Thursday, June 1, 2017

God With Us - By Glenn r. Kreider

I was talking with one of my uncles some months ago and he was lamenting the lack of good Christian books out there, pointing out that the only good 'Christian' books are the ones that lead you to read the Bible itself instead of more books about the Bible. God with Us: Exploring God's Personal Interactions with His People Throughout the Bible by Glenn R. Kreider is one such book.  I don't believe that I had heard of this book before, or at least if I had it didn't catch my attention at the time.  A friend gave it to me and I ended up being very pleased with it.

In the book, Kreider focuses upon the humility of God.  He goes through the different periods of Biblical history pointing out many instances of God's graciousness towards mankind.  I'll list some particular snippets that I found fascinating:

First, in his section on Abraham Kreider points out that God could have responded in anger for Abraham's asking how he would know that he will gain possession of the land (instead of just accepting that it would happen), but He didn't, "God's response is compassionate, gracious and kind.  He cuts a covenant with Abram.…..The covenant does not make the promises of God more secure, but it does give Abram something he knows and understands." God didn't have to make a covenant at all, but He graciously did so.  And despite Abraham's flaws, God condescends to be known as the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (who also were very flawed).

 Later on, in His call to Moses God condescends to answer Moses' objections to being chosen to lead his people out of Egypt, and has already provided a helper for Moses in the person of Aaron - This made me realize too that God could have made Aaron the leader of His people.  But even though Moses objected so much, God graciously still used Moses. 

And then of course, the amazing condescension of God to send His Son to earth as a human being….and as an infant, not an adult. Kreider says that for a while he had a hard time with the account given by Luke of when Jesus was 12 years old and deliberately stays behind in Jerusalem when His parents leave for home - in particular, Mary's apparently frustrated response towards Him, "My Son, Why have you treated us like this?..."   How could she dare do that seeing that she had been told beforehand that Jesus was "the Son of God"? And then he explains that his conclusion, " "Anyone who was in the presence of God in the flesh would recognize his deity, I thought.  I Now believe that this story reveals to us that Jesus' deity was well concealed.  Apparently, the difference between Jesus and her other children was not as obvious to Mary as I had thought.  Jesus never sinned, never rebelled against her; he never behaved in a depraved way."  He goes on to explain that, in a way, Jesus was, as it were, 'immature'(not meaning to indicate that Christ's action in staying behind was immature).  In other words, He still grew in wisdom, as that chapter points out, though in the process of growing in wisdom/'maturing'  He never sinned. And so Mary apparently had trouble perceiving His divinity because of this, despite having seen His perfect goodness.  I thought that was an interesting point. 

I also loved the concept that God has condescended to have His Son be in human form forever, "he humbles himself by adding to his complete deity complete humanity, not temporarily but permanently."  And not only this, but that Christ will be with His people forever on the new earth,  "The hope of redeemed humanity is not heaven but earth.  Heaven is a temporary home until the day of resurrection, when heaven will come down to earth and the God of heaven will make the earth his home (Rev. 21:3).  When the work of redemption is completed, the triune God will condescend to dwell eternally on this planet."

All in all I thought that it was quite thought provoking.  There were some things (as in any book other than the Bible) that bothered me a bit: such as Kreider's stating that, ""Although sin and rebellion will continue, God promises never to respond as harshly as he did in the flood." - I guess that he doesn't think that the future judgments to come upon the earth are not that bad? That confused me - especially as he says that he is premillennial.  And then he says that "Since the Scriptures testify about Jesus, any reading that fails to hear Jesus, any interpretation that fails to elevate Jesus, and any bible study that fails to focus on Jesus is incorrect and worthy of judgment." But what if certain passages elevate God the Father? What if they focus upon Him and not upon Christ…or what if they focus upon the Trinity as a whole? * Sigh*….. 

But I still liked the book.  Kreider does a good job of pointing out this other attribute of God, humility, that we ought to emulate, and that we will emulate because we have God- The Holy Spirit living inside of us.  It makes you want to take another look at the Bible with, not necessarily a new perspective, but with a heightened desire to notice God's condescension and humility towards humanity  that is revealed therein.  

