient Rome, for example, might explore whether Julius Caesar actually crossed the Rubicon River in 49 BC. One would examine ancient sources, compare accounts, and assesse archaeological and logistical findings to reconstruct the plausibility of the event.
Similarly, in the case of events recorded in Scripture, theologians and historians analyze ancient texts, contextual, intra-textual and inter-textual clues, archaeological findings and diverse historical accounts to reconstruct the plausibility and trustworthiness of biblical records of an event.
Here, we’ll consider six minimal and logically ordered criteria to answer the questions at hand. Each criterion is not only important but arguably indispensable—because spiritual claims from a historical source such as Scripture are validated via this historical method by no fewer than these six criteria.
Overview of the Six Criteria
If we lack confidence in biblical textual integrity, we cannot be sure we have the original message.
If the biblical authors weren’t eyewitnesses or close to the events, we have less reason to trust their accounts.
Without historical accuracy, the Gospels may be dismissed as legend.
If the writers were insincere or self-serving, the entire testimony becomes suspect.
If biblical accounts of miracles, including Jesus’ resurrection, weren’t public and falsifiable at the time, then they would be indistinguishable from private religious experience, such as visions that Mohamed (i.e., Islam) and Joseph Smith (i.e., Mormonism) claim to have had.
And without strong historical grounding for Christ’s resurrection—the cornerstone verification of Jesus’ divine identity and mission—the Gospels’ claims about salvation would collapse.
If all six criteria are satisfied, the four New Testament Gospels may be considered credible, coherent, and worthy of trust—even without considering the internal confirmation of the Holy Spirit that grants moral persuasion regarding the truth of the claims. This framework offers a critical and historical path for evaluating whether the Gospels truly speak to what is ultimate, true, and real.
Six Historical Criteria
Criterion 1: Textual Integrity
Do we today possess access to the original content written by the Gospel authors?
1. Quantity and Early Dating of Manuscripts
Over 5,800 Greek New Testament (NT) manuscripts exist, some dating within decades of the originals—more than any ancient text.
Papyrus 52 (P52), containing John 18:31–33, 37–38, dates to c. AD 125 and reflects a copy likely made less than a generation after the original.
Early codices such as Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus (4th century) preserve nearly complete Gospel texts and show remarkable consistency across regions from a day when no word processors and internet proliferation was available.
Comparatively, Homer’s Iliad has fewer than 650 manuscripts, and the earliest is 500 years removed from the original—yet its text is considered stable.
(See: Daniel B. Wallace, Revisiting the Corruption of the New Testament; Craig L. Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of the Gospels; Peter J. Gurry & Elijah Hixson, Myths and Mistakes in New Testament Textual Criticism)
2. Small Margin of Variants Affecting Meaning
Over 99% of textual variants in the NT are minor (e.g., spelling, word order) and do not affect any meaning or doctrine whatsoever.
Significant variants, like the ending of Mark (Mark 16:9–20) or the “Pericope Adulterae” (John 7:53–8:11), are transparently noted in modern Bibles and do not alter core teachings of Christianity.
Core Gospel teachings (e.g., Jesus’ death and resurrection) appear in all major manuscript families without meaningful variation.
Jesus’ predictions of His death and resurrection (e.g., Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22; John 2:19–22) are consistent across textual lines.
(See: D.A. Carson & Douglas J. Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament; Bruce M. Metzger & Bart D. Ehrman, The Text of the New Testament; Gurry & Hixson, Myths and Mistakes)
3. Early Church Citations of the Gospels
Church Fathers quoted the Gospels so extensively that nearly the entire NT could be reconstructed from citations alone by AD 200.
Justin Martyr (c. AD 150) refers to “Memoirs of the Apostles,” clearly aligning with the Gospels (1 Apol. 66–67).
Irenaeus (c. AD 180) defends the fourfold Gospel and attributes each Gospel to its traditional author (Against Heresies 3.1.1).
Gospel passages cited include Luke 1:1–4; Matthew 1:18–25; John 1:1–14—indicating that early Christians regarded these texts as authoritative Scripture.
