0:02 is your memory
0:04 unreliable is human memory riddled with
0:07 problems that make it impossible to
0:10 trust memory is an essential faculty for
0:13 how you live your life but many argue
0:15 memory is only an approximation of what
0:17 happened in the past and because human
0:19 memory is filled with gaps and holes we
0:22 cannot assume it preserves trustworthy
0:24 information when we recall Memories the
0:26 brain has to reconstruct what happened
0:29 it is not like playing a video recording
0:31 over time false memories creep in and
0:35 details change that make our memory
0:37 unreliable because of this we should be
0:39 skeptical of what we read in the gospels
0:41 which were not written down until 30 to
0:43 60 years after Jesus
0:46 died but is there any reason to think
0:48 that what is recorded in the gospels
0:51 could be accurate memories of Jesus the
0:53 research on memory is not as negative as
0:55 Skeptics make it out to be memory is not
0:58 perfect but it is also not unreliable
1:00 and researchers also point out out there
1:02 are different types of
1:04 memories certain types of memories are
1:06 more reliable than others and the
1:07 memories that the disciples would have
1:10 formed about Jesus were far more likely
1:12 to be retained with little change over
1:24 time human memory is often attacked for
1:27 being unreliable or poorly reconstructed
1:29 and everyone agrees memory is not
1:31 perfect we often forget where we placed
1:34 important things forget names or events
1:36 we experienced but on the other hand
1:39 memory is essential for human life and
1:41 it would be impossible to live if we
1:44 didn't assume our memory was mostly
1:46 reliable the research on memory is often
1:49 mixed on how reliable it is as many
1:52 studies reveal numerous errors in memory
1:54 but William Brewer notes laboratory
1:56 studies of memory are not necessarily
1:58 compatible with normal recollective memory
2:00 memory
2:02 sometimes studies focus on tasks that
2:04 are difficult to retain and others have
2:06 attempted to induce false memories that
2:09 don't accurately map onto the reality of
2:11 how we typically retain
2:13 information and jilli and Cohen go so
2:16 far as to say in experiments it is
2:18 usually more informative to set task
2:20 difficulty at a level where people make
2:22 errors so that the nature of the errors
2:24 and the conditions that provoke them can
2:27 be identified diary studies such as
2:30 those recording TOs and slips of action
2:32 have also concentrated on failures
2:33 rather than on
2:36 successes people do make naturally
2:37 occurring errors in ordinary life
2:40 situations but arguably the methodology
2:42 has produced a somewhat distorted view
2:44 of memory
2:47 efficiency so often studies on memory
2:49 have given us a warp view of how
2:50 reliable memory
2:53 is but if we look at memory studies that
2:55 attempt to mimic real life experiences
2:57 we do find evidence that memory can be highly
2:58 highly
3:00 reliable in a recent studies subjects
3:02 were put through complex real world
3:04 experiences and then they were asked to
3:06 recall the events a few days later the
3:08 researchers expected the reported
3:11 memories to only be roughly 40% accurate
3:13 but were surprised to find the memories
3:17 of the participants were 93 to 95%
3:19 accurate these findings suggest that
3:21 details freely recalled from one-time
3:23 real world experiences can retain High
3:25 correspondence to the ground truth
3:27 despite significant forgetting with
3:30 higher accuracy than expected giving the
3:31 emphasis on fallibility in the field of memory
3:33 memory
3:35 research in another study researchers
3:37 studied the memories of eyewitnesses to
3:39 an attempted gun shop robbery in
3:41 Vancouver Canada the police had
3:44 interviewed 21 eyewitnesses and 13
3:46 agreed to be interviewed again 5 months
3:48 later but the follow-up interviews had
3:51 two deliberately misleading questions in
3:53 additional questions designed to test
3:54 the accuracy of the subject's memory
3:57 that were irrelevant to the original
3:59 investigation the researchers founded in
4:01 the follow-up interviews the
4:03 eyewitnesses made mistakes but their
4:04 memories of the events were still more
4:07 than 80% accurate and despite there
