A Critique of AN, Wilson's book,jesus

I have been thinking a great deal

recendy on the issue ofCERTAINTI OF
KNOWLEDGE. How can we be sure
that our religious beliefS are true? How
can we be certain that the gospel events
actually happened? Howcanwe KNOW
FOR CERTAIN thatjesus is everything
the Bible claims He is?
These concerns have been on my
mind because of two things: (1). my
careful study of the preface to Luke's
gospelinLuke 1:1-4; and(2). myreading
of AN. Wilson's newly published book,
jesus,publishedinI992byW.W.Norton
& Company, New York. It could be on
its way of being a best-seller. Therewere
at least twenty copies in the secular
bookstore, (Bookstar), where I purchased
my copy.
AN. Wilson is CERTAIN that the
gospels are myths, and not at aU
historically accurate. He Writes: "Luke's
Gospel looks like history, and liberal
Christian SChOlaIS, when they JiISt came
to work on it, thought that aU they
needed to do was to correct a few
inessential erroISin thematterof dates. It
isonlywhen yougoalitde deeperbeneath
the surface that you realize that it is not
history at all:-pg. 75
(1). He is certain there is an
irreconcilable difference between the
':Jesus of History" and the "Christ of
Faith: and that in attempting to
reconstruct the ':Jesus of History," we
would do irreparable harm to the "Christ
of Faith." -pg. vii.
(2). He is certain that Jesus was not
born in Bethlehem of a virgin. In fact, he
says that "the story of the . baby being
born in a stable at Bethlehem because
there was no room for him at the itm is
one of the most powerful myths ever
given to the human race." -pg. ix. "If you
read the infancy narratives in Matthew,
Luke and the Synoptic Gospels, arid
these narratives alone ... it wouldnotoccur
to you that the Christian religion had any
claim to be morally serious."-pg. 90.
Wilson suggests that Jesus may have
been the bastard son ofa Romansoldier,
pg.76.
(3). He is not certain about this, but
he suggests that Jesus may have been
married and was an astrologer and a
magician, pgs. WI, 193, 202.
(4). HeiscertainthattheLord'sPrayer,
rather than wordsJesus actually said, are
"a pure distillation of monotheist piety,"
pg. 141.
(5). Wilson is certain that the radical
message ofJesus, as over against that of
Matthew, lllke, john and Paul is that
God forgives and accepts evil people and
welcomes them into' His kingdom
8 THE COUNSEL of Cbalcedon January, 1993
BEFORE theyrepent, "regardless of their
moral rectitude or turpitude, pg. 33,
144.
(6). He is VERY certain that ''we can
discoum the idea thatJesus ever claimed
to be the Second PeISOn of the Trinity, or
that he ever claimed to be God, since the
NewTestamentneverstatesthathemade
any such claim. We can even discount
thatJesus ever thought of himself as the
Pre-existemLogos(Word),sentfromthe
Fatherto'reveal' God ... ." -pg., 57. Wilson
bearsdeartestimonytohisunbeliefwhen
he wri\fS: "For many YeaIS, I was a
'practicing Christian, and tried to avoid
facing the implications of what I had
studiedwhenIreadtheolOf5fatuniversity,
(i.e" liberal theolof5f). -Ihadtoadmit
that I found it impossible to believe that
a fiISt -century Galilean holy man had at
any time ofhis life believed himself to be
the Second Person of the Trinity. It was
such an irtheremly improbable thing for
a monotheistic Jew to believe. Nor,
having learned how to read the New
Testament ctitically, could I find the
smaUest evidence that Jesus had ever
emertained such beliefS about himself;
nor that he had preached them." -pg.xvi
Wilson admits that he has been
"tremendously inspired" by the Writings ,
of Geza Vennes, in patricular by his
book, jesus the Jew. "For Vermes, and
those who think like him, Jesus comes
alive again as a recognizable Jew of the
first century. I may as well'start by
confessing that this is the Jesus in whom
I have come to believe. I believe that
jesus was II Galilean HASID or holy
man."-pg. xvii
(7). According to Wilson jesus
experienced some kind of inexplicable
"transfiguration" similano "acomparable
momem (which) occurred in the life of
Buddha." -pg. 156
(8). Wilson is certain that there is no
historical connection between the Lord's
Supper, the Eucharist, and Jesus of
Nazareth. The stories of the Last Supper
were invented, pg. xi. He Writes, "This
(the fact that Jesus instituted the Lord's
Supper) is perhaps the most glaring
inconsistencyinthe Christian claim to be
an historically based religion."-pg. x.