(See: Craig A. Evans, Jesus and the Manuscripts; J. Ed Komoszewski et al., Reinventing Jesus)
4. Transmission Practices and Copying Culture
Early Christians, influenced by Jewish reverence for Scripture (e.g., Deut. 6:6–9; Matt. 5:18), treated the Gospels as sacred texts and copied them carefully.
The use of nomina sacra (sacred name abbreviations) in early manuscripts reflects this reverence.
The transition from scrolls to codices allowed for more efficient copying and circulation of entire Gospel collections.
Geographical distribution (e.g., Egyptian, Western, Byzantine manuscripts) allows scholars to compare diverse textual streams and reconstruct the original with high confidence.
(See: Peter J. Williams, Can We Trust the Gospels?; Charles E. Hill, Who Chose the Gospels?)
Criterion 2: Historical Authorship and Proximity
Were the Gospels written by eyewitnesses or close associates of eyewitnesses within living memory of the events?
1. Uniform Early Church Attribution of Authorship
No apocryphal Gospel is ever attributed to Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John—only the canonical four are consistently tied to these names.
Papias (c. AD 95–110) states that Mark wrote down Peter’s teachings “accurately, though not in order” and that Matthew compiled sayings of Jesus in Hebrew (Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. 3.39).
Irenaeus (c. AD 180) confirms all four Gospels and their authors in Against Heresies 3.1.1, claiming they were handed down from the apostles.
No competing traditions exist in the manuscript record assigning these works to other authors.
(See: Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses; Martin Hengel, The Four Gospels and the One Gospel of Jesus Christ; Craig Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of the Gospels)
2. Internal Features Point to Eyewitness or Associate Testimony
Luke opens his Gospel with a historical prologue (Luke 1:1–4), affirming that he carefully investigated “everything from the beginning” using eyewitness sources.
John explicitly claims eyewitness testimony: “This is the disciple who is bearing witness... and we know that his testimony is true” (John 21:24).
Peter refers to “eyewitnesses of His majesty” (2 Pet. 1:16), supporting apostolic firsthand accounts.
The Gospels contain abundant “irrelevant” details (e.g., Mark 4:38 – Jesus asleep on a cushion; John 20:7 – folded face cloth) typical of authentic eyewitness memory.
(See: Peter J. Williams, Can We Trust the Gospels?; C.E. Hill, Who Chose the Gospels?)
3. Early Dating Supports Eyewitness Availability
Acts ends before Paul’s death (~AD 64–67) and does not mention the fall of Jerusalem (AD 70), suggesting Luke (and by extension Mark and Matthew) were written before then.
Mark is often dated to the early 60s; Luke and Matthew to the late 60s; John between 80–90s.
Paul’s letters, written earlier (e.g., 1 Thessalonians c. AD 50; 1 Corinthians c. AD 55), quote creedal formulas about Jesus (1 Cor. 15:3–5) that predate the Gospels, showing consistent early proclamation.
Jesus’ prophecy of the temple’s destruction (Matt. 24:2; Mark 13:2; Luke 21:6) is recorded without reference to fulfillment, further suggesting pre-70 authorship.
(See: D.A. Carson & Douglas Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament; Andreas Köstenberger et al., The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown; Craig Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of the Gospels)
4. Lack of Legendary Embellishment Suggests Early, Controlled Testimony
The Gospels describe Jesus performing miracles such as healing (Mark 2:1–12), exorcisms (Luke 8:26–39), and raising the dead (John 11:38–44) in measured, purposeful ways—not exaggerated or theatrical.
Jesus dies in shame and weakness (Mark 15:34; Luke 23:46), contrary to expected heroic embellishment.
The Gospels include difficult sayings (e.g., Matt. 7:23; John 6:60–66), rebukes of the disciples (Mark 8:33; Luke 22:24–27), and confusion about Jesus’ mission—all signs of authentic early memory, not propaganda.
Later apocryphal gospels (e.g., Gospel of Peter, Infancy Gospel of Thomas) include legendary elements like a talking cross and Jesus performing frivolous childhood miracles—absent in the canonical Gospels.
