The book does give a really interesting account of the history of finding the dead sea scrolls. It undoubtedly describes some extremely dubious scholarly practices by those who held onto the scrolls for 40 or more years and published very little. I do get the feeling, however, that other writers might have taken the same facts and produced a book with far less sensastionalism. Read the book -- it is interesting -- but I'd be cautious about how hard I jumped onto this particular bandwagon.

The authors have produced a very good book. The writing is clear and crisp, and covers all aspects of the Dead Sea Scrolls, and how much of the research concerning them has been mismanaged in the past. The detail is rich, and the authors clearly and efficiently provide evidence for their arguments. It was an excellent read, and definitely opened my eyes to the Dead Scrolls and their significance.

The alleged agenda and conspiracy of the International Team (all but one Roman Catholics) may in all likelihood be true. History is written, and critics silenced, often mercilessly, by the winners, Pauline Christianity included. One is struck by the reluctance, if not outright refusal, of the Israeli Government to cooperate in dissemination of the material. Final world-wide availability of the photographs of the scrolls and fragments was met not only by the vehement opposition of the International Team (understandably) but by the Israeli Government as well. Why ? Perhaps in some later work. And what of future document discoveries along the Jordan Rift Valley ? Will they in turn be subject to the same foot dragging by the Israeli government ? Perhaps in some later work.

"Where we got the Bible" is a very Catholic History of the bible, that will no doubt make many Protestants uncomfortable. However, thier is little in this book the can realy be disputed on a factual basis.

The Right Reverand Henery G Graham Dispells myht after historical myth about the Catholic Church and the bible. Some of these myths are so ingrained in society that even a large percentage of Catholics belive them. For example many people belive the Catholic Church in the middle ages prevented lay people from reading the bible and that the wycliff bible was the first English translation of the bible widely available this as Reverand Graham points out is just not true.

This book was origially written in 1911 and as a result some of the material is dated, for instance he states that no origal text dating prior to about the third century were known to exist which was true in 1911, 36 years before the dead sea scrolls were found. He also states that the Douay Rheims Bible was the only English translation still in circulation that was autherized for Catholic use again this was true in 1911 but many English versions have been approved since then including my personal favorite the Saint Joesph Edition of the New American Bible.

Even if you can't except the conclusions of this book, it is a fun read if only for the dated and often quaint and politicaly incorrect passages. An example of this is when he defends the crusaders as a group of highly motivated Christians willing to lay down thier lives for the Church and for Christ. This is at best a strech, many of course were in it for the money and or travel/adventure. It is however interesting to picture a time not long ago when one could defend the crusaders and not be labeled a right wing extremist Christian bigot or some such nonsense.

This is a worth while book for all Catholics and open minded Protestants who are interested in the real history of the bible and how it came to be as we know it.

An accurate and concise account on how the Bible came to be. Shows how the Catholic Church has defended holy scripture throughout the ages, despite the accusations of protestants and the Church's enemies. Accurately describes the rise and fall of badly translated protestant Bibles such as Tyndale's Bible (the english translation of Luther's Bible), the sinner's Bible (ommitted the word 'not' from some of the ten Commandments), etc. The English Crown ordered these versions burned or destroyed by decree when the errors were found. Errors and additions that have been handed down until this day (such as the addition of the word 'alone' by Luther to maneuver justification, and the addition of 'for thine is the kingdom, the power, and the glory.....'). This book is a must have for anyone wishing to learn which books were originally contained in the Canon of scripture and who put them there. Shows why the books of the Septuagint (referred to as the Apocrypha by protestants) are included in the Bible, and were in the Jewish Canon during the time of Jesus.

Reverend Henry G. Graham provides a compelling examination of Scripture and how it came to be as we now know it. The picture that emerges is that while divinely inspired it is the work of human tradition.

This excellent resource explains how the Church compiled the New Testament Canon, the work of the Monks of the early Church, refutes the Protestant argument of the "Bible alone", and explains some of the erroneous Protestant versions of the Bible.

The book also includes Reverend Graham's own conversion story "From the Kirk to the Catholic Church" which the original version does not contain.

