Historians also have to take bias into account. History tends to be written by the winners, and is biased against the losers.
Richard 3rd for example the nasty hunchback king who murdered the princes in the towers. As popularised by Shakespeare, a playwrite in Elizabethan England. Elizabeth was not too far descendant from the Tudor king that deposed the Plantaganet Richard. Other sources show that Richard wasn't as nasty as he has been portrayed.
Now, the gospels.
Written years and generations later. Lots of stuff (especially in Matthew) obviously just made up. The only contemporary accounts of Jesus by Josephus was faked.
there are no contemporary letters that mention him, no Jewish, Greek or Roman letters or diaries.
Not a single physical description of the man, his hight, his hair colour, his face.
He fed thousands, he raised people from the dead, and no one, no disciple or follower wrote it down.
So, did the writers of the gospels have a vested interest in the way they tell the story. Well, of course. Can we rely on the gospels to be an accurate history? Well, most would agree not all of the gospels, there might be some hanky panky, but surely the core story, the Jesus who said some lovely things and was crucified, surely that bit is pretty solid?
erm, perhaps not.
Richard 3rd for example the nasty hunchback king who murdered the princes in the towers. As popularised by Shakespeare, a playwrite in Elizabethan England. Elizabeth was not too far descendant from the Tudor king that deposed the Plantaganet Richard. Other sources show that Richard wasn't as nasty as he has been portrayed.
Now, the gospels.
Written years and generations later. Lots of stuff (especially in Matthew) obviously just made up. The only contemporary accounts of Jesus by Josephus was faked.
there are no contemporary letters that mention him, no Jewish, Greek or Roman letters or diaries.
Not a single physical description of the man, his hight, his hair colour, his face.
He fed thousands, he raised people from the dead, and no one, no disciple or follower wrote it down.
So, did the writers of the gospels have a vested interest in the way they tell the story. Well, of course. Can we rely on the gospels to be an accurate history? Well, most would agree not all of the gospels, there might be some hanky panky, but surely the core story, the Jesus who said some lovely things and was crucified, surely that bit is pretty solid?
erm, perhaps not.
'How can you say, "We are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely? Jer 8:8
A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five. Groucho Marx
A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five. Groucho Marx
