well I read the book for a school project and found it to be semi interestign at first then she started laying on the biblical stuff really thick and her fairy tale story was to predictable for my tastes. but if you like her books I found it strikingly similar to April Gold which I found much more interessting.

Set during the 1930s, "The Ransom" begins shortly after Christobel Kershaw's stepmother dies and the family (Christobel's father and 17-year-old younger brother Randall) comes together for the funeral. While "The Ransom" is supposed to be about Randall's kidnapping, that doesn't occur until about halfway into the book. The beginning half mainly has to do with the Kershaw's thieving servants and a gold digger named Mrs. J. Rivington Romayne who is all but climbing over Christobel's dead stepmother's body to become the next Mrs. Kershaw. I actually liked this beginning half, even though some readers may find it pointless to the overall plot.

It wasn't until around the midpoint that I began having difficulty finishing the book. For starters, the dialogue was slowing me down because of some of the character's accents, like this Scottish one: "This world's gangin' all aglae!" Then there were the occasions where the author wanted to preach at the reader instead of being a storyteller, which is her obvious intention by reading her bio--of being a "messenger" over a writer. So I'd just skim over these parts and move on to the bigger story.

While Livingston-Hill is a well-known Christian romance writer, there is no romance in this book. Yet I would hardly call it a suspense novel either. But readers who like wholesome, well-written stories that are somewhat akin to L. M. Montgomery, then I'd recommend this book.

Guy was once of my instructors in my first year of bible school and this book was required reading for "revival history" class. This book goes along with his two other books, "Catch the Fire" & "Pray with Fire". Guy relates much information in this book to historical events and other revivals. This book provides a different view to evangelism. Since Guy was one of my instructors i don't know how much I learned from this book. If you are going to read this book, read his other 2 as well. They really complement each other.

This easy reader book may not be such an easy reader. I have used this book with students in my class and they have found it difficult and confusing to read because of the tongue twisters. I would not recommend this book for first grade students. This book because of it's tongue twister contents must be used with experienced, confident readers. This book uses letter repetition which combines single consonant sounds with blends. For example sea and shell. The s is a single sound and the sh is a blend. The story can be very entertaining for more experienced readers. Students find it funny and like practicing trying to say the tongue twisters out loud. This book could be used as a read aloud with younger children.

I like this book because I think it does a really nice job of incorporating ideas of social psychology with their respectable theorists. However, I would not encourage professors to use this book because it is a bit too broad.

See the review of the book by Hebard "Washakie: Chief of the Shoshones." Despite the different subtitles, this is the same book hardbound. The other book adds a fifteen page historical introduction. Otherwise, it is exactly the same, even to the page numbers.

For those who are fashion addict, but not only for the trends, this book is a "must have". In a group of very representative photos you will find a good summary of his work. One jewel, Mister Bergé, former Yves Saint Laurent Couture President and close friend of him introduce the book with the conviction of somebody who was with him since the begining. I love it.

Cobb is a process theologian trying to communicate to the reader how Wesley's theology can be relevent today. He's not in his area of specialization in this book and doesn't seem to really want to carry on. I expect that Cobb knows of what he speaks, but the book is burdened with academic language and, in my opinion, missed opportunities at connecting Wesleyen tradition to today. As a well-educated reader with a keen interest in Christianity's search for relevence in today's world, even I had trouble slogging through this one. Your experience may be better than mine, but I would recommend this one only reluctantly. Not an old book, but seems dated.

John Cobb notes that much of what John Wesley addressed in his writing was situational in nature, and that Wesley's theology needs to be 'made relevant' if it is to be useful today. From this starting point, Cobb writes an interesting theological commentary with a 'Wesleyanist' slant. His ideas are useful, and sometimes profound. But they are not essentially faithful to Wesley. Indeed, they are so far removed from Wesley as to make it appear that John Wesley simply provides a scarcely related background to Cobb's own theological discourse. In some ways, it is not unlike hearing a sermon that ignores the text that is being preached.

Ultimately, I think one's comfort or discomfort with Cobb's attempt will be shaped by whether or not the reader agrees with the claim that Wesley's theology is too particular to his own time to be relevant today. For my part, I think there is much in Wesley that is still relevant. I therefore disagree with Cobb's premise.

Nevertheless, this book IS worth reading, and no student of contemporary Methodism should be unfamiliar with it.

Cobb, John B., Jr. Grace & Responsibility: A Wesleyan Theology for Today. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1995.

Cobb writes from the perspective that because our current situation is very different from the culture that John Wesley lived in, much of what Wesley taught is no longer useable for today's United Methodist. Cobb recognizes the lack of a unified sense of identity among United Methodists and suggests that a clarified role in the mission of the church must be preceded by a unified theology. He attempts to come to terms with the theological heritage from Wesley by reappraising his work and finding relevance of Wesleyan thought for the contemporary world.

