The Hypothesis of Undesigned Coincidences: A Critical Review
Michael J. Alter
Michael J. Alter’s The Hypothesis of Undesigned Coincidences: A Critical Review is essential reading for New Testament scholars, apologists, and students engaging with the reliability of the Gospels. Utilizing a cumulative case methodology, Alter systematically challenges the theory that unplanned narrative alignments prove independent eyewitness sources. By analyzing specific accounts like the feeding of the five thousand, he exposes methodological flaws and a disregard for biblical criticism. This rigorous critique is highly recommended for those seeking a scholarly rebuttal to contemporary defenses of the "undesigned coincidences" hypothesis.
Full review
The Hypothesis of Undesigned Coincidences: A Critical Review offers a systematic and rigorous evaluation of the theory that unplanned, significant links between independent biblical narratives prove the historical reliability of the Gospels. Originally introduced by William Paley and later promoted by J.J. Blunt, the theory has seen a contemporary resurgence through Lydia McGrew’s Hidden in Plain View. This collaborative work—featuring contributions from rationalist David Austin, counter-missionary Gerald Sigal, and philosopher Vincent J. Torley, with a foreword by Professor Evan Fales—seeks to fill a void in peer-reviewed academic critiques of McGrew’s thesis.
The text is structured into five chapters that move from methodological critique to specific textual analysis. The authors begin by examining McGrew’s credentials and the dangers of a casual approach to research, before transitioning into a detailed case study of the feeding of the five thousand. Here, the review scrutinizes the "Philip Controversy" and the significance of the green grass in Mark, arguing that Jesus’ inquiry to Philip may have been a narrative tool rather than a literal event. The work culminates in a broader critique of the theory's flaws, utilizing the scientific method and Cumulative Case Methodology to argue that proponents ignore established biblical criticism and the mathematical nature of randomness.
This volume is essential for serious students of New Testament studies and apologists who wish to understand the tension between the "Maximal Data" strategy and critical scholarship. What sets this work apart is its interdisciplinary approach, blending metaphysics, philosophy of religion, and textual criticism to argue that the theory lacks a standardized methodology for defining coincidences. Scholars should approach this text as a corrective to the current lack of academic scrutiny surrounding undesigned coincidences, using it to critically weigh the evidence for Gospel independence against the principles of causality and chance.