What a pity that this pathbreaking work is out of print while publishers flood the bookstores with fantasy-as-history in an unending stream.

Bishop Robinson, a theological modernist whose "Honest to God" made him controversial within the Anglican communion, began this book as what he labels "a theological joke": "I thought I would see how far one could get with the hypothesis that the whole of the New Testament was written before 70", the year in which the Roman army sacked and burned the Temple of Jerusalem. As it turned out, he got much further than he had ever expected, a journey made more impressive by his lack of any predisposition toward a "conservative" point of view.

His conclusion is that there is no compelling evidence - indeed, little evidence of any kind - that anything in the New Testament canon reflects knowledge of the Temple's destruction. Furthermore, other considerations point consistently toward early dates and away from the common assumption (a prejudice with a seriously circular foundation) that a majority of primitive Christian authors wrote in the very late First or early-to-middle Second Century under assumed names.

For want of data, absolute proof of Robinson's thesis is impossible, and the weight of his arguments varies - from overwhelming in the case of the Epistle to the Hebrews through powerful (the Gospels, Acts and the Epistles of John) to merely strong (the Pastoral Epistles, the non-Johannine Catholic Epistles and Revelation).

In a postscript, Robinson reconsiders the dates of several subapostolic works: The Clementine Epistles, the Shepherd of Hermas, the Epistle of Barnabas and the Didache, the accepted dates for which range from the 90's to the latter half of the Second Century. He shows that, freed of the "push" of late dating of the canon, the most natural dates for these writings are earlier and that all could well have been written by 85 A.D.

Whether or not one agrees with every word of Robinson's analysis, he makes his case well and should force all students of the New Testament to rethink seriously the presuppositions that underlie much of what is currently written about First Century Christianity. Of course, that's not likely to happen unless some publisher brings "Redating the New Testament" back into print.

In some ways Robinson's "Redating" is of the same genre as Eisenman's 1997 "James the Brother of Jesus." Unfortunately, Eisenman hardly mentions Redating and certainly fails to give the attention to John's Gospel that Bishop Robinson would have us give. Yet, through Eisenman's focus on James (and subordination of John and Peter) he achieves a higher level of connectivity with other sources (particularly Josephus) and perhaps makes some real progress as to the problem Bishop Robinson, too, thought very real: the surprising lack of contemporary references to Jesus and his colleagues. Robinson would have been pleased at the extension of his work, even if he might not have favored the redactionism of Eisenman.

Robinson argues that the gospels were oral traditions later reduced to writing. Eisenman does not say precisely this, but he would have us conclude that later "foreign" editors and redactors got the names wrong and mixed up, including the names of Joseph, Mary, Mary Salome, Simon and Judas and even Jesus, himself. He tells us what he thinks the real names were and makes connections that follow on from this analysis. One should reread Robinson and then go on to Eisenman.

In the latest reviews it is said that Eisenman does not take us beyond mere plausibility. The same, of course, was true for Robinson. The speculations they make, however, are charged with excitement and are remarkably well integrated and worked out so that the plausibility is worth noting. In the context of their works, they make it plausible that the next discoveries or rediscoveries will yield all the more.

Robert Gray

Dr. Robinson does an excellent job. Tho a difficult read--it's not the Sunday funnies--it is very scholarly. Dr. Robinson's premise is that a very important event in Jewish/Christian history is absent from the New Testament; since the destruction of the Temple (in 70 AD by the Romans) isn't mentioned anywhere in the NT, that indicates a pre 70 AD writing of each New Testament source.

David Arthur Walters writes conversationally, with lyricism, honesty and wit. A distinctive voice that is prophetic and elegant. Highly recommended.

I found this book a wonderful tribute.
Written in the intelligent style I have come to love in all of David Walters writings.

BRAVO David to this outstanding book!

I have been at a loss for words at how to respond to this book. This writer speaks with exquisite voice. I really appreciated these work! Thank you.

