I made the comment in a post somewhere below that N.T. Wright was a bit like Sherlock Holmes in his methods. In fact, after reading his article on the Virgin Birth (discussed in the post from last Saturday) I have been forced to modify my claim: Holmes and Wright follow methods which are completely opposite.
The famous Sherlock Holmes quotation is “… when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”
But Wright’s approach seems more appropriate for the historian: Without predeterming what is possible or impossible, look at the evidence and ask yoursef what is the most satisfying solution in terms of probability, simplicity and completeness (ie. it provides an explanation for all the evidence, without leaving awkward pieces of evidence out).
The answer may well lead you to covlude that what you initially thought was impossible actually happened.