Character of Alpha's Jesus

If the reader notices any error of any kind in this document, they are urged to send us the details. Thank you.

Chapter and Verse on Alpha's Jesus
Part 1: The Character of Alpha's Jesus

by Dusty Peterson
December 2002

INTRODUCTION

According to Gallup, the Alpha Course has now been run in over 150 countries.[1] Alpha materials have been translated into scores of languages, and a million people took the course last year alone. It is clearly something that every believer should be well-versed about.

A number of assessments have been published about Alpha since the early nineties when Nicky Gumbel took over responsibility for the Course, and many of these critiques claim that Alpha’s teachings about the Lord Jesus are worrisome. Jesus is obviously the very centre of the gospel and we have felt led to investigate these claims carefully from official sources. In this article we will focus on the Lord’s character.

Biblically, the ‘name’ of someone is a reference to their character. In fact, “the name is used for everything which the name covers”,[2] including the commands, deeds, qualities etc of the person. So where the Bible refers to the ‘name of Jesus’ or the ‘name of Christ’ (1 Pet. 4:14 ), or the ‘name of the Lord’ (Acts 2:21 ) it encompasses the Lord’s whole character. When Paul writes “[W]e pray … That the name of our Lord Jesus Christ may be glorified in you…” (2 Thess. 1:11-12) and when the Lord teaches that our prayers have to be in line with His character if they are going to be heard (John 15:16 ), it becomes evident that we must obtain a good idea of the Lord’s character.

Believers should have the “mind of Christ” (1 Cor. 2:16 ; Php. 2:5). This is naturally going to be harder if we have an inaccurate idea of His mind! Beyond this, God’s Word even says that a correct grasp of the Lord’s character is fundamental to salvation (Rom. 10:13 ). The Church plainly needs to be fastidious in this regard.[3]

As we check the pros and cons of Alpha’s treatment in detail, there will inevitably be moments where we have to be quite exacting, and some individual points may seem not to carry much weight on their own. The question we need to ask is: what is their effect when taken together? If we really love and care about our wonderful Husband-to-be then we will want the world to be taught only the truth regarding Him.

(Important Note: When we believers hear a gospel talk, we will usually have the prior knowledge required to ‘fill in’ any gaps or to rightly interpret any ambiguities in the talk. We will often do this automatically and we thus do not consciously notice the flaws in the talk. However, many unbelievers today are almost completely ignorant about the Messiah and the Bible, and will not be able to do this. It is vital to read the following with this in mind.)

WAS HE SINLESS?

The Bible openly states that the Lord Jesus was “without sin” (Heb. 4:15; 1 John 3:5b; see also Deut. 32:4). This issue is foundational to the gospel, for if the Lord was not a spotless ‘Lamb’ (1 Pet. 1:19 ) then His sacrifice on the cross cannot have paid the price for us. Such a belief might lead some people to try to ‘make up the difference’ through ‘good works’. Observers feel that Alpha could be clearer over this.

In the Alpha video talks[4] the actual word ‘sinless’ does not occur, and when Nicky quotes his Bible saying (in Hebrews 4:15 ) that “Jesus was tempted in every way”, the suffix “yet without sin” is strangely omitted [Talk 11]. Some commentators argue that what Nicky then says makes this absence particularly unfortunate:

“Jesus was tempted in every way, just as we are. Jesus had evil thoughts”. Earlier in the talks Nicky explains where ‘evil thoughts’ come from: “‘…from within, out of your hearts, come evil thoughts … they make you unclean’” [Talk 3]. It would be reasonable for hearers to assume that the Lord’s “evil thoughts” came out of His heart, and that the Lord harboured evil thoughts. Jesus was offered temptations, He was offered evil thoughts by the enemy, but He rejected them all instantly. Sadly Nicky chooses not to mention this point.

Nicky teaches that the Lord’s “friends said about him, ‘He’s without sin’” [Talk 2], but unsaved hearers may feel that friends saying something about you does not necessarily make it true. Having said that, Nicky does refer to 2 Corinthians 5:21… “ There St. Paul wrote, ‘God made him who knew no sin to be sin for us…’” [Talk 4]. (Oddly though, Nicky uses the phrase ‘knew no sin’ even though his Bible version actually says here that Jesus “had no sin”.[5] Some explanation of the Hebraism “knew no sin” would have been a help we feel, for “knew no sin” could be interpreted to mean ‘was ignorant of or unaware of His sin’ or ‘was not intimate with His sin’.)

