Anyone see Malcom Yarnell on Paula Zahn Wednesday the 8th? I saw it, but did not think he did as well as he could - of course the other guy was a blithering idiot. The segment was too short for anyone to say anything of consequence The transcript follows: ZAHN: I'm joined now by 2 people with very different points of view, the Reverend Dr. Hal Taussig, professor of the New Testament at Union Theological Seminary, and a founding member of the Jesus Seminar. Reverend Taussig says the Bible is not historically accurate. On the other side of all this, Reverend Doctor Macom Yarnell III -- that would Malcolm Yarnell III, director of the Center for Theological Research at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. Good to have both of you with us. Dr. Taussig, what proof do you have the Bible is historically inaccurate? REV. HAL TAUSSIG, UNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY: I don't have proof. I just have a way of reading it that notices that there are actually two different stories in the Bible about Jesus's birth. One in the Gospel of Matthew and one in the Gospel of Luke. And they do not agree in their story. For instance, in the gospel of Matthew, Mary and Joseph are living in Bethlehem. In the gospel of Luke, they are living in Nazareth and they have to travel to Bethlehem. In the gospel of Matthew, it's Joseph that receives the message from God. In the gospel of Luke it's Mary. There are a number of these very different takes in the two different gospels. So it seems to me that we need to read both of those gospels carefully, and not take them just as, shall we say, a journalistic report, no offense to you, but as another kind of language that's deeply religious and makes meaning. ZAHN: Doctor Yarnell, are you troubled by the fact that you do see these inconsistencies in the gospels? MALCOLM YARNELL III, SOUTHWESTERN SEMINARY: Well, first of all, I don't see inconsistencies in the gospels, Paula. ZAHN: So what Doctor Taussig just says you don't buy at all? YARNELL: No, ma'am, I don't, with all due respect to Dr. Taussig. I was glad to hear he said that he had no proof for his view. I look at it this way. The gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, are more like a choir, and they each sing a different part. Matthew singing as a soprano, Mark as an alto, Luke, you know, singing another part a tenor and John as a bass. And each one of them are singing a different note and yet they are all in harmony, because they are all inspired by the holy spirit who is one, to say the same thing but maybe at different times. I do not see a disagreement whatsoever. ZAHN: Doctor Taussig, I see you nodding, does that mean that the overall message of Jesus then is not changed, if you have these different voices talking about his life? TAUSSIG: Well, I think we need to take into consideration a couple of other factors when would we talk about whether these gospels are historically accurate. For instance, the gospel of Luke says that there was a census of everyone in the world at the time of the birth of Jesus. The problem is, we have no record of that in any of the Roman empire's records. The gospel of Matthew says there was a massive slaughter of innocence around the town of Bethlehem at that time. The Roman's kept great records of their military efforts. There's no evidence of either of these events. YARNELL: Let me... ZAHN: Is that evidence important to you at all? TARNELL: Well, the evidence in the surrounding culture is always important to analyze. The problem I think we have in our modern culture, where we have access to so much information off of the Internet and off of computers, is that we think that the information that is out there is immediately available. When you're dealing with information from the classical world, you're dealing with information that is 20 centuries old. And to be honest with you, the data that we have concerning the life of Jesus is pretty much restricted to the four gospels, and those four gospel writers were very clear about their search for accuracy in what they told us. And so I do have to say this: in some ways they were like a journalist, because they were seeking, at their best, to record and to give us the facts. But they went beyond what a journalist does, because they were also writing so that people would believe and have faith in Jesus Christ. ZAHN: And meaning to what they were saying. Well, doctors, I appreciate both of your joining us tonight. I'm sure you will spark some heated debate out there tonight as both of these articles did in "TIME" and "Newsweek." Thanks again.