To the Editors of the CRIMSON: The report in the Crimson, January 12, "Resurrection Is the Gospel Truth," raises several questions. (1) It does not state under whose auspices the meeting in Lowell Lecture Hall was held. (2) The statement that the Gospels were written "only 15 years after Christ's death" is incredible, and is presumably a misprint or a confusion between "the Gospels" and the old sources of the Gospels. (But the Resurrection narratives in the Gospels are commonly recognized as belonging to the very latest strata in them.) (3) As to the area of agreement of the panel of theologians with the lawyer-lecture's view of the "authenticity of Christ's resurrection": the distinction here between the Resurrection as historical fact and theological affirmation is confused. Assent to the Resurrection in the latter sense should not be taken to mean acceptance of the historicity of the Gospel accounts. In any case assessment of these accounts as of all such ancient texts is first of all a question of the most sophisticated kind of expert study and at this level should be left to the specialists. Historians of the rise of Christianity have long known how to understand and appreciate the midrashic or legendary "mistletoe" that attached itself to the early records. Amos N. Wilder   Hollis Professor of Divinity, Emeritus