The software wont work on any newer (win98+) systems. The book should be purchased seperatly for a couple of dollars. There is no technical support available for the product at all anymore.

Almost looked good.

The CD-ROM requires the installation of quicktime. I've installed everything on my computer and the CD-ROM works fine. Peter, perhaps you should e-mail me and I'll see if I can help you install the program and get it running.

marika57@earthlink.net

Being an amateur photography and Canon fan for twentyfive + years I decided to buy the Canon Photography Workshop as soon as it was published. Multimedia encyclopedias have reached a certain level of quality at that time and from the producer such as Canon I expected a pearl on that field.

When I started it, I simply could not stop. The Photography Workshop is a Canon product, but the name of Canon is never mentioned (except in the title itself). It is an excellent combination of a tutorial text, examples and spoken explanation. Following the chapters it starts from the basics for the beginner and goes on deep in the secrets of the photography.

The contents enables you to practice virtually on your PC the photographic elements such as Perspective, Composition, Aperture, Exposure, Film, Color and Magic of Light, ... joined in four main adresses: Techno, Light and Film, Tour and Art of Photography. The whole Workshop consists of plenty of examples. Unlike a classical Tutorial, the Canon one prefers the picture as the example and only a short, but effective explanation by text or voice. A true multimedia encyclopedia of working with a camera.

If you are a beginner and you want to get as much of information as it is possible in a efficient way, do not miss it. If you think that you are a skilled photographer, open it. Than look at the example, close your eyes and think. How would you do in this case, what do you like or dislike in this picture? What would you improve? What does the picture represent to you? Just do it. And after a while you just simply click and the Workshop will tell you its opinion. Believe me, it is a great pleasure when you find out, that it agrees with your thoughts or if it just completes them. Or even if it disagree and tell you some new facts.

And believe me, stay calm, sometimes you are right even if the great Canon says different.

Keep in mind that while the author claims to be a Christian, he is not a Christian who believes the bible. He does not for example believe that 2 Peter is written by Peter, nor that the pastoral epistles are written by Paul. This is the kind of unbelief that undergirds all the arguments set forth.

And make no mistake, the whole book is an argument in favour of the author's theory. His theory is not so much that there is an open canon, but rather there isn't really a canon at all, books can go in and out of the "canon" as per the community's practices. It's all very wishy-washy thinking.

That's not to say that there is no truth in his viewpoint, nor is it to say that there is not quite a bit of interesting information in the book, but every piece of information is moulded and shaped to fit the author's theory, it is by no means an unbiased approach to the topic. And frankly, the author's unbelief show's through in the conclusions he draws from every piece of evidence. The book is more worthy of an athiest than a Christian. As one reads the book, it seems like the most bold and interesting of his claims are the least well supported. There is a lot of general information that makes it seem like he knows what he is talking about in a scholarly way, but then he slips in these fairly unsupported claims that pretend to rest on the rest of the scaffolding. And when the historical record is silent or incomplete, it really shows through the author's unbelief in what he reads into that silence.

All in all, this is not a book that I can commend to the church.

McDonald's book provides an excellent overview of the topic at hand. Reads a lot like a textbook, which I suppose is how it's often used. He does a very good job of bringing in all appropriate evidence, but staying very methodical in his assessments and in getting his points across. You'll probably wish for more depth in some areas, less in others, but this book should at the very least point you in the right direction for more in depth research.

Perspective is always important when you're talking about books on this subject. The field seems to be dominated by highbrow apoligists (like Metzger and Bruce), whose glossing over of problematic (to the orthodoxy) canonical issues makes for limpwristed scholarship, or by the more deconstructionist liberal school of the Jesus Seminar and such. McDonald is a Baptist minister, and a scholar, and, in my opinion gleaned from this book, he wears both hats with aplomb and distinction. Hard core fundamentalists (like a previous reviewer) may find his conclusions troubling. I'll let McDonald respond in his own words, from the last paragraph of his "Final Thoughts":

"My aim in this study has not been to destroy the church's Bible, as if that could be done, but to bring some light to the often dimly lit corridors that led to the formation of our Bible and, in that process, to remind the reader of the true canon of faith for the church: our Lord Jesus Christ. The Bible is still the church's book without which the Christian faith would be a blur. I believe that a careful study of the biblical message in its historical environment and in the community of faith where it was first acknowledged as scripture and canon will prove invaluable to the church. Lessons learned from this approach will not only free the church from inappropriate loyalties but also will help the church to focus more clearly on the true object and final authority of its faith: Jesus Christ."

