My group of friends, who had all travelled Greece in our backpacking days, benefited greatly from this book. As our trip in July 2002 progressed, we relied more and more heavily on the book. The recommendations from sites to food to hotels proved to be excellent every time. I particularly liked that the lodging and restaurant recommendations had inexpensive through expensive listings, which we used as our budget-mindedness changed during the trip. For anyone beyond backpacking and Lonely Planet, this book is a must.

I found this book very useful. I used it mostly as a guide on a walking tour of Athens. I only had three days in Athens and wanted to see as much as possible. I spent a few hours browsing through the pertinent section and made my plan of action. Everything was as described. I also referred to it when making my hotel reservation and when looking for good restaurants. I stayed at the Hotel Philippos near the Acropolis - a great little place. Eating I went through great troubles one night to find the Taverna Sigalas in the Monasteraki area (because of subway construction,) but it was well worth the effort. I still drool at the thought of the wonderful Greek salad I had and the very best moussaka I've ever eaten. Going to Rome this year and I plan to buy a Frommer's for Rome because I only have three days there and I know I can depend on this book.

This book is the standard text for college level real estate course RE101. An excellent book with many walkthru examples to help understand difficult situations. GREAT BOOK!

I used this book for an adult education class almost ten years ago and found it to be clearly written, well-argued, and biblically accurate. My class responded well to the material. Bowman has a good knowledge of Scripture, theology, and heretical groups. When he is not arguing against biblical egalitarianism, he is generally a good source to consult. Bowman was a researcher at the Christian Research Institute at the time the book was published, 1992.

This is a short Bible study guide written by my father. Now, some of you may think I'm partial to my father's writings; however, if you know anything about "preacher's kids" you know that I didn't think I would like this book.
As far as Bible Studys go, the Covenant Bible Study Series is one of the most thought provoking. Instead of telling you exactly what to believe, this series teaches you how to interpret the scriptures. This Sermon on the Mount study guide is no exception. The study guide breaks the scripture down into "bite-size" chapters that are easy to approach. Each chapter is ended with application questions which challenge the reader to take the readings to a higher "thinking" level. The Sermon on the Mount study guide, along with others in the Covenant Bible Study Series, is a building block for reading the scriptures as well as learning to interpret the Bible. If you are looking to lead a Bible Study group or just expand on your own faith, this book is for you.

You open a Bible and examine it with a Jehovah's Witness and you get nowhere! What do you do? A beginning point is to get your hands on Bowman's book.

Bowman explains some basic logical and interpretive principles and then digs into the differences between JW and Christian ways of looking at the same Bible passage. The JW's method of Bible interpretation is shown to be dictated by the Watchtower and Bible Tract Society.

Bowman examines the New World Translation of the JW's, their belief system, and their use of "Jehovah" as their name for God. He offers a sample, technical case study of interpreting Luke 23:43. The book closes with appendices on the New World Translation and a word study on "stake" vs "cross." Bowman also includes an excellent annotated bibliography.

Bowman's purpose is not to attack, but to help Jehovah's Witnesses find truth. Read his book and absorb his insights.

The problem with this darn book is that once you pick it up, you're going to find yourself going on a CD buying binge well before you're half way through the book. - - Let's face it... Stax and Memphis Shoals = memories... and this is definitely a pretty funky strut down memory lane... the whole story, from the label's humble beginings in the mid '50s, an old movie theatre and record store, the golden era of Otis Redding, The Bar -Kays and M.G.s, to the superstar meglomaniacical rise of Hot Buttered Soul - - the Wattstax movie... and eventually, the infighting and financial woes that left the great soul machine screwed and in bankruptcy('circa '75). This isn't just a cute tabletop book with pictures of your favorite stars and cute trivial snippets (come to think of it, there's no big discography in the back !)- - its a well researched book that tells a great American/Afro-American story... (think of it, a racially integrated record label in the South circa the early '60s and moving on into the militant '70s that managed to turn the Northern recording establishment on its side !) It really gives you a glimpse of what was going on behind the scenes, how the sound evolved and the various personalities entered into the sphere and did their thing... the conflicts, the struggles, the accomplishments and the whole scene, bottom up... very tough to put down. Heck, they ought to turn it into a movie. - - If you consider yourself a STAX nut now... trust me, by the time you finish this book, you'll be a madman... spare yourself the wait... you might as well get the box sets while you still have the cash... this book is going to set you on a Stax jones... and well written enough that its definitely a keeper !