No religious bookshelf can be complete without this title.

Although not credited, I served as a freelance editor on the reprinting of this book.

Job 37:18 (NRSV) reads as follows:

"Can you, like him, spread out the skies, hard as a molten mirror?"

Is the sky as hard as a metal mirror? (The NIV translates "molten mirror" as "burnished bronze." So does the KJV.) No. It isn't. Does this mean that the Bible isn't true? No. The Bible is the absolute, revealed truth about man's relationship with God, eternity, morality, etc. But the Bible is not a book about science. There are parts of the Bible that show an amazing pre-modern insight into the scientific realities that we've only discovered in our own time, like the Big Bang (creation ex nilo), the spherical shape of the earth, the thermodynamic decay of the universe, etc. But the Bible isn't primarily concerned about science. Trying to take every statement in the Bible in its absolute literal sense will just get you in trouble, as this verse from Job proves.

Morris has made a career out of advancing a slavishly literal reading of the Bible, and in the process devestated and divided many churches. Recently he has started advancing the KJV-Only doctrine, apparently having decided that he hasn't done enough damage already. The Bible itself doesn't support this kind of ultra-literal reading: Gen. 2:4 says the creation days are "generations" of heaven and earth, indicating that the creation hymn was symbolic! Even my Fundamentalist Sunday School teachers acknowledged that the Bible is to be taken symbolically when it itself calls a passage symbolic!

Leave Henry Morris alone. By your fruits you will know them, and Morris has born bitter fruit indeed!

This book is a very refreshing devotional. Take an exciting new look at the oldest book in the Bible - the ancient book of Job! Learn about how Job lived during the Ice Age and describes dinosours that he has seen (Beheemoth and Leviathon)! Henry Morris is a world famous Christian scientist, and this book is written as well as his many others. I highly recommend this book to any born-again Christian!

This book is a very refreshing devotional on the book of Job. It is written exceptionally well, just like every other work Henry Morris has published. Take a look at the wonderful book of Job from a new perspective. Examine both the scientific and theological aspects of Job. Learn about how Job describes the Ice Age (during which time he lived) and dinosaurs! I highly recommend this book to any born again Christian!

To those who believe that they can perform an exegetical lobotomy on the Bible and discard the first eleven chapters of Genesis this book comes as a disapointment.

Morris takes us through the many passages in the Bible that speak about creation, the curse and the flood, from Genesis to Revelation, including the teachings of Jesus, the disciples and the apostle Paul. One cannot really make sense of any other of the central doctrines of the Bible, such as sin, death as a result of sin, the need for salvation, the physical encarnation of Jesus, His physical ressurection, the promise of a new heaven and earth without curse and death, apart from the doctrine of creation and the fall.

As I read this book I took the opportunity to read and mark all the quoted texts in my Bible and even found more interesting texts. I had never studied the biblical doctrine of creation before, and I must say that the simple reading of the relevant biblical texts is quite conclusive: theistic evolutionism and progressive creationism just cannot be made compatible with the Bible.

If Jesus, the creator Word, can get himself a new ressurected and special body in a matter of seconds, he can create the whole universe in six days. The opposite also makes total sense.

What's more, when Jesus multiplied the fishes and the loaves of bread and ressurected Lazarus, he didn't need trial and error nor randomness. He just did it right there. After all, the Bible makes it clear that he his the creator and sustainer of the universe, just by his Word. I just don't see why I should have more confidence in human scientists then in their creator.

It takes a lot of argumentative acrobatics to even try to harmonize the hipothesis of evolution with the Bible, but in the end it just won't work. The Bible presents a creator that knows exactly what to do and how to do it. Random mutations is just not his way of creating things. Nor mutations nor natural selection are able to generate all the complex specified information present in living organisms.

The reading of this book made it clear to me that there are good and irrefutable theological reasons to support the biblical model. It also made it clear to me that we are dealing with an whole powerful God that is not very impressed with the science of the guys at Harvard, MIT or Oxford. The Bible says, in the book of Eclesiastes, that there are things that God has done that will never be understood by human beings, no matter how hard they study them.

