The supposedly non-existent theology of Campbell
permeates current American religious discussion. Campbell
has perhaps more influence on current American religious
thought than any other contemporary writer. His books fill
the religion sections of major bookstore chains; are
required reading in most college and university religion,
literature, and philosophy courses; and have become
handbooks of spirituality to the New Agers, neo-pagans, Gaia
environmentalists, and 1990s religious dabblers.
Joseph Campbell did indeed have an ideology and a
theology. At one point in the PBS interviews, for example,
he ridicules the Judeo-Christian belief in a bodily
resurrection by calling it "a clown act, really." He then
says that immortality should instead be seen as a mystical
identification with the eternal things in our present lives.
If this isn't an ideology or a theology, then what is?
If God is an impersonal energy force that transcends
all categories of human thought, then God transcends even
that description and the concept of God becomes empty of all
meaning whatsoever. As David Clark and Norman Geisler point
out in Apologetics in the New Age: A Christian Critique of
Pantheism, applying specific attributes such as love or
power to God does not limit God if you believe those
attributes are infinite. Campbell tries to get beyond
Judeo-Christian concepts of a personal God, but he sets up
his own category of impersonality at the same time that he
rejects the use of such categories. It is illogical to say
that God transcends categories like personality, but then to
turn around and claim that God is an impersonal,
transcendent energy source. Campbell thus clearly
If God is the ultimate mystery that lies beyond all
categories of thought, then why does Campbell sometimes use
human reason to defend his pantheistic view of God? If the
transcendent is unknowable, as he says, then how does he
know that it is unknowable? To call God an infinite mystery
which can't be grasped by the human mind avoids "rational
responsibility," is self-defeating, and shows that
Campbell's theology has deep logical flaws.
The Hebrew-Christian Bible teaches that God is a
person who transcends the space and time of the material
universe. Viewed as such, God is separate from His
Creation. He is the divine foundation of all the rational
categories which Campbell wants to reduce into one all-
encompassing concept or force. Campbell may wish to deny
the universal validity of these rational categories of the
mind, but without them he defeats the rational plausibility
of his own arguments.
Personal consciousness is not the same thing as
energy. Only an Intelligent Designer with a personal,
conscious, and rational mind or spirit could create a
universe which includes other personal, conscious, and
When it suits his purposes, Campbell uses reason,
science, and history to refute religious beliefs he doesn't
like, but when it comes to some of his own mystical beliefs,
his test for truth often changes and becomes purely
subjective. Such a shift seems plainly dishonest to me.
Furthermore, I have yet to find one thing which
Campbell says against the Bible that can't be refuted by
looking at the actual scientific, historic, and rational
evidence or by reading the text in its proper context.
Despite all of his criticisms, the biblical record stands
intact. (See the bibliography at the end of this booklet
for a list of sources which defend the reliability of the
In trying to rid the world of one dogma, then,
Campbell simply invents a new one. Although he sometimes
claims to support an "open," pluralistic approach to
religion and morality, he strongly disagrees with those
people who don't share his own narrow beliefs. He berates
others for being dogmatic, but he himself is often guilty of
the same thing.
Not everything Campbell says is wrong, however. He
actually says some provocative things about what makes a
In the first interview with Moyers, for example,
Campbell notes that one of the acts which a hero does is to
sacrifice himself for another person, a people, or an idea.
We can apply this principle to Jesus Christ, who becomes the
ultimate hero because He is the first and only person in
history who sacrifices himself to redeem the whole human
race from the bondage of sin. Using Campbell's own method
of interpretation, we can thus affirm the unique,
comprehensive quality of Christian theology.
Even so, Campbell's method leads him to make many
false statements and unsound arguments that many Christians
and other thinking people will find offensive. This problem
seriously damages the credibility of all the things he says
which may be true.
