McClendon's 'Doctrine' is an unconventional presentation of Christian teaching that defies easy categorisation and summary. The author arranges his material the opposite way of most systematic theologies: beginning with eschatology and ending with methodological considerations. His work has the strength of including a lot concentrated biblical exegesis and theological history, which does, I think, greatly determine the way that he formulates his theology. However, his presentation is often dense and inaccessable, couched in a narrative scheme that is never made entirely clear to the uninitiated. This means that his exact thoughts on a certain issue are often hard to pin down. Also the 'baptist vision' that he seeks to present is highly questionable; I have never seen anything like it in either the theology or practice of the Baptist churches that I have been a part of. I think this 'vision' is more of a reification than something that actually exists the real world. Nevertheless, his work does possess fresh insights and new ways of thinking about some timeless doctrinal issues in the contemporary world.

I must disagree with my friend and classmate Rob Stovall in his review above. When I was forced to slog through this volume for Theology I and II at the Baptist Seminary in Richmond I with many others hated it--the style and presentation are indeed dense and difficult. But with time I have seen some of the originality and brilliance lurking here--insofar as a reader can figure out what McClendon is saying! His emphasis on the picture language of Scripture is an invaluable alternative to "fundamentalist" attempts to distill the Bible into discrete and entirely consistent propositions. It is this effort to stick to the real "plain sense" of Scripture, rather than parrot traditionalist (non-)readings thereof, which one appreciates most, even if McClendon does not adequately explain what may be some of his most brilliant and original contributions regarding doctrine as practice, eschatology and the beginning of our understanding of creation, and "ordinances" as "effective practices"--quasi-sacremental(?) understandings of baptism, communion, and preaching.

The appearance of (yet) another systematic theology would not generally be the occasion of great excitement. The mature thought of someone of the stature of, say, a Pannenberg may well draw large attention but a pattern fairly typical of systematic theologies is likely to be followed and while there will undoubtedly be abundant insights into specific issues, there is unlikely to be the kind of large scale revisioning of systematic theology that one finds in the work of James McClendon. McClendon's projected three-volume systematic theology is now two-thirds complete with Ethics appearing in 1986, Doctrine in 1994 and Witness forthcoming but expected shortly. McClendon's systematic theology is important for a variety of reasons. Notably, it represents, aside from Robert Jenson's new Systematic Theology , the only major and substantial, truly theological project (rather than methodological or epistemological) underway among those theologians loosely associated with the label 'postliberal'. More importantly, it exemplifies an approach to theology that gives priority to the ecclesial community rather than the academy: this does not mean theology 'made popular' but rather theology self-consciously rooted in the practices of the Christian community.

The most conspicuous evidence of this is the way that McClendon chose to begin his systematic theology: with ethics (Vol 1)! The usual presentation of systematic theology assumes an order presumed to be the only logical and proper way: that is beginning with 'prolegomena', followed by 'doctrine', then 'ethics'. 'Prolegomena' discusses questions of method and so forth, largely in terms of current philosophy and usually in terms of philosophical 'grounding' or justification for the following theological project. Doctrine provides a systematic presentation of Christian teaching often in quasi-scientific format and categories. Ethics, however, as Ron Sider says, is "often left until last and then left out"! McClendon seeks to counter this disjunction between doctrine and ethics by exemplifying another way that shows that 'doctrine' and 'ethics' are two sides of the same coin. It is the modern situation that has treated them separately.

McClendon does not challenge the threefold description of the theological task. He recognises that our convictions that make our

"common life possible fall into three broad, overlapping categories, those that inform Christian living (moral convictions), those that display the substance of Christian faith (doctrinal convictions), and those that open out into a Christian vision or worldview (philosophical convictions)." (21)

It is only with the foundationalist treatment of logical priority that he is concerned. According to McClendon, one can begin with any of the three but must recognise that each one presupposes to some degree the rest. The terms represent three levels of entry into theology, three kinds of "probing". Thus it is inaccurate to portray him as seeking to base theology on ethics as a new foundation. His decision to begin with ethics has to do with chronological priority, not logical priority.