This book provides a good overview of the developement of the entire Christian canon - both testaments. While this book does not go deeply into the arguments in favor of its positions, it does provide a general overview of the opinions of various scholars and presents basic but adequate reasons for choosing the positions it does.

This is a good introduction to canonical studies. For lay people like myself it will be enough, but scholars will use this as simply a good starting point for deeper research.

Good complement to the sometimes ambiguous owner's manual: the different metering and autofocus systems are well explained, and allow you to learn how to get the best of this camera.

The worse part is, IMO, the flash operation: the book is really weak on this topic, and it disappointed me a lot.

I'm a CANON EOS user for almost one year and I've had: EOS 500 and A2. Now I have EOS 50e and 3. All cameras I've bought in the used market without owner's manual. The Magic Lantern Guides help me to understand all cameras I had. The authors of the books write beyond the camera. They write about Flashes, Lenses and History... I could quickly understand overall EOS SYSTEM and love it. ...

If you're familiar with the Magic Lantern Guides (MLG), you already know this book as they all follow a common pattern: the basics of photography intermingled with operational specifics about the camera.

Everything in Canon's EOS 3 manual is covered here, but in a more expository manner. Whereas the original manual lists features and how to turn them on and off, MLG tells you more of the how and why. Moreover, photos and diagrams are given to expand on important points.

Basic operational functions are covered first while advanced functions are introduced in a graded progression. Thus, you if need to get started fast, read the first few chapters and save the advanced features for a rainy day.

The final section of the book is a survey of selected Canon lenses. Again, they cover the basics--lens classifications & uses--while surveying the various models.

I have 2 negative points about this book: 1) Some of the images are second-rate stock photos; and 2) the text needs professional editing (wordy & grammatically incorrect at times).

Who needs this book? Not an experienced photographer--they should stick with Canon's manual. However, a beginner would benefit from MLG's complete explanations, equipment survey and novice photo tips.

This is a very expensive book for something that looks like it was put together in someone's basement. The interior pages look like they were photocopied using a mediocre black and white copier. This obviously doesn't work well when you are trying to show people what their camera can do. I'm used to paying good money for a full color, hardcover book and this book is the complete opposite.

Secondly, the book doesn't really go beyond describing and re-describing the camera's functions (all of which are explained in the camera's manual & available on Canon's website). I was hoping it would go into more detail. For example, instead of telling me that I need to turn this lever to this mode to take such a picture, I thought the book would explain why I would want to set the camera in this mode versus this one for a particular kind of picture. What are the advantages and disadvantages of this mode? What other modes might work just as well? Et cetera. The book does not answer these questions.

I find the book to be a rehash of the Canon manual with lots of repetition probably used to beef the book up physically versus filling it with quality content.

I've had my G2 for about a year now and I think the best way to learn using it is to experiment. Learn about the different settings in the camera's manual and then try them out with flash, without flash, selecting different white balance, manual vs. auto focus. That's the only way you are really going to find out what the amazing G2 can do. And, if you still feel like you need a book to hold your hand through the process try getting a general, less expensive digital camera guide that will go into more detail.

A very helpful and usable manual. Even tho it's produced rather cheaply (spiral-bound, B&W), it really gives an excellent short course in photography as it relates to the feature-packed PowerShot G2. The manual that comes with the G2 is very well written, but doesn't really go into detail about how to get the pictures you really want, especially under difficult situations. This book definitely fills the gap.

The camera was a bit intimidating to me, at first. Now it's not.

I probably will print the PDF out in color, however. That's my major gripe.

This spiral-bound 108 page book is a great complement to the documentation that one receives with his/her Canon G2 digital camera. It doesn't go into a step-by-step how-to-use the camera approach, but fills in the blanks as to when you want to use certain functions. It is very thorough in its review of the primary functions of the G2, with many pictures setting out every step (a CD-Rom is also included which provides a color version of the manual - the printed copy is in black and white to keep the costs down). The chapter on exposure was one of the best I have ever seen in any photography book. I think that this is the best equipment specific camera book I have read (way better than the Magic Lantern books which cancontain a lot of fluff).