Before I became a Christian, I wrote my Ph.D.
dissertation in mythology, Campbell's field, at Northwestern
University. The title of my dissertation was Sacred
Encounters: The Myth of the Hero in the Horror, Science
Fiction, Fantasy Films of George Lucas and Steven Spielberg.
Although Campbell's book The Hero with a Thousand
Faces was one of the primary inspirations for my
dissertation, I also used other scholars for my research,
such as religious historian Mircea Eliade, literary scholars
Northrop Frye and Vladimir Propp, anthropologists Claude
Levi-Strauss and Victor W. Turner, psychologists Sigmund
Freud, Carl Jung, and James Hillman, and New Age philosopher
Ken Wilber. Except for Wilber, Freud, Hillman, and perhaps
Levi-Strauss, the other scholars I used were, on the whole,
more sympathetic to Christianity than Joseph Campbell. In
fact, if it weren't for some of the things they said in
support of Christian theology, I might still be waiting for
Unlike Campbell and other scholars, I don't use the
word mythology to undermine the historical truth of the
Christian faith. To me the word is a convenient term to
describe the stories which any society tells its people.
These stories may also have significance for people in other
cultures. They may be historical, and even scientific, or
they may be pure fantasy.
By limiting the concept of myth to the symbolic level,
Campbell makes all religions, including Christianity, purely
subjective. By completely separating myth from all notions
of historical truth, Campbell stacks the deck in favor of
his own theological world view.
Historian of religion Mircea Eliade doesn't believe a
historian can even discuss the historical truth of the
Resurrection and the other miracles that Jesus did. Still,
he generally accepts the truth of the other events
surrounding Jesus' ministry and the beginning of the
Christian church, as described by the New Testament
documents. So why does Campbell almost totally reject their
historical truth? The answer is that Campbell has an ax to
grind. And that ax is aimed directly at the head of the
Campbell makes two critical mistakes throughout his
work: he violates basic rules of logic, and his omits
factual evidence which does not fit his pet theories.
Under Campbell's crafty manipulation, polytheism,
monotheism, and the occult all become pantheistic in
character. Pantheism is the belief that the whole universe
and everything in it are part of a divine, impersonal force
Campbell often takes religious stories and forces them
to fit his pantheistic world view. He even does this with
During the interviews, Campbell and Moyers turn the
Judeo-Christian concept of "love thy neighbor" into a
pantheistic view of morality where we are supposed to "love
thy neighbor as thyself because thy neighbor is thyself."
Not only am I and my neighbor one, but God and I are also
one in Campbell's religion. Man is not made in the image of
God, according to Campbell, man is God.
It is common for Campbell to make the idea of God into
a kind of pantheistic dualism whereby God becomes an
impersonal, transcendent principle with a good side and an
evil side. Although Campbell often preaches compassion for
one's fellow human beings, he also says, "Everything arises
in mutual relation to everything else, so you can't blame
anybody for anything."
Campbell's morality is so fuzzy at times that he fails
to make any distinction whatsoever between the animal
sacrifices of the Bible and the human sacrifices of pagan
societies. In fact, he often reports glowingly on the
horrible religious practices of such pagans. At one point,
he even compares a horrible cannibal sacrifice of a young
man and a young woman in a primitive tribe from New Guinea
with the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross and the
Eucharist! Adding insult to injury, he ignores the idea of
Jesus Christ dying for our sins and changes it into some
kind of mystical at-one-ment where people and God the Father
Who are we to judge these pagan societies, says
Campbell. But who is Campbell that he should judge the
religious beliefs and practices of Jews and Christians, as
he so often does?
Critics of the virgin birth have never been able to
explain the origin of this Christian belief, says Machen.
In fact, they can't even agree among themselves on any one
theory for its origin. The virgin birth of Jesus Christ is
a unique event with no known previous parallel in religious
literature, unless one counts Isaiah 7:14.
Campbell sometimes personifies the image of Nature,
and even the earth itself, into a divine, conscious organism
from whom everything, including man, evolves.
