A Critique of A.N. Wilson's book, Jesus.
I have been thinking a great deal recently on the issue of CERTAINTY OF KNOWLEDGE. How can we be sure that our religious beliefs are true? How can we be certain that the gospel events actually happened? How can we KNOW FOR CERTAIN that Jesus 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 gospel in Luke 1:1-4; and (2). my reading of A.N. Wilson's newly published book, Jesus, published in 1992 by W.W. Norton & Company, New York. It could be on its way of being a best-seller. There were at least twenty copies in the secular bookstore, (Bookstar), where I purchased my copy.
A Critique of A.N. Wilson's book, Jesus.
I have been thinking a great deal recently on the issue of CERTAINTY OF KNOWLEDGE. How can we be sure that our religious beliefs are true? How can we be certain that the gospel events actually happened? How can we KNOW FOR CERTAIN that Jesus 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 gospel in Luke 1:1-4; and (2). my reading of A.N. Wilson's newly published book, Jesus, published in 1992 by W.W. Norton & Company, New York. It could be on its way of being a best-seller. There were at least twenty copies in the secular bookstore, (Bookstar), where I purchased my copy.
A Critique of A.N. Wilson's book, Jesus.
I have been thinking a great deal recently on the issue of CERTAINTY OF KNOWLEDGE. How can we be sure that our religious beliefs are true? How can we be certain that the gospel events actually happened? How can we KNOW FOR CERTAIN that Jesus 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 gospel in Luke 1:1-4; and (2). my reading of A.N. Wilson's newly published book, Jesus, published in 1992 by W.W. Norton & Company, New York. It could be on its way of being a best-seller. There were at least twenty copies in the secular bookstore, (Bookstar), where I purchased my copy.
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