But what about scientific reasons? In my opinion, you have to start by accepting the biblical account by faith, puting aside all materialistic and antimetaphysical assumptions. No doubt about it. But it is not a blind faith. There are good a priori reasons to this faith. I don't advocate just any kind of blind faith.

But once you accept the biblical notions of special creation, fall, curse, flood, Babel, dispersion and speciation, you will find that it makes sense of the origins of matter and life, the fine tuning of the universe, the fossil record, living fossils, good and bad design, DNA, homology, mutations and natural selection, speciation, irreducible complexity, complex specified information, apes and men, cave men, the emergence of languages and races, the ice age, continental drift, plate tectonics, radiometric dating, etc.

Most of all, it makes sense of the rational, moral and spiritual nature of man and of his longing for God and for eternity.

I was surprised to see how low the average customer review for this text was, however on second thought this is a very contraversial exposition with some extreme views. The book espouses an early( about 4'000 years ago ) six day creation in which all things as we see them today were brought into being. As a Christian and a scientist, I grappled with this view for years.
But with my objective study of science and biology and research into the Creation versus Evolution contraversy I finally came to the conclusion, that this notion, far from being nonsensical, is very plausible, and in fact I,m convinced of it's veracity. It's true that many in our modern "enlightened" society would parochially dismiss it as mere fundamentalist propoganda, but these are merely the narrow-minded product of a society inculcated by a sensationalist, unproven, 100 year fad called evolution. My advice is to approach this book with an open mind, and don't let societal prejudice influence your subjective judgement. I would highly reccomend Scott M. Huse's book "The Collapse of Evolution", and Malcolm Bowden's book "Science versus Evolution" as scientific companions to this book.

This is not a science book, it is a Biblical commentary. As such it is thorough and comprehensive, and the author clearly has extensive Biblical knowledge and not inconsiderable Christian wisdom.

Certain individuals seem to make a hobby of rubbishing books they have not read by authors they dislike. This is an unfortunate irritant we must live with, alongside the benefit of internet book reviews.

Many Christians think that since science has 'proved' evolution, the Biblical creation account must be myth or allegory. However, by examining the many references to Genesis and Creation throughout the Bible, this book shows that such a view is not easy to reconcile with the scriptures. In fact, to anyone who holds that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God, belief in evolution or an old earth is untenable.

Many people avoid the issue, by trying to come to some sort of compromise, or more likely, not thinking too much about it.

Be warned, this book could be dangerous. Armed with the Bible's references to a recent creation, you will soon reduce a progressive creationist to bluster and reference to scientific 'facts'. The more committed someone is to a compromise position, the more aggressive they are likely to be. Be careful talking to your vicar/pastor!

Understanding the reality of a recent 6-day creation, brings new understanding to the whole of God's Word, to the Gospel, and to evangelism.

It is unfortunate that these men feel the need to dilute themselves into believing that they can lay down a foundation for scientific creationism. First of all, science could never validate creationism because it is based on religous scripture that deals with intangible things (walking of water, miraculous cures, stopping the sun, and other things which defy science)

How can this science deny such fundamental discoveries like; radioactive dating, doppler effect (supporting the big bang), evolution by natural selection, and punctuated equilibrium. These are fundamental tenets to science and give us an accurate potrayal of our world. It baffles me to think that people will go to epic links to belch forth their brand of ignorant and intolerent "science". I would like to propose this scenerio.... had the bible never been written and all we had to go on was man's instincts and intelligence, what conclusion would we come to independent of religous belief. If there was no "moral" scripture to guide/control our thoughts, how would our view of earth's history be changed. Would we have evolution vs. creationism debates? We have to ask ourselves if our religous fervor is controlling our rational minds. Are these people so afraid of a life without biblical fanaticism that they will intentionally put out falsified information. It is books like this that make me believe that god is most certainly indifferent to our plight on earth, otherwise he wouldn't put such self-righteous, sanctimonious zealots here on earth to pollute our minds. Science is the answer, because it has no bias, if there was proof of god and the hand he/she played in our creation science would be the first to admit it. The evidence doesn't suggest the fairy tale these "writers" would have us believe.