It has been sometime since I read this, but I found it excellent complement to Peter Guralnick's Sweet Soul Music. Does a fine job in capturing the label's history and shows its impact. Book reads well too. Recommended to soul and rock fans

great stuff, well worth the price of admission. But not as good as Frank Zappa. Mediocre blues based jamming my foot.

Boa and Bowman have put together a lengthy survey on apologetic methods within Christianity. In the process, they have surpassed all other comparative apologetic works by cogently and thoroughly examining apologetic methods and the great thinkers who have subscribed to the various methods.

This book is extremely useful for a number of reasons. It's obvious strength is its thorough treatment of four major apologetic methods; classical, evidential, presuppositional, and fideist. This book is the best in print in dispassionately presenting each view, its strengths and weaknesses, and how each view interacts with various apologetic issues and objections. The reader will gain a solid working knowledge of apologetic school of thought to reflect upon and possibly incorporate in their own approach to apologetics.

Second, this book provides one of the best summary level examinations of many prominent Christian thinkers throughout church history. Anybody who wants a good summary treatment on the thinking of folks like Pascal, Kierkegaard, Van Til, Clark, Kuyper, Barth, Craig, Plantinga, Geisler, Aquinas, and many others will find it here.

Third, their demonstration of how each apologetic system interacts with key issues such as science, theology, the Bible, Jesus Christ, etc is very informative. I found these examinations to be very insightful, since it impressed upon me the reality that evangelical Christianity is not at all monolithic in how it views the relationship of apologetics to these vital issues. Through this diversity of thought, I have found my own approach to apologetics expanded and challenged in a very healthy way.

Lastly, the authors truly invoke a spirit of Christian love throughout this book. The authors clearly hold to the view that great Christians can and have held to each apologetical method, and the authors have properly resisted any attempt to use apologetical method as a litmus test to judge the level of anyone's Christian walk. This is very refreshing, and is definitely a step in the right direction. While properly pointing out where certain thinkers in each camp have strayed from acceptable evangelicalism (Barth and his errant view of Scripture, Pinnock and his god of limited omniscience, etc), they affirm the value of each apologetic method and the thinkers who hold to each view.

At the end of the book, the authors attempt an integration of each method which I found helpful and balanced. The authors properly note that pure integration may not be possible, and might not be desirable either. I felt that the biggest strength of their integration approach was the belief that each apologetic method is useful for reaching certain people who hold certain objections or presuppositions, and that these apologetic approaches can be integrated somewhat with certain methods being more emphasized than others based upon the beliefs and views of the person we are in dialogue with.

The only weakness of the book is that while it does attempt to deal with tangible objections such as in the inspiration of Scripture, the deity of Christ, and the problem of evil, readers who are looking for comprehensive apologetic responses to these issues may not be satisfied by what's here. This is a book that deals with apologetic method, and while it does show how each method generally responds to these kind of objections and issues, the reader will not really find a systematic treatment here, although I should stress that what is covered in these areas is very helpful.

But since this is not really the thrust of the book, I do not see it as a weakness of the book worthy of demoting the 5 star rating I've given it. This is a thoroughly researched book which in my view, presents the best contemporary treatment of apologetic methods in a spirit of Christian love that will hopefully serve as a model for further development of respectful apologetic method in the future. A well done book that is highly recommended.

This is a very nice reference text. A must for any serious apologist or, for that matter, anyone who simply loves to read apologetics texts.

The text is mapped out in such a way that it divides the various apologetic 'tasks' into 4 areas or parts. First, apologetics as 'proof.' Second, apologetics as 'defense.' Third, apologetics as 'offense.' And fourth, apologetics as 'persuasion.' Each part carries its own weight when dealing with certain areas or aspects of the task of apologetics. For instance, apologetics as 'proof' takes various thinkers, approaches, and worldviews and delineates them in detail for the reader. Further, a thinker is given, say, B.B. Warfield, his thoughts, writings, and methods are examined and exposited, and then his approach is described and demonstrated for the reader. This is the trend in all four parts.

