We all need to feel important and worthwhile. However, this need has been played way up to the point that "self-esteem" has blinded us to more fundamental conditions. Swindoll has provided a useful template for the individual to be important in the correct context, the church, and in the right perspective, a godly, biblical one. The goal is not to "feel good" but to accomplish God's will by becoming all that He commands and wants.

As a study guide this will be as good as your group makes it. I found some sections more useful than others. The topic, if you study topics, is one that is very useful in the materialistic, spontaneous culture we live in.

I found the questions incongruous to the study material at points. Things didn't quite flow together. However, the guts of the material was well thought out and interesting. Almost 4 stars.

The subtitle on the cover of my 1959, Harper & Row paperback edition of reads, "The Impact of Scientific Discoveries Upon Religious Beliefs in the Decades Before Darwin." Since the title page bears an altogether different subtitle--the one printed above in the Amazon catalogue--it seems probable that this alternate description was the choice of the publisher, and did not reflect the intentions of the author. Bringing a work of scholarship to a mass-market audience always involves some kind of compromise, so the change no doubt is understandable. After all, the vague suggestion of scandal in "The Impact of Scientific Discoveries Upon Religious Beliefs" promises to attract more readers than Gillispie's stodgy and academic-sounding "A Study in the Relations of . . . etc." The problem, of course, is that the "sexier" (for 1959!) subtitle is wildly inaccurate. Harper & Row's editors got it precisely backwards: Gillispie's book is about the impact of religious beliefs on science, and not the other way round. Unfortunately, in reinstating the book's original subtitle, Harvard University Press promotes truth in advertising in more ways than one, for indeed is a dry, scholarly and at times tedious work. And that ultimately is the greatest misfortune of all, since the academic deadwood obscures an important and highly instructive thesis. One of the prevailing myths of modern Christian fundamentalism is that of the "atheist scientist" presumptuously attacking the revealed truths of the Biblical world view and thereby undermining the foundations of faith and morality. While this myth occasionally leads to an outright rejection of science (a la "flat-earthers"), it more frequently results in the strained distortions of Christian pseudoscience ("scientific" creationism, "mind-of-God" cosmologies, prayer-as-medicine, etc.), a more sophisticated response whereby science is coopted to the service of religion and the "glorification of God." The teleological argument leads naturally to an interest in the universe, and science provides a rich store of data to reflect upon in this connection. To appreciate the Watchmaker fully, we must first study the Watch. That this reconciliation of scientific discovery with religious "revelation" frequently requires the distortion and suppression of the empirical evidence at hand ultimately is a small point, easily finessed away in the footnotes. Science, we are told, has proven the existence of God. The great value of Gillispie's study lies in the historical light it throws on this age-old yet perennially "new" problem. What Gillispie shows in page after carefully documented page of excerpts from contemporary scientific journals is that, far from a presumption of atheism, the geologists and paleontologists of the early nineteenth century predicated their studies on a very traditional religious faith and a keen desire to use science to verify and justify the Mosaic account of creation. The irony, of course, is that the more these scientists discovered, the harder it became for them to reconcile their newfound knowledge with the revealed traditions of Scripture. At no point, however, was this recognition a welcome or foreseen conclusion. The geologists took to their work with gusto, confident that exploring the history of the physical world around them could only tend to the greater glory of God by revealing the workings of His particular Providence. As it gradually dawned on them that their studies pointed to quite contrary conclusions, they reacted not with atheistic glee but with dismay and sometimes denial. Such observations are not original to Gillispie, nor is the pattern of pious scientists finding their faith shaken by the very facts they had worked to reveal unique to nineteenth-century geologists. In its detailed focus on the development of one branch of science in the period of its first flowering, however, nonetheless makes for a convincing, thought-provoking study of the uneasy relationship between science and religion. Although Gillispie avoids drawing any theological conclusions, it is not difficult to see the significance of the nineteenth-century experience in geology for the future of the teleological argument and "providential empiricism." As long as religion continues to turn to science for support, it will go on receiving problematic answers. Fundamentalist Christians would do well to consider that the science they so deplore was developed, to a great extent, by researchers whose motivation involved a very pious and orthodox desire to glorify the works of God. Atheists and other skeptics, on the other hand, no doubt can benefit from considering the reverse of the coin--the way in which the religious hypothesis, however limiting at times, has served as a genuine source of inspiration to seekers of the truth. The teleological argument, through science, proves to be self-refuting; but we need not let that blind us to the very human struggle which that process historically has involved. Gillispie offers valuable insights for each perspective. As noted at the beginning of this review, is a slow-going read. In his natural, historian's desire to be thorough, Gillispie often seems to lose the forest for the trees, tiring the reader with seemingly interminable details about publication dates, scientific allegiances and academic eccentricities. As the popular saying has it, however, God is in the details. The reader willing to slog through the great mass of quotation and documentation in will be rewarded with a broad yet vivid picture of the science-religion debate of an earlier era, and with much to ponder regarding the ongoing debate in our own.