My only complaint is that the book is 8.5" x 11" in size, which makes it unwieldy for tossing in the camera bag. I'd like to see a book similar to the size to the Magic Lantern books, although I'm sure that the photographs included would suffer from the reduced size. This is somewhat remedied by the fact that the CD contains a pocket-sized book that you can print out which summarizes the main points of the primary book (no pictures included).

This book is a very good accessory to go with your Canon G2. I'd say it's the next thing you want to get after you get your memory cards and extra battery.

It is somewhat ironic that of all Summer's works, his translation of the Malleus Maleficarum would become what he is most famous for. Most people who would call themselves occultists in our time would, also ironically, like to see every last copy burned. What fascinates me is not only the fact that the book's survival is now ensured, but that Summers goes to great lengths to actually defend the book and the Inquisition in his 1948 introduction. It is possible that he chooses his translation's second printing for this because that by 1948, the Malleus was no longer history's most infamous book. As to the actual content set down by Kramer and Sprenger, it provides a most interesting look into the minds of fifteenth-century biblical scholars-- and at the time these were considered two of the best. The text, though fascinating, often seems to be endless, but one must understand that this was the style of the time. Though it is doubtful that an actual witch (a better word would be "malefactor") was ever punished with this book's help, it remains a wonderful look into history and I for one am glad it will be around for future generations.

I find this book a difficult one to actually evaluate, but decided to give it five stars on the basis that it is a historical text that accurately documents the beliefs of the Catholic Church during the witch hunt era. (It is important to note, however, that not all Catholics at this time subcribed to these beliefs). This book is very significant in explaining the origin of witch hunts and persecutions of witches throughout history. The text was written originally by two Catholic priests, in which they fabricated evil practices of witches and ways to identify them and eradicate them. On the contrary, in the Pre-Christian era a witch was originally the doctor, spiritual healer, counselor-"everything woman" of her village. She was highly respected as the village's "wise woman," which is the original meaning of the word "witch." When the Catholic Church developed and began to gain more power, its higher members recognized the political power of these women and feared their pagan influence, and so the Malleus Maleficarum was born. Most of the accusations it makes are highly off base and ridiculous. I myself, do not practice Wicca, but am a born-again Christian. Therefore, I was very offended and upset by the comments made in the review entitled "Their Mother's Sons and Daughters," if this was even a sincere review. The reason neo-paganists are so offended by this book is not because it rings true to their beliefs, but because it was used for centuries as the justification for the death and torture of thousands of their predecessors and other innocents. Those who practice Wicca, in particular, do not even believe that Satan exists, therefore would never worship him or use him as a channel for evil purposes. Their religion, although I do not accept it as truth, is fundamentally peace-loving just as Christianity is. The comments that were made in this particular review I speak of and similar prejudices are ignorant, narrow-minded, and no doubt, are part of the reason for the widespread misunderstanding of Christianity in our modern society.

This book and Compendium Maleficarum is not written by modern authors. These are reprints of books used in witch hunts in europe, lies created by the pope, and the church, to hunt down many pagans. This was done to help win a religious battle with pagans because many people became pagans instead of christians, due to the celebrations. I myself am not christian, nor am I wiccan, or any other religion for that matter, I am atheist. It doesn't bother me that people give this book 1 star, but their reason isn't the best reason. They say it's filled with hate, which it is, but when a book is written to hunt down and kill people it is going to be filled with hate. This was created by a paranoid church, and it seems some people think it was written for modern times. This book should only be bought for those interested in the witch hunts of europe, and not those looking for a history, or to understand wicca. This book should be read to educate people of probably the most horrific time in the christian church(though there have been many). Not to be taken as a modern work, in how to deal with witches.

Nathaniel Branden writes in his review: "...this book, criticisms of Rand and all, will do more to advance the cause of Rand's work than all their (actual Objectivists) true-believer praise and idiotic adulation."

