|
|
The Bible as a Historical Document There is much debate over the issue of the Bible’s validity as a historical document. Many believe that the Bible was never intended as a historical text. Instead, these people believe that the writings were meant to teach us life lessons and open our eyes to The Light. Nonetheless, the Bible tells the story of Jesus’s life, so many people read the Gospels as historical documents. Therein lies the problem. One cannot take everything within the four gospels as fact. Each gospel offers a different version of events; different individuals wrote all four at different times and in different locations. The basic outline of Christ’s birth, life, death, and subsequent resurrection is consistent through all four gospels. It is only when one investigates the intricacies of the stories that the numerous discrepancies are revealed. One example of an inconsistency between the four Gospels comes when Jesus and his disciples are marching toward Golgotha. In the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Simon carries Jesus’s cross to the crucifixion. According to John, however, it was Jesus who carried the cross. Although this is only a minor detail within the story, it is significant because it casts doubt on the Bible’s validity as a historical document. How can a book contain such contradictory accounts of the same story and still be considered factual? Another inconsistency occurs between the accounts given about the time of Jesus’s death.
|