Some of the websites where this book may be purchased are and

My Rating:  5 out of 5 Stars *****

Wednesday, May 24, 2017

Amillennialism and the Age to Come - by Matt Waymeyer

Amillennialism and the Age to Come: A Premillennial Critique of the Two-Age Model by Matt
Waymeyer is an excellent critique of Amillennialism and, in the process, an excellent defense of Premillennialism.

I learned a lot about Amillennialism and grew even more confident (if that's even possible) in Premillennialism.  One of the key things that seems to mark the Amillennial view is that they apparently believe that many Old Testament passages that speak of a this-earth Millennium are symbolic, not literal in their content. They believe that the New Testament is the key to understanding Old Testament prophecies in their true symbolic meaning.  In other words, you shouldn't take these passages at face value.  The New Testament (excepting Revelation) is the section of the Bible that is the literal key to the symbolic Old Testament.

Waymeyer goes through and defends a literal interpretation of these OT passages, showing that the literal interpretation is the most biblical hermeneutic and the one that harmonizes best with the Bible as a whole.

He addresses many of the passages that Amillennialists think definitively rule out a 1000 year millennium  on this earth (which includes death, marriage and births happening under the earthly reign of the Messiah).  They think that these passages render it impossible.

One of their big proof texts is Matthew 12:32, "And whoever may speak a word against the Son of Man it shall be forgiven to him, but whoever may speak against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this age, nor in that which is coming.", they put a great emphasis upon "this age and the age to come" concept, basically saying that a this-earthly millennium would indicate that there are three ages, not two.  But Christ only spoke of two, therefore there cannot be a 1000 year Millennial Kingdom and therefore we cannot take the passages that appear to be speaking of a Millennial reign on this earth literally, they must be figurative.

One of their other texts is in Luke 20 where the Pharisees try to trick Christ with a question about marriage at the resurrection of the dead.  Part of Christ's answer is that there will be no marriage in the resurrection.  The Amillennialists believe that this rules out a Millennial Kingdom that includes people getting married and having children.  Waymeyer provides a good answer (I'll leave that for you to read when you get this book) and then in his conclusion says,: "If this were the only passage in Scripture describing the age to come one might understandably conclude that there could be no physical birth or death at any point during this time.  But with the testimony of the Old Testament prophets regarding the existence of sin, death, and procreation I the coming kingdom……..the need to harmonize the entirety of biblical teaching leads to the conclusion that Luke 20:34-36 is compatible with the millennial kingdom of premillennialism."

The only real problem I would have with this book is that Waymeyer does not address the, apparently future, sacrifices in Ezekiel (the section with the chapters in the 40s) that are described as "sin offerings". He does address the sacrifices offered at the Feast of Booths that are mentioned in Zechariah, but he doesn't address the ones in Ezekiel, which are one of the major questions even I, as a premillennialist, wonder as to how they will work out.   He doesn't even say, "I don't know what to make of them", which I would have preferred.  We don't need to know the answer to every question, but I would rather he would have addressed that section of Ezekiel even if he didn't come to a conclusion as to how they would potentially harmonize with books like Hebrews.

Assuming that these Ezekiel passages are Millennial, I don't doubt that they are perfectly compatible with the Millennial Kingdom. I just don't know how they are - this side of the Millennium.  The Premillennial view does have some questions that we do not know the exact answer to, but we know that these are paradoxes that will be explained at the time of Christ's 2nd Coming.  Just as the paradoxes of the first coming of the Messiah were cleared up at that time (how would the Messiah be a Conquering King and yet be rejected, and be pierced? Rule as King over Israel, conquering her enemies and yet be rejected and "cut off from the land of the living? ) by the realization that the Messiah would come twice.

Overall though, I think that Waymeyer does a great job in his critique.  One of the points that he thinks we should recognize is that "no single prophetic or narrative account is an exhaustive description of what has happened or will happen."  The prophecies complement and build on each other, they do not contradict each other.  And I think that that is one of the best arguments that Waymeyer makes throughout this book:  that, because of the passages that speak of a Kingdom on this earth, it is our duty to try to harmonize them with other passages that give us more information about the future, it is not our duty to allegorize them away when we are not given any prerogative to do so in the Bible.  We trust that somehow they all fit together perfectly, even if we do not see how at the moment.

I highly recommend this book, it is very well written (I read it in about two days), highly informative with intriguing and thought provoking arguments.  It has a lot of footnotes too, which I like in a work like this (especially when one spots quotes from, and references to, other books one may one to read) .  I think that it is very helpful and a great critique of the Amillennial position. 