"We are the fruits of an intelligent earth," says
Campbell. To him, paradise exists in the here and now, and
mankind already lives in a wonderful, magnificent garden.
The key to enjoying the bliss of this garden is to rise
above the suffering of this world by becoming one with the
God within you.
This ecology myth excited Campbell so much that he
often mentions it as the one myth which modern society
should wholeheartedly embrace. We can see echoes of this
kind of thinking in the Gaia myth that permeates some New
Age and environmentalist groups.
According to the 1989 edition of the Encyclopedia
Britannica and other secular sources, Neanderthal Man, who
may have been a special race of Homo Sapiens, lived
approximately 35-85,000 years ago during an intense period
of Ice Ages.
These dates refute Campbell's position in his earlier
works, where he placed the Neanderthal period all the way
back to 200,000 years ago. Campbell, to my knowledge, never
admitted this gross error or even mentioned the new dates
for the Neanderthals. Like many evolutionists before him,
Campbell wrongly tried to make Neanderthal Man a separate
species of human being who "evolved" into modern man, or
Homo Sapiens Sapiens.
In his earlier works, Campbell also makes all sorts of
claims for the religious culture of Homo Erectus, a
"hominid" species who supposedly lived before Homo Sapiens.
The above quotes about writing in The Power of Myth book,
however, seem to indicate he eventually stopped believing
There really is no evidence of any religious activity
among Homo Erectus or any of the other hominid species prior
to Homo Erectus. In fact, according to Britannica, experts
now believe that some of these hominids are more related to
apes than they are to Homo Sapiens. Homo Erectus actually
has unique features that neither apes nor humans share.
Britannica even states (18:955-956) that there is very
little, if any, evidence of evolution from Homo Erectus to
If you lean toward the view that the six days of
creation in Genesis one cannot be interpreted to mean six
twenty-four hour days, as several conservative scholars do,
then all of this evidence seems to match the biblical
account. Most secular scholars now believe that Homo
Sapiens entered the world between 150-250,000 years ago, but
the first examples of modern man (Homo Sapiens Sapiens)
don't appear until 30-40,000 years ago.
It is possible that the dates for Neanderthal Man have
been inflated erroneously by secular scientists, but it may
also be possible that the Flood in Genesis occurred before
the Neanderthal period, followed by the Ice Ages already
mentioned. The facial structure of Neanderthal Man is very
similar to that of the Eskimo, whose facial bones have been
formed due to the tough diet endured in the frozen north.
This fact has led many scientists to consider Neanderthals
a special race of Homo Sapiens.
Even if we accept this possibility, however,
Britannica says that "little can be confidently inferred
about Neanderthal beliefs and rituals." Some Christians in
fact believe it is more likely that Neanderthal Man was a
pre-Adamic race unrelated to human beings, and that Adam was
not created until 12-30,000 years ago. And indeed, modern
anthropologists don't record the concrete existence of any
religious artifacts until those dates.
Most anthropologists date the earliest known religious
artifacts 8-24,000 years ago. According to C. Simon, the
oldest known religious shrine dates about 14,000 years ago.
"Evidence of religious ritual" in cave paintings, decorated
objects, and apparent burial offerings older than this date
"has been difficult to justify," adds Simon. Once again,
secular sources refute Campbell's fanciful theories.
Recent studies demonstrate that some species of apes
can make tools, show affection, are capable of cannibalism,
can talk to humans in sign language and even lie to them,
and can use a camera, but evidence of such intelligence does
not prove humanity, much less any true spiritual or moral
capacity. As conservative scholar Gleason L. Archer notes,
"There may have been advanced and intelligent hominids who
lived and died before Adam, but they were not created in the
image of God . . . . there is no archeological evidence of
a true human soul having animated their bodies."
Primitive Ethical Monotheism
Using the idea of evolution, Campbell claims that
ethical monotheism is a late development in man's history.