Most of the book repeated the manual. Some of the explanations were clearer but it did not help that much.

I hate to give bad reviews, but let's just say that I was being generous with the 3. I recently got these notes to use as a quick review of the new testament. And I know that you really can't compile such a massive book into such a tiny book. However, it just didn't seem like Cliff even read the Bible. Ther notes were kind of loose and very uninformative. I have seen much better versions. And this goes for more than just the Cliff Notes on the Bible. On every note I look at, I am just disappointed. Sparknotes are much better. They give a more in-depth summary and have everything Cliff has. I am not sure if they have notes on the Bible yet, but everything else is good. In all honesty, don't spend your money on this set of Cliff Notes. It's not worth it. You're better off buying a student Bible with an index in the back. I suggest THE STUDENT BIBLE-THE NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION. That one is easy to read and wonderful in so many ways. If you are looking for something that can be used as a quick review, this Bible is great. The index is amazing. Amazon sells it; I wrote a review on it if you want more info on it.

Messrs Dyer et al have written up a pretty good crib for pastors and fellowship leaders who may have forgotten who or what was afoot in one or another book of the Tanakh. Plain & straight forward, the fellows mean well. They give each book its own write-up,and take modern scholarship somewhat into consideration without including anything that might threaten the average Protestant fundamentalist's world view. For that hardshell crowd who used to prowl the backwoods, eating a lot of fried chicken and climbing in back windows in the moonlight.

There are serious newspapers and there are tabloids. That's what sets this book apart I guess - the difference between a Washington Post and ... well, let's not name names as a metaphor of what I'm trying to say!

This book is definitely entertaining. Which is why I rank it 2 Stars instead of 1.

And it is thought provoking. But it's not thought provoking in the same sense that, say, a Clash of Civilizations (Huntington) is.

This makes you think, but not necessarily along the lines that the book leads.

For the uninitiated, Ancient Secrets of the Bible attempts to prove "scientifically" the historical content of The Bible;
That '[T]he most amazing accounts in the Bible - called myths and stories by critics for centuries - are true'

Unfortunately, the approach is anything but scientific. A collection of statements (to the authors' credit, quotes are on both sides of the argument) is not scientific study.

At best, this is a sensationalist TV Show in book form. Which brings me to another point. Maybe we should beware of BOOKS which say "As Seen on TV" on the cover. There SHOULD be a difference between books and Infomercials. Unfortunately, with this book the similarity does not end with "As Seen on TV". I can almost hear a voice-over with this book - and it's NOT the steady tone of the Discovery Channel or NGC.

Finally, what exactly are Seller and Russell trying to prove here? Are they trying to prove the Historical accuracy of the Bible - a claim that the Bible is a reliable historical source? Or are they trying to extend this to claim that therefore everything about the Bible is true and therefore lay claims to the universality of the RELIGION that associates with it? I'm afraid the tone of the book leans towards the latter.

Agreed, this is a potentially sensitive issue - the comparision of religions, but it is a valid question, one which I've experienced quite strongly in my own community.

And this takes the book further away from the 'serious work' domain into, instead of sensationalism, gospel!!

Make up your mind - is this history, or theology?

This book started out a whole lot better than it ended. Though for me I guess most of it was not news and therefore many people will enjoy it more. It is simple enough reading for anyone to finish. And just as a warning, some of the biblical stories are novelized on and off throughout the book. (I don't know why) Personally I find metal artifacts that 'should not be' and discovering the roof burnt houses of ancient Sodom fascinating, however naturalizing and explaining dried up rivers and city walls a bit boring. And though the ark of the covenant should be fascinating as well, their lack of substance and evidence did not make it much of an exciting read. However, thats also because I've already read Grant Jeffrey's book to which they constantly referred. All in all I recommend this to those interested. But myself, I was satisfied only with the sections on Sodom, Babel, and the Exodus.

Is there anyone outside the United States and Israel this fellow doesn't slam? All Muslims, the European Union, Russia ... it goes on and on. And you better hope you're on the right side, because it's all going to end in Armageddon. If the Bible really says all this, it's at least as ferocious as the Qur'an.
What you don't want other people to do to you, don't do to them. Try to fit that into Dyer's ideology.

I found this book to b very informative. I've read about 25 Bble prophecy books and this book cleared up some questions. Good price too at under .... I hope this helps :)

I was warned by a bad review of this book, and bought it anyway because I liked the Gospel According to Peanuts by the same author.

Short has become an apostate. This book amoung other things claims that satan doesn't really exist, and is just another side of the almighty God.

I assure you satan does exist, and is going to be shortly bound a thousand years. This isn't a Christian book.

Which is too bad, because it takes away from Charles Shultz own Christian cartoons, and in particular the much beloved Christmas special, A Peanuts Christmas.