On another vital occasion, Nicky again neglects to clarify Jesus’ sinlessness. He says that Jesus on the cross was “Godforsaken … not because of his own sin but because of our sin” [Talk 3]. Some detractors point out the potential ambiguity here and that it would only have taken a moment for Nicky to confirm that Jesus had no sin. He apparently decides against clearing up any doubt here.

Nicky prefers to say that “Jesus never did anything wrong” [Talks 3 & 4], and to refer to “Jesus Christ, who never did anything wrong” [Talk 4]. On the face of it, this seems to settle the issue, but Nicky elsewhere reminds us that it is not just a matter of what we “do”, but also what we say (“‘…good deeds’, that’s everything we do and say” [Talk 12]) and also what we think (“it’s not just our actions it’s our words and also our thoughts” [Talk 3]). Logically, this leaves the door open again for Jesus to have sinned in thought or word.

Additionally, there is more to being sinless than avoiding sinful behaviour. One also needs to be free of the sinful nature that Adam passed down to all his generations (1 Cor. 15:22 ). Jesus needed to have been born of a virgin[6] in order to avoid being tainted by ‘original sin’. Nicky does not mention the virgin birth in the talks and instead likens Jesus to a building that is “totally the work of human beings” [Talk 5]. But if Jesus’ conception was “totally the work of human beings” then He inherited man’s sinful nature and was not sinless.

Nicky also says: “There is a big difference between the things that we do wrong and the mistakes that we make” [Talk 1]. This allows for the Lord to have erred, which brings us to our next question.

WAS HE INFALLIBLE?

The Bible says of Jesus “the Word was made flesh, … full of … truth” (John 1:14 ) and that the Lord “faileth not” (Zeph. 3:5; see also Deut. 31:8). But does Alpha leave participants believing for certain that Jesus was infallible? (Again, and just for the record, neither of the actual words ‘fallible’ or ‘infallible’ appears in the talks themselves.)

From John 1:3 we know that “All things were made by” Jesus, yet Alpha sometimes suggests that the Creator did not do a perfect job. For instance, Nicky talks about “the created order that had gone wrong” [Talk 11]. To some observers this wording suggests an error on the Creator’s part. Nothing ‘went wrong’ with the Lord’s perfect handiwork. Creation fell through sin but this is not what Nicky says. Likewise, it was apparently left to the Holy Spirit, in the early days of the Universe, to bring “order out of chaos”.[7] Since “God is not the author of confusion”, the word ‘chaos’ here implies unfortunate things about our Lord.

Another concern for some folk is this. Towards the start of Talk 6, Nicky says “Jesus promises that our prayers will be answered”, but later in this talk he teaches that “[S]ome of our prayers may not be answered” and that “[S]ome of our prayers don’t get answered”. If Jesus wasn’t a liar, then the message appears to be that he was definitely mistaken.

Did Jesus have infallible faith? Consider this quote: “Jesus never said to anybody, ‘It was your lack of faith that stopped you being healed’. He sometimes said to the disciples, ‘You lacked faith’, but not to the person who was sick” [Talk 13]. Yet just moments earlier Nicky had said: “even with Jesus, on one occasion, he laid hands on a blind man and he said, after he had laid hands on them [the man’s eyes], ‘Do you see anything?’ and the man said, ‘I see people but they look like trees walking around’. So Jesus laid hands on him again”.[8]

The unavoidable conclusion from Nicky’s combined statements is that it was Jesus’ lack of faith that required Him to pray for a second time. (In fact if there is a ‘lack of faith’ on the part of the ‘person who is sick’ it most certainly does get in the way of prayers for healing, as Mark 6:5-6 makes clear.[9])

In both Talks 1 and 7 Nicky says “we all make mistakes”, but he doesn’t exclude Jesus on either occasion. Indeed, Jesus is the last person to be mentioned in both of these discussions on ‘mistakes’. Take Talk 7: “In conclusion, … the whole issue of guidance was not easy for Abraham. It wasn’t easy for Jesus. … Secondly, we all make mistakes”. A Christian may not pick up the wrong message from this, but what about someone who has never heard about Jesus before?

