Title: Outdated, Early Revisionist Work
Product review: This book is less about who wrote the Bible and more of a glimpse into 19th century revisionism. Originally published in the late 1800's, Gladden discusses much of the then-current scholarship regarding Biblical authors and canonical development. However, given the time period in which the book was written, the book skews hard towards the revisionist school of thought, which usually denies the traditional views of authorship. There has been much scholarly work done in the 100+ years since this book's publication that refute many of the author's arguments. Instead of this book, I recommend interested readers to pick up "Who Really Wrote the Bible" by Clayton Howard Ford. This book should be taken only for what it is: an outdated revisionist work, representative only of the ideas of its time.
Would you say this review depicts the product in a flattering or unflattering light?
