This is an very readable book about the marriage of one of the most famous US President's and his glamorous wife. The book opens with a short story about Jackie and details her early life very throughly. The book continues on telling how Jack and Jackie met, courted, and their marriage, ending with the death of President Kennedy. The book tells about the birth of the Kennedy's second son, Patrick who only lived a few days, how the Cuban missle crisis helped to define JFK, and JFK's hidden illness. The book is written in very easily understood prose which makes the book pleasurable reading. On that note, I do not think this book would be considered a piece of scholarly work. This is a good book for those looking for an easy read about the John and Jackie Kennedy.

I like to think of myself as a Kennedy expert- I know almost every little detail about the life of this amazing family. Actually, it's become a major fascination over the last few years. I wrote an extensive report on the family and did a great deal of research and came across this book, which I just reread. Again, I was completely mesmerized by this wonderful book by Edward Klein. He was really lucky to have know the family and have such an intimate relationship with these very tortured people. Many seem to forget that they were human like everyone else and had their share of problems and upsets in life. Klein, as a friend of both Jack and Jackie's, makes the story come alive with word for word converstaions from those who were closest to the Kennedy's. I was especially touched by the end of the book where Jack is shot on that fateful day in November of 1963. I cry everytime I read it and think how horrible it must have been for Jackie to not only witness her husband's death, but move on after the tragedy with grace and dignity. I highly recommend this book and if there is anyone who has a similar interest in the Kennedys, please e-mail me. This book is really worth the read.

I love biographies, and have read several on the Kennedy's. This is one of my favorites. It gives you a very in depth look at the real relationship between Jack and Jackie, which is, as the title says, "All Too Human". The book, which reads almost like a novel, starts with the first meeting of Jackie and Jack, and carries you all the way through until Jack was assassinated in November of 1963. Edward Klein was a personal friend of Jackie's for a number of years, which made him privy to alot of information. Some points of interest include Jack's affairs and womanizing, Jackie's feelings on being a politician's wife, Joe Kennedy's role in their relationship, how the death of their son, Patrick Bouvier Kennedy, brought Jack and Jackie closer than they'd ever been before, only to have it taken away on that fateful day in Dallas, and Jackie's relationship with her parents. Of course, there is a ton of other information in this book, but these are just a few. After reading this book, I read "Just Jackie: Her Private Years", which is also by Edward Klein. It picks up where "All Too Human" leaves off (shortly after the assassination of JFK). I highly recommend both books to anyone interested in reading about the Kennedys and Jackie O.

The atlas is U. S. centric even though the title is 'world atlas'. The map of the U. S. takes up about 25 pages, while the map of Italy, Greece, Romania, Bulgaria, and Yugoslovia (formerly) take up 2 pages. And the spelling is unbelievable. Many of the place names are rendered in the native language instead of English, at least I assume so. North and South Korea, about the size of Kansas is shown at about 1/2 the size of Kansas. One normally buys a world atlas to learn about the world, not the U. S. A disappointment.

The twentieth edition of Goode's atlas of the world continues to be a standard for U.S.-educational purposes. The reference maps themselves are not too accurate and detailed, but they provide a reasonably well-balanced coverage of the world, with handy larger-scale inset maps for the more populous regions of each continent. There is an elaborate thematic section on a variety of topics about the world, the continents, and the United States in particular. This is supplemented by a very good statistical section, and the 30,000 entry index gazetteer contains a pronunciation guide for each entry, which is unique for a world atlas. Non-US buyers probably have better alternatives, but for school purposes for North America, this is a very good choice. The publication of this twentieth (!) edition illustrates the endurability of this work since 1922.

When I took my first college-level geography class, my professor told the class that Goode's World Atlas is the best atlas on the market. Fifteen years and a couple of editions later, it's still the best atlas I've ever seen. The atlas includes a commendable section on map projections, many excellent thematic maps, easy-to-read regional (general) maps, tables of country and landform sizes, and a wonderful index. If you're looking for a road map, this atlas probably won't help. If you want to learn about the world, or teach school-aged children about the world they live in, then this is one of the top resources out there.