While we are on the subject of unbelievers and how they interpret things, consider this comment: “Jesus … was the most fully human person who’s ever lived, the most normal person” [Talk 15]. Without proper clarification, this is sure to be misunderstood by some hearers simply because of the definitions they attach to the highlighted words above. Phrases like “we’re only human” and “it’s only normal” are common secular ways of expressing failings and imperfections. Even so, Nicky still doesn’t say the Lord was “fully normal” – just that He was the most normal person to ever live. These two are not the same.

In his defence, Nicky does write the following in one of his books: “Only in Jesus Christ do we find infallible truth”.[10] But some of the more demanding detractors point out that this is not saying Christ’s behaviour was always infallible. Nicky’s phraseology could also be read as focusing on us. In other words it is rather like the time he writes “Only in Jesus Christ do we find eternal life”[11] or only in Christ can it [forgiveness] be found”.[12]

On the same page, Nicky writes “God’s revelation in Jesus Christ is infallible”. But critics understandably ask why he must add the emboldened words. They believe the extra words just serve to make some people wonder if only a part of Jesus contained “God’s revelation”, and thus if only this part is infallible. Why not simply put “Jesus Christ is infallible”?

What indeed could be the problem with stating categorically and repeatedly that Jesus was totally sinless and totally infallible at all times? In fifteen long talks and many associated publications there doesn’t seem to be any good reason why not.[13]

WAS HE ‘GENTLE, GRACEFUL, MEEK AND LOWLY’?

Paul described the Lord as “gentle” (2 Cor. 10:1) and, in Matthew 11:29 , the Lord Himself said “I am meek and lowly in heart”. His meekness and lowliness was also prophesied before His Incarnation (Zech. 9:9; Matt. 21:5). John 1:14 calls Him “full of grace”.

Jesus is never called ‘gentle’ or ‘graceful’ in the Alpha talks. Neither is He described as ‘lowly’ in the talks, although Nicky uses the term of himself [Talk 1]. The word ‘meek’ (often translated ‘gentle’ in Nicky’s Bible) doesn’t occur in the talks…[14]

Elsewhere on Alpha, our incarnated Lord is actually portrayed as very ungentle and ‘unmeek’. For example, at the top of Nicky’s list of emotions that Jesus had is “anger”,[15] and Nicky sometimes uses militaristic language to describe the Lord’s manner, even when it seems quite out of place: “Jesus fought against suffering wherever he came across it”.[16] And what led Nicky to say the following?

“Everywhere that Jesus went he removed evil [he expelled devils, but Nicky widens the scope dramatically]. He destroyed evil wherever he found it [he exposed it, but that is not the same thing at all]. And that’s what we are called to be. That’s the exciting thing” [Talk 11]. (Is it not ‘exciting’ just to walk with our glorious Bridegroom and Creator and to learn of Him?)

Please note: Some readers will feel we are being excessively ‘picky’ in these sections, but it should be remembered that Nicky has had more than a decade to get his material correct, and that it is vital to reflect the true character of Jesus consistently and precisely. The exact words Nicky uses will determine exactly what is communicated to hearers, many of whom today know virtually nothing of the Lord…

Some individual strands in this article are inevitably going to be minor on their own, but let us look for the resulting tapestry as a whole – is it a clear and accurate representation of the Saviour? As a Cambridge-educated barrister, Nicky is a master with words and with public speaking so he should be well able to get his statements right, yet consider the following items.

WAS HE A “MAN OF SORROWS”?

According to Scripture, the Lord was “rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from Him; He was despised, and we esteemed Him not” (Isaiah 53:3). Throughout His ministry the Lord was mocked, accused, cursed and rejected – all without cause. Most of His followers left Him (John 6:66); even His closest friends deserted Him after Gethsemane ; and ultimately He was tortured and crucified without any justification. But is this the picture Alpha paints of the Lord’s life?

“[I]magine being with Jesus! What fun it would have been!” says Nicky in Talk 2.[17] The Lord’s life in this unworthy world was actually characterized by sacrifice and suffering. No, it was not a lot of fun to watch it if you loved Him. In the previous video edition, Nicky insisted that Jesus “laughed” [Talk 2], but the Bible does not say this and there was certainly not much for Him to laugh about as He saw the dreadful apostasy into which the deceitful shepherds of His People had brought them. Indeed, the Lord cried “Woe unto you that laugh now!” (Luke 6:25) and He blessed those that mourn over this fallen world (Matt. 5:4).