Unsurprisingly then, McClendon finds himself in the company of those 'postmodern' in his rejection of general human categories as the basis of Christian systematic theology. He is not concerned with 'first principles' or to start from scratch but best exemplifies John Yoder's alternatives to "methodologism"; namely "walk and word", to begin "where we are", in the midst of the story of God in Israel, Jesus and the Christian community as witnessed in the Scriptures. Interestingly, it is almost to 'damn with faint praise' to label McClendon 'postmodern' since his earlier 'philosophical' work, Understanding Religious Convictions (co-authored with James Smith), was in many respects ahead of its time. As he and Smith comment in their updated edition, "we believe, not that we are catching up with the times, but that the times have at long last caught up with us."

If there is any doubt as to McClendon's engagement with the mainstream 'greats', then his Doctrine should remove them. McClendon engages with the breadth of the Christian tradition in an erudite and masterful way. Yet, as Hauerwas notes, it is Hans Hut (the sixteenth century martyr) rather than Hegel (the philosopher of the absolute) who is representative of the power of the Christian reality and who is paradigmatic of Christ's victory. In this way, McClendon both takes the best of the mainstream tradition and also subverts it with the 'weakness' of Christ and 'foolishness' of the gospel.

One of the many merits of McClendon's Doctrine is his exemplification of his concerns. His second volume is an example of service to the teaching practice of the Christian community. Such teaching of doctrine is "first order" and doctrinal theology is "second order" (23-4).

Doctrine's order is also somewhat disorienting to the traditional systematic theology reader. Whereas traditional theology typically begins with attributes of God, God as Trinity etc, the chapter on the "Identity of God" does not appear until halfway through. Instead McClendon begins with Eschatology under the section, "The Rule of God" moving on then to "The New in Christ" and then to Creation. The narrative approach places eschatology as the focus and telos of all that is to come and the view through which all else is understood, presented in a way more radical than that of the 'eschatological theology' of Thomas Finger. Each theme is treated fully cognizant of the others preceding and following. Philosophical engagement is also frequently present but it is McClendon's exemplification of the Christian tradition that is able to argue and persuade in way that is far superior to the philosophers and methodologists such that it seems, in David Ford's Barthian phrase, "the Best Apologetics is Good Systematics."

I only wish that McClendon had written a larger volume of doctrine or perhaps two since there is sometimes the sense that discussion is cut short. I felt left hanging at the end of his discussion of the divine and human in Christ as well as on theories of the atonement, for two examples. But where it may not fully satisfy here in this regard, it may instead inspire others to continue thinking.

J.W. Gibson's book has a misleading title; I sought it as a source of the technical aspects of the war in Vietnam, and instead found a polemic. His adulation for Ho Chi Minh and even faint praise for Joseph Stalin give away his bias--the book is clearly an anti-capitalist diatribe, although I certainly recognize the validity of some of his criticism. Having been an Army officer in the conflict (199th Infantry Brigade) I experienced first-hand the problems with morale and a frustrating conflict in which we consistently ceded the offensive to the enemy. But I must take exception to his perpetuation of the myth that we used our soldiers as "bait". He and Stanley Karnow, neither of whom fought in the war, agree that the typical American tactic was to blunder through the jungle until we found the enemy the hard way--by being ambushed. The fact is, rougly 90% of all ambushes (the most common type of combat in an unconventional war) in Vietnam were initiated by American or allied forces.

The concept of limited war is one that the author never seems to grasp. He even manages to write an entire book on it without mentioning George F. Kennan, the architect of this war-without-victory concept. The publishing date of 1986 is telling, as the author's pronouncement that the U.S. military has not learned from its past mistakes in Vietnam would shortly be proved wrong in Kuwait. In his subsequent update, he cites Saddam Hussein's continued tyranny after 1991 as proof of failure, as though this was a military blunder rather than a political decision.

Gibson's obvious affection for "wars of national liberation" carry over to his conclusion in which he seems to employ a fairness doctrine to war. If the other side is not our technological equal, we should not use our superiority to reduce our casualties and shorten the conflict. War is always a catalyst for invention and innovation, and the side that does a better job typically prevails. This did not happen in Vietnam because our electorate grew disillusioned after 14 years of war, and because we have elections every two years that resulted in a government that eventually cut the funding--and it is not possible to wage war without money. The other side did not have elections, but they did have tyrants in charge who were quite willing to expend ten or twenty of their young men for every American KIA. In the end, the war of containment became a war of attrition. This is another concept that seems not to have occurred to Mr. Gibson.