Prior to September 11, most Americans knew (or cared) little about Afghani politics, but today it seems imperative for us to learn all we can about the history, culture, and politics of this exotic but troubled nation. In *Unholy Wars*, reporter John Cooley has provided a wealth of information about Afghanistan and its geopolitical importance over the past quarter-century, including the 1979 Soviet invasion, the U.S.-supported campaign by the *mujahedin* to expel the Soviets, and the subsequent transformation of the most militant *mujahedin* into the Al-Qaida terrorist network led by Osama bin Laden.

Cooley succeeds in providing an admirably detailed account of the origin of U.S. involvement in Afghanistan, including excerpts from the now-infamous 1998 interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski published in a French publication in which he boasted about having entrapped the Soviets into invading so that they would experience their own Viet Nam-type military disaster. The involvement of the CIA, along with Pakistan's ISI, in supporting and supplying the *mujahedin* is laid out clearly, and Cooley even devotes a chapter to the significance of the opium trade as a source of funding for Islamist armies both during and after the campaign against the Soviets.

Other chapters discuss how the multi-national Islamist "freedom fighters" dispersed after 1989 to spread their gospel of militant Islam and their terrorist tactics to Egypt, Algeria, Chechenya, the Philippines, and ultimately, the United States. The book was completed prior to the events of September 11, 2001, but the material dealing with previous Al-Qaida attacks in the U.S., including the first bombing of the World Trade Center, is vital reading for people interested in historical background to the current crisis.

The main problem with this book is that whereas Cooley presents a veritable blizzard of "facts," there is very little accompanying analysis. The presentation reads like a first draft, a mass of semi-digested material in dire need of editing and refining. Particularly in the chapters pertaining to recent terrorist activities in nations outside of Afghanistan, the endless parade of names, dates, places, factions and parties will make even the most resolute reader's head spin.

Overall, the book seems to have been thrown together way too quickly, as evidenced by an appalling lack of careful proofreading or fact-checking. Examples of gaffes that should never have made it to the final galleys include the claim that California's Chico State University is located in Nevada, the declaration that the time period between 1956 and 1970 constituted 24 years, and a reference to the "two 110-foot towers" of the World Trade Center. Whoops! Aside from the obvious sloppiness evidenced here, the inclusion of these kinds of careless errors cannot help but cast doubt on the overall accuracy of Cooley's reporting in this book.

Given that so far there is but a handful of books in English that provide historical background pertaining to Al Qaida and international terrorism generally, I would say that Unholy Wars is definitely worth reading. We can only hope, however, that a more analytical and carefully written work on these subjects will emerge soon.

In this impressively detailed and exhaustively documented book, John K. Cooley gets to the roots of the international terrorist organizations that are striking fear and violence into the world’s populations. Beginning with surprising revelations about U.S. and Soviet actions in Afghanistan during the Cold War, Cooley traces the origins of today’s terror back to the West’s strategy of creating an army of fanatical Muslim warriors to mire the USSR in its own Vietnam. While that plan was successful, it gave birth to the terrorist violence we face today, and Cooley deftly explains how. (...) strongly recommend this book to all readers for the historic context lacking in mainstream media coverage of the war on terrorism.

