Mr. O’Reilly has recently written books about the killing of Abraham Lincoln and John Kennedy. His recent third book is about the killing of Jesus. It is sometimes of value to read what is written before the book actually begins in order to understand something about the author. In this case, it reveals much about Mr. O’Reilly’s thinking and it requires me to make it known. This is not a book from a man who has faith in the Bible or what it teaches. In the culture of our day, prisoners are denied access to Biblical materials while Moslems can request and receive prayer rugs. It should then be no strange thing to find writings such as this book that attempts to “shed light” on the death of Jesus the Christ.
One page one, Mr. O’Reilly has this comment about the authors, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. He writes… “but they sometimes appear contradictory and were written from a spiritual point of view rather than as a historical chronicling of Jesus life.” This strikes at the very heart of what our Christian lives are to be about. Faith comes from the Word of God (Romans 10:17). It is not the product of men trying to put their thoughts to writing but the Word of God comes from the Holy Spirit who gave men the words to write down (1 Corinthians 2:12-13). The Scriptures are words that are God breathed and it, therefore, records for us the truth (II Timothy 3:16). Since God is a Spirit, what other kind of book would one expect from a Spirit but a spiritual book?
The Bible, over the years, continues to wear out the arguments of the skeptics. Why is that the case? All attempts to present the Bible as a man-made product filled with errors have found themselves in the “trash bin” of honest and sincere thinkers. If the Bible affirms that God is not the author of confusion, how could anyone speak of contradictions in the Bible without casting reflections on Him who gave us the Bible (I Corinthians 14:33). Even Mr. O’Reilly uses the wording, “appear contradictory.” Why not take the time to explain where these contradictions are to prove that the Scriptures are from men and not from God. Bear in mind that if there is a plausible explanation, there is no contradiction.
On page 7 of his book, Mr. O’Reilly tells us in the first century that Jesus died at 36. How did he arrive at such an age? We have long held that the church was established in A.D. 33, while some back it up to A.D. 30. How then, does he arrive at the idea that Jesus was 36 at His death? Oh, this is just a work of fiction. If then, something is a work of fiction, does that give the author license to play with history itself? Some time ago a movie came out about Noah and the ark. It was placed with the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah and was raided by pirates. Would we be silent, for example, if some author in writing a work of fiction placed George Armstrong Custer at the Alamo? Authors and moviemakers seem perfectly comfortable with doing with the Bible what they would not dare do with any other work of history.
When I came to page 8, I took time to read the footnote. Mr. O’Reilly tells us that there were actually two Bethlehems and that both could lay claim to being the one where Jesus the Christ was born. At the end of his footnote, he again uses the language of ambiguity. He writes, “”…would seem to tip the scales in favor of the traditional site.” The writer of Hebrews says it was EVIDENT that our Lord came from the tribe of Judah (Hebrews 7:14). There are two cities that bear the name, Bethlehem. Which one was located in Judah? The language of “seems to tip the scales” reflects the growing view of so many. That the Word of God is not authoritative for our time and we do not need to take seriously what we find there.