Christ Before Caiphas

I'm now to the chapter on the trial in Farrar's Life of Christ. He talked about how sceptics (his spelling) use the discrepancies between the four gospels to raise doubt and I thought his response applies to our study of history.

He talks of "histories honest and faithful up to the full knowledge of the writers, but each, if taken alone, confessedly fragmentary and obviously incomplete.

"After repeated study, I declare, quite fearlessly, that though the slight variations are numerous--though the lesser particulars cannot in every instance be rigidly and minutely accurate--though no one of the narratives taken singly would give us an adequate impression--...it is perfectly possible to discover how one Evangelist supplements the details furnished by another, and perfectly possible to understand the true sequence of the incidents by combining into one whole the separate indications which they furnish."

My conclusion: Read widely and do not allow yourself ever to let one book of history be the final word. Truth will eventually emerge even though 'facts' seem contradictory. There is a danger in the single story.

This principle of learning is even woven into the Bible in the most important story ever told.

Art credit: Christ Before Caiaphas by Mattias Stom