For anyone who struggled to understand why the nephron concentrates, then dilutes, then concentrates again the urine, this book will do much to ease your pain. Since medical school I've purchased Editions 1, 3, & 5, just so that I could keep up with my interns & residents. Here's how he does it:
#1: short book, (you know how intimidating those tomes can be)
#2: lots of diagrams
#3: end-of-chapter questions (with answers & explanations)

If you want to understand the Kidney, no matter where you are in your studies or practice, I wholeheartedly recommend this text.

Renal physiology can be very difficult to truly understand, and yet an understanding of it is essential to understanding so many aspects of physiology, pathology, and pharmacology. Studying diuretics for cardio pharm is nightmarish unless you understand the physiology of the loop of Henle. Vander takes this difficult yet important subject and makes it easy to understand. The book reads extremely quickly, and the flow-charts and diagrams are amazing. I never even opened Berne & Levy for renal phys--I read Vander's book (which is no longer than B&L's renal chapters) and cruised through renal phys. I am writing this review now, a year after I took physiology, because I am now studying for the USMLE Step 1. I have not looked at Vander's book in a year, but I still remember renal phys, and reviewing it now is the easiest part of my studying (the only easy part, in fact). That is because, thanks to Vander, I actually understand renal physiology. A great book!!

For any medical student that needs a comprehensive, but easily understood explanation of the structure and function of kidneys, I highly recommend Renal Physiology by Vander. It is very well written, and covers all the basic principles that you will need to know to understand pathologies associated with the kidneys.

This book opened my eyes when I first read it in 1985.

This book is out of print and pretty hard to find, but if you ever come across a copy of it I highly reccommend you pick it up. It is a masterpiece of speculative essays. In it, Clarke accurately predicts many things... of course lots of things about space and satellite communications, and even an accurate description of the internet! Also of note are essays on what we should do if we have contact with an alien race, a debunking of UFO sightings (much needed), a debunking of the cliche "nothing is impossible" with a listing of things that are, much talk on the speed of light and relativity, and of course a lot about space. The two most interesting essays in my view are one that speculates on what the Star of Bethleham (Clarke settles on a supernova). Also, there is the short essay "God and Einstein" which is one of the most thought-provoking things I have ever read in my life. Highly reccommended.

This collection of 23 essays on the future of man and his technology is truly amazing. Written almost fifty years ago, ACC describes the requirements and experience of going to space, going to the moon, going to the planets and going to the stars... Often with original points-of-view and fantastic mental experiments. The best of all is how accurate his conceptions, predictions and extrapolations are. This book opens one's mind to who, what and where humanity is.

Quite frankly, I think that this is the greatest piece of critical philosophy written in the 20th century, and it is definitely in my top three. It was so good that it virtually destroyed the attempts of the Realist schools in the earlier 20th century to replace epistemological dualism with epistemological monism. And of course, in case the idealists started to get too proud, Lovejoy showed quite clearly that unless they were trying to claim insights they were not rationally entitled to, there is nothing about reality that supports the claim that objects of perception are found in an Absolute Mind.

I bought this book almost a year ago and it collected dust on my shelf because I lacked the level of philosophical sophistication required to attack it directly. Over the past year, I became more acquainted with philosophy and its history, most especially the works of Brand Blanshard and Laurence Bonjour.

I was arguing the case for psychophysical dualism on a website recently. I was already an epistemological dualist, having come to the conclusion that even the best-developed forms of rational and objective idealism were essentially dualistic. This is even more obviously the case if one incorporates the insights of modern physics about the constituents of matter, and its insights into time and space. However, psychophysical dualism, mostly because it is related to interactionist/dualist beliefs about interaction between the mind and the body or the mind and the brain, is associated with mysticism.

To see if I could find anything to make or break my belief in psychophysical dualism, I picked up this book, which I hadn't picked up in a while, having being frightened by such terms as the *cognescendum* a year ago. It was a great joy to read, as Lovejoy carefully laid out the secular and rational case for epistemic dualism and the related psychophysical dualism, while refuting philosophers that are far more famous that he was. Lovejoy explained that illusions and dreams, amongst other factors, created a problem that was best handled by the separation of the physical from the mental and the development of a gradually developed epistemology to make the causal connections work.