(See: Craig Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of the Gospels; Darrell Bock, Who Is Jesus? Linking the Historical Jesus with the Christ of Faith; Peter J. Williams, Can We Trust the Gospels?)
Criterion 3: Historical Reliability of the Narrative Framework
Do the Gospels accurately reflect the historical, cultural, and geographical realities of 1st-century Palestine?
1. Accurate Use of Names, Places, and Cultural Details
The Gospels reflect accurate use of Jewish names: the most common male names (e.g., Simon, Joseph, Judas) and female names (e.g., Mary, Salome) match frequencies from ossuary inscriptions and other historical data. (See Matt. 13:55; Luke 8:2–3; John 19:25 for common names.)
Jesus moves through verifiable cities and villages (e.g., Capernaum, Bethany, Jericho, Jerusalem) with accurate topographical sequences (Mark 10:46; Luke 19:1–10).
Social customs like betrothal (Matt. 1:18–19), Sabbath controversies (Mark 2:23–28), ritual purification (Luke 2:22–24; John 2:6), and synagogue reading (Luke 4:16–20) fit 1st-century Judaism.
(See: Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses; Peter J. Williams, Can We Trust the Gospels?; Craig Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of the Gospels)
2. Archaeological Confirmation of People, Places, and Customs
The Pilate Inscription (discovered in Caesarea Maritima) confirms Pontius Pilate as prefect of Judea, aligning with Gospel accounts (Matt. 27:2; Mark 15:1–15; Luke 23:1–25).
The Caiaphas Ossuary confirms the existence of the high priest named in all four Gospels (Matt. 26:3; John 18:13).
The Pool of Bethesda (John 5:2) and the Pool of Siloam (John 9:7) were both uncovered by archeologists and match the Gospel descriptions.
The Gabbatha (John 19:13), once thought fictional, corresponds to a stone pavement discovered in Jerusalem.
Synagogues in Capernaum (Mark 1:21; Luke 4:31) and Magdala affirm the Gospels’ consistent reference to synagogue preaching.
(See: Craig A. Evans, Jesus and the Remains of His Day; John McRay, Archaeology and the New Testament; Darrell Bock, Jesus According to Scripture)
3. Coherence with Known Roman and Jewish Political Structures
The Gospels accurately portray the structure of Jewish leadership: chief priests, scribes, elders, and the Sanhedrin (Mark 14:53–65; Luke 22:66–71).
They correctly describe Herod Antipas ruling Galilee (Luke 3:1), Pilate overseeing Judea (Matt. 27:2), and tensions between Roman and Jewish authorities.
Roman practices such as scourging (John 19:1), crucifixion (Matt. 27:35; Mark 15:24), and tomb sealing with guards (Matt. 27:62–66) align with known Roman policies.
The Gospels’ mentions of taxes (Matt. 22:17–21), census (Luke 2:1–2), and temple coin exchange (Matt. 21:12) are all supported by historical and economic research.
(See: Colin Hemer, The Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History; Darrell Bock, A Theology of Luke and Acts; Craig Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of the Gospels)
4. External Non-Christian Sources Corroborate Key Details
Josephus (Antiquities 18.3.3) confirms Jesus as a teacher who was crucified under Pilate and whose followers claimed He rose again.
Tacitus (Annals 15.44) reports that Jesus was executed by Pontius Pilate during Tiberius’s reign.
Pliny the Younger (Letters 10.96–97) describes early Christian worship of Jesus “as to a god,” showing continuity with the Gospel claims.
Suetonius and Lucian mention early Christian beliefs and persecution.
These sources verify that Christianity was known, organized, and growing rapidly in the early 2nd century—consistent with the claims of the Gospels and Acts (e.g., Acts 2:41–47; Acts 5:27–42).
(See: F.F. Bruce, Jesus and Christian Origins Outside the New Testament; Gary Habermas, The Historical Jesus; Craig Evans, Jesus and the Manuscripts)
Criterion 4: Sincerity and Moral Credibility of the Witnesses
Did the Gospel writers (i.e., Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) sincerely believe their claims, with no signs of intentional deception or ulterior motive?