The authors also cover the role of philosophy in apologetics, which I might add, is a very important role. Thank you for its inclusion, this makes for an important read. Moreover, once all the various thinkers/scholars are examined, the authors take their reader to what is called the 'integrated approach.' It seems interesting that the integrative approach is applied predominantly by/to reformers or those who adhere to what is known in philosophical circles as reformed epistemology. Nonetheless, this approach is examined along with its adherents.

Finally, the book also includes a few very nice extra features such as apologetic web sites, a further study section, lists of tables and charts, a name index, subject index and Scripture index. I have enjoyed reading this text, and it should be pointed out that it is written in a style of a reference text, so the reader can read 'at' it if the intent is to find a particular thing, or the text can be read from cover to cover. Either way, the book makes for good reading, I highly recommend this text.

A reviewer claims that Boa and Bowman's book tries "to take the strengths of each approach and put them together into one apologetic system." He then claims that the authors twist the approaches of other apologists to fit their categories and that the authors claim that their own integration is the best one.

Frankly, the reviewer could not have been more wrong. Boa and Bowman defend each of the four approaches as valid and helpful in their own right. They go out of their way to point out ways in which various apologists do not fit neatly into one category. For example, they suggest that William Lane Craig is a classical apologist with evidentialist leanings, and that Alvin Plantinga is a Reformed apologist with classical leanings.

When Boa and Bowman come to discuss the integration of the four major approaches, they state very plainly, "we do not claim that our proposals should be accepted as _the_ final integrative approach" (p. 509). Or again, "We do not wish to be interpreted as proposing a 'new approach' or a comprehensive approach that definitively unites them. Indeed, we are not sure that this is possible or even desirable" (p. 535). Instead, the authors recommend that apologists take whatever approach they find most compelling and then strengthen that approach by learning from the other approaches.

This is the first book that presents sympathetically the apologetic thinking of such disparate thinkers as C. S. Lewis, Richard Swinburne, Cornelius Van Til, Karl Barth, and Francis Schaeffer. There simply isn't another book like it.

This book is outrageous! It's full of dangerous recommendations such as putting babies to sleep on their stomachs, administering aspirin despite it's association with Reye's Syndrome, treating stomach upset or fever with enemas, and giving meat to 3 month old infants. The schedule she suggests for newborns is cruel - putting the baby down at 10 pm and letting it cry until 6 am. She notes that constant itching from a urinary tract infection can lead to masturbation. Do not buy this book - it's appalling!

I am a young mother whose pediatrician was Dr. Denmark. I am healthy and my sister is too. I now have a one year old and I've had her on Dr. Denmarks schedule since birth. Thank God someone knows how to take care of our children. All of the pediatricians I've taken my daughter to have been no help at all. Everything they tell you to do with your baby is doing nothing but harming them. I know mothers who do everything like their pediatrician says and their children are always sick. Ear infections,colds,fevers..... My child has only had one ear infection her whole life and that was after she was exposed to a child that had one in our family. My daughter is making her pediatrician scratch his head. He said, "this method is not what we have been tought, although she's doing better then most babies. I can't tell you to stop because she's doing so wonderfully" I smile and thank God that Mrs. Bowman and Dr. Denmark were put on this earth to help mothers have a great life being a Mommy.

I feel very sad for the mother [...] who will never realize the benefits of following Dr. Denmark's advice & time tested remedies. Dr. Denmark believes in prevention, not simply treating the symptoms. She teaches mothers how to be their children's best doctor. So many mothers today have stopped thinking for themselves and blindly follow well meaning doctors and The Academy of Pediatrics guidelines to no avail. That is why we have more pediatricians today than ever before. Our children are being kept sick by bad advice. We are however helping the economy by keeping the doctors & drug companies very much in business. This is not to say that their aren't times that we need our pediatricians help, but this book tells you things you can do to not have to get to that point.
Please, do yourself a favor and read this book & Dr. Denmark's book "Every child should have a chance". She explains the study that led to back sleeping & the incident that led to the Reye's Syndrom / Aspirin Connection. (Their is no connection!!)
Dr. Denmark is a gift to this world, but especially a gift to all mothers. I thank God every day that I learned about her. I even call her on the phone from time to time when I have a problem with my child's health that I can't solve on my own.

THANK YOU DR. DENMARK, FOR EVERYTHING!!!

[...]