(9). He is certain that the Cross is "the
point h ~ r we fee! the strongest clJJ.sh
between the mythological Christ of
religion and the historical figure ofjesus
of Nazareth. The mythological Christ,
who was pre-existent as the Second
Person of the Holy Trinity, was bomina
stable, instituted the Christian Eucharist,
and founded the Catholic Church, isnot
thesubjectofthis book. - This bookis
written with the hope that it might be
possible to say something about that
other Jesus, the Jesus of History."- pg.
xiii. He also writes that "those who cling
to the belief that Jesus was the Second
Person of the Trinity, or the gruesome
ideathathumansincouldonlybeforgiven
by the death ofJesus on the Cross must
miss the point of such Gospel stories."-
157-158.
"The fact thatJesus was a total failure
in life, and that his mission, whatever its
original purpose may have been, ended
ontheCross,leadstheevangelistsintwo
contrary directions. - ... ifthey believed
that Jesus was the great prophet chosen
by God to proclaim a new religion to the
world, it is embarrassing for them to
suppose that his death, which cut him
shott in the prime of life, should have
been in anyway a set-back. 50, they all
feel obliged to tell us repeatedly that
Jesus foresaw his death, and foretold his
own Resurrection after three days. rfhe
had really done sO,of course, his terror at
the time of his arrest, and the drops of
sweat which he shed in Gethsemane,
would have been so much theater."-pg.
169
(10). He is certain that the story in
Matthew concerning Judas' betrayal of
Jesus and death should be dismissed
because "every word of this story" is
"legendary."-pg. 216. Judas may have
committed suicide as it is recorded, but
"perhaps he killed himself in order to
avoid torture and crucifixion rather than
out of remorse fora 'betrayal' ofwhichhe
was very likely innocent." -pg. 216.
(ll). In amannerconsistentwithhis
intellectualschizoprenia, Wilsoniscertain
tlw.t "yOl.\ cannot simply pick up a copy
of the Gospels and read them as if they
were history. Nor is it possible to read
them as if they were imperfect history."-
pg. xiii. Nevertheless, he writes that "for
the sake of trying to convey what I think
Jesusstoodfor,andwhatsottofamanhe
was, I adopt the New Testament order of
events. I hope that I have not written
fiction. - From this illUsion, I believe
that it is jUst possible to reconstruct, I
hope plausibly, some picture of an
historical Jesus. But I have never lost
sight of the fact that it is an illusion." -pg.
xiii-xiv.
(12). Wilson is also certain that Jesus
did not arise from the dead. He asks:
"How can we reconcile ourselves to the
idea that the Fourth Gospel, with its great
injunctions to love one another as Jesus
loves his disciples, should concoct such
a whopping lie as the story of Jesus'
resurrection." -pg. 66. "Human beings
have such a boundless capacity to
fantasize, particularly in the area of
religious experience, that we need not
question the sincerity of the evangelists
when they describe the reappearance of
Jesusfromthetomb."-pg.67. Concerning
the resurrection appearances of Jesus,
Wilson writes, "My guess would be that
the followers of Jesus-Mary in the
garden, the two disciples on the road to
Emrnaeus, the fisherman by the lakeside
in Galilee-had actually seen James, or
another of the brothers of the Lord. The
angelsoryoungmenwhotoldthewomen
thathe had 'gone before them into Galilee'
were members oOesus' family, who had
come in the garden tomb in order to take
the body for burial nearer his home in
Nazareth." -pg. 171.