Among other places this book may be purchased at the Christian Book Distributors web site and also at and

My rating: 5 out of 5 stars

Tuesday, May 23, 2017

1777: Tipping Point at Saratoga - by Dean Snow

One of my favorite ways to learn history is by reading  books that focus on an individual event in that history.  I like overviews too, but I especially  like to "zoom in", as it were.  One of the ways in which I like to do that is by reading biographies of individuals in that time.  One of the other ways is to read books that focus on various individuals experiencing the same event. 1777: Tipping Point at Saratoga, by Dean Snow, is one of the latter.

The time period is that of the American War of Independence, the year is 1777.  General Burgoyne is heading toward Albany in an attempt to cut off New England from the other Colonies.  It is a risky move that may end up with him being cut off from supplies.  General Horatio Gates is waiting for him to show up.  The two armies end up clashing and Burgoyne finds that he is cut off from supplies and that all his enemy has to do is wait for him and his men to get hungry enough to either surrender.  The whole while the continental army is growing day by day.

It is quite an interesting read, switching in between the perspectives of various people on both sides.  There are the two opposing generals, there are other officers of both sides, and several couples on the British side (some women joined their husbands and followed the army around).  The narrative generally moves day by day, showing you particular characters in certain hours of the day and what had led up to that hour.  All in all, it's quite intriguing and carries one along - you really want to know what is going to happen to the various people, 

There are a few problems that  I had with the book.  First, take a look at this paragraph: "The founders tended to be Deists, or at least sympathetic to Deism, people who were skeptical of religious ideology, skeptical of institutionalized religion in general and of Christian doctrines in particular."  I feel wary about those statements, I have never gotten that impression from the history that I've read, but perhaps I just haven't delved into it enough. Anyway, he goes on to say, "This predisposed them to favor flexible democratic processes over rigid absolutes.  The Constitution eventually accomplished the intended objective, emerging as an amendable document subject to improvement."  That makes the constitution seem more like a suggestion than a standard of law.

Also there was one instance that I know of fiction, an elderly woman helping her husband by loading muskets who then cannot resist peeking over the top of the rampart and gets hit in the face by a musket ball.  The beginning of the book mentions that a skeleton of an elderly woman had been found with her face blown out.  The theory of how she died is, of course, a plausible theory but not known fact.  I would rather that that that would have been incorporated as theory in the narrative, not stated as fact.  It just makes me wonder if there are other places in the book that are fictional guesses as to what happened.  I do believe in rigid absolutes in certain areas, including the topic of history, and something factual happened to that woman, it isn't up to those who follow her in history to make up their own story of her death and present it as fact.

One more thing, I had some trouble understanding the maps with indicators of where the armies were in the map.  It's probably just me though, others will probably understand it well.

Otherwise I really enjoyed reading it.  I liked seeing the different perspectives and events of that section of days in 1777. 

I won an advanced reading copy of this book in a LibraryThing Giveaway (from Oxford University Press), I was not required to review the book (at all, either positively or negatively).  Many thanks to LibraryThing and Oxford University Press!! 

One of the places where this book may be purchased is on

Wednesday, April 5, 2017

CSB (Holman) - Ultrathin Reference Bible - Brown Leathertouch

The Christian Standard Bible is a new revision of the Holman Christian Standard Bible.  They have made some changes, and it seems to me that many of those changes are toward a more literal translation, which is a good thing. 

Here are some samples:

In Matthew 19:28 the HCSB renders it:
"Jesus said to them, 'I assure you: in the Messianic Age, when the Son of Man sits on His glorious throne…" This new revision has it as, "Jesus said to them, 'Truly I tell you, In the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man sits on His glorious throne…'" - CSB

Not that I'm disputing that the renewal of all things references the Messianic age, it's just that "the renewal of all things" is a more literal rendition of what Christ said, more toward a formal equivalence rather than a dynamic one - which I believe is a safer route.