Dr. Evans has caused a bit of a theological dispute with his latest book, "Totally Saved". The theology he presents in his book, while attractive to some, is unfortunately false. The thesis of his book is that Christ's death on the cross paid for the "original sin" (inherited from Adam) for all mankind. The implication of this theology is that all are born "sinless". For instance, he uses this view to claim that all children who die are automatically saved, as well as those who die unable to comprehend the Gospel (i.e., those with mental deficiencies). While the salvation of children can be believed in by the example of David's child though Bathsheba (2 Kings), this is not the justification that Dr. Evans uses. Furthermore, Dr. Evans asserts that "unreached people groups" (those in different cultures, for instance, who have never heard the Gospel or read a Bible) must be saved, as God, in order to be "fair", could not condemn them to Hell for not knowing Christ. This theology is clearly errant according to Paul, where in Romans 5 he explains that God has given man two "revelations" of Himself; that of Creation, in that man can observe the world around him and know that there is a god, and man's conscience, in that he will know right from wrong. However, Paul clearly explains that man cannot keep his own conscience (perfectly, which God demands), and thus, without a relationship with Christ, he is condemned to Hell. Dr. Evans' theology, if taken to its logical end, would mean that when we send missionaries to people and give them the Gospel, if they reject Christ, we have unknowingly help send them to Hell, as had they not heard of Christ, God would have saved them. Obviously, this theology goes against clear Biblical teaching, as indicated both in Pauline theology (i.e. Romans), and in the Gospels themselves. Jesus Himself said, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me."
Dr. Evans, please think this theology through! There are Christians who have given (and are now risking) their lives to proclaim Jesus' Gospel! Look elsewhere for sound doctrine on Salvation; start with a good study Bible and a commentary on Romans!

It is with great disappointment that I cannot recommend this book to new believers. It is more sad to read some of the recommendations on this page. What are Christians thinking? The lack of theological knowledge shows in this book. I expected Dr. Evans to teach sound doctrine, as he seems to promote, instead, his confusion of what original sin is (pp. 358-359), and how all men are born without it, it's horrendous. This a clear departure from orthodox theology. Another dissappointment comes from the publisher, Moody, the name one ought to trust, which banked on Evans at the expense of wrong doctrine. For a simple comparison and correction to Evans mistake, the reader should consult another Moody published book, Charles Ryrie, Basic Theology (1999), pp.252-255. Can both be true?

I once read that reading a book is like the relationship between a pitcher and a catcher in a baseball game. The catcher is the reader and the author is the pitcher. In baseball, the picture is only as good as his ability to get the ball over the plate. The same goes for an author. He is only as good as he is able to convey his message. In this book, Tony Evans pitches a perfect game. He skillfully unpacks different aspects the gospel and constructs, in the mind of his readers, what it means to be totally saved. If you are a Christian, this is an invaluable book, a must read. If you are just carious about what Christians mean when they use the word "saved", Dr. Evans hit its meaning in so many different ways that, after reading this book, you will be well versed in the subject of salvation.
Please read this book!!

Discovering the Plain Truth is a testimony of unbelievers coming into a system of faith with a premeditated plan for the destruction of that faith.
The disrespect for Mr Armstrong is evident from the outset.
In the 'real' Worldwide Church of God no one would be called 'Smith', 'Johnson', or 'Armstrong' !
The attempted disintegration step by step of every major belief of the 'real' WCG merely shows that these authors never believed those precepts to begin with. The authors present a 132

page account of guerilla warfare, a foray,if you will,of unbelievers into a territory strange to them with the sole intent of destroying the government of that territory!
To the Protestant world, those faithful folks who use the name of Christ to their own advantage, Mr Tkach is a hero! If a person
who has heard the truth (faith comes by hearing) has a shred of doubt and needs a club of cohorts to assure him that obedience (to the ten commandments) is not relevant, this is the source of comfort they need!
Mr Herbert W Armstrong was just a man, tempted just as we are!
Yes! He sinned! Just as we do! Jesus Christ was tempted just as we are! Yet without sin.... therein lies our only hope of salvation! Mr Armstrong was a man of faith, charachter assassination is only to his credit! It shows he was more correct in his understanding of the word of God than his detractors! He did not acheive his goals by trickery. He did not 'lie in wait' for someone to die then grasp an opportunity build his own ideals in the middle of someone elses' work then knock down the walls and present some bright shiny new thing to be accepted by a deceived world.