Bertrand Russell's realist position was criticized so devastatingly by Lovejoy that Russell because a dualist, with the belief (shared by most epistemic dualists) that the objects of our immediate perception are fundamentally mind-related. The trick, as Lovejoy noted, is to draw the right causal connections from the objects presented in perception to the subject matter of the physical sciences while being wary of the mind's ability to fall into error.

Epistemological monism has been slaughtered. As Brand Blanshard said, _The Revolt against Dualism_ is their 'tombstone'. Anyone wishing to argue uncritically against the bifurcation of mental objects and physical reality should read some philosophy, and then pick up this book. In fact, I might one day make an attempt to make its insights far more accessible to the common reader. However, common people sometimes know far more about these things than some so-called "great philosophers" - they just get carried away by the first philosopher that floats an idea around them.

The ideas in this book are a great antidote to such a problem. Lovejoy discusses a problem of great importance, especially to those who practice any field that involves epistemology.

Highly recommended.

This book explains why epistemological dualism must remain an objective reality. Arthur Lovejoy counters all of the historical and contemporary philosophical arguements against dualism with learned and precise answers to why we can never fully be connected to the world, at least as far as our perception is concerned. This book is liable to cause a crises in the minds of the "we are all one" and the "I am one with the world" types. The one consolation they may have is that Lovejoy never himself made an effort to experience the more Eastern states of meditation, such as Zen or certain Hindu forms. Thus he is only qualified to state his claim of dualism in intellectual and objective terms, and not by all subjective experiences. He brushes the subjective off rather quickly, and focuses on the scientific and objectively verifiable flaws of monism. It is a fascinating book to read for the pedantically philosophical and metaphysical scientist types (not "New Age" metaphysics, which naively has misinterpreted metaphysics as a path to monism), but CAVEAT EMPTOR, this is some thick stuff and requires a certain degree of hard prior study in the fields of critical thinking, the history of philosophical ideas, and metaphysics. A partial knowledge of the general concepts of physics would also make this book more enetertaining. If you are not entertained by this book, then you probably shouldn't be reading it.

This is not a book for those with a merely casual interest in philosophy. It is much too technical and difficult for the general reader. But for advanced students and the philosophically literate, this book is a must. Lovejoy was a brilliant master at the art of philosophical dissection. In "The Revolt Against Dualism," he dissects the view advanced by the so-called "neo-realists" which denies the traditional distinction between the perception of an object and the object itself. Lovejoy subjects a variety of inordinately technical arguments defending this view to devastating analysis, demonstrating how each of them fails to make its case. Lovejoy argues that all of these attempts to ignore the distinction between the perception of things and the things themselves constitutes a futile revolt against epistemological dualism.

Although this issue of epistemological dualism and distinguishing between perceptions of objects and the objects themselves may seem to be a mere technical problem without any real world significance, it nevertheless is one of the most important issues in philosophy. Confusion concerning the relation between ideas and the their objects in reality has probably given rise to more errors in philosophy than any other issue. All doctrines of philosophical idealism, whether skeptical or mystical in nature, are rooted in the failure to understand the duality between perceptions and the things perceived. The belief in what one philosopher called the "efficacy of consciousness" (i.e., the belief that consciousness can be regarded as a power in and of itself) can also be traced to this revolt against dualism. And so, although the issue of epistemological dualism may be a mere technical problem without any immediate practical significance, it is not without importance in philosophy. If a philosopher is confused or mistaken on this issue, he is likely to be confused or mistaken on a great many others. Hence, the significance of Lovejoy's masterful analysis of the revolt against dualism.

Professor Kinoy's persoanl account of legal struggles against reactionary forces in this country for over six decades is a chilling and inspiring antidote to forgetfulness. This book should be required reading in american history courses, especially now when opportunistic politicos and businesses once again exploit paranoia to keep civil rights and constitutional order under siege. Though Mr. Kinoy's style may sometimes seem repetitve, his book is an honest search for the answer to a question all too rarely asked: what can a citizen do, in the darkest of times, to help this country live up to its ideals?