Branden should review some of his own writings about making groundless, arbitrary assertions. Just exactly why or how is such a book superior in "advancing the cause"? As AR would have said: "No answer is given".

Secondly - anyone familiar with the 'personal history' of AR and Branden should find his use of the term "idiotic adulation" to be layered with irony. You couldn't find a more idiotic way to express 'adulation' for someone who is in the role of your mentor then ...well ... you know.

Sorry about that - but it had to be said.

Sciabarra is pretty obviously not too bright, and no comparison can be made between such a so-called 'scholar' and the truly educated and intelligent "poor souls at ARI".

Just another non-intellectual book on Ayn Rand that will be forgotten by the time Objectivism really takes hold.

I'm a contributor to this anthology. This book covers a lot of new ground, bringing together people and perspectives all over the map, from different disciplines and backgrounds, and even three continents. Few things provide a more fruitful and explosive combination than Ayn Rand and feminism. While most contributors to the book are feminists, at least one, maybe two are anti-feminist (depending on how one would classify Camille Paglia). Most contributors are positive to Rand, in the sense that they/we feel that Rand contributed a lot of value (and that more value can be gained by engaging Rand and feminism with each other), but not in the sense of uncritical idolatry. Rand provokes a lot of polarized response: idolatry or condemnation. What Rand needs is a more balanced and scholarly treatment, and engagement with other thinkers and traditions in intellectual history, and this volume does provide that. Feminism has individualist and collectivist wings, and the collectivist wings have been too dominating recently; engaging with Rand can lead to a revival of individualist feminism. In my own contribution, entitled _The Female Hero: A Randian-Feminist Synthesis_, (ifi.uio.no/~thomas/po/female-hero.html) I apply and extend Rand's conception of heroism to women, leading towards a new radical individualist feminism which is interestingly also an ancient vision of female strength and power. Thus I compare and combine Rand with myths of Amazons, and writers who explore these ancient images of power, writers like Merlin Stone, Barbara Walker and Riane Eisler and scholarly accounts of ancient goddesses and heroines. I also discuss androgyny and postandrogyny, and non-patriarchal sexualities. My article is available on my web site. I would also recommend the web site of Chris Sciabarra (co-editor of the book), where you can find a subsite about the book, which includes highlights from reviews and discussions of the book, including the archives of a structured online seminar going through all the articles of the entire book.

This anthology includes a marvelous variety of perspectives on Rand's philosophy as well as her fiction; to criticize this work based on the all-or-nothing behavior of the ARI or on (mis)perceptions of Rand's "egoism" is to fail to engage the actual subjects of the articles themselves. To address some of the arguments leveled in previous reviews:

This book does not claim to "promote" Rand, nor are its articles written from the perspective of the true believer. To disagree with Rand's Objectivism does nothing to address the contents of the anthology. As a matter of fact, several of the contributors themselves strongly disagree with and/or disapprove of Rand, for various reasons.

The editors do not claim Rand was herself a feminist, although the essays provide a framework for interpreting Rand from a feminist perspective. Further, Rand's self-identification as NOT a feminist does not mean that there is nothing in her work that can be applied to feminism, or from which feminism might benefit.

And to claim that the volume is trying to "cash in" on Rand's name is to ignore the entire scope of literary, philosophical, cultural, psychoanalytic, and feminist criticism. The work of the literary critic, for example, involves interpreting a text from a new perspective in order to suggest meanings or structures, to uncover parallels or contradictions, and to struggle with conceptual knots found in the text. One reading will differ from another, opening up different aspects of the text that may or may not have anything to do with the author; once a book has been written, anyone who reads it is free to interpret it as he or she sees fit. For the most part, the contributors here provide in-depth scholarly analyses and plenty of documentation to support their theses. By placing Rand in a sealed box, refusing to allow her work to be interpreted and discovered, and refusing to allow new minds to draw new conclusions from her stated premises, her devoted followers only guarrantee the death of Rand's ideas.

For those interested in current Rand scholarship rather than the repitition of Objectivist mantras, this anthology is superb. If you can't bear to hear any new thoughts on Rand, re-read Atlas Shrugged. If you hate Ayn Rand and think her philosophy is the root of all self-serving capitalist American evil, why the heck are you reading this anthology??? Save your cult-baiting for the Down With Objectivism website.

