This is an eight-volume history of Africa that I can't recommend highly enough. Patiently working my way through it over the course of several months did more to reduce my ignorance of human history than anything else I have ever done. I found several discussions particularly helpful:

- the physical evidence for human origins in Africa south of the Sahara

- The colonization of Madagascar by voyagers from Malaysia, which introduced the banana and several other valuable food crops into Africa in classical times

- How the conquest of valley-dwelling, agricultural Hutu by hilltop-dwelling, cattle-herding Tutsi serendipitously benefited both cultures, since manure from Tutsi cattle enabled greater Hutu cultivation of the banana

- How the Iron Age came to Africa south of the Sahara (this was what led me to this work in the first place)

- The breadth and depth of Arab learning and philosophy at the height of the Muslim empires during Europe's Middle Ages

I did find the discussions of late-Christian Egypt and Arab civilization more difficult to follow than the rest, because these discussions make heavy use of italicized Egyptian and Arabic words without bothering to explain them to the non-expert reader. This forced me to keep going back and re-reading earlier passages as I figured out these terms' likely meanings from their context in later passages.

Overall, however, this is a work I would love to have on my own bookshelf, if it weren't so very costly to purchase. The copy I read belongs to the King County Library system. (Seattle and Redmond, Washington, are the best-known cities in King County.)

I find this book very helpful in preparing for bible study and for the other teacher in Sunday school help them teach the lessons to the children.

I purchased this book to include in my library and to serve as a reference for lectures. I have found this book to be a superior guide for gaining the basic knowledge of the important topics in toxicology, without too much information. I very much enjoy all of the Secrets Series books that I have purchased (about 10 of them so far), but have found this one to be one of the best of the bunch. The concise nature of the various topics is put together very well and has many interesting "extra tidbits" that are great as "Did you know" facts for lectures. All major and many less common medications and environmental toxicities are covered. Definitely a great choice for the home or office library.

This is simply the best Anglo-Saxon dictionary you can find for anything resembling a reasonable price. It helps to know a little bit about the language (for example, the "ge-" prefix is used much the same way that it is in German). The only serious problem I found is Hall's using the "eth" character for cases where "thorn" is used in the original texts--a serious scholarly failure, though one that the serious student should be able to overlook with relative ease. I do feel that this dictionary could use quite a bit of revision--anyone up to the task?--but at the same time, it's the best you can find for the price, and certainly worth the money.

... this is more a lexicon than a dictionary. But it is the only affordable and valuable one on the market, behind the great (but very expensive) Bosworth and Toller's Anglo-Saxon Dict. Thus, sometimes you might not find the word you're looking for. So be smarter than the lexicon: search another word derived from the same root, suppress the prefixes, change the cases, think of the infinitive of the verbs, and you may finally obtain your translation of the word.
But let us be honest: this book is great, and affordable for most of us.
A classic ?

A wonderful source for Anglo-Saxon words and their meanings, which is very reasonably priced. Intended as a teaching aid, I have found it very helpful to the writer of period history and fiction.

This book is the work of five authors who set forth a version of theism known as Open Theism, the defining (though not necessarily central) characteristic of which is the proposition that God's omniscience does not include everything that will be actualised in the future.

Richard Rice opens with an exegetical case for the notion that God's immutability is restricted only to His character and ultimate plans; He experiences change in His actions, experiences and knowledge. Both the Old and New Testament are briefly (but carefully) mined to bring out both the pathos and openness of God to His people and the future respectively. Already in Rice's chapter, the pioneering Scriptural defense of open theism, we see a reasonable refutation of the only TWO verses in the OT - 1Sam 15:29 and Num 23:19 - which states that "God does not change His mind" (which Rice convincingly argues when taken in context is synonymous with "God does not LIE"). He contrasts this with the more than THIRTY which make the opposite point (e.g. Jer18, Isa, Hosea, etc.). Rice then discusses the life of Jesus and shows how the intense pathos of God is revealed through the Incarnate Son's ministry, tears, and ultimately His death on the Cross. How the doctrine of immutability can claim to be Scripturally derived in the light of the life of Christ is truly a mystery. Rice's work is passionate, meticulous and unassuming; the very first chapter of the first major work on the movement lays down the arguments in the Scriptural arena, within which the debate needs to take place. I heartily recommend him.

Next, I don't like saying this but I'm afraid I found John Sanders' contribution a little on the boring side at the time. His chapter is a very comprehensive look at what theologians throughout history believed about divine immutability, relationality, etc. Sanders shows the undeniable continuity between Platonic ideals and early Christian thought, and makes a strong case for the non-ability of much theological thinking to break free from the unBiblical notions left by this early influence. A very text-book-like chapter consisting less of an argument than a survey of a remarkably persistent trend to equate 'Perfection' in terms of 'Unchangeability'. Hopefully more people will find it more interesting than I did, but if not, Sanders' chapter of a similar nature in his "God Who Risks" will more than compensate for any disappointment with his work this time around.