Anthropologists have long abandoned this evolutionary
theory of human religion. If anything, there is strong
evidence that the first religion of early man was a
primitive type of ethical monotheism where the first
primitive societies worshipped a benevolent, celestial god
similar to the God of the Bible. The earliest examples of
human writing indicate that, in several different cultures,
this monotheism degenerated into a gross polytheism where
people in those cultures took the attributes of the one true
God and scattered them among an increasing array of deities
This evidence seems to confirm the description of
man's religious activity in the first few chapters of
Genesis. It also seems to match what Paul says about the
religions of men in chapter one of Romans.
One of the most prominent advocates of primitive
ethical monotheism was Father Wilhelm Schmidt, whose book
The Origin of Religion was published in America in the
1930s. Ironically, Campbell mentions Father Schmidt's work
in the 1959 edition of his four volume set The Masks of God,
but he never talks about Schmidt's evidence for primitive
monotheism, which contradicts Campbell's own theories.
Campbell is not the only secular scholar guilty of
such convenient memory lapses when it comes to Schmidt's
For example, both social anthropologist Edward Evans-
Pritchard in Theories of Primitive Religion, originally
published in 1965, and Charles Joseph Adams in "The Study
and Classification of Religion" in Britannica discuss the
criticisms which scholar R. Pettazoni leveled at Schmidt's
work. Pettazoni claimed, among other things, that the
ethical monotheism found in primitive cultures was far
different than the more advanced ethical monotheism found in
later societies. Neither Evans-Pritchard nor Adams,
however, discuss Father Schmidt's own criticisms of
Pettazoni's work. Their neglect makes me seriously question
the academic objectivity and skills which they bring to
Be that as it may, it is not really necessary for
Christians or Jews to prove that the very first religion of
mankind was ethical monotheism. All we need to show is that
ethical monotheism goes back in history as far as any other
known spiritual or religious idea. This is exactly what the
work of Schmidt and other proves.
Even Evans-Pritchard himself notes that most
anthropologists have abandoned all evolutionary schemes for
the historical development of religion. Campbell's work
must therefore be considered completely out of the
mainstream of modern anthropology at least as far back as
1962 when Evans-Pritchard gave the lectures on which his
book is based!
Throughout his work, Campbell assumes that the Bible
teaches, at most, a 6,000 year old creation and a flat
earth, but he never mentions the fact that such an
interpretation was not taught by the church before Columbus.
In fact, the 6,000 year date itself was not taught until the
17th century. Even today's creation scientists who believe
in the "young earth" theory don't accept a strict 6,000 year
old date for the origin of the earth. By telling us his way
is the only way to interpret the biblical text, Campbell
becomes more dogmatic about the interpretation of the Bible
than all but the most extreme Christians.
Campbell's Rejection of the Bible
As I noted earlier, Campbell constantly attacks the
historicity of the scriptures.
In Myths to Live By, he uncritically accepts the
documentary hypothesis, which rejects the Mosaic authorship
of the first five books of the Bible on spurious literary
critical grounds. Yet he doesn't give one shred of evidence
from the many conservative scholars who have successfully
challenged this theory. As a scholar who favors fairness
and objectivity, especially in controversial matters, I find
In The Power of Myth book and interviews, he calls the
gospels "contradictory," but he gives no evidence for this
broad generalization. I doubt he ever saw John W. Haley's
Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible or Gleason L. Archer's
Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, much less read them. If
he had, would he have cited them? Probably not.
In Flight of the Wild Gander, Campbell emotionally
lambasts the eyewitness testimony of the Second Epistle of
Peter, whose authorship by Peter is strongly questioned by
liberal scholars, but he completely ignores other evidence
from the New Testament, such as 1 Corinthians 15. The
authorship and historicity of this passage is beyond
question. In it the Apostle Paul presents the Gospel of
Jesus Christ's physical resurrection and sacrificial
atonement for our sins. It is an eyewitness testimony which
Paul claims to have received from the risen Jesus and from
Peter and James when he visited them in Jerusalem in A.D.
