I was in search for Philo's theory of the creative process and stumbled across this book. Although it has very little to do with how people create, or even how God created, it reaches deeply into the ideas of interpretation and the creation in Genesis in relation to the first five chapters of John. The act of creation acually becomes lost in the attempt to interpret the meaning of his main passages. If Carmichael had used his study of the Gospel as a post-modern interpretation, his book would have been very fascinating and even enlightening. However, he instead ties unrecognized ideas about the creation account to the way John formulates his account of Jesus' life and ministry. I am not saying that Carmichael's theory is impossible, but rather that the way he went about to persuade his readers is simply not convincing. If John had wanted to tie these two accounts so closely together, it seems that he would have made it more clear. Others may differ in opinion, but to me it seems that one can not bend the evidence to fit one's own interpretation. Although I do have a deep respect for Carmichael and his truly intellectual style, he would need to go more in-depth into his theory and become more convincing. But now for a word about Philo... He actually only touches on this topic but a few times. Carmichael seems to take out of context some of Philo's minor statements about the creation account. I truly love reading Philo and all he has to say about existence from the point of view of a philosopher. If you wish to wade through this book to get more insight into what Philo could have been saying: make sure to read Carmichael's story of creation with an open mind. I enjoyed reading it thinking, "What can I learn from this...What if this was possible..." I recommend this book to the reader prepared to move through Carmichael's thoughts in search for the truth that is there.