To some degree the same holds true with the following:

Daniel 9:25:"Know and understand this:  From the issuing of the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince will be seven weeks and 62 weeks…" HCSB

"Know and understand this:  From the issuing of the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until an Anointed One, the ruler, will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks" CSB

1 Peter 3:1-2: "In the same way, wives, submit yourselves to your own  husbands so that, even if some disobey the Christian message, they may be won over without a message by the way their wives live when they observe your pure, reverent lives." HCSB

"In the same way, wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands so that, even if some disobey the word, they may be won over without a word by the way their wives live when they observe your pure, reverent lives."  CSB

The translators also switched "languages" in 1 Corinthians 14 to "tongues", though I still think that Languages was a good translation.

There are also noticeable changes in the way the translators interpret the text, for example, in 1 Corinthians 7, where Paul is explaining that if a husband or a wife has an unbelieving spouse who wants to leave them, that they should let them leave, they then translate his next words as, "Wife, for all you know, you might save your husband.  Husband, for all you know you might save your wife." CSB  Whereas the HCSB said, "For you, wife, how do you know whether you will save your husband?  Or you, husband, how do you know whether you will save your wife?"  - 1 Cor 7:16?   Which is a rather significant change.

There were some things that I did not like about this translation.  For instance, they seem to have caved a little bit more on the gender inclusive language - 1 John 3:17  "If anyone has this worlds goods and sees a fellow believer in need but withholds compassion from him -how does God's love reside in him?" CSB

"If anyone has this world's goods and sees his brother in need but closes his eyes to his need - how can God's love reside in him?"   HCSB  They do note that their goal is to translate the Bible faithfully, they simply change some gender specific language to gender inclusive when the text itself allows for it. I still don't think that that is necessary, but okay.   

And then there is a problem that I had with the HCSB that I still have with this revision.  One of which is that, despite saying in their introduction that their "OT Textual notes show IMPORTANT differences among Hebrew (HB) manuscripts and ancient OT versions, such as the Septuagint…(emphasis mine)", they do not include the LXX variant of Psalm 40:6, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not; but a BODY hast thou prepared me: (Brenton- Emphasis added), Whereas the Masoretic text (which only goes back to about 900 A.D. [or CE]), the text the Majority of our Old Testaments are based on, says, Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; MINE EARS HAST THOU OPENED: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required." (KJV - emphasis added).  The difference is extremely significant as the writer of Hebrews quotation of that verse matches the Septuagint and not our Masoretic text in that it says that God prepared a body for the speaker rather than opened his ears.   And yet they include a manuscript variant of the number of the beast, 616 - which variant is quite suspect as Irenaeus (a person who lived in the earlier days of the church who is thought to have been a follower of Polycarp a follower of the Apostle John) said that this variant was false, and that the older manuscripts did not contain it nor did those who knew the Apostles support it.  If they included this variant of the number of the beast then I do not  understand how they did not give the variant of Psalm 40 which is supported by the writer of Hebrews in the Bible!

One other thing that confused me:  The CSB is presented as having been translated directly from the original languages rather than using an existing translation as its basis. There is a chart on the website for this translation showing many translations and separating them on the basis of whether or not they are translated directly from the ancient languages as opposed to using an existing English translation as the basis.  The CSB is shown to be a translation not based upon an existing translation. But to me this seems to be contradicted by the admission that the CSB is a revision of the HCSB.   That just struck me as rather deceptive.  Perhaps I simply didn't understand the chart….

Otherwise, this is quite a nice translation  Also, this Bible is very nicely bound, with a LeatherTouch cover (it feels very nice).  The text is in two columns with a center column cross reference.  There is also a concordance at the back as well as full color maps.  All in all, very nice.

Many thanks to the folks at B&H publishers for sending me a free review copy of this book (My review did not have to be favorable).

My rating: 5 out of 5 stars

Among other websites you may purchase this Bible at and on

Friday, March 31, 2017

The French Revolution - Ian Davidson

Did you know that Thomas Paine was a part of a constitution writing convention of the French Revolution?  Neither did I.  Actually, I really didn't know much about the French Revolution at all.  This book, The French Revolution: From Enlightenment to Tyranny by Ian Davidson sounded like a good resource for discovering more about this historic event.

This book was quite helpful, taking you through the many events that made up that period in French history, some of these events being: a National Assembly coming into power subordinating the King to a Constitution, France going to war with Austria, the King being condemned to death and executed, various uprisings of the people, the Terror, many public beheadings (apparently so common that they became boring) and the ultimate execution of Robespierre himself. 