36-38 Campbell also fails to mention (in Flight of the
Wild Gander and elsewhere) the historical evidence for
Luke's Gospel and the book of Acts, for Matthew, Mark, and
John, and for Paul's other writings. (See the list of
"Books that Defend Historic Christianity" in the
Once again, Campbell stacks the deck in his favor and
against historical Christianity. In effect, he has censored
reliable evidence which refutes his own subjective theories.
This distortion of the facts is very dangerous because it
may deceive unwary readers and viewers who might be inclined
to accept Campbell's credentials, and Bill Moyers'
"integrity," at face value.
Despite all of this subterfuge, Campbell admits in The
Power of Myth that "the sayings of Jesus [recorded in the
Bible] are probably pretty close to the originals," but then
he says that "the main teaching" of Jesus is "love your
enemies." And how do we love our enemies, according to
Campbell's interpretation? By getting rid of the mote in
our own eyes instead of plucking the splinter from our
Here we can see the real danger of Campbell's
theology. The "main teaching" of Jesus is not "love your
enemies," although Jesus does indeed command us to do that.
No, the main teaching of Jesus is that people everywhere
should repent of their sins and believe in Him as their
personal, divine savior. A simple reading of the first
twenty verses of Mark, the entire gospel of John, or the
last chapter of Matthew will make this message clear.
Worse than this, however, is Campbell's statement:
"No one is in a position to disqualify his enemy's way of
life." Here, Campbell takes a clear teaching of Jesus and
perverts it into an agenda for complete moral relativism.
For the sake of seeming "tolerant" and being popular,
Campbell apparently would let evil people choose whatever
lifestyle they wish. In saying this, however, he is in fact
disqualifying the ethical validity of anyone who makes moral
judgments about other people. By morally judging those who
morally judge, Campbell makes himself a hypocrite.
This is not the kind of "love" Jesus Christ talks
about in the biblical text. When Jesus say "love your
enemies," he is not commanding us to accept or approve the
lifestyles of wicked people. And when Jesus says, "Do not
judge, or you too will be judged," recorded in Matthew 7:1,
he doesn't mean that we should never make moral judgments,
but that they be based on God's word in the scriptures. He
is telling us to be careful how we judge and to realized
that we too can and will be judged.
Contrary to what relativists like Joseph Campbell and
Bill Moyers (a theologically liberal Christian) might think,
Christians have a moral duty to expose the evil deeds people
do, including our own. Evil is judged not subjectively, but
by the standards God has revealed in scripture. We also
have an obligation to give people God's solution to the
problem of evil and the bondage of sin -- Jesus Christ's
message of salvation.
Joseph Campbell had a God-given right to believe what
he wanted, even if that belief was false. He also had the
right to use logical fallacies, to play word games, and to
distort the facts in order to defend his belief.
Contrary to Moyers' dogmatic statement, Campbell most
certainly had a theology. He tried to enforce his own
ideology and morality on other people. Joseph Campbell was,
in fact, one of the most opinionated myth scholars and lay
theologians in the world. His open hostility toward
orthodox Christianity, especially the Catholic Church, not
to mention his emotional attacks on Judaism and Islam is
plain to see. Unfortunately, Bill Moyers, PBS, and scores
of literature, philosophy, and religion professors appear
blind to these facts. Instead, they continue to propagate
his own prejudiced theology under the guise of relativism
The Gospel of John warns, "This is the verdict: Light
has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of
light because their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil
hates the light and will not come into the light for fear
that his deeds will be exposed. But whoever lives by the
truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly
that what he has done has been done through God."
Come out of the darkness and into the light.
