On Style and Content

C. S. Lewis, besides being a renowned author, was a world-class literary critic. When reading the gospels, he noted: “I have been reading poems, romances, vision literature, legends, and myths all my life. I know what they are like. I know none of them are like this. Of this [gospel] text there are only two possible views. Either this is reportage… or else, some unknown [ancient] writer…without known predecessors or successors, suddenly anticipated the whole technique of modern novelistic, realistic narrative… “

Lewis is saying the reasonable conclusion based on style is that the gospels are an accurate report of the life of Christ.  To believe otherwise requires an explanation of how the authors came up with the remarkably unique style of writing – those so far suggested are far less rational.

Now consider the very nature of the content; if the Gospel narratives were indeed fabricated there are stories missing that should have been included.  If it was correct that the Christian leadership made certain that the Jesus in their stories supported the policies and beliefs of their communities, you would expect to see many places in the gospels where Jesus takes sides in debates that were going on in the early church.  However, we do not find this.

For example, one of the great controversies in the earliest church was that some believed Gentile Christians should be required to be circumcised. In light of that great conflict, it is remarkable that nowhere in the gospel accounts does Jesus say anything about circumcision.  The most likely reason that Jesus is silent about circumcision is that the early church did not feel free to fabricate things and put words in Jesus’s mouth that he didn’t utter.