1. Willingness to Suffer and Die for Their Testimony
The apostles consistently endured persecution and suffering, not for private benefit but for proclaiming the risen Christ:
Peter and John: beaten and threatened (Acts 4:18–21; Acts 5:40–41), yet continued preaching with joy.
Stephen: stoned to death for testifying to Jesus’ resurrection (Acts 7:54–60).
Paul: imprisoned, flogged, stoned, and ultimately executed for proclaiming Christ’s resurrection (2 Cor. 11:23–28; Acts 21:30–36).
Church tradition affirms martyrdom for Peter, Paul, James (the brother of Jesus), and others—yet there are no accounts of apostolic retraction.
While people may die for mistaken beliefs, they do not die for what they know is false—suggesting the disciples sincerely believed what they testified.
(See: Sean McDowell, The Fate of the Apostles; Craig Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of the Gospels; Gary Habermas & Michael Licona, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus)
2. Absence of Personal, Political, or Financial Gain
Jesus warned His followers that suffering and rejection would accompany discipleship (Matt. 5:10–12; John 15:20), which contradicts any motive of personal advancement.
Paul described his ministry as one of toil, not profit: “We preach not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord” (2 Cor. 4:5; cf. 2 Cor. 11:7–9).
The apostles gained no power, wealth, or social status; instead, they were frequently marginalized (1 Cor. 4:9–13).
Their message emphasized humility (Luke 22:26), self-denial (Matt. 16:24), and suffering for truth—traits not typically associated with deception.
(See: Craig Keener, Christobiography; Peter J. Williams, Can We Trust the Gospels?; N.T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God)
3. Consistent Character and Moral Vision in the Writings
The moral vision of the Gospels is profound and internally consistent: Jesus teaches love of enemies (Matt. 5:44), integrity (Matt. 6:1–6), mercy (Luke 6:36), and justice (Matt. 23:23).
The apostles reflect this in Acts and the epistles—exhorting holiness (1 Pet. 1:15–16), unity (Phil. 2:1–4), and truthfulness (Eph. 4:25).
There is no evidence of manipulation, coercion, or agenda-driven deception in their presentation.
False prophets are explicitly condemned (Matt. 7:15–20; 2 Pet. 2:1–3), reinforcing their commitment to sincerity and truth.
(See: D.A. Carson, The Gagging of God; John Stott, The Cross of Christ; Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses)
4. Embarrassing and Counterproductive Details Included
The Gospels candidly portray the failings of key figures:
Peter denies Christ three times (Matt. 26:69–75; Mark 14:66–72).
The disciples fall asleep while Jesus suffers (Matt. 26:40–43).
Women, not men, are the first to witness the resurrection (Luke 24:1–11; John 20:1–18)—a detail unlikely to be invented in a patriarchal culture.
Jesus is initially accused of being out of His mind by His family (Mark 3:21) and is rejected in His hometown (Mark 6:1–6).
These four features suggest authenticity rather than fictional embellishment, since they damage the public credibility of the witnesses if false.
(See: Michael Licona, Why Are There Differences in the Gospels?; J. Warner Wallace, Cold-Case Christianity; Craig Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of the Gospels)
Criterion 5: Public and Falsifiable Nature of the Supernatural Claims
Were the central spiritual claims (e.g., miracles, resurrection, claims of eternal life, etc.) embedded in real history and not in myth or allegory?
1. Supernatural Claims Tied to Verifiable Historical Contexts
Jesus’ miracles are presented as public acts within specific locations:
Healing a paralyzed man in a crowded house in Capernaum (Mark 2:1–12)
Feeding 5,000 men (not counting women and children) near Bethsaida (Mark 6:30–44; Luke 9:10–17)
Raising Lazarus from the dead near Jerusalem, with many eyewitnesses (John 11:38–44)
These miracles are not vague or visionary—they involve physical restoration, real people, and named towns.
These miracles are not vague or visionary—they involve physical restoration, real people, and named towns.
