Yesterday I (Chris) introduced a common objection to the historicity of Jesus: the accounts of Jesus’ life are so varied in the Gospels that they cannot be about the same person. (You can go back to read that here.) To many, the idea of contradictions in the Gospels is compelling. My purpose in this post is to show why that narrative rests on faulty foundations. (Be sure to check out the last in this 3-part series, in which I address the contradictions themselves.)
At the heart of the argument is the assumption that if two biographies differ, their differences must necessarily be contradictory. That’s one option, of course. But differing accounts might also be complementary, depending on the evidence. Consider these two sets of claims:
Scenario 1
Person A: Our friend Mike passed away last year this time.
Person B: I played basketball with our friend Mike last week.
Scenario 2
Person A: Our friend Mike passed away last week.
Person B: Wow. And to think, just last week Mike and I were playing basketball together.
The first two claims are contradictory. Mike was either dead or alive last week, he can’t be both (or neither, if “Mike” is my imaginary friend). In Scenario 1, If Person A is telling the truth, then Person B—by necessity—isn’t, and vice versa. But Scenario 2 is more vague. An impartial reader would probably recognize that those two claims are complementary, not contradictory, even though they’re both talking about “Mike last week.” The contrast between the two statements doesn’t serve to discredit Mike’s history, but to highlight it.
This is just a small example, but the Gospels are full of such variation. Those who object to differing portraits of Jesus seem to be unaware of how biographies—all biographies—work. I love reading several biographies on the same person, because different biographers will draw out different features of a person’s life. There was only one real Abraham Lincoln, or Martin Luther King, Jr., or Winston Churchill. But read a handful of biographies, and you’ll see different angles on each man.
In my experience, the more dynamic a personality, the more varied those biographies become. How can you contain a larger-than-life person in one book? And this is where we come back to the Gospels: wouldn’t a person as unique as Jesus Christ be larger than life? Why do we accept complementary depictions of Lincoln-as-leader, Lincoln-as-politician, Lincoln-as-abolitionist, Lincoln-as-idealist, and not allow a similar variety with Jesus?
You see, the biography reader in me shakes his head when I hear that “Mark’s Jesus” and “John’s Jesus” are miles apart. If nothing else, it betrays such an anemic understanding of the human personality. As the argument goes, Mark’s Jesus is indirect, misunderstood, meek, and mild. (He’s hipster Jesus, essentially.) John’s Jesus is overt, triumphant, ready to conquer. But it begs the question to simply state that one person couldn’t have both elements in his personality.
My point here isn’t that we should ignore contradictions when we find them. It’s that a charitable interpretation demands that we at least allow for for the possibility that Mark and John really are talking about the same person, each trying to highlight certain aspects of his life or personality.
Be sure to check out the last in this 3-part series, in which I address the contradictions themselves.