Recognize Joseph Campbell for what he was, an articular,
charismatic literary critic and dedicated pantheist/mystic
who spent his life dabbling in research, writing books, and
giving lecture and interviews supporting his own moral and
Recognize Jesus Christ for who and what He was: Not
a clown in charge of some circus, nor a madman in charge of
an asylum, nor a fool leading his followers the way to dusty
death; but the only begotten Son of the Most High, Living
God, the Son who died for our sins and who redeems us from
those sins, the God of Truth, Justice, and Love who is the
source of all goodness and who gives eternal life to all
people who honestly seek Him.
Above all, let's recognize these truths by looking at
the logical and factual evidence for and against them, not
by casting unfounded aspersions against those who disagree
with us, and not by making mystical declarations that tickle
the ears of those untrained in the basic rules of logic,
appealing to the arbitrary feelings and capricious whims of
people with an ax to grind.
We must accurately perceive truth so that we can
proceed in truth. It is only when we see the truth
correctly that we truly be able to love our neighbors as
ourselves and find the bliss that God has waiting for us.
Suggestions For Action
Write your local PBS station and request
they discontinue showing
The Power of Myth interviews.
Contact your local college or
university that uses
Campbell's books as texts.
Ask the professor, department,
and administration to drop
the books as texts.
Recommend objective materials
on religion, Christianity, and
myth to your local college
Learn more about the facts
and truth of Christianity.
Be ready to share with
those who have been unfairly
influenced by Campbell's writings.
Check your local bookstores.
Suggest responsible titles
to stock along with or in
place of Campbell's books.
Check your local libraries.
Suggest responsible titles to
accompany or replace
Campbell's books. Donate
a copy of this book.
[Note: Copies of this book may be obtained from Answer's In Action]
Commit yourself to truth.
Communicate that truth to others.
Books by Joseph Campbell:
The Flight of the Wild Gander: Explorations in the
Mythological Dimension. South Bend, IN: Regnery/Gateway,
The Hero with a Thousand Faces. Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 1973.
The Masks of God. London: Penguin Books, 1976, four
The Power of Myth. New York: Doubleday, 1988.
Books on Mythology and Comparative Religion:
Brandewie, Ernest. Wilhelm Schmidt and the Origin of the
Idea of God. Lanham, MD: University Press of America,
1983. (An excellent resource.)
Eliade, Mircea. Cosmos and History: The Myth of the
Eternal Return. New York: Harper and Row, 1959.
______________. A History of Religious Ideas. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1982, three volumes.
(Although Eliade sometimes engages in subjective
speculation, he gives an excellent secular overview of
this broad topic.)
______________. Myth and Reality. New York: Harper and
______________. Rites and Symbols of Initiation: The
Mysteries of Birth and Rebirth. New York: Harper and
Row, 1975. (The title may be misleading. The book is not
an argument in favor of reincarnation.)
______________. The Sacred and the Profane: The Nature
of Religion. New York: Harcourt, 1959.
Evans-Pritchard, E. E. Theories of Primitive Religion.
New York: Oxford University Press, 1965.
Leach, Edmund. Claude Levi-Strauss. New York: Penguin
McConnell, Frank. Storytelling and Mythmaking: Images
from Film and Literature. London: Oxford University
Montgomery, John Warwick, ed. Myth, Allegory, and Gospel.
Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers, 1975.
Schmidt, Wilhelm. The Origin of Religion. New York:
Cooper Square, 1971 ed.
Slotkin, Richard. Regeneration through Violence: The
Mythology of the American Frontier. Middletown, CN:
Weslyan University Press, 1973.
Turner, Victor W. Dramas, Fields and Metaphors: Symbolic
Action in Human Society. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University
Press, 1974. (The late Victor W. Turner is one of the
greatest anthropologists of the twentieth century. I cannot
guarantee that he always, or even mostly, spoke the truth,
but if anyone deserved a six-part series on television about
myth, it was this man, certainly not Joseph Campbell.)
_________________. The Forest of Symbols: Aspects of
Ndembu Ritual. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1967.
_________________. From Ritual to Theatre. New York:
Performing Arts Journal Publications, 1982.