Jesus was crucified “under Pontius Pilate” (Matt. 27:2; Mark 15:1; Luke 23:1; John 18:28), a real Roman governor mentioned by Tacitus (Annals 15.44), placing the central supernatural claim (the resurrection) in datable, geopolitical history.
(See: Craig Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of the Gospels; Peter J. Williams, Can We Trust the Gospels?; Gary Habermas & Michael Licona, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus)
2. Public Eyewitness Claims and Challenges to Disprove Them
The apostles proclaimed the resurrection in Jerusalem, where the tomb could be examined (Acts 2:22–36; Acts 3:15; Acts 4:10).
Peter says, “God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of it” (Acts 2:32).
Paul cites over 500 eyewitnesses of the risen Christ, “most of whom are still alive” (1 Cor. 15:6)—inviting investigation.
The inclusion of specific individuals (e.g., Simon of Cyrene in Mark 15:21; Bartimaeus in Mark 10:46–52; Mary Magdalene in John 20:11–18) may function as named sources, validating the historicity of the accounts.
The early message was openly proclaimed before hostile audiences, not quietly introduced generations later.
(See: Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses; Sean McDowell, Evidence That Demands a Verdict; N.T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God)
3. Absence of Legendary Indicators
The Gospels do not feature fanciful or mythological traits found in apocryphal literature:
Jesus’ miracles serve moral or theological purposes (e.g., demonstrating His authority to forgive sins in Mark 2:10).
There is no use of cosmic battles, magical incantations, or deified heroes—unlike Greco-Roman or Gnostic myths.
Gospel restraint is notable:
Jesus refuses to perform signs on demand (Matt. 12:38–40; Luke 23:8–9).
The Transfiguration (Matt. 17:1–8) and resurrection appearances (Luke 24:36–43; John 20:24–29) are presented with clarity, not exaggeration.
The contrast with texts like the Gospel of Peter (e.g., a talking cross) or the Infancy Gospel of Thomas (e.g., child Jesus killing playmates) highlights the sober realism of the canonical Gospels.
(See: Craig Keener, Miracles: The Credibility of the New Testament Accounts; Michael Licona, Why Are There Differences in the Gospels?; C.S. Lewis, Miracles)
4. The Resurrection Framed as a Historical Event Open to Scrutiny
Jesus’ resurrection is not presented as a private spiritual experience but as a bodily event:
He eats with His disciples (Luke 24:41–43)
He invites physical touch (John 20:27; Matt. 28:9)
He appears repeatedly over 40 days (Acts 1:3)
The tomb was known and accessible; it belonged to a public figure, Joseph of Arimathea (Matt. 27:57–61; Mark 15:43–47).
Early preaching in Jerusalem boldly declared the tomb was empty (Acts 2:29–32), and Jewish leaders never produced a body—only claimed that the disciples stole it (Matt. 28:11–15).
The proclamation of resurrection began immediately (Acts 2), not after generations of legend development.
(See: Gary Habermas, The Risen Jesus and Future Hope; N.T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God; J. Warner Wallace, Cold-Case Christianity)
Criterion 6: Empirical and Historical Support for the Central Spiritual Claim: Jesus’ Resurrection
Does the resurrection of Jesus have strong historical grounding as a divine validation of Jesus’ identity and teaching?
1. The Empty Tomb
All four Gospels report that Jesus’ tomb was found empty on the third day by a group of women (Matt. 28:1–10; Mark 16:1–8; Luke 24:1–12; John 20:1–18).
The women as first witnesses is striking: their testimony was not legally credible in 1st-century Jewish culture (cf. Josephus, Ant. 4.219)—making this detail unlikely to be invented.
The burial account includes verifiable details: tomb owned by Joseph of Arimathea (Matt. 27:57–60), sealed by Roman authorities (Matt. 27:62–66), and guarded.
Peter’s Pentecost sermon in Jerusalem openly declared the tomb was empty (Acts 2:29–32)—where the body could have been shown if present.
No competing tradition ever claimed Jesus’ body remained in the tomb; rather, Jewish leaders alleged theft (Matt. 28:11–15), conceding the tomb was indeed empty.
