Week 10: Section 2, Chapter 9 — Principle #3: Were They Accurate?

1.Wallace examines whether the Gospels are internally consistent — meaning they do not contradict themselves in ways that would disqualify a witness in court. How does he handle the apparent discrepancies between Gospel accounts (for example, different details about the women at the tomb or the wording of the inscription on the cross)? Are his harmonizations convincing to you?

2.He stresses the importance of distinguishing between a contradiction and a "different perspective on the same event." Two accurate witnesses describing an accident from different angles will describe different details. How do you apply this principle when you encounter a difficult passage in the Gospels?

3.Wallace points out that the Gospel writers include details that were publicly verifiable in their own day — naming specific people, places, and events that contemporary readers could check. How does this public accountability affect the likelihood that the authors would have included false or embellished material?