A classic! Friends and foes of Biblical truth both agree that this seminal book was largely responsible for triggering the modern revival of interest in creationism.

Even though most of its scientific content has been superceded by more recent creation science, it still provides a useful framework for understanding Flood Geology. The theological portion of this book is invaluable for showing the incorrectness of compromising evangelicals who try to twist Scripture to make it fit a local flood instead of the indisputably global Noachian Deluge. A must read!

Had you asked me a year ago, I would have said that the Biblical story of Noah could not possibly be taken literally. Now I have been forced to reconsider my position.

The authors did what I have never seen or heard before: used the scientific evidence rather than ignoring it. One question I would like to pose for the casual reader: how is it possible we have massive fossil deposits of extinct animals (dinosaurs, et cetera) from millions of years ago, yet no fossil deposits of modern animals? That is a question that made me wonder why I hadn't heard it before.

Despite the statements of some reviewers, who based on their reviews didn't seem to have read the book in depth, the authors do use scientific evidence to back up their position. It isn't the usual assertion that we must believe the Bible because the Bible says so.

I would recommend this book to everyone; and I plan to present these arguments to geologists and challenge them to refute them.

Of course, you should read this for yourself before you decide.

This book has nothing to do with science. Every time a scientific theory is discussed, Morris starts talking about his own faith and urges the reader to discard the stupid ideas you learned in science class and read your Bible again. For example, the order of creation. Morris points out that Genesis says the order of creation was (1) earth (2) sun, (3) moon, and (4) stars other than the sun. Okay, he's right, that is the order of Creation in the Bible. Then he goes off the deep end and says that the order of creation in the Bible makes more sense to him than the imaginary and unproven scientific theory that the stars existed before our earth did, and that the planets somehow spun off from older stars. Since the universe was created FOR man, it only makes sense (to Morris) that God chose to create the most complicated structure, the earth, before the less complicated structures (moon and stars.) For the neo-Creationists out there, the scientific theory says that the Big Bang initially created hydrogen and helium, and heavier elements like iron, carbon and oxygen were formed through a fusion process inside the extreme heat and pressure of a star, and then expelled by either a nova, or possibly a huge solar flare. Either way, a star had to go through enough of its life cycle to produce iron and then expel it, before our earth existed at all. Now, if you use this nonsense in a debate, they may not laugh at your face, but you know what they're thinking: this is why Christians complain that science is pushing religion out the back door. A better developed approach is Intelligent Design, but the underlying theme is the same. Let's teach those kids about the Bible in public schools, and get rid of those damn fool theories that contradict the Word of God. The simple truth is that we have learned a lot more about the universe since Genesis was written, and those ideas prove, beyond any doubt, that Genesis was neither written nor inspired by the Infinite Intellect that created the Universe by a mere act of Will. It was written by a desert nomad sitting in the desert, staring up at the stars and wondering, How did I get here?

This was the first creation book I have picked up and found it very useful in weighing the evidence presented in numerous school courses. Henry Morris looks straight at the facts of science and gives his own PHILOSOPHICAL interpretation within his framework, the Bible. It's within this framework that he claims science can best be interpreted. I performed a debate in Civics with this book and found no equal for Creation Science...

If you are not deeply into science or technology, don't be intimidated. This book presents an easy-to-read introduction to the relationship between the Bible and Science. Unlike the ignorant critics who would have us believe that the Bible was written by nomads, or who tell us that the Big Bang theory is fact (as if its major problems, or mainstream scientists who question or reject it, did not exist), this book sticks to scientific facts in presenting its case.