(13). He is certain that the ascension
oOesus from the Mount of Olives to the
right hand of God is absurd, and only
stupid people believe that hedid. His own
words are: "For a modem observer, of
whatever religiOUS beliefS, it is impossible
nottoknowthatarnanascendingvertically
from the Mount of Olives, by whatever
means of rnil1lculous propulsion, would
passintoorbit. Onlydullatdswouldneed
to be told this."-pg. 3.
(14). Wilson is certain that the Book
of Revelation is "uncouth" in its Greek
syntaxandstyle, "deranged"initsirnagery
and "irmtional" in its ethics. "It seems as
far from the spirit ofjesus as it is possible
to be, and yet it provides tile conclusion
of the Christian Bible."-pg. 250
(15). He is surprised with
Christianity's emphasis on the centrality
of the family, "eventhoughJesus,andthe
majority of Christians for the first three
centuries of the faith's existence, were
rathernostile to the family."-pg. 254.
(16). Wilson is certain that "there
could be no greater insult to his Qesus')
memory than to recite the creeds."-pg.
255.
(17). Wilson is emphatic repeatedly
that "when the Churcl1 ttiumphed over
thesynagogue ... thedeadlylegacyofanti-
Sernitism remained embodied in the
Christian view of the world," (pg. 256),
because it implicated the Jewish people
inthecrucifixionofjesus. "WereJesusto
contemplate the fate OF HIS OWN
PEOPLE AT THE HANDS OF THE
CHRISTIANS, (emphasis mine. Think
about it!), throughout the history of
Catholic Europe, culminating in Hitler's
Final50lution, itisunlikelythathewould
have viewed the missionary activities of
St. Paul with such equanimity, (I.e.,
composure)."-pg.256.
(18). In passing Wilson speaks of
such things as "the bloodcurdling
mythology of the book ofjoshua," (pg.
10), and that "every single thing
prophesied in the First Letter to the
Thessalonians ... tumed out to be
untrue ... ," (pg.17): "Sd1olarshavebeen
right to warn us not to place too much
relianceuponActsasanhistoricalsource.
January, 1993 ~ TIlE COUNSEL of Chalcedon 'i' 9
On the other hand, bUried beneath its
untruths, and its distortions, there are
clues as to what might actUally have been
the case."-pg. 27. "There is also in the
Fourth Gospel a strongly anti-Christian
vein-or at least anti-Christianity-
according-to-Paul-or-Mark-or-Luke."-
pg. 55. Wilson speaks of John's
''mythological way oflooking at things"
andhis ''mythological presuppositions."-
pgs.54-55. ThewriteISoftheN.T. ''have
done their best to obscure
Jesus altogether in an
encrustation of fantasy." -pg.
68. Wilsonis convinced that
his own representation and
interpretation of the "facts" is
"more likely than the New
Testament account of
things." -pg. 172.
So, what happened to i: :<Y.
i:l.:,:::::I::
with Christian morales and '.i ,...;
, : ; :.::::.;.: : . . : : :
biographiesofgreatChristian : . '., .. ,

so hostile to the Christ of"
orthodox Christianity, God in human
flesh? Why is it that this man, so gifted
in literary skills,.haswasted them in such
sloppy,obsoleteandbiased"scholaISltip"
which has been refuted and discredited
years ago? ANSWER: Emotional,
intellectUal, spiritual, self.conscious
preference! A.N. WILSON ARBITRAR-
ILY AND BLINDLY PREFERS TO
BELIEVE WHATHE BEUEVES, and so
hereartangesandmisrepresents the facts
and stories of the Bible to suppon his
own preferred convictions. He admits
his reconstruction ofjesus is an illusion,
but he has chosen to believe in an illusion
before he will bowto the resurrected and
exalted Jesus Christ.
Wilson has chosen not to believe in
the Jesus Christ of the Bible, but to
discredit Him so that his own views
about Godandlifewillstandand prevail.
His choice, in spite of the facts, illustrates
the truth that the difference between
faith and unbelief is not one of insight or
intelligence, norisit because of the some
alleged obscurityofthe biblical revelation.
