The Trial Of Jesus Of Nazareth

874 Words Sep 25th, 2015 4 Pages
When it comes to the gospels of the Bible, scholars must question what kind of material they are analyzing and what viewpoint they are analyzing said material from-- whether it be historical or theological. Rather yet, a better question to ask would be what did the people who compiled the Gospels thinking, and what was their goal in putting together the texts. This is exactly the issue that S.G.F. Brandon explores in his book, The Trial of Jesus of Nazareth. Within his first chapter, “History or Theology? The Basic Problems of the Evidence of the Trial of Jesus,” he raises several important questions that historians must keep in mind. Did the people who wrote down the Gospels mean for the works to be a purely factual, historical accounts of Jesus’s trial and death, or did they mean for them to be religious, theological works? After all,the Gospels were written not as religious texts, but merely as narrative. The fact that they also tell accounts of proven historical figures such as the priest Caiaphas and Roman Pontius Pilate points towards some historical fact, but then there is the issue of the extent of historical reliability. Thus, some historians believe that the Gospels represent a later religious presentation of the historical events that happened. But there are still issues with this theory as well. The Letters and Epistles of Paul were written years before the earliest Gospel, yet they already present an extremely theological view of Jesus’ death. This clash…
Open Document