Rating: 
Summary: Thought provoking ideas create a thirst for more knowledge
Review: I was looking for a new Bible to read during this first year of the new millenium (I'm on my fourth pass through the Bible) and came across this book by Helms. I went home without buying it, even though the jacket stired my interest. It was no use. I couldn't get it out of my mind. So several days later I went back and bought the remaining copy.I've always enjoyed the thrill of well thought-out new ideas and logically explained differences of opinion. And Helms does an excellent job of leading the reader, step-by-step, through his thought processes. Describing very thoroughly how and why he reached his conclusions. In addition, Helms has the ability to transmit enthusiam for his research through the written word. Whether or not your religious convictions allow room for what Helms puts forward is a personal choice. Being a liberal (some would say - radical) Presbyterian, I see no harm in questioning any ideas put forward. It then becomes a personal choice as to whether or not the idea is accepted in part or in its entirety. The only shortcoming in the book was the absence of the presentation of acceptable or plausible alternatives to Helms thesis, and a discussion as to why those alternatives fell short of the mark. Along with providing some interesting ideas, Helms fired my desire to undertake additional reading in this area.
Rating: 
Summary: No factual research on this subject prior to writing
Review: It is apparent that the writer of "Prophecy ex post facto" was just writing from opinion's of other's as within his writing I found no facts of the three facts of truth. To understand biblical truth you must place side by side the trinity of truth, namely, revelation, history, and nature. If this is not done there is no way to understand spiritual truths as revealed in Scripture, (Romans chapter 1) It is no wonder why the world is in the condition of unrest for it is satanic movement of this uneducated uncalled writer. This is an outrage for anyone to print. I would not accept this as nothing but fiction.
Rating: 
Summary: Poor Scholarship. Pure Speculation.
Review: R.M. Helms claims to be on the 'cutting edge' of Biblical scholarship with this book "Who Wrote the Gospels." The interesting thing about his remark in relation to his work is the fact that if one were to peruse the bibliography one could not help but notice that his sources are from the 50's and 60's (predominantly), some 70's and 80's, and a scant few from the early 90's. Cutting edge? Hardly. The material in this work was very hard so swallow. In fact, most of his assertions regarding authorship were speculative at best (albeit the fact that he had no real serious sources to back up his claims). Moreover, his dating of the manuscripts are off base mostly due to the actual 'cutting edge' research that has surfaced since Colin Hemer's work 'The Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History.' Where is Helms use of the LXX? What sources did Helms actually use to date the Gospel accounts? None, is the answer, other than his wide use of the source Q. A source which has absolutely no historical backing or evidence, no extant manuscripts, and is purely speculative. This work is wrought with problems. In fact, Amazon does not give me enough space to write a proper response dealing with all the problems which arise in this text, so I merely highlighted the major ones (and that, without much detail). There are far greater sources written by much better scholars than this one. For instance, I would certainly recommend any source material for the Gospels written by Bruce Metzger, or Alister McGrath, and the Colin Hemer text I mentioned above, but this one should be left on the bookstore shelf as a dust collector.
Rating:
Summary: Poor Scholarship. Pure Speculation.
Review: R.M. Helms claims to be on the 'cutting edge' of Biblical scholarship with this book "Who Wrote the Gospels." The interesting thing about his remark in relation to his work is the fact that if one were to peruse the bibliography one could not help but notice that his sources are from the 50's and 60's (predominantly), some 70's and 80's, and a scant few from the early 90's. Cutting edge? Hardly. The material in this work was very hard so swallow. In fact, most of his assertions regarding authorship were speculative at best (albeit the fact that he had no real serious sources to back up his claims). Moreover, his dating of the manuscripts are off base mostly due to the actual 'cutting edge' research that has surfaced since Colin Hemer's work 'The Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History.' Where is Helms use of the LXX? What sources did Helms actually use to date the Gospel accounts? None, is the answer, other than his wide use of the source Q. A source which has absolutely no historical backing or evidence, no extant manuscripts, and is purely speculative. This work is wrought with problems. In fact, Amazon does not give me enough space to write a proper response dealing with all the problems which arise in this text, so I merely highlighted the major ones (and that, without much detail). There are far greater sources written by much better scholars than this one. For instance, I would certainly recommend any source material for the Gospels written by Bruce Metzger, or Alister McGrath, and the Colin Hemer text I mentioned above, but this one should be left on the bookstore shelf as a dust collector.
Rating:
Summary: Helms is brilliant, but does not have the final word.
Review: Randel Helms, like Bruno Bauer and Wilhelm Wrede in the 19th century, invoked the theory that the Messianic Secret could not have been real -- it seems so much like a literary invention. However, the arguments were not convincing in the 19th century and they are still not convincing. Dr. Morton Smith, for one, has portrayed the historical Jesus as one of many itinerant exorcists in Palestine, and suggested that such an outlaw from the Law of Moses would have a tangible reason to wish to keep a low profile, to evade the local clergy, and when in doubt to instruct people to give credit for healings to tradition. Jesus was also used to keeping his secret even from the Twelve Apostles as MARK faithfully records. No, MARK was not a literary invention, but was a compilation of many stories. I think Helms is right that the author of MARK was the first genius to interpret Daniel in relation to Jesus and so he was the source of the 'little Apocalypse.' But I don't find enough evidence to convince me that he was the inventor of the Messianic Secret.