Itisamatterofetbicalchoice. Thosewho
chose to believe the gospel ofJesusChrist
doso becauseofthegraceofGodenabliug
them to do so freely and gladly, with the
whole hean. Those who chose not to
believe to gospel do so, because theywill
do so, and not because they have
intellectual problems. The unbeliever
will not give up himself, his belief in his
own ultimacy and autonomy, and his sin
in order to embrace the gospel ofJesus
Christ. He will chose to believe in an
illusion before he will bow to the reality
of the exalted Jesus Christ. He will
"suppress the truth in unrighteousness,"
Rom. 1:18f, and make himself believe a
lie, before he will bow to the truth as it is
in Jesus.
A.N. Wilson wills to be exalted at the
expense of Christ's expense. But, in
reality, Christ will be exalted at A.N.
Wilson's expense. What a price he will
pay! "Enter the rock and hide in the dust
10 TIlE COUNSEL of Chalcedon Jannary, 1993
from the terror oj the Lard and from the
splendor oj His majesty. The proud look oj
man will be abased, and the lojtlness oj man
will be humbled, and the Lord alone wiU be
exalted in that day. "-Isaiah 2:10-11
Whatinfluenced Wilsontoapostatiz.e
from the faith? FIRST, it must be
undeIStood, asJesussaid, that we are not
what outside influences make of us, we
are what our bean makes us. It is not
what goes into a man that defines him, it
is what comes out of his
hean. The innnoderate,
emotional and slanderous
misrepresentatious of Jesus
and the Gospels by Wilson
reveals the true state of his
hean.
SECOND, Wilson's
church experience was
probably the Church of
England, where the focus is
usuallyonliturgyratherthan
on the sound and forceful
preaching of the whole
Word of God. From
Wilson'sabysmalignorance
of the biblical text itself, it is
obvious thathehashad little
contact with "the preaching
of the cross, which is the
powerofGoduntosalvationto those who
believe."
1HIRD,Hehasreadthewrongbooks,
without having an informed faith that is
able to handle their false teaching. One
out of over two hundred books in his
bibliography is written from a position
that the Bibleis trustworthy, and that one
is]. Gresham Machen's great book, The
Origin oj Paul's Religion. There are no
allusious, references and attempts to
refute this book in the text of Wilson's
book, indicating that he did not take this
scholarly book seriously, or else that he
had read it and thought ita good idea not
to try to deal with it, because of iis
irrefutable position. The rest of the
books in his bibliography are written
from the peISpective of Higher Criticisni
~
I
orworse,i.e.,theBibleisnottheinfallible
revelation of God.
I have read many of the authors listed
in Wilson's bibliography, and yet they
did not inll.uence me as they inll.uenced
him. Why? He has been so narrow-
minded in his perspective that he has
listed only one bookthatwouldconttadict
his entire thesis. Why? Is he afraid to be
open-minded? Is he afraid of those
scholarly books that defend the pOsition
that theJesusofhistory and the Christ of
onhodox Christianity are one and the
same-God in human flesh? I
have not been afraid to read the
books he recommends. Why, if
he is a true scholar, has he not
carefully studied all perspectives
on this vitany impottant issue,
before he made his conclusions
and wrote his book? ANSWER:
Either he is afraid of "our" books,
or heis ignorant of their existence,
or he simply PREFERS to believe
what he believes, "without being
confused by the faqs."
And now, in conclusiOn, back
to the issue of CERTAINTY OF
KNOWLEDGE. (1). True faith, in
contrast to blind faith, recognizes the
IRRATIONALITY OF OOUBT in the
infallibleauthorityoftheBibleindoctrine,
ethics and history. Faith knows that
giving into doubt is a pandering to pride
and self-love. God has spoken so clearly
and so powerfully that doubting His
i l i ~ revelation is blatam, inexcusable
unbelief, not an honest wrestling with
the issues. (2). Ulckofcettaintyregarding
Jesus Christ and the Bible is based on
blind, irrational, deliberate unbelief.
There is no reason whatsoever to doubt
that Jesus is God incarnate as the Bible
revealsHimto be. (3). Cettaintyregarding
Christ and the Bible gnows out of faith in
Jesus Christ and the Bible as the Word of
God, and self- surrender of intenect,
hean and life to that Word. ''The fear of
the Lord is the beginning of knowledge. "
Wilson pretends that he comes to his
subject with an attitude of objectivity.