This book is a good refutation of the Watchtower booklet "Should you believe in the Trinty." I like how Mr. Bowman proved, on page 49, that the JW's are truly polytheist even though they claim to be monotheist. If Jesus is "a god" then you are making another God plain and simple. This book also exposes there belief that there are two kinds of creatures they claim are honored as gods is scripture- angels and men. This book is not an exhaustive study of the doctrine of the Trinity but rather a simple written explanation of the Trinity! This book will strenghten your faith in the Trinity and expose the error of the watchtower's "should you believe in the Trinity" booklet! Worship God as he revealed Himself.

Robert Bowman has done a great service to those who seek to know more about the Trinity to refute the deceptive teachings of the "Jehovah's Witness" cult. The book is intended for those who may be faced with tough questions at the door or at work or who may have a friend or a family member exposed to their propaganda. This book makes a point by point refutation of the JW position in their widely distributed pamphlet, as well as defending the apostolic doctrine of the Trinity. It then examines the historical record, which proves that the Trinity is not some pagan influence on the church centuries later, but the articulation of the central belief of the earliest Chrsitians. More significantly, Bowman uncovers examples in the JW pamphlet which can at the very least be called serious misrepresentations, if not outright deceit. As an example:

"Matthew 28:19 reads: "Go, therefore, make disciples of all nations; baptize them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." Do those verses say that God, Christ, and the holy spirit constitute a Trinitarian Godhead, that the three are equal in substance, power, and eternity? No, they do not, no more than listing three people, such as Tom, Dick, and Harry, means that they are three in one. This type of reference, admits McClintock and Strong's Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, "PROVES ONLY THAT THERE ARE THREE SUBJECTS NAMED, . . . BUT IT DOES NOT PROVE, BY ITSELF, THAT ALL THREE BELONG NECESSARILY TO THE DIVINE NATURE, AND POSSESS EQUAL DIVINE HONOR." Although a supporter of the Trinity, that source says of 2 Corinthians 13:13 (14): "WE COULD NOT JUSTLY INFER THAT THEY POSSESSED EQUAL AUTHORITY, OR THE SAME NATURE." And of Matthew 28:18-20 it says: "THIS TEXT HOWEVER, TAKEN BY ITSELF, WOULD NOT PROVE DECISIVELY EITHER THE PERSONALITY OF THE THREE SUBJECTS MENTIONED OR THEIR EQUALITY OR DIVINITY."" (McClintock and Strong: Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, vol x, p. 552, as quoted in, Should you believe the Trinity?, Watchtower publication)

WHAT THE QUOTE REALLY SAYS:

The texts relating to the doctrine of the Trinity may be divided into two classes - those in which the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are mentioned in connection, and those in which these three subjects am mentioned separately, and in which their nature and mutual relation are more particularly described. 1. The first class of texts, taken by itself, PROVES ONLY THAT THERE ARE THREE SUBJECTS NAMED, and that there is a difference between them; that the Father in certain respects differs from the Son, etc.; BUT IT DOES NOT PROVE, BY ITSELF, THAT ALL THREE BELONG NECESSARILY TO THE DIVINE NATURE, AND POSSESS EQUAL DIVINE HONOR. In proof of this, the second class of texts must be adduced. The following texts are placed in this [first] class: Mt 28:18-20. THIS TEXT HOWEVER, TAKEN BY ITSELF, WOULD NOT PROVE DECISIVELY EITHER THE PERSONALITY OF THE THREE SUBJECTS MENTIONED, OR THEIR EQUALITY OR DIVINITY. ... 2 Cor. 13:14, " The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and beloved of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Here we might infer, from the parallelism of the third member of the passage with the two former, the personality of the Holy Spirit; but WE COULD NOT JUSTLY INFER THAT THEY POSSESSED EQUAL AUTHORITY, OR THE SAME NATURE. John 14:26 offers three different personal subjects ... Mt 3:16-17, has been considered a very strong proof text for the whole doctrine of the Trinity. But though three personal subjects are mentioned ... 2. We now turn to the second class of texts, viz. those in which the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are separately mentioned and in which their nature and essential relation are taught. These texts prove (a) that the Son and Holy Spirit, according to the doctrine of the New Testament, are divine, or belong to the one divine nature; and (b) that the three subjects are personal and equal ... The Deity of Christ: To prove the deity of Christ we present three classes of texts (McClintock and Strong: Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, vol x, Trinity, p 552).