Former President Jimmy Carter was awarded the 2002 Nobel Prize for his Middle East peace efforts. Yet Carter's Central Asian policies were directly responsible for the spawning of international terrorism as we know it now. On Juy 3, 1979, Carter, acting on the recommendation of his National Security Advisor, cold-warrior Zbigniew Brzezinski, began clandestinely supporting Islamic insurgents in Afghanistan. Carter may rue this now. But at the time, he believed Afghani Islamist rebels were simply fellow Believers denied their religious freedom by the "godless" Marxist government in Kabul. Brzezinski knew better. But as he stated in a 1998 interview: "This secret operation was an excellent idea. Its effect was to draw the Russians into the Afghan trap." When the Soviet Army entered Afghanistan in late December 1979, Brzezinski gloated, "Now we can give the USSR its own Vietnam War!" Brzezinski and Carter's CIA Director Adm. Stansfield Turner freely acknowledged that "possible adverse consequences of the anti-communist alliance with Afghan Islamists (and shortly afterward with their radical Muslim allies around the world) -- the growth of a new international terrorist movement and global outreach of Central Asian drug-trafficking -- did not weigh heavily, if at all" in their calculations. Brzezinski, asked later whether he regretted arming and training future terrorists, retorted: "What was more important in world history? The Taliban or the fall of the Soviet empire? A few over-excited Islamists, or the liberation of eastern Europe?" Brzezinski's native Poland was, of course, in eastern Europe... Carter encouraged Islamist incursions into the Central Asian republics of the USSR, ostensibly to foment religious rebellion in those secular Islamic states. As Brzezinski admitted, the US intended to "build bridges to states having a strong Muslim identity." However, the insurgents frequently committed small-scale terrorist acts by planting bombs in crowded markets, bus depots, apartment and government buildings, and through kidnappings and executions. Carter's sincere but misguided religious naivety regarding Islamism was rewarded with the Iranian hostage crisis which ended his chances of a second term.
The Reagan regime continued Carter's Central Asian policy, and began to deploy an army of Muslim zealots from geographically strategic Pakistan and wealthy Saudi Arabia. Jihadists from every corner of the Muslim world were recruited and trained by the CIA and US military Special Forces in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and even at US military bases. Reagan vastly increased funding of mujahedin "holy warriors" who established their own facilities -- later to become terrorist training camps -- in Afghanistan. There, exiled Saudi billionaire Usama bin Laden started his ascent from mujahed commander to international terrorist mastermind. Following the death of Leonid Brezhnev, Mikhail Gorbachev implored the UN to intervene and help negociate an end to the Soviet Afghan quagmire. At this, Reagan responded with his infamous exhortation to the mujahedin "Declare holy jihad and go for the victory!" After the Soviet withdrawal, the government of Afghanistan collapsed. The various mujahedin factions began to fight amongst themselves for political supremacy, territory, and opium. The fundamentalist Wahabist Taliban emerged victorious. The so-called northern alliance was (and still is) a loose coalition of warlords and bandits with the motive of personal power, tribal bigotry, and drug profits for its opposition to the Saudi-sponsored Taliban. Moscow regarded the Northern Alliance as the sole barrier between Wahabist extremism and the vulnerable bordering Central Asian states. Russia committed ongoing support to the northern forces, whose leader was, ironically, one of the most notorious CIA-trained rebel operatives during the Soviet Afghan War.
Normally, I am not impressed by right-of-center interpretations of history, because they so frequently attempt to absolve the US of responsibility for disasterous policy. But Cooley has written an honest, unbiased account of the birth and rise of a world-threatening evil. And "Unholy Wars" does not spare recriminations toward any country whose actions contributed to the empowerment of international terrorism. It is a frighteningly eye-opening and timely book. All I can say is, read it now!

John Stuart Mill, author of On Liberty, defines the nature of civil liberty, and most importantly, the harm principl. He aims to give readers a better understanding of the nature and limits of power that can be exercised by society over individuals. The purpose of this book is to inform interested individuals about the rights of individuals and the limitations of the government. This book of philosophy was written almost 150 years ago. By reading the book, the reader is able to apply Mill's message and examples to our lives in America today. The ahead-of-the-times ideas that are in On Liberty can be related to our world because it discusses controversies that are still seen in our courtrooms today. Mill is able to accomplish his purpose because he uses many examples, thoughts, and theories about individual and social rights. He works through each of his ideas, looking at both sides of the issue to enable the reader to make their own informed decision about each matter. This book has a practical meaning because it allows the reader to develop and reason ideas about government power and when that power should be exercised over the people. Unfortunately, this book does have one draw back. Mill was a very educated man and wrote very well for his time. Yet today, our style and writing techniques are not the same as they were in the nineteenth century. This makes On Liberty a difficult book to read. His book is very decriptive, yet his wording is not easily understadable and some paragraphs have to be read two or three times to fully understand what he is writing about. Aside from his writing style, John Stuart Mill has put together an essay full of educated ideas about society and individuals. John Stuart Mill wrote an informative book geared towards an educated audience. He has achieved his purpose for the essay through the use of situations and examples that can be applied to real life cases still today. He managed to keep the readers interested and I look forward to reading other books he has written.