4:09 being a number of news reports of the
4:11 event that were inaccurate none of them
4:12 made their way into the eyewitness
4:15 accounts as false
4:17 memories although memory is not perfect
4:19 it seems to be highly accurate in
4:21 recalling the past which is in line with
4:22 our intuition about the strength of our
4:25 own memory we expect that we will forget
4:27 things over time but we retain important
4:29 memories and are able to remember them
4:30 fairly well
4:33 well but researchers are also quick to
4:35 point out the reliability of memory
4:38 decays over time memory is not like
4:40 re-watching a movie in the mind memories
4:42 are often recalled through a process of
4:44 full or partial reconstruction and with
4:47 that Minor Details can change if the
4:49 gospels were not written down until
4:51 decades after Jesus died how can we
4:52 trust what they wrote as accurate to what
4:54 what
4:57 happened as noted how reliable a memory
4:59 is often depends on the type of memory
5:01 that is formed formed remembering
5:02 something as simple as the color of the
5:04 shirt of a person who sat next to you on
5:07 a plane is likely to be forgotten but
5:09 remembering your first kiss the day of
5:11 your wedding or other important life
5:12 events are far more likely to be
5:14 remembered accurately for a long period of
5:15 of
5:18 time most studies that conclude memories
5:21 unreliable focus on memories over short
5:23 time frames and not on details that
5:24 would not have been important for life-changing
5:25 life-changing
5:29 events Robert K mclver says most Psych
5:31 iCal experiments on memory focus on
5:34 periods of seconds and minutes rather
5:36 than periods as long as the 30 to 60
5:38 years that most likely intervene between
5:40 the crucifixion resurrection and the
5:43 writings of the gospels furthermore the
5:45 stimulus materials usually used in
5:48 psychological experiments are quite
5:49 different from the materials found in
5:51 the synoptic
5:54 gospels to understand whether or not the
5:56 gospel authors could accurately retain
5:58 information for several decades we need
5:59 to look at research on Long term
6:01 memories to see if there is anything demonstrating
6:03 demonstrating
6:05 reliability one type of long-term memory
6:07 is called episodic memory which is the
6:09 conscious recollection of previous
6:12 experiences together with their context
6:14 in terms of time place Associated
6:17 emotions Etc this is basically the
6:19 memory of everyday
6:22 events William Wagar researched his own
6:24 episodic memory and found that after 6
6:26 months he was able to remember half the
6:29 events of his past with one q but this
6:32 dropped less than 20% after 5 years
6:34 given more cues Wagar could remember
6:36 about 40% after 5
6:38 years however many of the events and
6:41 things Wagar attempted to remember fell
6:43 under the rubric of ordinary memories it
6:45 were not necessarily important memories
6:48 that were impactful nor did his research
6:50 extend beyond 5
6:53 years Harry P barck conducted a study a
6:55 longterm memory where he studied
6:56 subjects who learned Spanish at an early
6:58 age and tested to see how well they
6:59 retain their know knowledge of the
7:01 language decades
7:04 later this was not a study on episodic
7:06 memory but he found there was a
7:07 forgetting curve for the first 3 to 6
7:10 years where much was forgotten but after
7:12 that point their memories of the
7:14 language became stable he found that
7:16 what was remembered after this period
7:19 was retained for decades to quote there
7:22 is a period from approximately 5 to 25
7:24 years after training during which no
7:26 responses appear to be
7:28 lost he also found the better the
7:31 initial learning environment was the
7:33 better the memories were
7:36 retained similarly a review of various
7:38 studies found that roughly 50% of
7:40 significant material learned in school
7:42 can be retained for many years so it
7:44 seems our memory can be quite reliable
7:46 in Remembering large swast of
7:47 information while at the same time
7:49 forgetting various
7:51 percentages but other research on
7:53 long-term visual memories found considerable
7:54 considerable
7:57 retention one study found that subjects