Nicky has now replaced that extrabiblical statement with the words “He was the supreme example of … joy, but never at another’s expense” [Talk 2]. Again, unregenerate listeners will not understand that joy in the spirit does not equate to laughter. The Lord wept over Jerusalem (Matt. 23:37 ) and over other things (John 11:35 ), and He did not exude much joy in Matt. 17:17; Matt. 8:20-22 etc.

Another stated problem on Alpha, which makes it even harder for participants rightly to interpret Nicky’s teachings about the Lord, has been identified by a young theology student who notes: “When discussing Jesus’ character, Biblical references are conspicuous by their absence”.[18]

WAS HE RIGHTEOUS AND HOLY?

To be ‘righteous’ means to be upright, virtuous, just, and obedient to God’s commands. The Bible calls our Saviour “Jesus Christ the righteous” (1 John 2:1). Although Alpha does employ the word “righteous” in several places, it is never categorically applied to the Lord Jesus except to say that he shared the “human” emotion of “righteous anger” [Talk 2]. (Strangely, the term ‘righteousness’ is redefined on Alpha as merely meaning “right relationships”, so it would not tell hearers much even if Nicky did call the Lord “righteous”.)

The word ‘holy’ does not just mean righteous; it means ‘apart, sacred, separate, set-apart’. The Lord is called the ‘Holy One of Israel’ over 30 times in the Bible (e.g. in Isa. 43:14-15 and Isa. 47:4) and is described as ‘holy’ on very many other occasions too (e.g. in Jer. 51:5; Rev. 4:8; and throughout Acts). The words ‘holy’ or ‘holiness’ occur a full 586 times in Scripture and can be said to be the primary characteristic of the Lord - and of those who are truly following Him.[19]

Amazingly, whilst the Spirit of God is called ‘holy’ on well over 100 occasions in the Alpha talks, and the church of God is frequently called ‘holy’ there too, Nicky only manages to call the Son of God ‘holy’ twice in the entire video set…[20] and apparently only then because the term is part of a Bible verse that Nicky is quoting for other reasons.[21] (The Lord is not called ‘holy’ during either of the two Alpha talks that are devoted to Him.) Perhaps even worse is the fact that the word ‘holy’ is never explained on Alpha. This is all very incongruous, coming as it does from a church called Holy Trinity Brompton.

WAS HE PERFECT?

Nicky writes that “Jesus himself set us a great example”,[22] but surely Jesus set us the perfect ‘example’? As we have seen, Nicky also regularly says that Jesus was “the supreme example”,[23] but it could be argued that ‘supreme’ still does not mean perfect or pure; it simply means the best around. There is a fundamental difference. (Note that Nicky does not have a mental block about using the word “perfect” to describe other things. At one point he tells us of a man called Earl, saying that “Earl was thrilled because the paper in this Bible was very thin and it was perfect for rolling joints!” [Talk 5]. He also says that Christians are “perfectly righteous in God’s sight” [Talk 4]. Ironically, Holy Trinity’s head man (Sandy Millar) has repeatedly said of Alpha “I think the course is now about as perfect as it can be”.[24])

DID HE FEAR HIS FATHER?

Every recorded prayer that Jesus uttered displayed godly fear towards the Father, and every time He spoke of His Father it was with deep reverence. Indeed, the Bible says that His prayers were heard by the Father because Jesus “feared” Him (Heb. 5:7).

Alpha does not say this at all.[25] Instead it says “Abba is an Aramaic word which means, well, the nearest translation is ‘Daddy’” [Talk 6]; “It was distinctive of Jesus. Jesus had this intimacy with the Father … and he made it possible for us to address God as Abba … Prince Charles is the Heir Apparent to the Throne … But to William and Harry, he’s ‘Daddy’”.[26] We believe that this dangerously misrepresents the correct attitude towards God the Father that Jesus exemplified.

While Jesus opened the way for our relationship with the Father as adopted sons, we are to look upon our heavenly Father with reverence and fear. As Jesus said, “I say unto you my friends, Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do. But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear Him, which after He hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear Him” (Luke 12:4-5).

This implies more than ‘reverential awe’. It clearly menas that fear is a proper attitude in those who would please God with their lives. Nicky Gumbel fails to give the same warning Jesus gave, which was meant to keep us in line. That failure allows for a laissez-faire attitude in one’s spiritual walk.

