Bible history, gossip and godsip

 

Herbert Butterfield (Christianity and history. Fontana book, 1949) wrote:

p. 27 “There exists in most historical writing…an appearance of definitiveness and finality which is an optical illusion…”. The history lacks fibre.

p. 28 “How much more easy it is for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for the most excellent trained historian to repeat a piece of gossip or an anecdote at the dinner table without adding a little varnish…”

If this is true, how can one trust the written historical record? And the written historical record of the Bible? Is it harder for a camel to go through the eye of a needle without the most competent recorder of biblical history to write what God has revealed without adding a wee drrram of godsip.

Herbert Butterfield – Christianity and history. Fontana book, 1949.

p. 27 “There exists in most historical writing…an appearance of definitiveness and finality which is an optical illusion…”. The history lacks fibre.

p. 28 “How much more easy it is for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for the most excellent trained historian to repeat a piece of gossip or an anecdote at the dinner table without adding a little varnish…”

If this is true, how can one trust the written historical record? And the written historical record of the Bible? Is it harder for a camel to go through the eye of a needle without the most competent recorder of biblical history to write what God has revealed without adding a wee dram of godsip.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s