The document discusses arguments for and against whether the gospels can be trusted as historically accurate accounts of Jesus. It presents perspectives from those trying to prove or disprove the gospels' historicity. Specifically, it covers criteria like primacy of the sources, agreement between multiple sources, and potential motivations or biases of the gospel writers. Both sides are represented with points about the timing of the gospels, consistency or inconsistencies between them, and whether the writers had reason to embellish details. No definitive conclusion is reached, as scholars disagree on how much credence can be given to the gospels as historical evidence of Jesus.

1. Why Deeper? 37.3 (71%) million state their religion as Christian in England and Wales. (2001 Census) Church of England attendance falls for fifth year in row. 3% of those claiming to be Christian. (Guardian Friday 22 January 2010 )

2. Why Deeper? 1 Peter 3:15 … Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect We will never argue people into the Kingdom, but we need to have an answer for those who believe inaccurate information peddled as fact, by the like of Dawkins.

3. Ground Rules Do you own research, don’t trust me. Sources and theology language not included for sake of easy reading. Please request my essay entitled ‘Can The Gospels Be Trusted As Evidence For Jesus” for that information. Just because I am the author of the following does not mean I believe all that I am about to describe. This is an attempt to be prepared with an answer.

4. Colour Code Blue: Anything someone trying to prove the gospels as historic fact might say. May or may not be accepted by most theologians as true. Red: Anything someone trying to disprove the gospels as historic fact might say. May or may not be accepted by most theologians as true. Black: Neutral can be used as background information for either side. Probably accepted by most (but not necessarily all) theologians.

5. Method Proving the Gospels are historically accurate and hence Jesus is who he says he is. Primary – How close it the source to the original material (time & generation). Agreement - Multiple sources with a consistent message. Motivation – Authors bias or desires.

6. Primary Written Within Decades of Jesus Death Close sources Oral tradition accurate More accurate then Socrates & Alexander The Great No writings during Jesus life or by Jesus himself None of the Gospel writers were eye witnesses Chinese whispers create errors Multiple errors

7. Agreement Jesus of Nazareth existed Socrates writers didn’t agree Historians accepted legends do not start within two generations MML Agree on much Jesus just a teacher The Gospels disagree on details Legends explain any agreement within the Gospels Using 3 criterion we find we know nothing of Jesus

8. Motivation Embarrassments within the Gospels show their lack of biases Bias doesn’t mean falsehood Christian martyrdom Luke considered a historian Gospels writers have a biases Enough said!

9. In Conclusion The Gospels can be trusted as historical fact for Jesus The Gospels can not be trusted as historical fact for Jesus