It requires little imagination to describe U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War as both misguided and mismanaged. As the politicians who got America bogged down in someone else's civil war have much to answer for, so too do those senior military officers who ran the war; the scorched-earth, search-and-destroy strategy that MACV opted for was not only wrongheaded, unworkable, and doomed to fail, it was also immoral.All this James Gibson tells us in THE PERFECT WAR. The problem is that he adds more heat than light to the discussion so overt are his biases against the U.S. military and in favor of the National Liberation Front. The same ground is covered much more intelligently in Neil Sheehan's A BRIGHT SHINING LIE. Gibson takes the officer corps to task for the poor quality of leadership displayed during the war by the many field-grade and general officers who "led" their units from a helicopter seat and who displayed more concern over their efficiency reports than their troops. Fair enough. It is true that there was not an overabundance of heroic leadership at the battalion, brigade, and division level in Vietnam. It is also true, as Gibson argues, that the war produced a lot of senior officers who should be embarrassed to wear the Silver Stars and Distinguished Flying Crosses they were awarded.Still, for all the helicopter-seat heroes in the war, there were still plenty of field-grade officers who led on the ground, with their troops, in the style of the battalion and regimental commanders of WWII. Gibson should have given these men their due. He does not. A much more incisive, well-rounded discussion of the quality of combat leadership in Vietnam is to be found in ABOUT FACE by David Hackworth.Gibson's sources are a major problem. He does not appear to have done a lot of original research, but rather quotes from previously-published books and magazine articles. Worse, he relies heavily on three books (NAM by Mark Baker, CONVERSATIONS WITH AMERICANS by Mark Lane, and SPOILS OF WAR by Charles Levy) which, once published, were thoroughly discredited by journalists, historians, and veterans who pointed out the fabrications, distortions, and exaggerated accounts contained in them. It is distressing to see the bogus accounts from these three books repeatedly popping up in THE PERFECT WAR. Gibson seemed prepared to believe the worst about everyone who served in Vietnam, from private to general. The US Army, as described in THE PERFECT WAR, seemed to do nothing but smoke dope, kill civilians, frag its officers, and lose battles.The communists, on the other hand, are idealized in THE PERFECT WAR for their patriotism, determination, and bravery. The Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese Army had an abundance of all three virtures. It was, in fact, their patriotism, determination, and bravery which won the war, not (as the right-wing in this country would have it) the machinations of a treasonous press, a cowardly congress, and anti-war protesters. For all that, though, the communists were capable of great cruelty in fighting their war, from the murder of government officials and their families, the massacre in Hue (which Gibson downplays), to the systematic abuse and torture of American POWs in places like the Hanoi Hilton. Gibson seems unable to come to terms with the dark side of the communist war effort.

This book looks at the Vietnam War in a perspective that can be deeply appreciated by someone who had a four year involvement in it. I couldn't put the book down. Having spent two tours
in-country, being non-military, but supporting the US Army, in both combat and non-combat situations, this book cleared up a lot of "why in the world is this or that happening"? Also, there were several situations that Gibson mentioned that I was a participant in and his writing gives me the notion that he does have some idea of what he speaks.

I do not believe he was leaning to the communist efforts, this writing was about our side. I also know that everyone there was not a dope smoking idiot, but the way MANAGEMENT handled most situations, made a sane person wonder what in the heck were THEY thinking and whos side were THEY on? I have never seen such waste of assets and personnel!

I believe everyone who was there would have a better understanding of all of the goofyness that went on, and there was plenty of it, if they would read this book.

I have read that Wilkie Collins had this to say about writing: "Make them laugh, make them cry, make them wait."
The Dark Clue:
a) is utterly devoid of humor (you won't laugh)
b) builds no sympathy in the reader (you won't cry)
c) at 390 pages (in my copy), it certainly makes you wait, but there is a total absence is suspense (your waiting will be tedious).
James Wilson has written a very accomplished novel, in that it recreates Victorian speech and settings quite proficiently. It obviously took him years of research and writing time. But where are the rounded, memorable characters, like Laura Fairlie's peevish uncle with his delicate "nerves" (from The Woman in White) or the terrifying Count Fosco with his white mice, or even the faithful house-steward Gabriel Betteredge (from Collins' The Moonstone) who consults his copy of Robinson Crusoe at every important turn in his life? Lastly and most importantly, what Wilson does with the brave, noble characters of Marian Halcombe and Walter Hartright is not only UNTRUE to their characters, but despicable. For a terrific Victorian novel, stick to Wilkie himself.

