Eyewitnesses as Guarantors of the Accuracy of the Gospel Traditions in the Light of Psychological Research

Abstract

attention of NT scholarship has been directed by Judith Redman to an important set of data relevant to the ongoing debate concerning the role eyewit nesses may have played in the formation of the gospel traditions. Her recent arti cle How Accurate Are Eyewitnesses? Bauckham and the Eyewitnesses in the Light of Psychological Research,1 highlights a range of experimental data that lead her to a generally negative view of the historical reliability of any eyewitness memories incorporated into the Gospels. As evidence to support her view, she points out that psychological research has identified many factors that can change eyewitnesses' memory of an event. She notes that (i) facets of another individual's report may be unconsciously incorporated into eyewitnesses' memory of that event; (ii) witnesses tend to avoid conflicting with reports from others and usually choose a culturally appropriate version of the event; (iii) post-event information can influence what elements of an event are retained in memory; (iv) eyewitnesses guess some ele ments of their report, and over time these guesses become treated as part of the original memory; (v) errors become frozen into memories; and, most important, (vi)(vi) while group memories are more stable than individual memories, group mem ories incorporate from a very early time the mistakes made by individual eyewit nesses; and furthermore, (vii) these group memories will be further shaped by theological considerations within the community. These and other considerations led Redman to conclude, The continued presence in Christian communities of eyewitnesses to Jesus' ministry until the time when these events were recorded is a