Clark Pinnock then whips the storm back up again with his powerful and systematic proposal for a RELATIONAL view of God as the foundation of everything else we understand about Him. His experiences, actions and - most saliently for the book - His knowledge is dynamic and undergoes progress and change by the very nature of the Person He is and the Creation He's brought into existence. Like Sanders' piece, this chapter doesn't so much argue a case for open-theism as much as it elaborates a particular understanding of God, given the authors' assumptions. I've found this approach to be characteristic of Pinnock's work in which, in effect, he seems to be saying, "I'm not going to try hard to prove you wrong and I right; I'm just going to show you the theological beauty and benefits of my view of God and its congruity with Scripture, and you tell me if you prefer this to traditional (mainly Reformed) theology".

William Hasker's philosophical perspective (my favourite, next to Rice's) begins by highlighting problems with the notion of divine timelessness and scrutinizing the traditional equation of divine 'perfection' with divine immutability. His essay begs us to reconsider, "What is 'perfection' in a Personal Being, anyway? And why have we traditionally associated it with 'changelessness'?" He, like Sanders, pinpoints Neo-Platonic philosophy as the major influence on classical theologians for their bias against change. He then briefly discusses the major theistic viewpoints of divine providence and omniscience: Calvinism (which makes God logically responsible for all evil), Molinism (which, though removing many problems associated with Calvinistic divine sovereignity, still eventually makes God the 'Arch Manipulator'), Simple Foreknowledge (which sorta 'imprisons' God in His foreknowledge, making Him helpless to intervene), Process Theology (which is panentheism in Biblical packaging), and Open Theism (which Hasker sets forth as showing God to be a loving risk-taker who desires creatures who voluntarily love and befriend Him and has thus actualised a universe with incredible contigencies, beauty and surprise - but also terrible potential).

Finally, we come to David Basinger's spelling out of the explanatory and experiential superiority of open-theism as compared to Calvinism and Process Theology on the following aspects: petitionary prayer, divine guidance, suffering, social responsibility and evangelistic responsibility. Like Hasker, he presents open-theism as the redeeming 'middle ground' between the divine helplessness of process theology and the all-determining Control Deity of Calvinism. Only with open-theism can there be a meaningful notion of human responsibility (contra Calvinism, which leaves one wondering what the point is resisting evil/sin since everything's been foreordained) without the need to state that God has already done 'all that He can' (contra process theology, which gives us a powerless God). Though insightful and honest with regard to existing non-resolved issues, I wouldn't recommend this chapter to anyone not at least open to the possibility that the Bible teaches the openness of God.

Although the book, being a pioneering 'ground-breaker' for open theism, certainly needs more elaboration and work, I'd have to say that I agree with its overall thesis. Critics often fail to note that open theists employ solid Biblical epistemology and evidence to derive the back-bone of the view, particularly the non-exhaustive understanding of God's omniscience (the Sriptural evidence for immutability is pitifully scant; the number of 'divine repentance' passages itself, like I've mentioned, is a staggering 30-plus which was the major factor forcing me to rethink my theology. I can't help but wonder why God would say so often in His very own Word that He experiences genuine changes of mind and thus knowledge, if this is a completely false ontological notion). Unfortunately, academic backlash is usually focused on the philosophical and experiential implications of open theism, all the whilst seemingly ignorant or dismissive of the powerful Scriptural case in favour of it.

With that said, I would propose that this book be read only AFTER one absorbs either John Sanders' "God Who Risks" or Gregory Boyd's more accessible "God of the Possible". All in all, the book IMO represents an inspiring work and a necessary provocation to the Christian (especially the Reformed) community to relook at its Biblical foundations and traditional presuppositions about the nature of God. And in closing, allow me to quote from Pinnock's chapter, which eloquently sums up the picture of God the book puts forth:

"...God is so transcendant that he creates room for others to exist and maintains a relationship with them...God is so powerful as to be able to stoop down and humble Himself...(and) God is so stable and secure as to be able to risk suffering and change."

The Openness of God attends closely both to the broad biblical text and Christian piety when offering a much-needed "open" alternative to deterministic Calvinism. Through an easy reading, multi-dimensional, textual format, Rice, Sanders, Pinnock, Hasker and Basinger offer a more or less comprehensive evangelical, "free-will" theism that corresponds closely with the theology of many scholars in the Arminian, Wesleyan, and Charismatic traditions. This should be a required text for seminarians of all stripes. Perhaps the book's only drawback is that its authors sometimes misrepresent process theology and thus fail to adequately consider more of the theological alternatives offered by process thought. Otherwise, this is the kind of book you will want to give a friend who has been exposed to just enough classical theology to want to write off theology altogether. This is good medicine for former evangelical intellectuals who may have left the fold disillusioned by the Calvinistic brand of evangelical theology. Take, eat, digest, and flourish!

After reading and studying The Open View of God I cannot say much, except that it was refreshing! How unfortunate it is that Sproul has sprawled so far and Reformed philosophy is so pervasive in the populist theology world today. Thank God He still is enlightening beyond the Reformation!

The Open View challenges the classical-Philosophical view of God preached and taught by so many in a systematic and decisive way. Our traditional understandings of immutablity, providence, sovereignity, and immpassiblity need to truly be re-examined in the light of our practice/experience and, as the authors so argue, in the light of the Biblical text. Aristotle is put in his place, sorry, but the un-moved mover is not the God of the Holy Writ. To be ever changing and relational is to be Divine. I Give this Book a strong 10!!