Consider this statement that I just made up:

We can be sure that during the crucifixion there was either some non-cloudy times or that there was not a new moon. Otherwise one of the gospels would have pointed this out: This happened to fulfill the scriptures (Psalm 121) – “The sun shall not strike you by day, nor the moon by night.”

Looks good, but I disagree. I think this statement goes against the idea of the inerrancy of scripture. This makes it sound like the writers of the Gospel went through the Old Testament and found portions that were fulfilled in Christ. This is not what happened. When the Old Testament prophesies were written, their words were inspired by a God who knew how and when they were going to be fulfilled. And the New Testament writers, under God’s inspiration knew this. They didn’t just say “Hey, cool, Jesus’s bones weren’t broken and doesn’t it say in Psalm 34 something about someone’s bones not being broken? I’ll put that in and say that it was fulfilling scripture.” The prophesy fulfilling was more ordained than that.

Does that make sense?