If we read the dialogues of Plato the person who is the mouth piece of his thought is a historical character Socrates. It is clear however that Plato is not simply writing down what Socrates has said, but he puts in his mouth ideas that he thinks are correct. Mack thinks that this was a common practice in Greek communities and that a large number of the sayings of philosophers like Diogeneses were constructed after the event to reflect the spirit of his philosophy.

Mack is a biblical expert and has written previous works on the subject including one on the existence of a common source of sayings for two of the Gospels known as Q.

In this book he uses as a tool of exposition the recent finding of the Gospel of Thomas. A manuscript written in Coptic which was found in 1945. Rather than being a Gospel which purported to tell Jesus life, this is a collection of his sayings. Mack believes that all of the Gospels have a similar background. A series of sayings which have been developed by different Christian communities to reflect their teachings over practical and theological issues. The interesting thing about the Gospel according to Thomas is that there are no miracles, there is no crucifixion and no physical resurrection, suggesting that these things became important somewhat later.

He sees the writing of the Gospels as something akin to fiction writing. The authors of the Gospel wrote their stories to illustrate and to explain the doctrinal intricacies of their belief system. In much the same way that an ancient Greek may have developed a saying of Diogeneses to illustrate a point about his philosophy.

Later these stories have become something else and have been seen as literal history. The book is interesting as an exposition of what is common knowledge about the study of the bible. I personally would have preferred more detail about some things such as the means of dating the Gospels. However the book is aimed to be an introduction to a complex field.

As a liberal Methodist, I highly recommend this book to anyone interested in the origins of the Christian Bible.

"Who Wrote the New Testament?" is not an easy read, especially for the layman with a minimum knowledge of the scriptures. But for those curious about the origin(s) of the New Testament and it's textual and theological relationship with the Old Testament, this is a "must" read.

Accepting the research and scholarship so evident in this study, it's surprising that this book and the issues it raises have not been aggressively addressed in the public arena by both secular and religious commentators and scholars.

Mack's introductory and closing chapters were written to stir wide-spread interest and debate. I wonder how seminary schools deal with this book. Do they shun it as the work of the devil?

Burton Mack is a great author and that shows in this highly readable book. This book goes through the New Testament and examines each book for its authorship, date, provenance, and purpose for existence. A caution to the reader is that Burton Mack's view does not speak for everyone in the study of the New Testament. I council everyone to read this book because it is an excellent introduction to the world of New Testament scholarship. However, don't stop at reading just this one book. Mack's book involves the reader in the world of the early Christians that wrote and codified the New Testament. It is absorbing, exciting, and very enlightening. I suggest you read this book as an intro along with "The Complete Gospels." ed. John Miller. That is all a person needs to start learning about the Historical Jesus and Early Christianity.

O.K. here is the choice-accept the gift of salvation in Christ Jesus ( If he did not intercede for mankind, human beings would no longer exist ) or indulge yourself. What utter despair one would feel if one rejected the former!! One's can easily understand that the Pearl Of Great Price is The Bible. How then can those other "books" be called "great"??

I have to give Drake credit here for a couple of good ideas: the formation of an actual canon of gay/gay-themed works and the suggested ways of building a reading group around those works. However, his approach borders on the erratic (some texts get huge write-ups, others barely get a page with little or no mention as to why they should be included in this survey) and his writing style aims for cleverness but usually only makes it to melodramatic, twee, or even flat-out vulgar. In my quest to find recommendations of "gay lit," I have been better served by collections such as _Pages Passed from Hand to Hand_ and especially _The Columbia Anthology of Gay Literature_, both of which provide not only spot-on analysis but also sizeable and helpful excerpts of the works themselves. (And not to quibble--after all, it's Drake's list, not mine--but was _Dancer from the Dance_ really as awful as he would like us to believe, and where is Leavitt's _The Lost Language of Cranes_?)