Given the difficulty of claiming to uphold Scripture and yet deny the Trinity, it is no surprise that JWs will resort to lying by selective quotation to argue their point. As a biblical doctrine, the Trinity relies not on a handful of "proof texts" as used by JWs, but on the entire corpus of the Bible, Old and New Testaments. One does not see the word "Trinity" in the Bible, nor is the immanent Trinity defined, but one can fully apprehend the economic Trinity in Sripture: the Father redeems mankind through His Mediator, Jesus Christ, in the communion with the Holy Spirit. Arians can do no more than grasp at straws. Glory to God: Father, Son, Holy Spirit, now and forever and unto the ages of ages.

Robert Bowman has presented us with a book that deals with the main issue that separates the WT from fundamental Christianity--the Trinity. No time was wasted in offering this rebuttal to the WT booklet, "Should You Believe in the Trinity?", since it was also published in 1989.

The book has 10 chapters:

1). Understanding the Trinity
2). The Bible and the Trinity
3). The Church and the Trinty
4). Will the Real Polytheists Please Stand Up?
5). Is Jesus a Creature?
6). Does the Bible Deny That Jesus Is God?
7). Jesus Christ Is God
8). Is the Holy Spirit a Force?
9). Trinitarianism in the New Testament
10). Worship God as He has Revealed Himself

Bowman demonstrates how the WT has dishonestly handled scholarly sources and misrepresented the early church fathers and their view of Christ. He also addresses the Watchtower's misunderstanding of this doctrine, which results in their typical "straw man" argumentation.

The book is not a difficult read, and it deals with many of the objections JWs have and offers answers for them.

There is a scripture index for easy reference and a recommended reading section for those interested in doing more research on the Trinity.

Unfortunately, most JWs will not take the time to do their own research in an attempt to understand all this doctrine really entails. They remain content to accept the "straw man" version set up by their organization.

Consider the following quotes from Bowman' book:

"As we shall see, nearly all of the arguments brought against the Trinity by JWs depend to some extent on misunderstanding the Trinity."(p.15)

"To say that the Trinity cannot be understood likewise is imprecise, or at least open to misinterpretation. Trinitarian theologians do not mean to imply that the Trinity is unintelligible nonsense. Rather, the point they are making is that the Trinity cannot be fully fathomed, or comprehended, by the finite mind of man. There is a difference between gaining a basically correct understanding of something and having a complete, comprehensive, all-embracing, perfect understanding of it. The way many other theologians would express this difference is to say that the Trinity can be understood, or 'apprehended,' but not 'comprehended.'

Some of the scholarly sources quoted in the JW booklet makes this very point. For example, the Encyclopedia Americana, which the booklet quotes as saying that the Trinity is 'beyond the grasp of human reason,' does make that statement, but in this context:

It is held[by trinitarians] that although the doctrine is beyond the grasp of human reason, it is, like many of the formulations of physical science, not contrary to reason, and may be apprehended(though it may not be comprehended) by the human mind." (pp.16,17)

This is the best critical analysis of the Word of Faith (or Word-Faith) movement to date. Bowman, a non-charismatic, shows an acute awareness of the pertinent issues and seems familiar with not only the primary literature and tapes of the Word-Faith proponents but also it’s critics and counter-critics (e.g., Bruno, DeArteaga, & Spencer). Contrary to the primary critics of the movement such as Hanegraaff, McConnell and Hunt, Bowman feels that the movement has its roots in the evangelical faith-cure movement of the late nineteenth century, not the metaphysical cults (New Thought, Christian Science, etc.). Nonetheless, he does qualify this by stating that “the possibility exists that the evangelical faith-cure movement and early Pentecostalism were also influenced in some respects by meta-physical thought” (pg. 82), although he leaves this possibility relatively unexplored in the book. Interestingly, contemporary New Thought authors Anderson & Whitehouse, in their book “New Thought: A Practical American Spirituality” (1995), also note the similar interest in healing between their movement and the evangelical faith-cure movement and, like Bowman (but unlike some critics), recognize the differences in world views (pantheism vs. Christian theism). It is also worth noting that they state that most of the leaders of the major New Thought groups existing today came from Traditional Christian backgrounds which didn’t meet their needs, especially for healing. Apparently both movements expanded their interests to include not only physical health but also overall well-being and success (including wealth). From the evangelical faith-cure movement came the 20th century’s Pentecostal & Charismatic movements, which included a revival of supernatural charismatic gifts, including speaking in other tongues (unknown languages) by the Holy Spirit.