(See: William Lane Craig, The Son Rises; Gary Habermas & Michael Licona, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus; N.T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God)
2. Postmortem Appearances to Individuals and Groups
Paul records appearances to Cephas (Peter), the Twelve, over 500 believers, James, and himself (1 Cor. 15:3–8).
These appearances include private (Mary Magdalene – John 20:11–18) and group settings (disciples – Luke 24:36–43; John 20:19–23), indoors (John 20:26), outdoors (Matt. 28:9–10), and during meals (Luke 24:41–43).
Jesus invites physical touch (Luke 24:39; John 20:27), and eats food to confirm His bodily presence (Luke 24:42–43).
These events took place over a 40-day period and concluded with the ascension (Acts 1:3–11).
Hallucination theories cannot explain the group appearances, varied locations, and physical interactions.
(Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses; Sean McDowell, The Fate of the Apostles; Michael Licona, The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach)
3. Sudden and Radical Transformation of the Disciples
Before the resurrection, the disciples fled (Matt. 26:56), denied Jesus (Mark 14:66–72), and hid in fear (John 20:19).
Afterward, they boldly preached the risen Christ before hostile audiences (Acts 2:14–36; Acts 4:8–12).
James, Jesus’ skeptical brother, became a leader in the Jerusalem church and died a martyr (1 Cor. 15:7; Acts 15:13; Josephus, Ant. 20.200).
Paul, a persecutor of Christians, converted after encountering the risen Christ (Acts 9:1–19; Gal. 1:13–16), and became Christianity’s foremost missionary.
These transformations are best explained by genuine belief in resurrection appearances—not wishful thinking or conspiracy.
(See: J.P. Moreland, Scaling the Secular City; Craig Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of the Gospels; Gary Habermas, The Risen Jesus and Future Hope)
4. Early, Resurrection-Centered Proclamation
The resurrection was central from the earliest days of Christian proclamation—not a later theological development.
The creedal summary in 1 Corinthians 15:3–5 (“Christ died… was buried… was raised… appeared…”) is dated by most scholars to within 3–5 years of Jesus’ death.
Peter’s sermon in Acts 2—just 50 days after the crucifixion—declares Jesus’ resurrection as fulfillment of Psalm 16 (Acts 2:25–32).
Early Christian worship practices reflected resurrection faith:
Sunday gatherings (Acts 20:7; Rev. 1:10)
Baptism symbolizing union with Christ’s death and resurrection (Rom. 6:3–5)
The Eucharist as a proclamation of Jesus’ death “until He comes” (1 Cor. 11:26)
No Gospel or early epistle omits the resurrection—it is the linchpin of Christian identity and hope (1 Cor. 15:14–19).
(See: Larry Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ; N.T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God; Martin Hengel, The Atonement: The Origins of the Doctrine in the New Testament)
Conclusion
Taken together, even despite the universal difficulties of proving any historical event, the cumulative evidence for the New Testament Gospels satisfies each of the essential criteria necessary to trust their spiritual claims.
Textual criticism confirms we possess the original content of the Gospel authors by unparalleled manuscript support and minimal variance.
Authorship and dating evidence show the Gospels were written by eyewitnesses or close companions within living memory of Jesus’ life, lending firsthand authority.
The historical and cultural framework of the narratives—confirmed by archaeology, external sources, and internal coherence—anchors the message in verifiable history.
The moral sincerity of the Gospel writers, demonstrated by their willingness to suffer and their lack of personal gain, strongly suggests they believed what they wrote and did not author fraudulent accounts.
The supernatural claims themselves, including Jesus’ miracles and resurrection, were public, observable events—situated in time and place, open to scrutiny and falsification, not hidden or allegorical.
Most decisively, the resurrection—the central validation of Jesus’ divine identity—is supported by the empty tomb, eyewitness appearances, the radical transformation of His followers, and the rise of resurrection-centered proclamation.
