As I watch an old (1998) PBS series about the life of Jesus which a friend invited me to view, and as I listen to the various scholars offer their considered opinions on the relative veracity of the various biblical accounts about Jesus, I wonder constantly about the fine line we scholars draw between faith and history.  If one is invested in what she considers to be a personal relationship with Jesus and also makes her livelihood studying his life, it seems that she must balance what she believes is true with what she finds to be true. That is, people do not need to know every detail about Jesus' life or world to place their trust in him as God.  They need only know, and believe, that he loves and died for them. Once they do this, they may spend the rest of their lives never questioning whether the accounts of Jesus' life are historically true.
     For those of a more scholarly frame of mind, including the scholars interviewed for the program, however, this is not enough.  They must have historical proof.  They must balance and reconcile their belief system with what they find.  Though their faith is solid. they acknowledge that there is more to Jesus' life than meets the eye, and that as scholars they are obligated to explore such things.
     If what these scholars find appears to threaten the integrity or veracity of their (or anyone else's) faith in Jesus, they, nor anyone else, need not worry.  As the scientific method corrects scientific reasoning without undermining the worth of the method itself, so do biblical scholars correct their conclusions as they uncover new information without undermining the worth of the God around whom their investigations center.  If God is really active and there, he will not be negated by scholarly discussion.
     The larger, and vastly more challenging question therefore becomes this:  how willing, within solid and verifiable reason, are we to believe?