I don't like gimmicks in general and I find them a bit of a fraud when used to mislead a potential reader about a book. Wilkie Collins is generally considered the inventor of the mystery novel and whether you agree with that or not, he was one of the exceptional writers of Victorian England. "The Moonstone", and, "The Woman In White", are just two examples of his work that remain in print in the 21st century. Author James Wilson borrows 2 characters from one of Mr. Collins's novels, and, by insinuation at the very least suggests there is more than that of Mr. Collins to be expected. Borrowing these characters was meaningless to the telling of this story, a bit of vacuous name dropping is all that it amounts to.

The tale is the writing of a biography, a book within a book. The subject is the 19th century painter J.M.W. Turner, and the author has used all 7 major biographies of the man to write his novel. I have read none of them, but I cannot imagine any of them being less enjoyable than this book, and I bet they even have pictures! My complaints in general are that the book is too long, the story presumes the reader to be obtuse, the ending is completely unsatisfying, and this book must be amongst the entries for the most obsessive use of commas. The first two sentences have 4 commas, 2 hyphens, and a parenthetical. The cadence of this book is an uncertain staccato.

I have read Mr. Wilson's other book which was non-fiction and extremely well written. I don't know if he has the ability to eventually write a great or even a good novel, but he will never get there by trying to imitate the work of another. He makes his attempt exponentially more difficult by trying to mimic the writing of an author who has endured for centuries, and he even borrows a character from the man he seeks to emulate.

As the main character in this book sinks in to depravity, the story becomes confused, unsure of what it wants to be, and who is in charge. Many authors say they create their characters and then let them lead. Allowing them to lead, and allowing them to run amok are very different.

When I purchased The Dark Clue I had no idea that I had picked up a book that would entertain, intrigue, and educate me. Through letters and diary entries I was taken back to Victorian England and introduced to Walter Hartwright and Marian Halcombe, a brother and sister-in-law team searching for the "real" story of the renowned, reclusive landscape artist J.M.W. Turner. Through their research in writing Turner's biography I met wonderful characters that took me punting on the Thames, hiding around the corners in the backstreets of London's slums, and visiting the finest homes of the elite all the while feeling that the "truth" of Turner's life was just at hand. As the character's obsessions grew to find the truth, so did mine with an ending so surprising but so fitting of the bizzare life of Turner.
I say this is the best reading we can hope for... fiction combined with real historical characters and education combined with great entertainment.

I am not sure who this book the 'committee' wrote this for, but I can think of no one. More like a hodge-podge collection of Internet clippings somewhat related to Java & Macs, interspersed with useless code. It is sad because the Mac market needs a Java book covering getting started and the many options and tools Apple has provided the Java student & developer.

I am sorry I wasted my money & was responsible for the deaths of the trees that made it!

This is probably the worst technical book that I have read. Its more a collection of papers than anything else, and much of the content is trivial. Beginning progrmmers would find nothing in here. Advanced programmers will probably find a few nuggets of information that are useful, but they are few and far between.

If you are looking for an excellent book on Java on the new Macintosh operating system OS X, this is one to get. The writing style is well done and the book, in terms of content, is well thought out. I am enjoying the authors coverage of pure Java vs Mac OS X specific issues in particular. Keep up the good job.

The title of this book is misleading. For over 200 pages I got to read all about his family, his holidays, his pets, inside jokes, and other uneventful detail. Once in a while for a couple of pages he would slip in something about how he armed pre-teen children to fight in the jungles. If his book was his personal reflections, the title shouldn't say it's about CIA operations in Laos.

It is good to see a "down to earth" book like this, coming from a "been there, done that" author. As far as I am concerned, this book should be mandatory reading for all high school history teachers. It would be nice to see the future generations "completly" educated. A 68-69 Udorn RTAFB, Thailand veteran.

