RE: Historian explains why Jesus ''mythers'' aren't taken seriously by most Historians
June 5, 2015 at 2:36 pm
(This post was last modified: June 5, 2015 at 2:37 pm by TheMessiah.)
(June 5, 2015 at 2:33 pm)Dystopia Wrote: I have a question - Why are the gospels automatically dismissed as unreliable in its entirety? There's certainly a load of horsecrap (probably most of it) but shouldn't it be analysed like any other historical document to find which contexts are reliable and not? Why do I see people on this board instantly label all the bible as invalid? Don't all myths need some kind of real life event to serve as an inspiration?
Well, that's the point.
Historians don't discard the Gospels; bloggers might, but most Historians do not. The Gospels provide insight into the time; they have real people in them - what Historians do, is discard all the magical horsecrap and examine what is said - and then use that to contrast it to the socio-political atmosphere of the time.
They're actually pretty good as historical sources, for gaining knowledge into the context of the time.