7:58 were able to remember the names and
8:01 faces of classmat well for roughly 35
8:04 years so sometimes ordinary information
8:07 can be remembered for long periods of
8:09 time some have tried to compare the
8:11 memories of the disciples to what are
8:12 called flashball
8:15 Memories this type of memory is a highly
8:18 Vivid and detailed snapshot of a moment
8:20 in which a consequential surprising and
8:22 emotionally arousing piece of news was
8:25 learned an example is that most people
8:26 remember exactly where they were when
8:29 9/11 happened or when President Kennedy was
8:30 was
8:32 assassinated because of the emotional
8:34 and impactful nature of the events
8:36 people often retain Vivid memories of
8:38 when these events happened in their
8:40 analysis of the reliability of flashball
8:44 memory Brown and Kulik say a flashball
8:46 memory is fixed for a very long time
8:48 conceivably permanent varying in
8:51 complexity with consequentiality but
8:53 once created always there in a need of
8:55 no further
8:58 strengthening however other researchers
9:00 found that flash ball memories do Decay
9:02 over several years but what is retained
9:04 is vividness and the level of confidence
9:07 people have in them a 1992 study on the
9:09 memories of the explosion of the Space
9:11 Shuttle Challenger demonstrated
9:13 substantial inconsistencies over time in
9:15 one's memory of the
9:18 event a 2003 study found that flashball
9:21 memories Decay similarly to episodic
9:23 memory much can be retained but the
9:25 memories naturally decay in the same way
9:27 episodic memories
9:30 do but we need to point out out that
9:31 many of the events recorded in the
9:33 gospels are not ordinary episodic
9:36 memories flashball memories or mere
9:39 visual memories but personal event
9:41 memories and in the study of long-term
9:43 memories research has found that
9:45 important and emotionally impacting
9:48 events can be retained well for
9:51 decades David pmer lays out the criteria
9:52 of personal event
9:55 Memories the memory represents a
9:57 specific event that took place at a
9:59 particular time and place rather than
10:00 than a general event or an extended
10:03 series of related happenings the memory
10:05 contains a detailed account of the rem's
10:07 own personal circumstances at the time
10:10 of the event the verbal narrative
10:11 account of the event is accompanied by
10:15 sensory images including visual auditory
10:18 Al factory images or bodily Sensations
10:19 that contribute to the feeling of
10:22 reexperiencing or reliving memory
10:25 details and sensory images correspond to
10:27 a particular moment or moments of
10:30 phenomenal experience the rememberer
10:32 believes that the memory is a truthful
10:35 representation of what
10:37 transpired these are the types of
10:39 Memories We form from defining personal
10:41 experiences personal trauma key
10:44 experiences with loved ones or critical
10:47 incidents personal event memories are
10:48 most likely what the disciples would
10:50 have had of Jesus because Jesus was
10:52 their Rabbi who they loved and followed
10:55 for roughly 3 years they would have had
10:56 a close connection with him and shared
10:59 many personal experiences
11:02 pilmer notes personal event memories
11:03 have been demonstrated to retain a high
11:07 degree of accuracy for years a 1993
11:09 study stated the majority of earliest
11:11 childhood memories emerged here as
11:12 apparently accurate Recollections of
11:15 real events thus the Assumption of a
11:17 standard or frequent Distortion factor
11:19 and infant tal recall was not
11:21 supported who were in risberg reviewed
11:24 laboratory and naturalistic studies of
11:26 vivid and highly emotional experiences
11:28 and found emotional memories will
11:30 contain errors and will eventually be
11:32 lost nonetheless we believe it is likely
11:34 that we can largely trust our Vivid
11:36 memories of emotional
11:38 events in a 1993 review of the
11:40 literature they found the evidence
11:42 supports the view that adults asked to
11:44 recall Salient factual details of their
11:47 own childhoods are generally accurate
11:49 especially concerning experiences that
11:51 fulfill the criteria of having been
11:55 unique consequential and