Hewrites, "[tisalsonecessaty, before one
statts, to empty the wnd and to take
nothing for granted." -pg. 8. He rerers to
himself as a "detached inquirer." -pg. 48.
He points out that "the attentivereaderof
theNewTestamemmustgivehimselfup
to the world-view which it represents,
and look at the nature of things through
the eyes of men and women" of Palestine
in the first centuty." -pg. 63, i.e., submit
himself to the worldview of first century
human beings, not to the mind of God
revealed in the Bible. He infonns us that
he learned to read the Gospels in this
"demythologizing" way from "the great
Rudolph Bultmann," "one of the greatest
oftwentieth-centutytheologians." -pg. 63.
Rudolph Bultmann, (b. 1884), was
anything but objective when he
approached the study of the New
Testament. He believed that the message
of the N.T. is expressed in mythological
tenns, rnatelial drawn from the myths of
Jewish apocalyptic literature and the
Gnosticmythsofredemption. Bulttnann,
appreciates the critical spirtt of the older
liberalism thattaught that Christian Faith
must be reinterpreted in order to square
it with the modem, humanistic view of
theworldstemmingfromtheRenaissance
andtheEnlightenment, whiledisagreeing
with many of the conclusions of that
liberalism. He becomesevenmote radical
in his program of demythologization by
using the irrational philosophy of
existentialismastheworld-viewbywhich
the Gospels must be understood. For
Bulnnann, as for Klerkegaard, "the event
of Jesus Christ," which must be
disengaged from the mythical, biblical
framework which envelopes it, "is not
opentotheneutralhistolicalinvestigator;
it is only for faith. - The Gospels
wimess more to the faith of the early
Churchthan to any histortcallyveIifiable
events."-Knudson in Creative Minds in
Contemporary Theology, Eerdmans
Publishing Co., pg. 140-141.
The truth is that, contrary to Wilson's
desire to come to the Gospels with an
emptymind,onecanneverescape
his basic presupposi.tions. We all
have them. We never possess an
"empty mind" in this sense.
Evetyonehasagrtdofassumptions
he makes about God and the
world, whichassumptionshemay
not be aware of, and which he
takes on lilith, but by which he
interprets and assesses everything
that goes on around him. "As a
man thtnhstn his heart, sois he," says
the Proverbs. Bultmann had his
presuppositions-the critical
spilit of liberalism and existentialism,
i.e., the belief that lire is paradoxical and
that truth is subjective and relative.
Wtlsonhashispresuppositions. HOnesty
and good scholarship demand that a
person become aware of his
presuppositions and admit to them, rather
than hiding from them or pretending
they are not there. Wilson's prejudices
againstthetruthsoforthodoxChristianity
can be found on almost every page ofhis
book It is prejudice and not objectivity
that writes: "For a modem observer, of
whateverreligious belielS, itisimpossible
not to Imow that a man ascending
vertically from the Mount of Olives, by
whatever means of miraculous
propnlsion, would pass into orbit. ONLY
DULLARDS WOUlD NEED TO BE
TOLD THIS." (emphasis mine)-pg. 3.
A.N. Wilson wroteJesus because he has
an axe to grtnd.
Augustine said, "I believe therefore I
know." Theworldviewsand philosophies
January, 1993 l' l1lE COl)NSEL of Chltlcedon ~ 11
of all people are based on faith. Wechose
to believe whatwe believe. However, the
faithis eithera blind,irrational faith or an
informed faith based on a solid
foundation. There are two kinds offaith:
one based on rock, another based on
sand. Blind faith says: the only way to
knowanythingistrueisbyhumanreason.
Butwhatreasondoesonehaveforplacing
his faith in human reason? Saving faith
is based on the self- authenticating
authority of the Word of the Creator of
the universe. The Christian's faith rests
not on the testimony of men,but on the
testimony of God given
with clarity and power in
the Bible.