It was not Socialism itself that is an evil, but the way it was implemented in some countries, in response to white-anglo-whatever's totally value-less review. Mill's book about liberty was of vast importance in freeing the individual from the tyranny of communal opinion. Someone may dislike homosexuals, but has no right to harass them or pass ethical judgements on them for what is their choice, of no harm to anyone else. Those are opinions of an indeterminate validity. Socal intervention may only be used to protect someone from restriction of their liberties. What Mill lacks in rigour, he makes up for in persuasiveness. He has some great lines in defense of liberty, a pre-dominant value of human life. Although, it is to be noted that the book can be somewhat tedious in areas which it is repetitive. This book also illustrates what can be seen as a fault in utilitarianism. Utilitarianism takes no notice of other values, or of a conflict of values, such as liberty of existence over the majorities happiness, in which ethics slides into absurdity.

J.S. Mill has written the best promulgation of classical liberalism in his book "On Liberty" (OL). Although a socialist himself, many of the ideas in OL are actually tenets of modern libertarianism (also called classical liberalism). Mill states that the only reason that force can be used on any man is to prevent harm to others. I consider "focre" to be either social or economic. Mill saw it as only social, which explains his socialism.

Not to detract from Mill or OL, the book is a resounding defense of civil-liberties. OL completes modern democratic theory as promulgated by John Locke in his "Two Treatises of Government." While Locke argues for some kind of democracy reminiscent of Athens, Mill qualifies Locke's point by protecting the minority from the majority. This book should be read by Americans who want to know more about freedom, and by our elected officials.

Sadly, it's our elected oficials who probably won't get it.

For the greater part, Tyson's book is a reasonably accurate review of the material in Dee's diaries. So long as you are using it solely as a reference for the basic elements of the system, you won't go wrong. However, he tends to "interpret" unresolvable ambiguities in the material according to his own view without ever noting that there are ambiguities. He also selectively quotes the original material to support his views; a substantially different sense of what was said sometimes arises when the material itself is studied. Where Tyson really crashes and burns is in his association of the Enochian material with the apocalypse, particularly in his belief that the Calls are meant to bring about the end of the world. Here he combines Christian fundamentalist myth with elements of H.P. Lovecraft's fictional horror universes; there is nothing in the original to support his ideas.

I suggest starting out with "modern magick" by donald michael kraig before studing or even practicing the enochian system,for it is very very complex,just because it says it's for beginners really means for someone who has some knowledge of the actual enochian system or has actually been taught and feels comfortable enough to go ahead, he does put a little to much in the book to "start off"with,and it should just be a refrence guide at first.otherwise enjoy and be safe. love,life and light

This book is an invaluable source of reference for magicians who would like to try their hands on Enochian magic. The author has researched extensively in an attempt to put forward as good as possible the original workings of Dee and Kelley.

A word of warning here - the book is not a complete manual for performing Enochian magic. Those who are used to ceremonial magic will have no problems with what is or rather what isn't included in this book. Those who are new to ceremonial magic, and so do not understand certain observances required should not attempt what's been written. 'Enochian Magic for Beginners' is not, or should not be meant for absolute beginners.

Many readers, even educated readers, see the US Civil War as an event in a glass bubble between 1861 and 1865 and the people who fought that conflict as having sprung up at First Bull Run. Mr. Longacre does an excellent job of giving depth and context to a truly professional cavalryman -- John Buford. A product of the "Old Army" and the ante-belleum Dragoons, General Buford was representative of the best qualities of that hard profession. While the popular movie "Gettysburg" may have brought General Buford to the eye of the public, he had a long and varied career before June 30 - July 1, 1863. Longacre puts it all in perspective.