Kinoy is an unsung American hero. Always willing to defend the underdog, he has sometimes overcome tremendous legal obstacles and emerged on top. This book chronicles his more well-known cases: the Rosenbergs, the Chicago Seven, Martin Luther King and the Montgomery Bus Boycott, Adam Clayton Powell, and many more. Why Kinoy isn't more well-known is a mystery.

In his uniquely humorous, heartfelt, and soulful voice, Kinoy teaches the reader about the behind-the-scenes battles fought by the legal workers of the US civil rights movement. Shocking stuff revealed as Kinoy packs a lot of information about judges, FBI agents, and freedom fighters in this can't-put-it-down book. If you are considering trying to use the law to achieve justice, you should read it. You should also join the National Lawyers Guild.

Lamb's story of Sanderson's Lunch is a fascinating journey though emotion, passion, hard work, and fruitless endeavors. To hear Lamb's story is to laugh, cry, and seriously consider getting a job at a 24/hour diner just to have a glimpse of the crazy antics like those at Sanderson's. The reader will cheer with the successes, be crushed at the defeats, and empathize with every emotional state Lamb was in at the time. If you are a KC native, you are doing yourself an injustice to overlook this outstanding work. It is a little piece of history and a small masterpiece of nonfiction

I enjoyed the book but would like to see more articles telling more of the wacky tales of the old 24 hour restaurant, perhaps in a newspaper or KC mag. Maybe there are enough for another book with a bit more emphasis of the unusual parade of customers. (I couldn't resist!)

Art Lamb is my step-grandfather, and I picked up the book out of curiosity and started reading one afternoon. The next thing I knew, night had fallen, dinner was cold, and the kids were conked out in front of the TV. I shrugged and kept on reading. Witty, engaging and fast moving, this slice of life will capture your interest and engage you until the last page.

This book stands head and shoulders above every book on the subject that has come out since, especially the recent glut of "new age" fluff books. (Hint: never subscribe to a philosophy with a name that rhymes with "sewage.")

This book is one of the more sophisticated of the books that deals with this topic. Givin in a traditional fashion that could be annoted only to such a scholar, and pioneer, as John Woodroffe. The detail is uncompairable and unless you have a solid understanding for the language and representations, it is a hard read.

This work will bring the reader into the power of Devatma Shakti Kundalini just by reading and pondering the text. Old feelings will find a home in the transformation from experience to understanding as the book flows forward. Gentle delight is the mark of a true Tantric text and this book, although strange and difficult at times, is pure de-light. If you want to know about Chakras and such, this is a classic text by one who really knows. Old and grand, this is a favorite treasure of mine and one I give away regularly to friends who must have more. Lam-to-Aum... Riley Jackson

One of my favorite photo essays on the old middle east. Wonderful collection of photographs and fascinating history.

"Sevruguin and the Persian Image" presents the Smithsonian's collection of one of Qajar Iran's preeminent photographers. In addition to the photographs, the volume contains valuable histories of early photography in Iran, the career of Antoin Sevruguin, and how the collection itself came about. The double entendre of the title refers to how Sevruguin's art was informed by and catered to the Orientalist tastes of a Europe in which he was educated. Yet as an Armenian Christian who was born, lived, died and was buried in Tehran, he presented a different image of Iran than the typical Orientalist photographers of the day. "Sevruguin and the Persian Image" is both a solid examination of a photographer's art as well as a thoughtful analysis of the Western image of Iran in the late nineteenth century.

this is a great collection of some excellent photos of iran at the turn of the last century - it chronicles everyday life, including peasants, and the aristocracy and monarchy - there is a great picture of tehran's bustling main street, with horse-drawn, rail carriages, and the throngs of crowds, some of whom are temporairly mesmerized by the photographer perched on some rooftop. A must-have for iran-history-nastalgic buffs. Only wish there was more...