I'll state first that I am not a Bible translation ideologue. I prefer the King James and the NASB, in that order, but I think that whatever translation brings someone closer to the Words of the Old and New Testaments is a good translation. I think that people then will naturally gravitate to the translations they are most comfortable with and the ones which they need, as they see their needs, and as their needs evolve. As for this new Holman Christian Standard Bible translation, well, it is about as comical an enterprise as it gets. First of all, including the publisher's name in the official name of the translation should give anybody a hint of what's in store. The translation itself ranges from laugh-out-loud funny to bizarre. It is very difficult to describe how they make Jesus sound, so I'll quote: "You don't want to go away too, do you?" "Didn't I choose you, the Twelve? Yet one of you is the Devil!" [Both quotes from John 6.] "Let the little children come to Me, and don't stop them, because the kingdom of God belongs to such as these." [From Luke 18.] "Whoever falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; but on whomever it falls, it will grind him to powder!" [From Matthew 21.] The use - extensive in the case of this translation - of exclamation marks is just simply a symptom of amateur writers at work. They always come across as comical and needless, especially in sacred writings. The prose itself is mostly passable, but too often - too very often - runs into patches of painfully comical bad writing. The translation's stated goal of not cowering under the strictures of political-correctness is obviously commendable. Though it's claim to greater accuracy is undercut by the publisher's reluctance to expand in the intro on the choice of manuscripts used and so forth. They obviously want to avoid taking on the extremists of the King James only folks, but there's no way they will be able to do this. Avoiding these issues from the beginning won't make them go away. I actually don't feel good criticising an effort like this, especially one that is attempting to bring the actual Word of God closer to people and to preserve it; but intended faithfulness to the text is not enough, you simply have to bring a greater level of talent and inspiration and good taste to the enterprise.

See related reviews for the pocket version of the Holman Christian Standard Version. Anyway, I'll be brief: If you want the flavor of this translation, it reads the the NIV with most of the questionable passages fixed.

Rather than paraphrases like "sinful nature,' we have "flesh." In places where the Greek has "age" you will find "age" in the translation, rather than "world' or something else. It often gives alternate readings which rely heavily on the Byzantine text, which is fine by me. It translates "pornea" as "sexual immorality," a rather vague relativistic phrase in my opinion. I would have preferred "fornication" as it has a distinct and correct dictionary definition. Rather than obscure renderings like "sexual pervert" or "sodomite," the Holman Christian Standard Bible translates "homosexual." (The NIV "homosexual offender" is unnecessarily complex: Does it refer to a homosexual who offends? people who offend homosexuals?? I'm totally lost on that rendering in an otherwise excellent translation.)

Anyway, I digress. Many verses are clearer: 1 John 2:25 " Do not love the world or the things that belong to the world. If anyone loves the world, love for the Father is not in him." (Other translations have "love of the Father," causing uncertainty in understanding; does the Father not love him, or vice versa?)

Some insist that the NASB is more literal and correct. I doubt that. Even the NASB paraphrases and often puts the literal rendering in the footnotes. The NASB is excellent, but too wooden to read in public or to memorize from. If you like the flow of real English found in the NIV, try this translation out. Ignore the Blackaby comments on the side if they annoy you- concentrate on the text. I find it refreshing.

Being in the ministry and also an avid reader, I'm always looking for new stuff to read. I found this one purely by accident as I was doing some research on the internet. A few days later, I ordered me a copy at a Christian website. It was probably the best investment I made in 2002.

I agree with the reviewer named Ken in what he said regarding the NIV. Being a pastor I can shed some insight. Even though the NIV is a popular version of the Bible and I do own one, there are some problems with it. The probelms are all with the translation of the text. When the translators put the NIV together, they were not sure what to do with many of the words. So, in the process, many of the words sound odd in the NIV. The average layman wouldn't notice it unless they read a different version of the Bible. Then, many questions would soon arise.

Why is this version different? The HCSB New Testament is what the NIV would've sounded like if it were taken straight from the Greek and was in modern English. All of the language & wording are made simple enough so that there's no question as to what the translators meant. And unlike the King James Version, you don't need a dictionary or have to understand Shakespeanian English to understand it. This version is really that understandable and that direct.

But there are a couple of added features to this version. Henry T. Blackaby adds thought provoking questions and comments in the margain. His comments are all based on a passage that's on that particular page. Mind you, his comments & questions don't change any of the content of the Bible. But what he says will make each page & passage more direct and personal to you. Some of his comments & questions include, "What has God called you to?" "God is still in control of things." "Let your light shine for others to see." As I read through each passage, I get the sense that his comments are divinely inspired.