The best part of the book is Chapter Two, "How it all Began," an interesting summary of the history of the WCG under Herbert Armstrong. The rest of the book is filled with errors and confused theological arguments. The authors claim that Herbert Armstrong "denied that Jesus was human"(p.13) and that he taught that Jesus possessed "only a single divine nature"(p.47). This is false-the WCG always taught that Jesus was fully human as well as God. Indeed, in "Mystery of the Ages"(p.211), Armstrong writes "We need to bear in mind that though Jesus was God in the human flesh, he was also human even as you and I." In fact, one of the Tkach doctrinal changes was the reversal of Armstrong's teaching that Jesus could have sinned (although He never did) since He was fully human. When this change was made, Armstrong's teaching was called "the great gamble" theory-the authors refer to this on page 92 but apparently do not realize it refutes their claim that Armstrong taught that Jesus was not human.
With respect to law and grace, Herbert Armstrong never taught that we are saved by works. The current WCG leaders even admit in their interview on page 123 that "HWA knew that salvation was by grace, not by works" and that HWA "meant that lawkeeping was a consequence of faith, not a cause of salvation." Armstrong wrote thousands of pages of books and articles and no one has ever produced a quote where he taught salvation by works. The teaching was quite plain and clear-works are what we owe to God, but they do not save us. The authors, as well as Greg Albrecht (who says on p.109 "Christians want to read about Martin Luther") are fond of Luther's theology. This is the same Martin Luther who was so confused about works and grace that he called the epistle of James "an epistle of straw" which he claimed did not belong in the Bible. Luther's 'soundness' of mind is shown in his work "Concerning the Jews and Their Lies"(1543), where he "not only repeated all medieval libels against Jews but went further than his predecessors in explicitly preaching violence: 'We are at fault in not slaying them,' Luther wrote"(The Holocaust Encyclopedia-p.18).
Then there is the circular reasoning (p.42); one cannot use councils and creeds of one's own church as proofs against those who claim to be the spiritual heirs of the early dissidents. Also, on page 50, the authors cite 1Corin15:42-44,51-52 as 'proof' of the immortal soul, but ignore verse 53 which says that "this mortal must put on immortality". By the way, was Jesus teaching salvation by works when he said in John14:15 "If you love Me, keep My commandments"? How about in Matt19:17 when He said "But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments"? Was Peter teaching salvation by works in Acts2:38 when he said "Repent"? How about Paul in 1Corin7:19 where he says "Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters"?
The point the authors (and Luther) miss is that Paul in his writings is addressing those who thought they could be justified by keeping the law (see Gal2:16,21), not those who kept the law out of obedience and love toward God (see 1Jn2:4 and 1Jn5:2-3). James, on the other hand, was addressing those who thought they could be saved by faith without any accompanying works. We should always take the clear, unambiguous Scriptures and use them to interpret the confusing ones. The authors write (p.59) "The church is described in a number of ways in the Bible. ...None of these designations for the church alludes to the keeping of the sabbath, or to any law categories whatsoever." Well, none of the 13 verses they cite does, but Rev12:17 and Rev14:12 CLEARLY describe the Church as those who "keep the commandments of God." How is it then legalism for Armstrong to say that we must obey the commandments? If Jesus, knowing this controversy would arise, had wanted to settle the matter in advance, He could not have taught more clearly than He did in Matt5:17-19 when He said "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets". Likewise Paul when he said in Rom3:31 "Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not!" And those who claim to be New Covenant Christians would do well to read Heb8:8-10 to see what that covenant is.
And finally, the Global Church of God was started near the end of 1992, not in 1990 as the authors claim on page 74.

This book provides a good look at the history and teachings of the Worldwide Church of God (WCG) and how it was transformed from a cult to a Christian Evangelical Church. However, it is aimed at an audience not familiar with the WCG and does not get into much detail at all.

The book was disappointingly brief and somewhat academic in its approach. What could have been made to be an exciting narrative on events that lead to the dramatic turn around in the WCG is instead a short look at main points. Further, the book hinted a problems and concerns within the church but never explored them in any detail or gave any indication of sources.

Outline: 1) Present Situation (pg 15-17) 2) History of Herbert Armstrong (pg 19-40) -- drew heavily on Armstrong's autobiography and did not really go beyond the surface 3) Teachings (pg 41-59) -- good examination of WCG teachings 4) 1986 to now (pg 61-71) -- only ten pages are actually dedicated to the title of the book -- a disappointingly short, cursory explanation of what happened. 5) Reaction (pg 72-83) -- once again, too brief -- only six paragraphs are dedicated to "the dissenters." 6) Future (pg 83-89) -- offers only a number of "we hopes" but no informed expectations. Appendix (pg 90-132) is an examination of the new WCG teachings and transcripts of interview with WCG leadership.

Overall, I found the book accurate but a disappointing effort and not worth the price.