I suggest getting that video, and ignoring this book.

I had to read it to believe [the] review since I too read "The Gospel According to Peanuts" by Robert Short and found the same results when comparing these two books by Short. It's an ironic joke how Short emphasizes the importance of knowing the bible while he doesn't notice his own failure at knowing enough to write accurately upon Christian doctrine. For example, Short is correct about his explanation how man really doesn't have the free will to choose God since God is sovereign and elects whom He predestines. The problem comes when Short claims there is no future Judgment Day and no future hell. My question for him to answer is, "What has God saved His children from if it isn't eternal damnation?" Another confusion Short doesn't realize he creates through this book comes from the false doctrine of Jesus having died for each and every person who ever is/was conceived and using that as his explanation for why there will be no person to be punished by God's wrath for sin. He failed to point out how the context of how the word "all" is meant in the verses he focuses on. The sense of all as to eliminating the exclusion of certain groups of people compared to the meaning of each and every individual is an immensely vital concept to reveal for understanding the true humility behind, "Therefore but by the grace of God go I into heaven while others do NOT receive His gift of mercy." The fact is most people don't think they need mercy because they think there is nothing to fear from God and again this book doesn't help to bring someone to realize their need to drop to their knees in repentance begging for it before it is too late. True love warns others of imminent danger while the selfish person only seeks to be popular by talking about only things which are pleasing to hear and will make the speaker popular. The Old Testament contains plenty of examples of prophets rejected or accepted by people. Learn the lesson of what human nature tends to want to hear and then compare it against what God has to say. If only Short used his own advice on childlike faith to write this book rather than expressing childish faith in what he is teaching.

Theologians don't usually get enough credit for showing all they know. In the case of Robert L. Short, this book, on THE BIBLE and Peanuts, may be expected to generate comments on religious doctrines, like my own tendency to suggest that it suffers from single savior syndrome, as churches tend to do. This can go on until the Hegelian cows come home, but the fundamental matter actually gets discussed in Chapter 9 of this book, on "the experience of a broken heart." (p. 38) The kind of sense which Short is trying to make comes out as an inner dialectic on precisely this point. "Indeed, it's the purifying and purging and hellish fires within the broken heart that boil down the Bible's message into what is most essential and necessary for us to understand for our heart's peace." (p. 41) For my own good, it is nice to know that a comic strip in which Lucy van Pelt offers flawless advice for 5 cents, with "THE DOCTOR IS IN" showing on the front of her neighborhood shrink booth in five of the panels of that strip, can be seen on page 45 of this book, and helps make psychiatric care a contender for those who need some support in order to seem more respectable, even if her final comment is "BACK ALREADY? WHAT HAPPENED?" The effort to deal with profound matters in the tensions of our times shows up best for me in the Notes on pages 141-2. Note 11 shows that his quote of Oscar Wilde was from the poem, "The Ballad of Reading Goal," not a matter to be taken lightly.

A perceptive reader has correctly pointed out to me that I made an obvious mistake in my first review. The Biblical reference to the Nachmanides commentary should have been to GENESIS 4:23 and NOT to "Exodus 4:23" as I had written previously . After all, Lemech (also spelled Lamech) died long before Moses was born; and in Exodus, ch. 4, Moses is already a grown man.

I would have wished that the books had included the original Hebrew text. The translation is not literal by any stretch of the imagination, and the portions that I needed for a law review journal article that I am working on did not even attempt to translate clauses that were crucial for my purposes. I refer, for example, to the translation of Exodus 4:23 in which Ramban expatiates upon how Lemech reminded his wives, who feared that he would be punished for having invented metal working including sword making, as Cain had been punished for having killed Abel with fists and rocks, and thus allegedly had enabled many others to commit murder. The portion that was completely missing in the translation dealt with how Lemech "reminded them that not only with the sword or the spear can a man kill also with bruises and or lacerations in a much more horrible death than with a sword, and the maker of thesword does not bear the sin kill, but the evildoer does."

These omitted words of wisdom loom large in the currently raging firearm control and prohibition debate.

If any of you would like to communicate with me by e-mail, my e-mail address is: david_i_caplan@hotmail.com

specially interesting is the complement of information regarding Maimonides explanation of the Tora ,not always in the same direction as our author. I feel the aproach of Nahmanides more human while Maimonides looks more rational.

This study guide was designed to be a study aid when listing to Chuck Swindoll's "Insight for Living" radio series. It is mostly a fill-in-the-blank spiritual journal for recording your thoughts and discoveries as you study Proverbs. For a more in-depth commentary on Proverbs read THE COMPLETE GUIDE TO THE BOOK OF PROVERBS by Cody Jones. The comments are interesting and very readable and put things into a historical setting. It includes many historical drawings and photos to give you a sense of the culture of the time. Six translations in parallel aid understanding and numerous Biblical characters are pointed out who illustrate King Solomon's witty observations on human nature.