Unlike other Civil War generals, John Buford did not leave behind a large body of correspondence, and he died before the end of the war. These two factors, combined with a lack of other source material led to Edward Longacre's initial reluctance to begin researching this biography. His reverence for the book The Killer Angels, and his service as a technical advisor to Sam Elliott (who played Buford in the movie Gettysburg), combined to help him overcome his fears. The result is this 248-page biography. The book has many strong points. Longacre clearly describes Buford's dealings with the politics of the Army of the Potomac - especially his rise to command after being closely affiliated with three disgraced generals: Pope, Burnside, and Hooker. He does well in conveying a sense of Buford's growing disillusionment as the Army of the Potomac missed many opportunities to destroy the Army of Northern Virginia after Gettysburg. The chapter on Gettysburg is probably the best in the book as it gives the reader a good insight into the problems faced by a Civil War general on the field who had to assess terrain and eploy his troopers to take advantage of the ground while trying to anticipate the probable actions of the enemy. The book is well-produced, has an extensive bibliography, and good maps - even though the typography is sometimes jarring. People looking for an exhaustive "tell-all" biography will not find it here because of the lack of primary source material to work with. Within these limits, though, Edward Longacre has written a worthwhile book about a long-neglected commander.

As mentioned in the other reviews the author was limited in the amount of primary resource material available to him whilst writing this biography. Taking that into consideration he has produced an excellent account of General John Buford. I found the narrative was fluid and easy to read and the chapters concerning Gettysburg and after very interesting. The book is 312 pages in length, contained in 12 chapters with 6 maps and 16 photos. Overall this is a well presented and researched book but does not offer an extensive account of this man's life due to the lack of material. I would think that any person who enjoys Civil War history should find this an enjoyable account of a professional Union cavalry officer.

I would like to say this book has a pretty good overview of tourist attractions, accommadations and travellers tips. It is however at times just rude to India and Hinduism in particular. It always mentions Buddhism first such as "Buddhist and Hindu temples" and the like. It also has the nerve to say of Varanasi, "before it was the most sacred place in the world for Hindu, the Buddha preached his first sermon near here". Besides this and incorporating the bogus Aryan Invasion Theory in the history section, I would recommend this book to readers but beware of some of its facts

I took this book on my first trip to India and once there didn't even use it. We didn't go to the tourist-y places so didn't need the book, and the places we went weren't in the book. The history and culture sections were useful in pre-trip preparation. We found clean and inexpensive hotels and restaurants on our own; it wasn't difficult. While in India I did find a book called Culture Shock: India. This is the book I wish I would have found and purchased before my trip and it's the one I've been recommending to everyone (even if they don't ask me!). Go to India without a guidebook!

I have a different perspective on this book than a "regular tourist". I was looking for the following -
a) a reasonably clear overview of each city or historical site, when it was built, and by whom, and why it is of importance to tourists and to India
b) reasonable detail for cities, outside of the usual tourist attractions
c) some attractions/ towns not listed in most tourist books.

I was checking the sections on West Bengal and Orissa in particular (having lived and travelled in both states). I used those sections to compare between this guide (the 1999 edition) and Lonely Planet etc. For my purposes, Rough Guide was the most helpful - in describing places, in offering different ways to get around (with notes on how safe it is for women etc), in evaluating the historical and/or tourist appeal of places, and so forth. I think I fell for this guide when I noticed the level of detail it had on eating places and places of worship in a residential area in South Calcutta (not to mention a critique of the Pipli handicraft industry).

The little vignettes on getting around in a Hindu holy site (and in temples, where allowed in) were also quite interesting. I have never been one to make pilgrimages, but if I wanted to do so, this would be useful to have along. The history section was surprisingly thorough and balanced - and I learned new things not covered in Indian history textbooks in school.

Is this book perfect? Of course not. But a guidebook generally cannot cater to all tastes equally. For me (a non-tourist but an NRI returning home), it did quite well (even though Jammu & Kashmir were omitted but Ladakh was included). It sparked in me the determination to visit Madhya Pradesh (one of the few states I have never visited) and parts of the Northeast. I would love to see a Rough Guide or the equivalent that focuses more on Eastern and North-eastern India, but until this, this works fine.