_________________. "Myth and Symbol," The International
Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. David L. Sills, ed.
New York: Macmillan, 1968, 10:576-582. (This is one of the
shortest, and perhaps the best, overviews of myth ever
_________________. The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-
Structure. Chicago: Aldine Publishers, 1969.
Van Gennep, Arnold. The Rites of Passage. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1960. (Originally written in
the early 1900s, this seminal book talks about the three
stages of initiation rituals or rites of passage:
separation, transition, and incorporation. Many myth
scholars use Van Gennep's theory, including Eliade, Turner,
and Campbell, but Turner seems to mention it the most.)
Wilber, Ken. No Boundary: Eastern and Western Approaches
to Personal Growth. Boulder, CO: Shambhala Publications,
1979. (A Buddhist, Wilber is the myth "scholar" closest in
temperament to Joseph Campbell. His kind of thinking has
infected both the New Age and secular societies.)
Christian Books on Evolution and Science:
Geisler, Norman L. and J. Kerby Anderson. Origin Science:
A Proposal for the Creation-Evolution Controversy. Grand
Rapids: Baker Book House, 1987.
Hummel, Charles. Creation or Evolution? Resolving the
Crucial Issues. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press,
_______________. The Galileo Connection: Resolving
Conflicts between Science and the Bible. Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity Press, 1986.
Moreland, J. P. Christianity and the Nature of Science: A
Philosophical Investigation. Grand Rapids: Baker Book
Poythress, Vern S. Science and Hermeneutics: Implications
of Scientific Method for Biblical Interpretation. Grand
Rapids: Zondervan Publishing Company, 1988.
Ramm, Bernard. The Christian View of Science and Scripture.
Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1954.
Ross, Hugh. <The Fingerprint of God. Orange, CA: Promise
Wilder-Smith, A. E. Man's Origin, Man's Destiny: A Critical
Survey of the Principles of Evolution and Christianity.
Minneapolis, MN: Bethany House Publishers, 1975.
___________________. The Natural Sciences Know Nothing of
Evolution. Costa Mesa, CA: The Word for Today Publishers,
___________________. The Scientific Alternative to Neo-
Darwinian Evolutionary Theory. Costa Mesa: The Word for
Today Publishers, n.d.
Books that Defend Historic Christianity:
Allis, Oswald T. The Five Books of Moses. Phillipsburg,
NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1949.
Archer, Gleason L. Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties.
Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing Company, 1982.
_______________. A Survey of Old Testament Introduction.
Chicago: Moody Press, 1985. (Like the book by Oswald T.
Allis above, Archer's book totally devastates secular
theories about how the first books of the Bible were
written. In defending the Mosaic authorship, they undermine
much of what Joseph Campbell says about the Bible.)
Bruce, F. F. The New Testament Documents: Are They
Reliable? Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1987.
(This is a must book in any library.)
Clark, David K. and Norman L. Geisler. Apologetics in the
New Age: A Christian Critique of Pantheism. Grand Rapids:
Baker Book House, 1990.
Cotterell, Peter and Max Turner. Linguistics & Biblical
Interpretation. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1989.
(This is a new book, very contemporary, but one that gives
solid principles of biblical interpretation. By reading
such books, both Christians and non-Christians will begin to
see why Campbell's subjective method of interpretation is so
Custance, Arthur C. The Doorway Papers. Grand Rapids:
Zondervan Publishing Company, 1976 (Vol. IV).
Geisler, Norman L. Christian Apologetics. Grand Rapids:
Baker Book House, 1989 edition. (This is one of the best
books defending the Christian faith. The only book which
perhaps surpasses it is The Reconstruction of the Christian
Revelation Claim by Stuart C. Hackett. For ways in which to
combine Geisler's view with Hackett's, contact Bob and
Gretchen Passantino, Answers In Action, P. O. Box 2067,
Costa Mesa, CA 92628.)