I learned that the Revolution did not start with the people wanting the King overthrown (I guess I sort of assumed that they were all for Regicide), the move was made at first to keep the King but subordinate him to a Constitution. He would no longer be the ultimate authority, rather there would be a National Assembly which would have the power to vote on things - I think the King was given some sort of veto power, but that didn't last long.   Even after the  monarchy was completely removed not all Frenchmen wanted the former King executed (the lack of that desire caused trouble for them later on), but they were overruled. 

Robespierre eventually comes into power and the Terror begins, and it truly sounds as though it would have been quite terrifying.  Ultimately it came down to utter lawlessness,  if one was accused of being against the government, you didn't even need proof of guilt.  It was basically a matter of one's being presumed guilty simply because one was accused.  ""the tribunal could only choose between two verdicts, acquittal or death, and that based not on evidence but on the moral conviction of the jurors."  Ironically, Thomas Paine was supposed to be executed (due to various events) but was saved by a mistake.  Davidson does not focus on the Terror part of the history (It only takes up about one chapter), the Terror was simply one part of the whole Revolution…or 'revolutions' of power in France, and it actually didn't last as long as I had presumed.

The history in and of itself is a bit overwhelming as there are so many changes of power, various political inclinations of the characters involved, and many constitutions and other political documents produced, but the author of this history does a pretty good job of talking you through what was happening.  it's still hard for me to keep track of all that happened in retrospect, but that's where the timeline at the beginning of the book comes in handy.  

I want write a few notes here, about the book, first, there is an awkward discussion in one of the notes at the end of the book, that I don't quite see as relevant to the history - or at least is not something that I felt the need to know. And also there are pictures in the middle of the book, two of which (paintings) are not decent (some nudity).  

On another note, there were  several helpful maps included in the book, a timeline and also an interesting list, compiled by Davidson, of people of note in the revolution. His list "suggests" that "anyone who did anything in the Revolution that could come to the attention of later historians had a 43 percent chance of a violent death".  

One of the things that I found striking about the French Revolution, as opposed to the American one, is that it appears that it was quite atheistic in its endeavors.  Robespierre tried to remedy this by coming up with something called the Supreme Being, but even then, Robespierre seemed to consider himself the supreme being rather than any supernatural entity. That seems to be the 'thing' about the French revolutionary leaders: they were themselves the moral reference rather than anything outside of themselves - which is perhaps why events were so mixed up,  because the people, with their varying opinions, were themselves the standard rather than any fixed point.  They really were not governed by any fixed law, rather it was the laws made up by whoever was in power at the time.  The people governed the law rather than vice-versa.

 Davidson is an interesting writer, he keeps the attention quite well and is not afraid to give his own opinions and speculations on the various events of the Revolution. I didn't necessarily agree with all of his opinions of the events he is recounting, but it was interesting to see what he thought.  Before I read this book, I mainly thought of the French Revolution  as a chaotic, murderous, disorganized attempt at mimicking the American one.   In a way that is true (at least in my opinion), but it was more organized than I thought, though there were many conflicts as to how it should be organized (thus multiple constitutions and changes of power), it was, perhaps, a little less murderous than I thought, though it still struck me as rather violent during pretty much every stage, and it wasn't quite as chaotic as I had thought, at the beginning, though it still seemed to get more and more chaotic as the Revolution progressed.

All in all, it was quite the fascinating read. 

Many Thanks to the folks at Pegasus Books for sending me a free review copy of this book!  - My review did not have  to be positive

My Rating:  4 out of 5 Stars

Here are a couple (there are more of course) of websites where this book may be purchased:  Amazon and Barnes and Noble

Wednesday, March 8, 2017

Answers to Prayer - George Muller

Answers to Prayer by George Müller is part of the Read & Reflect With the Classics Series (I am reviewing the hardcover version) which provides thought provoking questions and also prayers at the end of each chapter.   Müller's book details various accounts of God's all sufficient grace in the works that God had prepared for him to do.

The way that Mueller approached the ministries that God graciously gave him is very unique compared to most present day Christian ministries (and perhaps most ministries in Müller's day as well).  Ministries today are very focused and reliant upon, money.  They  hold fundraising drives, have commercials on the radio asking for people's support, and some will send tons of letters and emails begging for monetary help. I think of one ministry in particular, which, although its founders believe in God's absolute sovereignty, they contradict their belief by implying that their ministry cannot continue without the help of people, that "your support makes ministry happen". 

