– Customer review on 09/12/2009

This book is absolutely ridiculous. Ridiculous and so many junctures. It is ridiculous as the author is most definitely not a scholar - yet she insists on presenting herself as a scholar. Does she have any scholarly expertise in the issues? Nope. She has an undergraduate degree. How does she claim she is a professional? By citing people who died over 200 years ago as if they are on the forefront of scholarship. But she does attempt the allusion that she has utilised scholarship. Take the backflap for example - she lists "authoritative" people who she quotes, as if that redeems the fact that she (1) abuses the quotes and (2) those she quotes disagrees with her to the point of ridiculing her (eg. Ehrman).

Much of the book is simply a poorly composed summary of the gospels. Take examples where she attempts to engage with scholarship, such as in chapter 6 on dating the gospels. Where are her quotes from? An interview in an apologetic book!! Not quite the forefront of scholarship! She pretends to translate Luke 1:1-4 by redacting a number of English translations, and attempts to exegete it. In the process, she makes it evident that she does not know Greek. For an exegesis on Luke 1:1-4 and the role of eyewitnesses in the Lukan material (Luke-Acts) see the real scholar Richard Bauckham in his book "Jesus and the Eyewitnesses". She attempts to reject the gospels, claiming there is no Aramaic background despite the massive works of Professor Maurice Casey who has clearly demonstrated this in regard to Q and Mark (See. An Aramaic Approach to Q; The Aramaic Sources of Mark's Gospel.) The errors, and ignorance go on and on.

Really, a pathetic book by a pathetic author.