11:57 unexpected numerous studies indicate
11:59 that personal event memories have an
12:01 autobiographical nature and retain a
12:04 high degree of accuracy for decades
12:05 David pilmer notes personal event
12:07 memories are not perfect but he still
12:10 concludes research supports a conclusion
12:11 that fits nicely with commonly held
12:14 conceptions of human memory memories of
12:16 personal life episodes are generally
12:18 true to the original experiences
12:19 although specific details may be
12:21 admitted or misremembered and
12:23 substantial distortions occasionally do
12:26 occur Shaker put it well on balance
12:29 however our memory systems do a remark
12:31 ably good job of preserving the general
12:33 Contours of our past and of recording
12:35 correctly many of the important things
12:38 that have happened to us we could not
12:44 otherwise one 1993 study noted that
12:46 childhood memories of adults only
12:49 contain roughly 12% inaccuracies
12:51 supporting the notion they retained a
12:53 far higher degree of accuracy than other
12:54 types of
12:57 memories included in personal event
12:59 memories are often teachings or sayings
13:02 from parents teachers or close friends
13:04 Research indicates people can often
13:05 remember important teachings from close
13:08 peers for long periods of time and are
13:10 used by the individuals for personal
13:12 guidance throughout
13:14 life due to the difficult nature of
13:16 studying the reliability of personal
13:19 event memories over several decades few
13:22 Studies have looked into this but one
13:24 2005 paper did study the accuracy of
13:27 personal event memories across 60 years
13:29 they looked at the memories of who lived
13:31 through World War II and compared them
13:33 with those who were born after the war
13:34 and obtained all their information from
13:37 later reports participants were asked to
13:40 recall the events of April 9th 1940 the
13:42 day Germany invaded Denmark
13:44 interestingly the results indicated
13:46 those who Liv through the experiences
13:49 had many accurate and Vivid memories 100
13:50 individuals remembered the weather of
13:53 the day correctly the iwitness group was
13:55 also able to give far more accurate
13:57 information than the control group but
14:00 they also note Danish resistance
14:02 movement had higher accuracy scores than
14:04 more canonical categories for the two
14:07 public events and they remembered all
14:09 four events with greater Clarity than
14:11 did participants who did not report such
14:14 ties in other words those invested in
14:16 the resistance movement had the most accurate
14:17 accurate
14:20 memories a similar study from 1990
14:22 looked at police reports following the
14:24 closure of a German concentration camp
14:26 for Dutch prisoners in
14:29 1943 the researchers interviewed living
14:31 survivors roughly 40 years later and
14:33 compared the reports for accuracy what
14:35 they found was the most striking aspect
14:37 of the testimonies is that the witnesses
14:40 agreed about the basic facts which is
14:42 demonstrated by a comparison of 55 longer
14:43 longer
14:45 interviews there is no doubt that almost
14:47 all the witnesses remembered Camp Erica
14:50 in great detail even after 40 years the
14:51 accounts of the conditions in the camp
14:53 the horrible treatment the daily routine
14:56 the forc labor the housing the food the
14:58 main characters of the guards are remarkably
14:59 remarkably
15:01 consistent also the recall of smaller
15:04 details were remarkably accurate in many
15:07 instances 17 of the 30 Witnesses
15:09 remember their date of arrival in the
15:12 camp 16 out of 30 Witnesses remember
15:14 their full registration number but a
15:18 minority of Witnesses were occasionally
15:20 mistaken although not everything was
15:22 remembered correctly the horrible
15:24 personal experiences of the camp led to
15:26 the creation of reliable memories that
15:29 lasted for over 40 years
15:30 the human memory is not like a video
15:33 recorder inaccuracies do slip in
15:35 occasionally but personal event memories
15:37 do seem to retain a great degree of
15:40 accuracy even decades after the
15:43 events as Alan battley says much of our
15:45 autobiographical recollection of the
15:47 past is reasonably free of error