The other thing that's different about this translation is that he includes many Greek words from the original Greek New Testament. He translates and explains them and tells how they were & still are relevant to the gospel. Since I'm a pastor that hasn't been to the seminary, this has been very helpful to me.

I'd recommend the HCSB New Testament to anyone who needs a more accurate version of the New Testament that they can understand. I'd also recommend this to anyone in Bible college, the seminary, or in any type of Christian leadership.

Kudos to Henry T. Blackaby!

This is unfortunately one of the worst apologetics books on the market. I loose more respect for Morris with each publication like this I come across! What is wrong with this book? ALOT. I can't expose every single error in his reasoning but I can highlight several errors just to drive my point home. Where do we start? Well, let's start with the slightly bad and save the worst for last.

The first blunder is on the reliability of the Old Testament. Morris uses the biblographical test to support the OT's reliability. Okay..nothing wrong with that. But Morris also uses a appeal to authority. One of the authorities? Christ himself! Question-begging, unfortunately, and constructing a circular argument! It only goes downhill from here. Morris has a chapter on biblical prophecy. He goes on to list the course of empires and other civilizations that were subject to biblical prophecy. But Morris doesn't describe in exact details how these prophcies were fulfilled. Morris doesn't give the dating of the prophecies, the dates and places of the fulfillments! How are critical/skeptical readers interested in Christianity suppose to verify the fulfillments!?

Morris also blows it when it comes supposed scientific case for creation. He doesn't try to explain away the traditional case for evolution ( homology, vestigial organs, nested heirachy, fossil record) but instead relies on a bogus argument about the alleged law of biogenesis( kind begats kind that was supposedly demonstrated by Louis Pastuer). He also argues that mutations are extremely rare and harmful and also another argument about the interconnected-ness of genes and characters and implies that mutations cannot cause evolution without some form of saltational change through the whole genome of the organism!

The worst chapter was on the "Fact of God". Here Morris employs a "First Cause" argument that originated with Aristotle and popularized by Thomas Aquanis. Morris argues that the first cause of life must be living and the first cause of love must be loving, etc. There are MANY flaws in this argument. Morris assumes that there is a direct causation (and not a chain of causation).Example: the first cause of life must be living. To argue this is begging the question that there was a first cause for life to begin with and not a chain of causation like a series of chemical reactions to form the first life form over time such as a cell.

Morris also assumes that each effect has the nature of the first cause ( first cause of love must be living) but what if we consider the first cause of the opposites? Is the First Cause of life also the first Cause of death? Does this mean that the First Cause is both living and dead? Is the First Cause of love also the first cause of hate? Why not? Morris also seems to assume that all these first causes are the same identitical identity. But why conclude that? Why do we have to conclude monotheism and not multiple first Causes? And what about the First Cause of unlimited space? How can we infer omnipresence from this? ( Not to mention that it begs the question that space is infinite..especially when we lack a quantum theory of gravity.)

This is just a tip of the iceberg in terms of faulty logic and questionable conclusions. In short, I think the EPA should sue Morris for wasting so much paper in the form of books like this! I would not recommend this book even as to help hold a coffee table up!

Mr. Morris has jump started me many times with this wonderfully referenced work. It's a great book to return to when seeking fact based information on the infallibilty of the Bible. It covers many areas such as prophecy and fulfillment including examples and statistical data, history, astronomy, geology and many other topics. It also contains some good data that clashes with mainline evolution. It clearly is not intended to be in-depth on each topic but is an easy read with an index and references for deeper study in many of the topics.

Other books that deliver mounds of factual evidence showing the absurdity of standard evolutionary beliefs include In Six Days, written by 50 well-accredited scientists (many who are reknowned), Starlight and Time, Search for the Truth, In the Beginning, and Darwin's Black Box.

