Knowable Word

Helping ordinary people learn to study the Bible

Copyright © 2012–2025 DiscipleMakers, except guest articles (copyright author). Used by permission.

You are here: Home / Archives for Historicity

Were the Gospels Intended to be Read as Literal History?

By

What genre are the four Gospels of the Bible? Did the authors intend readers to take them as historical fact? Scholars of religion often answer in the negative, but Timothy Paul Jones explains one reason why the answer is yes.

One reason why I’m convinced that the Gospel authors didn’t intend to write fiction is because the most crucial claims that the authors of the Gospels made about Jesus also appear in another literary genre, the genre of epistle. Much of the New Testament is made up of epistles—letters sent to particular communities to be read publicly and then circulated widely. Many of these epistles were penned prior to the New Testament Gospels. Most important for our purposes, virtually every essential claim about Jesus that appears in the Gospels also shows up in these letters, despite the fact that these epistles were composed for people who already knew about Jesus.

Jones then elaborates on five specific claims from the Gospels that are backed up in New Testament epistles. It is well worth your time.

Check it out!

Are Bible Narratives Story or History?

By

Knowable Word LogoThe blog of the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersmen recently posted an article entitled, “When Reading the Bible, Do you Really Understand?”

In the article, the retired Rev. Howard Bess asks a series of excellent questions to guide one’s reading of the Bible. Who wrote this passage? When did he write? To and for whom did he write it? What were the circumstances of the writing? What literary devices did the author use? In other words, Bess encourages Bible readers to consider both historical context and literary sensibilities. So far, so good.

But, I don’t think Bess ends up at the right conclusions. He asserts that story and history are different things, and thus he concludes that Bible narratives presented as stories must not be historical. He likewise asserts that the Matthew 1-2 and Luke 1-2 (narratives of the birth of Jesus) cannot be reconciled with each other, and thus cannot be historical. He asserts the same thing about the resurrection narratives in the four Gospels.

I urge you to read the article and consider Bess’s arguments. Consider: How does he get off track? How would you respond to someone who draws similar conclusions about the Bible’s historicity?

Check it out!