My dad was born there in the 1950's and i was named after it. not a bad place, not much to do but nice to visit. the book is informal but informative.

. . . on Aran as everywhere else. I have had the privilege of spending two weeks on Inish Mor, one 4 years ago and one in the summer of 2001. The difference between the two visits was enormous . . . where on the first visit I saw perhaps 5-6 cars a day on the little roads, now there are minibuses beetling along everywhere. The pony carts are strictly for the tourists. I missed the women setting up kiosks on the road, selling their beautifully made sweaters. At the same time, throughout the summer, the young people put on a nightly concert featuring traditional Irish music and dance -- and it is fantastic! So wonderful to see the beauty of the old traditions taking hold in the hearts of the young men and women.

BUT ... what is quaint to the tourist translates into abject poverty for the native. Reading Synge gives one a sense of what WAS, and how hard it has been (and still is) for families to make a go of it on Aran.

Read it with respect, and remember . . . all things are changing.

"The Aran Islands" is a delightful rendition of the experiences of J. M. Synge during his visits to the Aran Islands just over a century ago. Synge's journey had been encouraged by William Butler Yeats. "Go to the Aran Islands. Live there as one of the people themselves; express a life that has never found expression." Here Synge gained an insight into the Irish character which would enrich his later works.

The Aran Islands are a chain of islands off the coasts of Connemara and Clare. Isolated by the sea, the Arans, like the Galapagos in the natural world, preserve the language and customs of traditional Ireland.

The book is a narrative of what Synge saw and the stories he heard during his stays in the Arans, told by a master storyteller in the finest Irish tradition. The language is delightful, the stories are entertaining and the insight into the Irish soul is profound. A must read for any lover of the Irish.

Time travel in fantasy is now such a cliche that it's a bit hard to write anything original about it. But John Bellairs managed. "Trolley to Yesterday" has a bunch of intriguing twists and unexpected events, and while it doesn't have as much supernatural content, it still is an enjoyable read.

Professor Childermass is acting even more oddly than usual, which is saying something. When Fergie and Johnny try to investigate his weird behavior (including sand on his carpet and talking to himself), they find the professor having a conversation with Brewster, a magical Egyptian statue. He admits his secret: Behind a bricked-up wall is a time-travelling trolley. And the boys hitch a ride when Childermass travels back in time to save the city of Constantinople from invasion.

The problem? They arrive a little too late, and the city is being overrun by Turkish soldiers. As they struggle to make their way back to the trolley and the safety of the future, they encounter the trolley's creator (who accidently got left behind during one of its previous excursions), a deranged monk, and a group of ghostly Crusaders. But then Johnny is poisoned, and the only cure means going back to Constantinople -- and back into danger.

Usually time travel books are full of cliches, and this one has a few, but you probably won't notice them. Kids who read this book may become interested in the Byzantine Empire -- while Bellairs doesn't present huge amounts of historical detail, he gives enough to be very, very interesting. (There's also a dash of Egyptian stuff too) There's adventure, humor and the odd way of getting around.

Johnny and Fergie remain the surprisingly courageous duo of previous books, the shy boy and his brasher, jokier pal. Professor Childermass is crusty, sometimes a bit irrational, but very lovable. And Brewster (a deity of Upper and Lower Egypt) really steals the show with his dry little comments. .

This book proably has one of the lowest amounts of supernatural stuff of Bellairs' books. Certainly it doesn't have much in the way of horror. But there is a great twist about halfway through, where our heroes are aided by a group of ghostly Crusaders, who are trying to make amends for sacking the city centuries before. I suppose Brewster technically counts as supernatural, and he provides a lot of the humor (such as translating a Turkish soldier's words as "Butter and eggs, and a pound of cheese!").

"Trolley To Yesterday" isn't Bellairs' best novel, but it is an intriguing and informative historical book that adults may enjoy as well, especially if they're Byzantine buffs. Good fun.