Many ministries act as if they are the most important ministry in God's Kingdom and that if you do not give money and they expire, that God's Word will not be given out any more.  Muller did not act like that.  He knew that God did not need human beings in order to get His work done. 

Müller took a more faith-based approach, relying upon God rather than upon people for help.  He would not ask people for help with ministries, he asked God, period.  And God provided.  "Never since the Orphan work has been in existence have I asked one single human being for any help for this work; and yet, unasked for, simply in answer to prayer, from so many parts of the world, as has been stated, the donations have come in, and that very frequently at a time of the greatest need."

He also came to the conclusion that one should not rely on people's promises to give money and that one should not even think about those promises: "Now this morning it came to my mind, that such promises ought to be valued, in a certain sense, as nothing, i.e., that the mind ought never for a moment to be directed to them, but to the living God, and to the living God only.  I saw that such promises ought not to be of the value of one farthing, so far as it regards to thinking about them for help."  This is quite a contrast to ministries who beg for pledges of money, and put large or regular donors names up on plaques.  They make more of the people, more of the tools,  that God uses than the Supplier Himself!  God is the One who supplies all our need, and though he may use people to do it, they are but channels (think "Channels Only").  God doesn't need people, or their money, AT ALL in order to supply our needs!

As Müller puts it, "Earthly friends may lose their ability to help us, however much they desire so to do; but He remains throughout eternity the Infinitely Rich One.  Earthly friends may have their minds after a time diverted to other objects, and, as they cannot help everywhere, much as they may desire it, they may, though reluctantly, have to discontinue to help us; but He is able, in all directions, though the requirements were multiplied a million times, to supply all that can possibly be needed, and does it with delight, where His work is carried on, and where He is confided in.  Earthly friends may be removed by death, and thus we may lose their help, but He lives forever, He cannot die.  In this latter point of view, I have especially, during the past 40 years, in connection with this Institution, seen the blessedness of trusting in the Living God alone.  Not one nor two, nor even five nor ten, but many more, who once helped me much with their means, have been removed by death; but have the operations of the Institution been stopped on that account?  No.  And how came this? Because I trusted in God, and in God alone."

Müller would at times give updates on God's provision for the ministries in times of great need, but this was to encourage Christians in the faith, not to work on their emotions to make them feel compelled to give supplies.  At least one time Muller and his fellow workers put off giving an update because at the time they were, from a human perspective, in desperate straits, and they did not want other people to know it, wanting to rely solely on God for help.

Many ministries want God to give them a yearly supply rather than just their daily bread.  The ministries that God gave Müller charge over lived day by day in reliance upon God's supply, many times literally being given the means for their daily needs DAILY on the day they were needed, rather than in advance.

I really liked this book. The only thing that I didn't quite like were the prayers that were added at the end of each chapter.  I would rather that they have been commentary rather than prewritten ways that we can use to talk to God. Yes, we do not know how to pray as we ought, but neither does the person who wrote those prayers.  Though I don't think that using other people's prayers is necessarily wrong, Christians ought not to rely upon other Christians to write their prayers for them, we have the best Helper of all in the Holy Spirit who is our Interceder in our prayers (Romans 8:26-27).    There are good concepts in them though, "You provide what I need, and if I don't have it, I can absolutely trust that I don't need it. "

Before I end, and I really need to end because this is quite long, at the end of the book there is an appendix containing an article by Muller on "The Careful and Consecutive Reading of the Holy Scriptures".  It is an excellent read, and describes Muller's goal in writing this book.  He advocates the consistent daily reading of the Scriptures, over and above any other book.  He describes how he once slacked in that area and how he had gotten into the habit of reading other books, including Christian ones, instead of the Scripture.  "…thus, like many believers, I practically preferred, for the first four years of my divine life, the works of uninspired men to the oracles of the living God."  As he put it, "God himself has condescended to become an author" and this is the "book of books" containing all that we ought to know!  We should not value Christian books (including this one) above the Scriptures, the Scriptures themselves should be our delight. 

Many thanks to the folks at B&H Publishers for sending me a free review copy of this book (My review did not have to be favorable).

My rating:  5 out of 5 stars

This book may be purchased at (among other websites) the Christian Book Distributors website and