"Byitsverynarureand
essence faith can find rest
in nothing but a word
from God,apromisefrom
the Lord. Any other
ground makes it shaky,
because it is human and
therefore shifting and
unreliable. Only a word
from God can give life to
our souls and provide an
immovablefoundationfor
the building of our hope.
When all human things
obtruding between God's
grace and our faith are
eliminated,and when our
faith fastens on God's promises directly
andimmediate1y,thenfaithwillbecettain
. and unshakable. Then faith no longer
rests on a subjective, changeable
foundation but on an objective, abiding
foundation. The unshakableness of the
foundation is conveyed directly to the
person who, rescued from life's
shipwreck, plants bothfeetfirmlyonitin
faith. When the plan of faith is allowed
to take root in the ground of God's
promises (in the Gospel), it will naturally
bear the fruit of certainty. The deeper
and firmer the roots anchor themselves
in this ground, the stronger and taller it
will grow ,andthericherwill beits fruit."-
Herman Bavinck, The Certainy of Faith,
Paideia Press, St. Catharines, Ontario,
Canada.
TheJesusofA.N. Wilson is not God.
He is not even a real man. By Wilson's
ownadmission,heisanillusion,afigment
of Wilson's imagination, created by his
desperate attempt to find something in
Jesusuniqueandexnaordinaryin which
he can trust, having rejected the true
JesusChristHimself. The JesusofWilson
is a Galilean holy man, who doodled
with his finger in the sand, who had
"sudden outbursts of anger, and sttange
Dashes of mysticism; an exorcists," (pg.
253), who could not get along with his
family, and Who died as a result of some
mysterious conspiracy, which included
some very shadowy people. In fact,
Wilson admits that "we shall never
recapture his Oesus') features, his look,
or the sound of his voice; but there a
moments in the New Testamem where
one has the sensation of having only just
missed the Presence. It is like walking
into a room which a person has only just
left, and seeing evidence of their
presence-the impression of a head
against a cushion, a glass half empty by
the chair, a dgarette still smouldering in
theash-ttay."-pg. 91- 91. Howpathetic
is this Jesus of Wilson. WHYWOUlD
12 Of TIlE COUNSEL of Chalcedon ~ January, 1993
ANYONE WANT TO PUT HIS FAITH
INTHEjESUSOFWll-SON? HENEVER
EXISTED. HE IS AN IlLUSION.
On the other hand, the real Jesus
Christ said, "My sheep hear My voice,
and I know them, and they follow Me;
and I ~ etmrallife to them; and they
shall never perish, and 110 one shall
snatch them out of My hand."-John
10:27-28. True believers HAVE heard
the voice ofJesus Christ, and WIlL hear
it again, along with A.N. Wilson:
JesusChristsaid: "Truly, truly, I say to
you, Wlhouriscomingandnow
is, when the deadshaIlhearthe
voice of the Son of God; and
those who hear shall live. -
Do not marvel at this; for WI
hour is coming, In which all
ho are In the tombs shall hear
His voice, and shall come forth;
those who did good, to a
resurrection of life, those who
committed the evil to a
resurrection of judgment."-
John 5:25-29.
Postscript
One last word must be
said about Wilson's abysmal
ignorance or hisboldattempt
to deceive his readers. He
writes: "The ultra-orthodox
Christians-whether
catholic or Protestant-are so anxious
topreserve their religious faith intact that
they do not dare to confront the
conclusioUS of the last two hundred years
of New Testament scholarship." - pg. xv.
What an incredible statement] IfWilson
had read Machen's book, The Orlgtn of
Paul's Religion. listed his bibliography,
then in this quote he is deliberately
misleading his readers. But Why? Jesus
Christ of the Bible and ofhistoryrilust be
discredited in order for Wilson to sell the
Jesus of Wilson! If he did not read the
bookinhisbibliography, why did he list
it in his bibliography?
For "two hundred years" scholarly
book after scholarly book has been
,

,
I
pUblisbed not only confronting. butably
refutingtheconclusionsofHigberCriticaI
scholarship on the New Testamem, and
on the Old Testam.em fur that matter.