15:48 provided that we stick to remembering
15:54 events moreover false memories and
15:56 inaccuracies that occur are rarely
15:58 radically different from the original event
15:59 event
16:01 in other words when the brain recalls a
16:03 memory it will construct it in a way
16:05 that mostly remains faithful to the
16:08 original event false memories more often
16:09 than not tend to work with the original
16:12 event not radically alter what occurred
16:14 some research has shown that false
16:16 memories are more likely to be subject
16:17 to correction or suppression in healthy young
16:18 young
16:21 adults and to quote two researchers
16:23 memories are sometimes inaccurate but
16:25 provide a good first approximation of
16:27 the events that make up our personal
16:30 past the first order faithfulness also
16:32 tells us something important about
16:34 memory errors in memory are errors that
16:36 make sense in terms of constructing a
16:38 more or less accurate rendition of the
16:40 gist of past events as with vision
16:42 memory provides a constrained
16:44 interpretation of our past based on
16:46 ambiguous fragmentary evidence but does
16:48 so in a way that makes sense in terms of
16:50 the world we live in and our own
16:53 personal experiences with it a quality
16:55 control memory system fills in gaps with
16:57 schemas and post-event information
16:59 because such information is reliable
17:02 more often than it is
17:04 not so there are limits to how much
17:06 memories can be changed it's not the
17:08 case people will typically have vivid
17:10 false memories that are entirely
17:12 divorced from reality especially when it
17:14 comes to personal event memories which
17:17 retain a high degree of accuracy for
17:20 decades from this research we can see
17:22 memory is not perfect but still carries
17:25 reliable information for years personal
17:27 event memories are likely to be more
17:29 reliable than General episodic memory or
17:32 the specific type known as flashball
17:35 memories given this the claim the
17:36 disciples would not have remembered the
17:38 life and teachings of Jesus by the time
17:40 the gospels were written is not
17:43 necessarily true as Craig Keener says
17:45 the gospels do suggest that Jesus's
17:47 closest followers would have had such
17:50 Stark emotive
17:52 experiences given their closeness to
17:54 Jesus and the life-changing nature of
17:56 many of the things Jesus said and did it
17:58 is likely this would have been a recipe
18:01 for for the formation of strong
18:04 memories Helen Williams Martin Conway
18:06 Jillian Cohen and William Brewer note
18:09 that lowf frequency events are far more
18:11 likely to be remembered over events that
18:13 happen regularly we are also more likely
18:15 to remember events that are Salient or
18:17 consequential and ones which we are
18:19 emotionally involved with as two experts
18:22 say we conclude that emotional events in
18:24 real life situations are retained well
18:26 both with respect to the emotional
18:28 events itself and the central critical
18:31 detail information of the emotion
18:33 eliciting event that is the information
18:36 that elicits the emotional
18:38 reaction the events reported in the
18:40 gospels were lowf frequency events they
18:43 obviously had consequential implications
18:45 and the disciples were emotionally
18:48 involved additionally Jesus lived with
18:50 his disciples for a few years and likely
18:51 would have spent time instructing them
18:54 to remember his teachings it is unlikely
18:56 he gave the lessons we find in places
18:58 like The Sermon on the Mount just once a
19:01 Jewish rabbi from the first century
19:02 would expect his disciples to remember
19:04 what he taught them and have them repeat
19:06 it back to him in their own
19:08 words Research indicates frequent
19:10 rehearsal helps to result in reliable
19:12 memory and such a practice was expected
19:15 in the culture of first century
19:17 Judaism Jesus also frequently taught
19:19 with short sayings or in the style of
19:21 Parables which would have made much of
19:23 what he said easy to
19:26 remember furthermore Robert mver notes
19:28 it is inconceivable that the disciples
19:30 would not have discussed the stories of
19:32 Jesus after the fact which would have