WHAT DOES HIS “NAME” MEAN?

Is there something magical about the word ‘Jesus’? In fact the word ‘Jesus’ itself is just that - a word. It is merely an Anglicization of the Greek pronunciation of the Lord’s name.[27] As we saw in the Introduction, the important thing is the Lord’s character. This is what is in view in Scripture in the manifold references to ‘the name of Jesus’…

Unfortunately, this is not what is communicated on Alpha. It isn’t that Nicky Gumbel’s statements are erroneous, per se. It is that he fails to make it clear that merely using the name of Jesus, as opposed to walking in obedience to the Father’s will, does not produce truth or righteousness.

Consider, for example, Nicky’s discussion of the ‘Lord’s Prayer’: “‘Hallowed be your name’. That literally means ‘May your name be honoured’ … People don’t respect the name of Jesus. So often it is used as a swear word or it’s just a laughing matter” [Talk 6].[28] The Lord’s ‘name’ is merely equated to the word ‘Jesus’ here.

Nicky also teaches that “at the end of our prayers, we say, ‘In Jesus name’ ... It’s an acknowledgement…” [Talk 6]. But it is through emulating Jesus’ character that we can abide in Him and can thus approach the Father in prayer. (And if Alpha is not describing the Lord’s character correctly, how can hearers properly emulate Him?)

In light of the fact that the ‘name’ of the Lord is never explained in the talks, one can easily guess the unfortunate (i.e. superstitious) interpretation that many hearers will place on statements like the following. “Jesus is the only name that can save”;[29] “Origen in the third century, [wrote] that ‘the name of Jesus can take away diseases’” [Talk 13]; “[T]here is such power in the name of Jesus. That’s why the apostles used to expel evil [again, not just devils] in the name of Jesus” [Talk 11]; “…Satan and his demons are so frightened of the name of Jesus”.[30]

The heart-stopping peril of thinking you are serving God just because you use the actual word ‘Jesus’ is made horrifyingly plain in Matthew 7:22-23:

“Many will say to Me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Thy name? and in Thy name have cast out devils? and in Thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from Me, ye that work iniquity.”

CONCLUSION

Confused about Alpha’s position regarding the Lord’s character? How much more are participants being muddled! (Sadly, this article is not exhaustive in terms of the evidence we could bring to bear regarding Alpha’s teachings on this topic.)

The collective effect of these points is that hearers are coming away from Alpha with a worryingly inaccurate impression of the Lord’s character. And since the Bible places such huge emphasis on the ‘name’ – the character – of Jesus, Alpha’s failure to describe it rightly is of genuine concern and obliges us to ask what other problems may be present.

God-willing, the next instalment of this short series of articles will look at the nature of Alpha’s Jesus. We intend to ask: if He was pre-existent, if He was the Word made flesh; if He had the Holy Spirit before His baptism; if He was Christ – the Son of the living God; and if He was Jehovah God. (The findings were fascinating in each case.)

May God bless you.

The Alpha Course and its related publications offer teachings on a wide variety of Christian topics. We believe a clear and logical assessment of the world of Alpha is available in our book Alpha – the Unofficial Guide: Overview.[31] We have endeavoured to make it as gracious as possible so that it is suitable for as many as possible.

If this article has been a serious help to you, we'd love to know.
Click here to find out how to tell us - and to see a list of other ways in which you can support this work.

Forward to Part 2: The Nature of Alpha’s Jesus

Back to BTR Articles

[1] Alpha News (UK Edition), Jul – Oct 2002, p17.

[2] Strong’s, 3686.

[3] For yet more reasons to be precise about the Lord’s character see Matt. 18:5, 20; Mk. 9:41 , 16:17 ; Jn. 14:13-15, 26; Col. 3:17.

[4] In this article, phrases like ‘the talks’ or ‘the video talks’ always refer to the official Alpha video transcripts released in the Summer of 2000. Apart from Bible quotes taken from Alpha talks, all Bible quotes (and all statements about the Bible’s contents) relate to the King James Version. All emphases in quotes (whether from the Bible or not) are our own unless otherwise stated.