Some of the most brilliant, best educated
and most widely acclaimed men in the
world have written books exposing tbe
errors of the critics of the Bible. Let me
mention JUST A FEW:
1. Stonehouse, Ned, The Witness oj the Synoptic
Gospels to o,rut, 1979, Baker Book House, Grand
Rapids, Mich.
2. Machen, ].G., The Virgin Birth oj o,rlst, 1930,
Harper &. Row, N.Y.
3. Hughes, P.E., ed.,CreativeMiJUlsinContemporary
Theology, 1966, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.,
Grand Rapids, Mich.
4. Kistemaker, Simon, ed Inlerpreting God's Word
Todt!Y ,1970, Presbylerianand Relormed Publishing
Co. Nutley, N.J.
5. Ridderbos, Hennan, The Coming of the Kingdom,
1975, Presbylerian and Relonned Publishing Co.,
Nutley, NJ. .
6. udd, George. The New Testament and
1967, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand
Rapids, Mich.
7. Vas, Geerhardus, The Self-Diselosure oj Jesus,
1926, George Doran Company, N.Y.
8. Harrison, Everett, Introduction to the New
Testament, 1964, Wm. B. Eerdmans
Co., Grand Rapids, Mich.
9. Guthrie, Donald, New TestanJent Introduction,
1974, Inter-varsity Press, Downers Grove, Ill.
10. Tasker, R. V.G., The Nalure and Purpose of the
Gospels, 1962,Jahn Knox Press, Richmond, Va.
II. Bruce, F.F., TheBooksandtheParchments, 1950,
Fleming H. Revell Company, Westwood, NJ.
12. Tenney, Merrill, "Reversals 01 New Testament
Criticism" in Revelationand the Bible, edited by Carl
F.H. Herny, 1958, Presbyterian and Relanned
Publishing Co., Nutley, NJ.
13.North, Gary, The HoaxofHigherCriticism, 1989,
Institute lor Christian &anomies, Tyler, Te",
14.Ridderbos, H.N., Paul and Jesus, 1974,
Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co.,
Philadelphia, Pa.
15. Warfield, B.B., The Inspiration and Authority of
the Bible, 1964, Presbyterian and Reformed
he First 350 Years
Publishing Co., Philadelphia, Pa.
16. Machen,].G., o,ristianityandl.iberalism, 1923,
Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids,
Mich.
17. Machen,].G., The Origin a!Paul's ,1925, Wm.
B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, Mich.
18.Hendriksen, William, New Testament
Commentary: The Gospel According To MaUbtw,
1973, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Mich.
19. une, William, The Gospel According To Marh,
New lntemational Commentary on the New
Testament, 1974, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing
Co., Grand Rapids, Mich.
20. Geldenhuys, Narval, Commentary on the Gospel
of Luke, New International Commentary on the
New Testament, 1951, Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, Mich.
21.Manis, Leon, Studies in the Fourth Gospel, 1969,
Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids,
Mich.
22.Monis, Leon, The Gospel According to John, New
International Commentaryon the New Testament, .
1971, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand
Rapids, Mich.Q
For over lOOyears Americans have been subjected to historical misin-
fonnation. We have been given ties for truth and myths for facts.
Modem, unbelieving historians have hidden the truth of our nation's
historyfromus. America:TheFirst350 Years not only correctsthelies,
but also points out things "overlooked" by modem historians. It
interprets American history from a Christian perspective so that you
hearnotonlywhathappened, bywhyithappened-and whatitmeans
to us today. 32 lectures on 16-90 minute cassettes, 200 page note-
book, 16 page study guide, lecture outlines, index & bibliography.
special rate for Counsel of Chalcedon readers--
see page two editorial for more details

AMERICA: The FIrst 350 Years-$64.95 x __ =
Louisiana residents add 7% sales tax (!.a:J) =
SHIPPING AND HANDLING: Add 10% (15% UPS) =
(Check or Money Order) Total Enclosed
(name)
(Street Address or P.O. Box)
(City) (State) (Zip)
PLEASE ALLOW 4-6 WEEKS FOR DELIVERY
Send self-addressed stamped envelope to receive more information
January, 1993 TIlE COUNSEL of Chalcedon 13