OK. No book attempting to establish any kind of a canon, let alone a gay canon is going to satisfy anyone. I picked this book up a couple of years ago, and used it as the basis for an online book group that read through Drake's recommended book group selections. Since then, the book group has dissolved, but I've kept the book on hand as a handy guide when I'm looking for something to read and don't have any immediate ideas. Drake's list is by no means exhaustive or all-inclusive, but it's a good place for the curious, or anyone who just wants to broaden their literary horizons, to start.

If you are looking for an easier to read manual of the Canon EOS 2000, this is the book for you. If you are a novice wanting to learn about photography, forget about it.

I bought the Canon EOS 2000 because I wanted to learn to take professional pictures yet have the automatic features so I can take "good" pictures while I am learning. I expected this book to help me make the jump from using the automatic features to using the camera in the manual mode. In other words, I expected to learn something about photography. Unfortunately, this book did not help.

The book does a reasonable job of explaining the different automatic modes and situations where they should be used. It also provides information about how to change the settings of the camera and some basic information about how you can take better pictures. At the same time though, it does not teach anything about photography. I guess they assume that someone wanting to know about the manual settings is already versed in photography and knows what to do with them. In my case, they were wrong.

A huge portion of the book is dedicated to lenses. It uses more than 50 pages of the 175 pages for providing the history of removable lenses, zoom lenses, and listing the different lenses available for the camera. While this maybe a helpful reference sometime in the future, it does virtually nothing for teaching me about photography. Disappointing.

The bottom line is that if you are looking for getting more information about the camera, you will find it here. If you want to learn something about photography, look somewhere else.

This is a great replacement for the original manual. It goes into much more detail than the original manual, and I was impressed with the one that came with the camera, as it was similarly well-written, and Canon seems to have taken more care in producing it than most manuals, as if they really want you to learn the basic and technical features of the camera to make you a better photographer. I would recommend you read the original manual first, and then buy this book if you want more information.

Since we're on the subject of the EOS Rebel 2000, I thought I would make a few comments about the camera too. I bought my EOS Rebel 2000 several months ago and already am extremely satisfied with it. I've taken a couple of short trips in that time and have run several rolls of film through it, and the photos came back nice and sharp. The only thing I could have done better in the photos was to use some exposure compensation. On one of the trips I was shooting wildlife at a beach on an overcast day, and even then, the sand was reflective enough so that the some of the subjects were a little dark and looked somewhat silhouetted. I was aware of many situations where you need to use backlight compensation--for example, I remembered to use it when shooting a stream at Yosemite with the sun shining from the side and glinting off the waters--but I didn't think that on a very overcast day I needed to worry about it, even shooting against fairly light-colored sand. Well, I admit I am still learning technically and I learned something there.

Happily, this little camera gives you manual control over shutter speed and aperture, as well as many other nice features, such as depth of field preview (which even the ELAN II lacks), and a respectable 1/2000th of a second top shutter speed. If you've been mostly a point and shoot camera owner until now, your fastest shutter speed will only have been about 1/500th of a second, unless you own one of the Contax point and shoots such as the T2, which go up to 1/700th of a second, but cost about 5 times as much as even the more expensive and capable point-and-shoot cameras. Then at the extreme high end there's the Rollei QZ 35W, which, although a superb "cadillac point and shoot," weighs in at 22 ounces, and at about twice the price of even the T2, will truly cost you a pile of green stuff. But it's a great camera too and has an amazing 1/8000th of a second top shutter speed.

I'm getting used to the controls, which are a little different from my Rollei QZ35W. The jog wheel feature, for adjusting ASA settings and so forth, I find an interesting feature which I'm more used to seeing on Palm PDA clones such as the Sony CLIE, but I find I like it here, too.

In addition to the lens that came with it, I found a Tokina ATX 25-70 mm constant F2.8 Pro Series lens used at a great price, and decided to buy it for the little EOS Rebel. The camera fits comfortably in my hand, if I have one complaint, it's that the grip on the right side is a little small for me with the much bigger Tokina lens mounted, but it's okay.

To give another plug here for this great little camera, a friend at local camera shop says he knows a pro photographer at a large newspaper who uses nothing but EOS Rebel 2000 bodies, and he just puts his $3000 pro lenses on it. He says they're capable enough to do anything he wants, but cheap enough so he doesn't worry about hurting them. He carries 3 of them at a time with him, and if one has a problem, they're cheap enough so he just throws away the malfunctioning one and grabs a new one out of his bag.