Johnny, Fergie, and Professor Childermass are back and it seems the cantankerous old coot has something special in his basement. A time machine! Well, actually a Time Trolley! When Johnny and Fergie notice the Professor acting strange they decide to investigate, instead of finding the Prof one step closer to insanity they find that he has an honest-to-God time machine that allows him to travel to Constantinople right before its fall to the Turks! The Professor has a hair-brained, but well intentioned scheme to alter the course of history (and save more than a few helpless souls) but alas, things do not always go according to plan.

With grand, Bellairsian style the inseparable trio come across ghosts, statue guardians, Turkish hordes, and a really cool thingamajig that allows them to fly only by uttering a few simple words. With any John Bellairs book you know you're in for a treat, and although The Trolley to Yesterday is amongst some of the master author's lighter works it never fails to entertain. So if you're a fan of the fantastic hop aboard The Trolley to Yesterday!

For my first comment, I must say this: Any book featuring a god of Upper and Lower Egypt is really, really cool.

When said book is by John Bellairs and features 1)Well-done historical fiction, 2)Absolutely groovy plot, 3)Unforgettable characters, and 4)Time travel using a truly funky trolley, well, the book's really extremely cool, then.

This was Bellairs' first foray into historical fiction. I don't know whether he was trying to diversify or merely experimenting with a different genre, but the book was the first cool historical fiction book I ever read. Constantinople is vividly described, and many useful tidbits of information are scattered through the book -- such as the Seven Hills of Rome -- which everyone should know in case they run into a Guardian (read the book, then you'll get the joke).

This book also supplied the hilarious quote "Now, when Justinian was king --and boy, did they have the parties then!" -Brewster . Everyone should read this book as an excercise in, er, good books. Really good ones.

Mr. Noe has done a great job of forcing people to rethink much of what most people have been spoon fed about eschatology. It was in reading this book that I had to find out much of what was to become of my own views on the subject. I had a hard time accepting the idea that the Second Coming was a past event. (An objection that I still maintain). I had seen that in the writings of "Preterist" authors, they quote Dr. R.C. Sproul in support of their views. And responding to his so-called "inconsistencies". I have great respect for Dr. R.C. Sproul, which forced me to get a hold of his views on the subject. I, like Dr. Sproul have not made up my mind on all elements of the "Preterist" view. Those who hold to the views that Dr. Sproul does on this issue (like myself) are usually called "Partial-Preterist". A title that I think is appropriate.
This task caused me to reevaluate and alter many of my own views in the process. In doing so I found a number of things that Mr. Noe and other "Preterists" are forced to do in order to affirm their view. They are forced to deny fundamentally essential doctrines of of the gospel of Christ. I have no objection to the understanding that Christ came in judgement upon Israel in the first century. I also have no problem believing that they were living in the last days. That the end of the age was the "age of the Jews" which I believe Scripture has in view here. It is what is being denied by these men that troubles me, and gives me great concern.
Because of lack of space I will only concern my self with the atonement. Because of the problem of the resurrection that has been thrown at Mr. Noe. He has had to "spiritualise" the resurrection, taking away it's physicality. So when the Bible says that the day will come when those in the graves will hear the voice of Christ and rise from the dead. (John 5:28) He has done so by affirming that since before Christ finished His work of atonement no one could enter heaven and had to go to the "Hadean realm" a.k.a. the "bossom of Abraham". (Luke 16:22-23) That no one could enter heaven (with the exception of the 'first fruits of the resurrection' "Preterists" are not agreed on this point however), because without the Second Coming the atonement is incomplete. It is the assertion of all "Preterists" that deny the "physical" resurrection, i.e. the resurrection of the "flesh". (Which makes them "Docetic" in their view of the resurrection, i.e. "Docetic Preterists").
Mr. Noe says the following words,
"But just as the atonement ritual of the Old Covenant
was never considered complete with only the slaying of
the sacrifice, neither was Jesus' atonement work
finished at the cross, or even when He entered into the
true Holy of Holies...In order for Jesus to perfectly
fullfill the final, inseparable, and essential act of
atonement: to appear "a second time" to show that his
sacrifice had been accepted, and to fulfill the role of
both goats-one dead, one alive."
("Beyond The End Times P. 192)
This denial is based upon a misinterpretation of Hebrews 9:28 where Jesus is said to return "for salvation". The problem is that Mr. Noe assumes that the Bible is reffering to the atonement in this verse. The word "atonement" however means reconciliation with reference to the payment for sin. The passage says that Christ returns "without reference to sin". If Christ's "Second Advent" is "without reference to sin", then it cannot be to finish the atonement. In fact the Bible teaches that Christ had allready "canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us and which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross". (Col. 2:14) Mr. Noe doesn't seem to understand the present reality of the reconciliation that Paul believed he had while he was alive. (Roman 5:1) (Though it is true that the chapter is talking about the atonement, the words "without reference to sin" takes the passage to a much more glorious point, the glory of Christ).
He also does not look at the fact that just because Christ comes for salvation. Doesn't mean that it must be to "finish" the atonement. Romans 8:29-30, tells us the elements of salvation entail not only the atonement (which is in reference to our justification) but also glorification. Which in context is in reference to the resurrection from the dead. That is to say that the resurrection from the dead of all believers are "for salvation". (Though the atonement and the resurrection cannot be seperated from eachother with reference to salvation. They must be distinguished from eachother, not confused with one another). It is not refering to the atonement, hence Mr. Noe is setting up a false dillema. He is trying to tell us that if Christ has not returned, then the atonement is not finished.
This is wrong and should lovingly and prayerfully be rebuked.

