Undesigned coincidences in the gospels: Surprising evidence for Jesus’ feeding of the 5000

The feeding of the 5000 is one of Jesus’ most popular miracles. If you grew up in church, you probably saw it depicted on many a flannel graph. You know the story: Jesus was in a deserted place where large crowds were hanging on his every word. When it started to get late, Jesus’ disciples asked him to disperse the gathering to the surrounding villages so they could grab a bite to eat. Rather than sending them home, Jesus took five loaves and two fish and fed the multitude. The young lad who shared his food became famous that day and was sent home with 12 baskets full of leftovers.  Critics of the Bible tend … Read more

A hopeless Bible contradiction? Why do Matthew and Luke give us two different genealogies for Jesus?

Early in their respective Gospels, Matthew and Luke both present to us Jesus’ genealogy. But there’s a rather glaring problem between the two records. They are irreconcilably different. Popular skeptical blogger Bob Seidensticker calls this one of the most damning Bible contradictions, a discrepancy that strikes at the foundation of Christian claims. To help me state the objection in more detail, I’ll let Bob do the talking: “The Messiah had to be of the line of David (Jeremiah 33:15–17; Isaiah 9:7), so two gospels provide genealogies of Jesus to validate this requirement. The problem is that we only need to go back one generation, to Joseph’s father, to find a problem. Jacob [was] the father … Read more

3 times archaeology has confirmed the Gospels and shut the mouths of skeptics

Liberal scholars and radical skeptics like to say that gospels have more holes than swiss cheese. Aside from the gospels being full of unresolvable contradictions, they also make grave historical blunders. If they were reliable historical documents based on eyewitness testimony, they’d get the details right. Therefore, they’re mere religious fictions. But in recent times many of the holes that critics have tried to poke through the gospels have been filled by the shovel of archaeology. Excavators have come to the rescue and provided a counterbalance to suspicious views against the gospels. Here I’m going to share three examples where biblical archaeology has made the critics look flat-out silly. If that whets your appetite for … Read more

Do the 3 accounts of Paul’s conversion in Luke contradict each other?

There are three accounts of Paul’s conversion to Christianity found in the Book of Acts. They’re all a little bit different, and because of that, some critics have cried foul. I don’t think these skeptics are paying very close attention when they say that there are irreconcilable discrepencies. So what are the differences that critics point to? Biblical scholar Darrell Bock tells us in The Holman Apologetics Commentary on the Bible: The biggest differences in the accounts have to do with whether the men traveling with Saul see the light and hear nothing (22:9) or stand speechless, hearing the voice but seeing no one (9:7). . . . Another difference is that Ananias does not appear … Read more

Critics say that Jesus never predicted his resurrection. These statements were allegedly put in Jesus’ mouth to further their theology. There are two big reasons why that’s false.

Over and over in the Gospels, we read that Jesus predicted his own death and resurrection. Like Babe Ruth, he called his own shot. This prediction may have fallen on deaf ears, but nevertheless, his disciples should not have been surprised on the first Easter. Yet critical historical Jesus scholars tell us that he never really said those things. These were sayings put in Jesus’ mouth after belief in the resurrection. It’s a bit like the story of George Washington admitting to cutting down the cherry tree. It probably never happened even if you did hear it in elementary school. This fun little story was projected backward to make Washington look like he was a … Read more

No, the resurrection accounts in the Bible are not “fake news” because they are written by biased sources. Why the “Biased Testimony” objection fails.

This is the age of fake news. Distrust of the media has never been higher. There aren’t all bad reasons for that. We’ve all seen the press skewing things to suit a political narrative. Both sides have been guilty. It’s gotten so bad, you even have social media companies trying to combat fake news. Funny enough, they often reveal their own biases in the process. And to add to the irony, on those same platforms, we have the President constantly calling out certain members of the press for fake news! So yeah. We got some trust issues. This is the cultural background we’re living in. In this age of hyper-awareness of bias, Christians have the … Read more

There’s one terrible reason to believe the gospels were written late, and there are 7 historical reasons to believe that they were written early

Here’s a question that’s raised by skeptics from time to time. Why were the gospels written a generation after Jesus died? I mean, it’s only the “Greatest Story Ever Told.” Why did it take them so long to write this thing down if it was so important? One terrible reason to believe the gospels were written late: The consensus of critics tells us that the first gospel was written around 70 AD. The other three followed within the next 5 to 20 years. But where does this consensus come from? I’ll be straight up here. This dating comes from historians who rule out the supernatural. You see, Jesus had a lot to say about the … Read more