[5] Nicky’s Bible version DOES however say that Jesus may well have lied! In John 7:8 the Lord said He was ‘not yet going up’ to a particular Feast, but a footnote in the NIV says “Some early manuscripts do not have yet”. Since Jesus did go up, this would have been a lie. And since the NIV constantly extols manuscripts based purely on how ‘early’ they are, the inference is clear.

[6] As per Isa. 7:14 & Matt. 1:23 .

[7] Green Alpha Manual, (HTB Publications, 1995), p30.

[8] Without clarification, these words also suggest that Jesus did not actually know whether His prayer had been completely successful or not. (His question was surely just asked to encourage more faith in the blind man.)

[9] We are not supporting the (excessive) ‘Word-Faith’ line in saying this!

[10] Nicky Gumbel, Searching Issues, (Kingsway, 2001), p30. But does not the Bible offer infallible truth too?

[11] Why Christmas? (HTB Publications, 1997), p10.

[12] Questions of Life (Kingsway, 2001), p19.

[13] Immature Course participants are far more likely to come away believing that Rome is infallible than that Jesus was. (See our book for the reasons why.)

[14] Nicky does say at one point that Jesus “was the supreme example of … Of humility, [and] … kindness” [Talk 2], but in more than eleven hours of talks supposedly centred on Jesus this is just about all that participants get. Note too that, although the Lord certainly humbled Himself by becoming a man, there is a subtle (but significant) difference between Him always behaving ‘humbly’ on earth and being ‘meek and lowly’. Since He claimed to be God, some hearers may get the wrong idea about what being humble involves!

[15] Green Alpha Manual, p5.

[16] Searching Issues, p23.

[17] Nicky encourages Alpha churches to go to great lengths to keep the Course as ‘fun’ and relaxed as possible, and he always talks in an informal way – hence our decision to refer to him as ‘Nicky’ in this article.

[18] David R. Coaker, A Critical Evaluation of the Use and Influence of the Bible in the Alpha Course, (Draft for Comment, 20 Aug 2002 ), unpublished BTh paper 9T15, Mansfield College , Oxford University , p19. This statement was specifically in reference to Nicky Gumbel’s book of the talks, Questions of Life, (Kingsway, 2001), p34. This book is tighter in some ways than the video talks themselves, but is not much better overall. For example, Jesus is still called “‘the Lord of laughter’” there (p34). Besides, it is the videos that many churches use.

[19] Alpha claims that the Lord is all about love, but the Bible puts the emphasis squarely on His holiness. Only 22 verses in the whole Bible speak of “God” alongside His “love” for us.

[20] See Talks 8 & 12.

[21] Interestingly, both of these verses (Luke 1:35 in Talk 8, and Acts 4:30 in Talk 12) relate to Bible corruptions.

[22] Nicky Gumbel, 30 Days, (Alpha Publications, 2001), p8.

[23] Talk 2; see also Green Alpha Manual, p25.

[24] Introduction to video Talk 1. N.B. Millar said these words about the Alpha talks three full years before the release of the problematic transcripts used in the article you are currently reading. Nicky does quote a famous name who said: “‘I believe there is no one … more perfect than Jesus’” [Why Jesus?, (HTB Publications, 1997), p7], but critics counter that this still does not mean Jesus was perfect, just that no-one has bettered Him.

[25] The Bible says God is “greatly to be feared” (Psa. 89:7) but Alpha does not portray a God that is remotely to be feared. Nicky even insinuates that fear of the Lord is of Satanic origin: Adam was “‘afraid’ [of God]. That was the aim of the devil … And that’s not how it is meant to be” [Talk 11], despite many dozens of verses saying the opposite (e.g. Psa. 111:10; 147:11; Luke 12:5; Isa. 8:13 ; Acts 9:31 ). See our book for more.

[26] Talk 9. (Underlined emphasis in original HTB transcript.)

[27] The Lord’s earthly name was Y’shua - Hebrew for ‘salvation’.

[28] Nicky must mean the name ‘Jesus’ is treated as a laughing matter. (Whilst we are on the subject of the ‘name’ of the Lord, Nicky gives Him the New Age’s preferred title ‘the Teacher’ three times in Talk 12 for some reason.)

[29] Searching Issues, p26.

[30] Questions of Life, p166.

[31] Our book is available in the U.S. from discernment-ministries.com; but for a list of outlets worldwide see the ‘Better Than Rubies’ section of our own website (www.bayith.org).