I have studied the end times off and on now for almost 3 years. It started with a study on Revelation at my church. I read my bible more than ever while studying Revelation because in order to understand Rev., you simply have to! During my own personal study, something about the "Left Behind" theory just didn't seem to fit scripturally, even though I was raised to believe it. I delved deeper in scripture and read books on different end times "theories" and beliefs. I kept comparing scripture to scripture and would come up with contradictions with my old beliefs. I prayed that God would lead me to the truth. This view point (preterist) makes more logical sense and is more in line with the scriptures than anything else I have read. In the last chapter of Revelation Jesus told John 3 times "I am coming soon". Jesus himself told his disciples that all "this" (Matt 24) would be fulfilled during "this generation". Many have tried to spiritualize that statement, yet make others literal. Since there are so many instances where the disciples and Jesus said that the time was "soon" it makes perfect sense to take these "time stamps" literal.

In Chapter 21 the New Jerusalem is described: "the old order of things is passed away", "I am making everything new", we get to drink from the "spring of the water of life", there is no longer any sea (no separation from God),"now the dwelling of God is with men, and he will live with them". I believe most Christians would believe that the old order of things has already passed away and that we are already drinking from the water of life,we do not have a separation from God and that He dwells with us NOW. The New Jerusalem is present! We don't have to wait...we are living it as Christians. Yes, He also said there would be no tears/pain, but pain can also mean anguish and He was talking to believers THEN. Their anguish and tears were wiped away by the Holy Spirit.

Also, while Daniel was told to "close up" his prophesies concerning end times, John was told NOT to seal his up because "the time is near". Daniel's prophies came totally true to the days he layed out if you believe the preterist view.

I have found this view to be lacking in the inconsistencies that the other views seem to have. I have also found this view point reminds me of the tremendous gift (the Holy Spirit) that I have as a believer and the power He can give. I need to live my life for Christ now and make a difference for him now and not wait to be lifted out and hoping for an escape.

I would highly recommend this book to every Christian believer who has studied and feels that the scripture isn't "matching up" to what they currently believe. This book lines up scripture and compares scripture to scripture so that you can see the Bible is a book of truth and common sense.

Easy to read book on the fulfillment of all NT passages
dealing with "end times". The author lays out that the
utter destruction of Jerusalem in AD70 marks the coming
of the apocalyptic Son of Man, descending in judgement
upon that very generation. The Jews answered Pilate to
let Jesus' blood be upon them and their children, and so
it was !

Read a few excerpts at http://doctrine.net/ontheclouds.html