I truely enjoyed reading this book. I especially liked the character developments of each person and their envolvement during the Vietnam War. i believe that Mr. Parker has a great understanding of the incidents as relating to the CIAs' involement in the Vietnam War.

First of all I am not a statistics major and although I find statistics to be a very interesting but challenging subject I am afraid to say that so far I have not been very successful .... I need extra help and I have not yet found the solution manual for this textbook and I am amazed at the fact that there isn't one ? Can anyone help me...

Thanx

Norma_Zuniga@yahoo.com

Having taken an introductory college course that used this book up through most of chapter 9 (infrences based on two-samples using confidence intervals and hyopthesis tesing), I must say as usually happens in intro stat textbooks, the probablity chapter (3) is the weakest area, it needs more worded explinations on counting rules to clarify seemingly ambiguous situations. I've also heard professors complain that some of the examples used are over simplified and ignore obvious possiblities in the interpertations of results that add new dimentions to the problem. Not to mention the whole things needs a few more passes by some competent editors, as there's quite a few painfully obvious mistakes and misprints. Other than that, it's understandable enough, the applications problems are welcome, if occasionally flawed. For a more intensive introduction to general statistics, I suggest you seek a textbook that wasn't aimed at the widest possible market. (try the texts that say something like: statistics for engineers)

Often using real-life examples taken from the media, McClave presents materials in an orderly fashion. Sub-sections are small (usually 5-6 pages) and problem sets are very nicely divided into Mechanics, Basic, and Advanced problems. My only dislike was chapter 3 counting rules, which seemed to be added without proper foundation. As both a student and now a tutor of this text, I find McClave's level of explanation sufficent for an introductory text.

I was very surprised when I ordered this book and found out that yes, indeed, it was merely a very tiny portion of what I had expected. I suppose I should have known from the price, but the description (at least at that time) did not make it clear that it wasn't the entire dictionary.

While this may be a very thorough source for the words it covers, it should be noted in the basic information that this is ONLY 128 pages of a 15,000 page work. The description above is very misleading.

itz a dictionary. what more can i say

I found this book exremely biased, especially on its treatment of ethics and environmentalism, which were extremely collectivistic and altruistic. I felt like I was also overcharged for the text book, for something so vaguely written.

Most textbooks do a very poor job of addressing current issues in a clear, accurate, concise manner. This book, however, is to be commended. I especially found the resource information and discussion cases to be a tremendous benefit. The discussion questions and current event topics encourage the students to explore these issues outside of class, in their businesses and in the community. Business and society is a topic of extreme importance. Unfortunately, it often goes overlooked in so many universities and colleges. Overall, I rank this book as a worthwhile investment and hope the authors continue to explore these important issues in business and education.

I was asked to review this text by a group of EMTs at the teaching hospital where I am employed as an ER physician and surgeon. The text contains conflicting information and is not well organized. I would not recommed this text for teaching new EMTs. It could be useful as a review for experienced technicians or paramedics.

While the information can, at times, be repetitive or confusing, overall the book stresses those skills and topics which are important for prehospital emergency providers. The book is easy to use as a reference, reads at a slightly higher level than many introductory texts, and can be a valuable resource even for an EMT-P. This book does require, however, some direction and sometimes elaboration from from a knowledgeable and organized "Basic" instructor.

Worth owning and using.

THIS IS A EXCELLENT BOOK TO USE FOR LEARNING THE BASIC EMT. THIS BOOK WAS USED BY MY PROFESSOR AND 16 OUT OF A CLASS OF 19 PASS THE STATE TEST. SO ADVICE IF YOU GOING TO STUDY TO BE AN EMT USE MOSBY IS THE BEST

We use english units in my state. This book is all metric. They could have at least had both metric and english in the book. I sent mine back, as it is worthless to me.

This book was a classic, but why does it have to be metric? I guess converting it gave the academics something to do. Here is a news flash for the publisher: Civil Engineers praticing in the US don't use the metric system. Even our state DOT has given up on converting. I wish that the 6th edition was still available. Its just about useless now.

If you need a reference manual, this has everything. Although, most people need text books for problem solving, whether they be a student or a professional. This book some how managed to completely avoid sample problems. I returned it.