19:33 helped to enhance their
19:35 memory given that the earliest
19:36 Christians were in the business of
19:38 evangelizing they would have often been
19:40 talking about what Jesus said and
19:43 did Research indicates frequency of
19:45 rehearsal AIDS in forming reliable
19:47 memories this constant use of their
19:49 memory early on would have led to
19:51 stronger and more reliable memories that
19:53 would have allowed them to last longer
19:56 as Richard bacham says we can be sure
19:57 that the eyewitnesses of events in the
19:59 history of Jesus would have first told
20:02 their story soon after the
20:05 event research does seem to indicate
20:07 that after about 5 years memories tend
20:09 to become stable for long periods of
20:12 time the real issue for the disciples
20:13 would have been forming and retaining
20:16 accurate memories in the first few years
20:18 after that very little change would have
20:20 occurred so it would not have mattered
20:22 if the gospels were written down 10 or
20:24 50 years after Jesus had died it would
20:26 likely have been the same
20:29 story given that the nature of personal
20:31 event memories and that the textual data
20:33 suggests the disciples began to preach
20:35 and evangelize in Jesus's name shortly
20:38 after Jesus died we should expect that
20:40 the disciples were in positions that
20:41 would have allowed for strong memories to
20:46 form of course that doesn't mean they
20:48 developed photographic memories of
20:51 Everything Jesus said and did but it is
20:52 very likely they would have been able to
20:53 accurately remember much of what he
20:55 taught who he interacted with and what
20:59 he did CR barklay said autobiographical
21:01 memories are true in the sense of
21:04 maintaining the Integrity in gist of
21:05 past life
21:08 events as Craig Keener notes the
21:09 disciples would likely retain a reliable
21:12 G recollection of much of what Jesus
21:14 said and did without having to remember
21:16 the exact wording of
21:18 everything evangelists themselves did
21:20 not pretend to capture Jesus's words
21:22 verbatim one need only compare for
21:24 example Matthew's fairly regular
21:26 reference to the kingdom of heaven and
21:28 Mark's regular kingdom of God or one may
21:30 compare Luke's varied wordings for words
21:33 spoken in the scenes that Luke himself
21:35 repeats what matters more is the
21:37 substance of his acts and teachings the
21:39 gist the sense and we have very good
21:41 reason to believe that this is what the
21:43 gospels offer us though some of the
21:46 evangelists such as John May develop
21:47 their understanding of that gist more
21:49 extensively than
21:52 others there is no doubt Minor Details
21:54 would have been forgotten but the story
21:56 of Jesus does not rest or fall in Minor
21:58 Details but the main body
22:01 as mver said it is safe to conclude that
22:03 the memories of most eyewitnesses 30 to
22:05 60 years after the crucifixion would
22:07 have been as reliable and complete as
22:10 their memories 3 to 5 years after it not
22:12 that this automatically guarantees that
22:14 such memories are free from error human
22:16 memory is capable of extraordinary Feats
22:18 it works well in extracting meaning and
22:20 significance from the Cascade of sensory
22:24 events that continuously impinge on
22:26 humans of course this does not prove
22:28 that what we read in the gospels is
22:31 witness testimony however given that
22:32 we've already looked at the biographical
22:34 nature of the gospels which shows us
22:36 that when they were written they were
22:37 written with the intent to record
22:40 accurate history of the life of Jesus we
22:42 can infer the gospel authors were likely
22:44 recording accurate and reliable
22:46 information that wouldn't have decayed
22:48 much and given that there is strong
22:50 evidence the authors were Matthew Mark
22:52 Luke and John it is likely the gospels
22:54 did come from eyewitnesses or Close
22:56 Associates of the disciples meaning the
22:58 information we read in the gospel Els is
23:00 likely the reliable memories of the
23:01 eyewitnesses of
23:04 Jesus there is no reason to dismiss the
23:06 gospels as unreliable information that
23:08 were written down too distant from the