Bowman considers E. W. Kenyon to be the grandfather, not father, of the Word-Faith (W-F) movement because he considers it to be essentially a Pentecostal movement since the W-F movement’s primary “father”, Kenneth Hagin, was Pentecostal, unlike Kenyon (but he also considers William Branham and Oral Roberts to be contributing “fathers” to the W-F movement in various ways). He also thinks that Hagin contributed certain doctrines to the movement that Kenyon didn't teach. Bowman thinks the W-F movement is an extreme Pentecostalism, or a Pentecostalism “at it’s worst”. One must keep in mind, however, that there are various definitions of what constitutes “Pentecostal” and “Charismatic”. Technically, the former is applied strictly to those who believe that speaking in other tongues is the sole “initial evidence” of the Baptism in the Holy Spirit. In other words, if one doesn’t speak in tongues, then one HASN’T been baptized in the Holy Spirit. This is the position of classical Pentecostal denominations such as the Assemblies of God (A/G), the largest Pentecostal denomination in the world. Those who reject this position but still believe that speaking in tongues is for today, along with the other charismatic gifts of the Spirit, are generally categorized as “Charismatic”. Kenneth Hagin was once affiliated with the A/G, but left the denomination to become “independent” or “non-denominational”. Although Hagin is a classical Pentecostal, I personally don’t think that the “initial evidence” position of Hagin is integral to the W-F movement & its theology. There are many in the W-F movement that are Charismatic, not Pentecostal. Bowman occasionally uses a broader definition of “Pentecostal” than the more technical definition related to the “initial evidence” position which he considers a “hard-line view” (pg. 62), rejected by such men as F. F. Bosworth, author of “Christ the Healer”.

Bowman considers the W-F views on healing and prosperity to be the least problematic aspects of their theology (pg. 11), but I tend to think that their distinctive theology was formulated to reinforce the movement’s views on healing and prosperity. The doctrines of healing and prosperity as available in this life through “faith” are the “positive” motivating force of the movement regardless of the distinctive aberrant theology just as they are the thrust of the New Thought movement with its “positive” message regardless of its pantheism and/or panentheism. It is not surprising that the New Thought authors noted above consider Norman Vincent Peale and Robert Schuller as promoters of some of New Thought’s ideas on positive/possibility thinking although neither Peale nor Schuller is a pantheist or even a Pentecostal or Charismatic....

Robert Bowman did an excellent job in this book! He really does his homework and does a lot of research on how the word faith movement came to be, with its roots in e.w. kenyon, to its spread thru word faith teachers like hagin, copeland, price, dollar, hinn, etc. Also, I think the tone that he writes with is great, because he doesnt attack or condemn anyone, but instead carefully tries to show thru scripture why the word faith teachings are erroneous. An excellent book i recommend to all christians, especially anyone who is currently caught up in the word faith movement. a definite eye opener!

Robert Bowman indicates that this book is the "culmination of about fifteen years of research, study, and dialogue." It shows. 'The Word-Faith Controversy' is a well-researched book that provides the reader with a balanced approach to the Word-Faith debate.

I consider this to be the most significant critique of the Word-Faith movement published to-date.

As in his other books, Robert Bowman Jr demonstrates his ability to present all sides of a complex issue with great clarity - as well as with gentleness and respect. In the process, he carefully documents why he considers the Word-Faith movement to be "neither soundly orthodox nor thoroughly heretical."

Bowman also evaluates books that denounce the Word-Faith movement - books that have become standard works of reference on which many Christians have based their own views regarding the controversy. They include, for example, D.R. McConnell's "A Different Gospel," and Hank Hanegraaff's "Christianity in Crisis." If you have read these books on the Word-Faith movement, I highly recommend you read Bowman's book as well. (As the Bible says, "The first to present his case seems right, till another comes forward and questions him." - Proverbs 18:17 NIV)

Because of Bowman's gentle, reasoned, and well-documented approach, I feel as comfortable sharing this book with friends in the Word-Faith movement as I do recommending it to the movement's critics.

Highy recommended!