One final thing, as I mentioned above, the original manual is really well written, very clear and concise. They seem to really want you to learn and make use of the camera's features to make you a better, more technically aware, photographer. So be sure to read the manual. Then follow it up with this book.

I've found this to be an exellent little camera at a very reasonable price given all the features Canon has packed into it. Canon has produced an outstanding value and a very capable camera in this little package. I can recommend this camera without reservation, especially if you're considering moving up from the point-and-shoot category to a camera with more advanced features.

I found this guide extremely useful! I have been taking photographs for years with a "point and shoot" camera, but have recently purchased a Canon Rebel 2000 and needed additional information other than the basic information the manual that came with the camera provided me. This guide is great for getting more in depth about the cameras features, different lenses, filters, when to use the "auto" focus, etc. and just how to take better photos. I highly recommend it to all!

Davies want to make an argument so badly, that he ignores all of the data that contradicts him. His effort here is to prove that the bible was not just redacted (something every scholar agrees on), but was composed out of hole cloth by scribes at a very point and that the text has no historic basis. You may want to know why he wants do this, but first lets review the evidence that proves him wrong.

1- Davies tries to argue that biblical Hebrew is a scribal language created by these mysterious scribes to give the text an ancient gloss. The problem is that we have countless examples of ancient Hebrew from archeology dated 800-1000 years before the time when Davies puts the text as being composed. Moreover, why can you find no Greek rooted words in the Hebrew Bible, if that was the lingua franca when it was written?

2- The Hebrew Bible is filled with place and personal names that were not current in the Hellenistic period, but were in use in the iron age, when most archeologists place the events. If the redactors were not working from old texts, how would they know the names of places destroyed centuries before?

3- The Hebrew Bible does not represent in any way the dominant Hellenistic world view that was in place when Davies claims the text was written. In fact you can see this by looking at the book of Daniel, probably the latest book in the bible and the only one to reflect this later world view.

Why does Davies ignore all of the evidence to put forward an argument that is patently false? He is part of a fringe group of scholars, self styled 'biblical revisionists' who are looking to attack the Hebrew Bible in an effort to prove that Jews have no history or historic connection to the land of Israel. It is pathetic when serious scholars prostitute academic credentials in an effort to make a purely political argument.

For a tremendous critique of Davies and his colleagues work, see Dever's "What did the bible writers know.' It i s an awful title, but an excellent and thoughtful text.

Philip Davies has a reputation as one of the more extreme members of the recent school of Biblical minimalists/revisionists. However, in "Scribes and Schools" he keeps himself fairly well restrained and highly referenced. The result is a book that, while not conclusively definitive, intrigues the reader with a wealth of possibilities about how the canon of the Bible grew into the one we are familiar with today.

He starts by introducing us to the idea of canons generally, moves to those who controlled the technology of writing in the ancient world, a hereditary international class of scribes attached to palaces and temples, and how they operated in the fairly well-documented societies of Mesopotamia, Egypt and Greece. He then reviews various approaches taken by scholars regarding these issues in Judaism, and summarizes Israelite and Judean history from the monarchic to the Roman periods. The remainder of the book is devoted to specific divisions of the Bible: the Torah, Prophets, Widsom Literature and Apocryphal writings, taking into account the libraries at and around Qumran. The final chapter considers the final form: the transition of canonical collections of literature into Holy Books as we now know them.

The book is fairly short, written in a rather dry, academic style, and good enough to recommend to anyone thinking about the Bible's growth into its present form. Sometimes Davies is insightful, as when he suggests a Persian period date for the composition of Deuteronomy on the basis of its diminished notion of the role of the king, which would have been unsuitable for a monarchic state but well-adapted to a colonial one. Other times he is less so, as when he suggests that the oldest parts of 1Enoch were composed at the same time as the oldest parts of Genesis, since it is quite clear in comparing these texts that they come from totally different literary and conceptual universes! Davies also refers to obscure sources which is very interesting, at least to me.

Traces the development of scribes and the notion of canon in ancient Israel and other ancient cultures. I found it made me rethink what I thought I "knew" about the development of the canon.