__________________ and Winfried Corduan. Philosophy of
Religion. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1988 edition.
__________________ and William E. Nix. From God to Us: How
We Got Our Bible. Chicago: Moody Press, 1974.
__________________ and William D. Watkins. Worlds Apart:
A Handbook of World Views. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House,
Habermas, Gary. The Verdict of History: Conclusive
Evidence for the Life of Jesus. Nashville: Thomas Nelson
Publishers, 1988. (Highly recommended.)
Hackett, Stuart C. The Reconstruction of the Christian
Revelation Claim: A Philosophical and Critical Apologetic.
Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1984. (This is the most
complete defense of historic Christianity I have read. If
one takes this book and the books by Allis, Archer, Geisler,
Habermas, Lewis, Machen, McDowell, Montgomery, and Moreland
listed in this section, one can answer most objections non-
Christians have about the New Testament testimony of the
gospel of Jesus Christ. For help in doing such a task,
contact Bob and Gretchen Passantino of Answers In Action,
P.O. Box 2067, Costa Mesa, CA 92628.)
Lewis, C. S. Mere Christianity. New York: Macmillan,
1952. (A classic work.)
Machen, J. Gresham. The Origin of Paul's Religion. Grand
Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1947.
(Another classic work that refutes secular theories of the
alleged pagan roots of Christianity.)
__________________. The Virgin Birth of Christ. Grand
Rapids: Baker Book House, 1985.
McDowell, Josh and Bill Wilson. He Walked Among Us:
Evidence for the Historical Jesus. San Bernardino, CA:
Here's Life Publishers, 1988.
Mickelsen, A. Berkeley. Interpreting the Bible. Grand
Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1989. (A
classic work that gives solid principles of how to
interpret, or explain the meaning of, the Bible.)
Montgomery, John Warwick. Human Rights & Human Dignity.
Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing Company, 1986. (Pages
131-160 give a short, but brilliant, defense of the
________________________. Where Is History Going?
Minneapolis, MN: Bethany House Publishers, 1969. (Another
Moreland, J. P. Scaling the Secular City: A Defense of
Christianity. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1987. (This
is a philosophical, but highly readable, argument in favor
of historic Christianity.)
Ramm, Bernard. Protestant Biblical Interpretation: A
Textbook of Hermeneutics. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House,
1970 (third edition).
Silva, Moises. Biblical Words and Their Meaning: An
Introduction to Lexical Semantics. Grand Rapids: Zondervan
Publishing Company, 1983. (This book has some important
things to say about biblical interpretation and how to
determine the meaning of words.)
Terry, Milton S. Biblical Hermeneutics: A Treatise on the
Interpretation of the Old and New Testaments. Grand Rapids:
Zondervan Publishing Company, 1974 printing. (This is a
classic defense of traditional methods of biblical
Young, Warren C. A Christian Approach to Philosophy. Grand
Rapids: Baker Book House, 1954. (Young's book is perhaps
the best of its kind. It's also highly readable.)
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Tom Snyder teaches writing, philosophy, aesthetics,
social science, and film at National University in Southern
California. He taught aesthetics and media criticism at
Southern California College and film at Northwestern
University, where he received his Ph.D. in film studies in
Snyder worked as a journalist and public relations
editor. He did post-doctoral research in Christian
Apologetics at Simon Greenleaf School of Law and currently
studies apologetics, theology, and philosophy at Christ
Lutheran Church (Missouri Synod) in Costa Mesa, California.
Snyder's article on the biblical doctrine of faith
versus works was published in 1989. His latest work is a new
book from Baker books just released in January of 1995, Myth
Conceptions, Joseph Campbell and the New Age. He enjoys writing about
film and politics, and has published many short articles on
those subjects in magazines, newspapers, and encyclopedias.
He lives with his wife, Jan, and two cats in Tustin,
California. Tom would like to have a pet dog, but the cats
decided that wasn't a good idea.