29 years after it original release this work is still at the "TOP" among "CHRISTIAN EVIDENCE" works, primarily because of it comprehensiveness. It's only short coming, as a prior reviewer mentions, more documentation could have been used (in some cases) in the chapter on fulfilled prophecy. However even here more than enough evidence (at least 7 Historic Prophecys, plus the Messianics) are presented to prove the Authors point. "Mazzaroth" or the constellations (in the Bk of Job), the "GOSPEL IN THE STARS" which is primoral revelation was handled well. It's almost impossible to find someone who knows & "Understands" this Primative truth who doesn't accept it !
Also exceptional in the field of Apologetics "EVIDENCE THAT DEMANDS A VERDICT" and Grant Jeffrey's "SIGNATURE OF GOD"... here the advanced medical information presented is "Astonishing". Jeffrey's is excellent for "Apologetics", but should be avoided in "Eschatology"......

I read the Bible in Spain immediately after reading Lavengro and Romany Rye. While I find that particular characters and anecdotes were actually more powerful than those in Lavengro etc, the book on the whole was rather poor and worthy of neither the author, nor the tales he recounts. There were extremely boring rants against "papists" at every opportunity, for one thing. But, if I remember correctly, Borrow even said he was aware of these faults in the introduction; it was one of his earlier works, and he said he wrote it in seclusion based on the many letters he had sent to the Bible Society (for whom he was working at the time); I think he had either lost steam by the time he wrote the book, or else he was unsure how to procede and leant too heavily on the letters. In any case, the book certainly reads like a report, besides the odd sketch--that is otherworldly and unforgettable, but suddenly ends, and doesn't really relate to the narrative, which jumps abo! ut without reason.

In short, if you read Lavengro and Romany Rye and couldn't get enough of them, then this book is worth it; I have read none of his others, (besides dipping into Wild Wales, which I also found dull) so I don't know if another would be better. Also, if you're really obsessed with Catholicism in the Mediteranean or Spain during that civil war, then you'll enjoy this book. Otherwise I wouldn't recommend it.

Duane Gish isn't content to claim that the Bible says the earth is 6,000 years old. That claim alone is faulty theology - the Bible is chock full of references that state the Earth is extremely old (e.g., Hab. 3:6b), and the book of Genesis merely states that God created the world "in the beginning," without the Ussherite timetable Gish insists upon...

Gish - along with other Young Earthers - have confused the church of Christ for too long. The Bible doesn't teach that the Earth is 6,000 years old - Seventh Day Adventists teach that, and they're hardly reliable theologians. There is a marvelous resonance between what science now believes about the Big Bang, the nature of time, and other issues and what is taught in the Bible. As Christians, we should be rejoicing at the way in which modern science has, despite all attempts to the contrary, run smack-dab up against God in its equations. Physics, cosmology, astronomy, and other fields have all been shaken to the core by what they've found. The only reason Darwinian Evolution remains unscathed is because Darwinists use people like Duane Gish as red herrings to make it appear that all anti-Darwinists are Young Earthers who shouldn't be listened to.

Read Hugh Ross, Michael Denton, David Berlinski, and Michael Behe for more sound scientific analysis on these matters... Leave Young Earth Creationism for the sub-Biblical cults, where it belongs!

Creationists are fortunate to have such a highly qualified scientist as Dr Gish on our side. Even the famous evolutionary origin-of-life researcher and opponent of Gish, the late Dr Sydney Fox conceded:

'Duane Gish has very strong scientific credentials. As a biochemist, he has synthesised peptides, compounds intermediate between amino acids and proteins. He has been co-author of a number of outstanding publications in peptide chemistry.' [_The Emergence of Life: Darwinian Evolution from the Inside_, Basic Books, NY, 1988, p. 46]

This gives the lie to sceptical claims that no creationist has ever published in scientific journals, and there are many more. And it means that Gish is extremely well-qualified to discuss theories of the origin of life from non-living chemicals. But he is also widely read in many other fields.

The style is lucid, and the book is beautifully illustrated. This makes this book a good introduction, mainly for young people but good for all ages.

The book is about the biblical view of creation, get a clue! If you want to read about evolution, get a book on evolution! This is a excellent resource for homeschoolers and others who want to teach the creationists view of creation to their children. If you don't believe in the billions and billions of years thing, then this book gives a wonderful review of God's 7 day plan. The book is excellent even if you disagree with the thinking. It's a shame unethical people use a book review as a platform to promote their bias thinking.