Rating:
Summary: Helms is brilliant, but does not have the final word.
Review: Randel Helms, like Bruno Bauer and Wilhelm Wrede in the 19th century, invoked the theory that the Messianic Secret could not have been real -- it seems so much like a literary invention. However, the arguments were not convincing in the 19th century and they are still not convincing. Dr. Morton Smith, for one, has portrayed the historical Jesus as one of many itinerant exorcists in Palestine, and suggested that such an outlaw from the Law of Moses would have a tangible reason to wish to keep a low profile, to evade the local clergy, and when in doubt to instruct people to give credit for healings to tradition. Jesus was also used to keeping his secret even from the Twelve Apostles as MARK faithfully records. No, MARK was not a literary invention, but was a compilation of many stories. I think Helms is right that the author of MARK was the first genius to interpret Daniel in relation to Jesus and so he was the source of the 'little Apocalypse.' But I don't find enough evidence to convince me that he was the inventor of the Messianic Secret.
Rating:
Summary: A lot of fun
Review: Short, clear, and entertaining. This book along with "The Five Gospels" has renewed my interest in the bible and biblical history. Unwavering dogmatic belief is no longer a pre-requisite for understanding. Helms shows how Mark precedes Matthew and Luke and how they indeed edit Mark with their own agendas in mind. I don't know that I buy Helms' argument that Luke was a woman, but it's a fascinating hypothesis anyhow.
Rating: 
Summary: Not St Lucia
Review: The biggest disappointment with this book is that it is published by Skeptic Magazine, and edited by the magazine's editor, Michael Shermer. One would have thought that Skeptic magazine would be skeptical of the Jesus Seminar orthodoxy. This book does not actually answer the question in the title by proposing any candidates as the writers, and is apparently innocent of books like Robert Eisenman's 'James the Brother of Jesus' that do attempt to answer the question. Eisenman gives star billing to Epaphroditus, colleague of Paul, secretary to Nero, and sponser of Josephus. Helms' book - with one exception - restricts itself to textual analysis that is well known if you are well read in the field. If you want an easy introduction to this material, this does in fact fit. Afterwards read Robert Price's 'The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man' for a thousand details that Helms did not mention. The one exception is Helm's proposal that Luke was a gentile widow. His proposal is plausible and this is the only book to make the argument. However he does not compare his argument to the similar arguments that the writer of the Odyssey and the Yahwist writer of the Torah were also women. Nor does he mention that Eisenman has proposed a female writer of the gospels, as also has Joe Atwill in 'The Roman Origins of Christianity' working from different evidence. Both these writers have proposed Berenice of the Herodians. Berenice actually appears in Acts 25, and arguably twice more in Luke. Berenice is hardly the respectable widow that Helms imagines, but then Luke-Acts - like the other gospels - is more intriguing than Helms lets on. See Atwill's book for some of the details.
Rating: 
Summary: A work of art
Review: The book Gospel Fiction is a book that clearly explains problems of the treditional view of the gospels. Randel Helms takes texts that were thought as truth and redirects the thought process to ask questions of the treditional belife system. Dealing with the nativity , miracles, passion narratives and the resurrection stories, all of which are the foundations of christanity, the author forces us to reflect on the belifs that have supported millions for ages. This book has confermed my suspicions of the gospal texts and has deepened my understanding of how gospal writers composed scritpures. Gospel Fictions is a breath of fresh air to the questioning sole.
Rating:
Summary: A lot of fun
Review: This book is a perfect beginning point for anyone interested in modern scholarship into the origins of the Christian Bible, and of the origins of traditional Christianity. Helms' writing is clear, his arguments cogent, and his scholarship is commendable. While not as detailed, subtle and penetrating as Burton Mack's "Who Wrote the New Testament," this book is far more approachable and understandable for regular people who may not be academically oriented. While it may come as a suprise to many, it has been known for centuries that the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were not written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John. Instead, these are "traditional" names given to anonymously-written works over a hundred years after they were written. This much is not controversial among biblical scholars. What is controversial is the attempt to assign actual authorship to these anonymous works, and to place them in the proper historical, social, cultural, and theological context. Helms does an excellent job of showing how these Gospels were not simply eyewitness accounts, or even second-hand accounts, of Jesus' time. Rather, they are products of complicated theological advocacy written generations after Jesus' time. Each Gospel is shown to reflect the author(s) own theological interests and agenda, as each sought to advance their own vision of the emerging religion. While I do have a few quibbles and reservations about some of Helms' more speculative speculations, I found his arguments to be convincing generally. Christianity as we have come to know it, is the historical product of a historically brief period between the traditional dates of Jesus' ministry and the Council of Nicaea in the early 4th century. During the intervening centuries, Christianity began as a diverse and conflicting collection of religious associations and movements, passed through a period of competition and acrimony among sects, and ended in the triumph of one particular brand of Christianity which has come to be labeled "orthodox." Helms book illuminates an important part of this historical process, by showing how the Gospels reflect the viewpoints, concerns and agendas of these anonymous early Christian writers during the period of competition between the various visions and interpretations of Christianity. An enlightening and worthwhile read for anyone interested in Christianity or the history of religion in general.
| 