Altogether, the Gospel accounts compel us to regard them not as pious fiction, but as historically grounded, morally credible, and divinely vindicated testimony. If true, they are not merely reliable records—they are the voice of God inviting faith in Christ. ❖
Quote this Article
Footnote: Timothy J. Harris, “How Can We Verify the Spiritual Claims of the Gospels?,” Practical Theologian, July 31, 2025, https://www.practicaltheologian.com/blog/QandA-ent4e.
Bibliography: Harris, Timothy J. “How Can We Verify the Spiritual Claims of the Gospels?” Practical Theologian, July 31, 2025. https://www.practicaltheologian.com/blog/QandA-ent4e.
Resources
Bauckham, Richard. Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2017.
Blomberg, Craig L. The Historical Reliability of the Gospels. 2nd ed. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2007.
Bock, Darrell L. Jesus According to Scripture: Restoring the Portrait from the Gospels. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2017.
Bock, Darrell L. Who Is Jesus?: Linking the Historical Jesus with the Christ of Faith. New York: Howard Books, 2012.
Bruce, F. F. Jesus and Christian Origins Outside the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974.
Carson, D. A., and Douglas J. Moo. An Introduction to the New Testament. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Academic, 2005.
Carson, D. A. The Gagging of God: Christianity Confronts Pluralism. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996.
Evans, Craig A. Jesus and the Manuscripts: What We Can Learn from Old Texts. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2020.
Evans, Craig A. Jesus and the Remains of His Day: Studies in Jesus and the Evidence of Material Culture. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2015.
Gurry, Peter J., and Elijah Hixson, eds. Myths and Mistakes in New Testament Textual Criticism. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2019.
Habermas, Gary R. The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ. Joplin, MO: College Press, 1996.
Habermas, Gary R. The Risen Jesus and Future Hope. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2003.
Habermas, Gary R., and Michael R. Licona. The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2004.
Hengel, Martin. The Atonement: The Origins of the Doctrine in the New Testament. Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 2007.
Hill, Charles E. Who Chose the Gospels?: Probing the Great Gospel Conspiracy. New York: Oxford University Press, 2010.
Hurtado, Larry W. Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003.
Keener, Craig S. Christobiography: Memory, History, and the Reliability of the Gospels. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2019.
Keener, Craig S. Miracles: The Credibility of the New Testament Accounts. 2 vols. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2011.
Komoszewski, J. Ed, M. James Sawyer, and Daniel B. Wallace. Reinventing Jesus: How Contemporary Skeptics Miss the Real Jesus and Mislead Popular Culture. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2006.
Köstenberger, Andreas J., L. Scott Kellum, and Charles L. Quarles. The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown: An Introduction to the New Testament. 2nd ed. Nashville: B&H Academic, 2016.
Lewis, C. S. Miracles: A Preliminary Study. Reprint. New York: HarperOne, 2001.
Licona, Michael R. The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2010.
Licona, Michael R. Why Are There Differences in the Gospels?: What We Can Learn from Ancient Biography. New York: Oxford University Press, 2016.
McDowell, Sean. The Fate of the Apostles: Examining the Martyrdom Accounts of the Closest Followers of Jesus. New York: Routledge, 2015.
McDowell, Sean, and Josh McDowell. Evidence That Demands a Verdict: Life-Changing Truth for a Skeptical World. Updated and expanded ed. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2017.
McRay, John. Archaeology and the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 1991.
Metzger, Bruce M., and Bart D. Ehrman. The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration. 4th ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.
Moreland, J. P. Scaling the Secular City: A Defense of Christianity. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1987.
Stott, John R. W. The Cross of Christ. 20th Anniversary ed. Downers Grove: IVP Books, 2006.
Wallace, Daniel B., ed. Revisiting the Corruption of the New Testament: Manuscript, Patristic, and Apocryphal Evidence. Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic, 2011.
Wallace, J. Warner. Cold-Case Christianity: A Homicide Detective Investigates the Claims of the Gospels. Colorado Springs: David C. Cook, 2013.
Williams, Peter J. Can We Trust the Gospels? Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2018.
Wright, N. T. The Resurrection of the Son of God. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003.
