1993 issue 1 - book review: jesus, the myths of a.n. wilson - counsel of chalcedon

8/12/2019 1993 Issue 1 - Book Review: Jesus, The Myths of A.N. Wilson - Counsel of Chalcedon

1/6

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

gospelinLuke1:1-4; 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 thematterofdates. 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

woulddo irreparableharm

to

the Christ

of Faith.

-pg.

vii.

(2). He is certain that Jesus

was

not

born in

Bethlehem

of a

virgin.

n

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 religionhadany

claim

to be

morally

serious -pg.

90.

Wilson suggests that

Jesus

may have

been the bastardson ofaRomansoldier,

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 thanwordsJesus

actuallysaid,

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, regardlessof heir

moral rectitude or turpitude,

pg.

33,

144.

(6). He is

VERY

certain

that

''we can

discoum the

idea

thatJesus ever

claimed

tobe the

Second

PeISOnof he Trinity, or

that heever claimed to beGod 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

studiedwhenIreadtheolOf5f

at

university,

(i.e liberal theolof5f). -Ihadtoadmit

that I found it impossible to believe that

a

fiISt

-century

Galilean holy

man

had

at

any time

ofhis

ife believedhimself

to be

the Second Person ofthe 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

sma est 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,

j sus

th 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

theLord's

Supper, the Eucharist, and Jesus of

Nazareth .The stories of the

Last

Supper

were

invented,

pg

. xi.

He Writes,

This


2/6

(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 iscertain 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

thatJesuswas a total

failure

in life, and that his mission, whatever

its

original purpose

may have

been, ended

ontheCross,leadstheevangelistsintwo

contrary directions. -

...

iftheybelieved

thatJesus 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

comm itted suicide as it is recorded, but

"perhaps he

killed

himself in order to

avoid torture

and

crucifixion

rather than

out

ofremorse

fora 'betrayal'

ofwhichhe

was

very

likely

innocent."

-pg.

216.

ll). n

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 hey 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 asJesus

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

he

Lord. The

angelsoryoungmenwhotoldthewomen

thathe

had gone before them into Galilee'

were members

oOesus'

family, who had

come

inthe garden tomb inorder 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

stupidpeople

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 he

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 OUNSEL

o

Chalcedon i

9


3/6

n

the other hand,

bUried beneath

its

untruths, and its distortions, there are

cluesas

to

what

might actUallyhave 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 he "facts"is

"more likely than the

New

Testament account of

things."

-pg.

172.

So, what happened to

i :


4/6

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 onebookthatwouldconttadict

his

entire

thesis.

Why? Is

he

afraid

to be

open-minded?

Is

he afraid of

those

scholarly

books

thatdefend 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 oftheir

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

apandering

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

n

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

JesusChrist

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

theNewTestam

emmustgivehimselfup

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 thatChristianFaith

mustbe 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, theevent

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 s that, contraryto 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

man thtnhstnhis 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

presuppositionsandadmit

to them, rather

than hiding from them or pretending

they are

not there . Wilson's prejudices

againstthetruthsoforthodoxChristianity

canbe 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 intoorbit. 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' l lE

COl)NSEL

of Chltlcedon 11


5/6

ofall peopleare based onfaith. Wechose

to

believe

whatwebelieve. However, the

faithis eithera blind,irrational faith or

an

informed faith based on a solid

foundation. Thereare 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

obtrudingbetween God's

grace and our faith are

eliminated,andwhen 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), itwillnaturally

bear the fruit of certainty. The

deeper

and

firmer the roots

anchor themselves

in

this

ground, the stronger and taller it

will grow

,andthericherwill beitsfruit."

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

ofsome

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 ofhaving only

just

missed the Presence.

It

is like

walking

into aroom which aperson has onlyjust

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

f 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 y voice,

and

know

them

and

they

follow Me;

and

~ etmrallife to them; and

they

shall

never

perish,

and

110

one shall

snatch

them

out

of

y hand."-John

10:27-28. True

believers

HAVE heard

the voice ofJesus Christ, andW lLhear

it again, along

with A.N.

Wilson:

JesusChristsaid: Truly ruly say t

you,

Wlhouriscomingandnow

is

when

the

deadshaIlhearthe

voice of the Son of God; and

those who

hear

shall live.

-

Do not marvel

at

this; for W

hour

is

coming,

In

which

all

ho

are

In

the tombs shall hear

His voice and shall come orth;

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 orhisboldattempt

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 he last

twohundredyears

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 ofhistoryrilustbe

discredited in order

forWilson to

sell

the

Jesus ofWilson 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


6/6

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

ynoptic

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 RelormedPublishing

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 C r i J i c ~ m

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 u b l ~ h i n g

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 35 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 th 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 GospelAccording

to

John, New

International Commentaryon the New Testament,

.

1971,

Wm. B. Eerdmans

Publishing Co.,

Grand

Rapids, Mich.Q

For over lOOyears Americans havebeensubjected

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:TheFirst35 Years

not

only

correctsthelies,

but

also

points out

things

"overlooked"

by

modem

historians.

t

interprets American history

from a

Christian perspective

so

that you

hearnotonlywhathappened, bywhyithappened-and whatitmeans

to

us

today. 32 lectures on

16-90minute

casset tes, 200

page

note

book 16 page

study

guide lecture outlines index &

bibliography.

special rate

for Counsel

ofChalcedon

readers-

see page

two editorial for more details

MERICA:

The FIrst350 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

1993 issue 1 - book review: jesus, the myths of a.n. wilson - counsel of chalcedon

Documents