<P> The consensus among modern scholars is that the gospels belong to the ancient genre of bios , or biography . Ancient biographies were concerned with providing examples for readers to emulate while preserving and promoting the subject 's reputation and memory , and so they included both propaganda and kerygma ( preaching ) in their works . Mark , for example , is not biography in the modern sense but an apocalyptic history depicting Jesus caught up in events at the end of time . As Luke 's attempt to link the birth of Jesus to the census of Quirinius demonstrates , there is no guarantee that the gospels are historically accurate . The gospel authors altered the traditions at their disposal ( their sources ) to serve their own ends -- thus Matthew and Luke have frequently edited Mark , and the contradictions and discrepancies between John and the synoptics make it impossible to accept both as reliable A second problem is that the gospels as we have them are not the originals , but have been edited and recopied over time , and evidently differ from them in thousands of ways . In that long chain of transmission the texts have been corrupted , leading Origen to complain in the 3rd century that `` the differences among manuscripts have become great , ... ( because copyists ) either neglect to check over what they have transcribed , or , in the process of checking , they make additions or deletions as they please . '' Despite all this , scholars are confident that the gospels do provide a good idea of the public career of Jesus , and that critical study can attempt to distinguish the ideas of Jesus from those of later authors and editors . </P>
<P> The consensus among modern scholars is that the gospels belong to the ancient genre of bios , or biography . Ancient biographies were concerned with providing examples for readers to emulate while preserving and promoting the subject 's reputation and memory , and so they included both propaganda and kerygma ( preaching ) in their works . Mark , for example , is not biography in the modern sense but an apocalyptic history depicting Jesus caught up in events at the end of time . As Luke 's attempt to link the birth of Jesus to the census of Quirinius demonstrates , there is no guarantee that the gospels are historically accurate . The gospel authors altered the traditions at their disposal ( their sources ) to serve their own ends -- thus Matthew and Luke have frequently edited Mark , and the contradictions and discrepancies between John and the synoptics make it impossible to accept both as reliable A second problem is that the gospels as we have them are not the originals , but have been edited and recopied over time , and evidently differ from them in thousands of ways . In that long chain of transmission the texts have been corrupted , leading Origen to complain in the 3rd century that `` the differences among manuscripts have become great , ... ( because copyists ) either neglect to check over what they have transcribed , or , in the process of checking , they make additions or deletions as they please . '' Despite all this , scholars are confident that the gospels do provide a good idea of the public career of Jesus , and that critical study can attempt to distinguish the ideas of Jesus from those of later authors and editors . </P>
the literary genre that best describes the gospels is
the literary genre that best describes the gospels is
biography
biography