I read the book and tried to follow the reasoning in my personal life. For instance, when trying to decide between two Ralph Lauren polo shirts - one a celedon green and one a melon - I stopped to consider what Jesus would do, and then bought the melon-colored shirt. But when I got home and put it on I looked SO washed out. Jesus had a swarthy Mediterranean complexion which was complemented by shades in the orange family. I, however, am of Norse descent and the melon looked horrible on me.

Even though it doesn't really cover it in the book, I'm convinced that you have to think, WWJWFM? or "What Would Jesus Want For Me." But I guess that's too much for a bracelet or a bumpersticker.

Thanks, anyway.

To tell you the truth when I found out I had to read this for school, I thought it would (...)... But I read it and here's what I think...(You can hear my opinion, but read this book yourself as well, trust me and be open-minded!!!)

So it goes, a pastor of a church Henry Maxwell is interupted in finishing writing his sermon for Sunday morning tomorrow when the doorbell rings and he has to answer it because his wife is out. Well when he opens the door there is what a appears to be a tramp(A dirty shabby man), asking for work. But Henry is kind and tells him he knows of none. The man leaves and Henry get's back to work. Henry was proud of his sermon, until the next morning at church, after the sermon is over the man(supposed tramp)burst into the church and runs up to the front of the church where the pastor is. He tells them he is no tramp nor drunk. But he is searching for work and everyone has been rude to him and that they could not be real questions, and he really questions them what it is to follow in Jesus steps. Then the man passes out

So starts the amazing revelation of the First Church of Raymond, Henry is so moved by the question, which questions his own discipleship that he asked anyone who is willing to meet him in a room after the service if they are willing to take a pledge to ask the question "What Would Jesus Do?" no matter what the consequences of anything including: Social and financial loss... What good is money and social status after you are dead anyways? around 50 ppl in the first week promise to take the pledge. Which changes the course of life not only in Raymond, but in many other cities to come as well.

It is a little slow the first few pages, but quickly speeds up. The author develops the story through the development of the characters, and is a very nice change from the normal novels most of us read. Plus it has all the ingredients of most novels and so much more. It has murder,deception,and greed, but also contains Godly principals which build the book.

I was not let down, but was amazed at how good the book was, since I expected it to (...)!!! So come in with low expectations and an open-mind and you are sure to enjoy this book and be truely inspired. It is especially for Christains and non-Christains as well. (...)

I really enjoy reading in His Steps and What Would Jesus Do? It was interesting to know what people in the past had to do to follow the teaching of Jesus. It is also interesting to see how the people of this era have to say and do to follow Jesus. I think it is harder today than in the past because we have more to tempt us and more outwordly things to distract us from the purpose that Jesus set for us. I think everyone should read this book. I feel it would do a lot of people a lot of good. I know it did for me.

This is a very touching book which gets you thinking and challenges you to walk in faith. I have never read In His Steps, but I liked this book, which I think is very similar except it is a contemporary version. In the novel, a pastor of a church challenges his congregation with the ulitmate question-- What Would Jesus Do? He challenges them to ask themselves this question before making any decision. This challenge also affects us as the reader because it also challenges us. It is a good challenge, to think of what Jesus would do before making any decision, and I think it is a challenge we all should take.

The current "WWJD" (What Would Jesus Do") phenomenon is not the Biblical understanding of how we are to determine right and wrong. While this book did not start that pop phenomenon, some may read this mistakenly. What Jesus would do would be different that you or I because He was fully man AND fully God, second Person of the Trinity. He was sinless, and although tempted in every way as we are, He did not sin. His purpose was to fulfill the Law in order to be the spotless sacrificial lamb of God, the atonement and substitute for our sins. He was the omniscient God incarnate, so He knew what was in each heart and what was the perfectly appropriate thing to say and do in each situation in order to accomplish His mission. In that sense, what He would do in a situation as God is a hypothetical we cannot know as finite creatures. What He might have done is a speculation. We are, however, TOLD in Scripture what we are to do, how as Christians we are to act and live.

I'd recommend reading Charles Sheldon's "In His Steps" before reading this. Then you decide who is the better writer and has a real handle on the concept.

I read this book with alot of hesitancy, being that it was loaned to me from one of our deacons, but I read it and once I got started, I couldn't stop! This book changed my outlook on life and how I should treat others. I loved this book and it's message so much that I bought 8 of them and gave them out to my co-workers. It has truely been an eye opener! Every Christian should read this book! If you didn't fully understand Jesus before, you will once you read this book.

Garret Sheldon's short work opens up a door previously pointed out by Katcham, in which Ketcham specified Madison amongst others believed the Ten Commandments, Sermon on the Mount,and Romans to be canonical. As most of Madison's personal papers may have been destroyed this work offers an insight not frequently explored, but certainly worthy of consideration.

Sheldon explores an area of Madison's life most just generalize - his early education. Frustrated by the lack of direct Madison writings covering this early period, many authors choose simply to generalize his educational process. Sheldon uses evidence we do have about the people (John Witherspoon) and institutions (College of New Jersey) to help better define what shaped this Founding Father. Very helpful in understanding what motivated Madison - especially the time spent under the strong Calvinist influence of John Witherspoon and the College of New Jersey (Princeton).

This book is insulting to what Jefferson, and America stand for. It may be true that both wore great visionaries but, Jefferson's visions created the United States of America, while Ataturk's created the Republic of Turkey which does not allow religious freedom, which persecutes the Kurds, and has no concept of human rights. I think that this is a good book to read if you want to laugh, but if you want to learn about Ataturk and the republic of Turkey read a book that does not glorify them but gives the facts as they are, which this book does not.

Two Giants from two different eras and countries, July 30, 2001 Reviewer: Dr J.E.Botton from Lynchburg, VA United States
I have been looking forward to the publication of this interesting book by Prof.Garrett W.Sheldon. This concise work by a jeffersonian scholar (87 pages and an appendix outlining the American and Turkish Constitutions) had been inspired, according to the author, by an "uncanny resemblance between the ideals of republicanism, freedom of religion,liberty of conscience, public education,economic development and national independence found in Ataturk and Jefferson". Although I read it with great interest, I was somewhat dismayed by the the rather limited place given to Mustafa Kemal Ataturk (only three references..) versus a man certainly very well known, particularly in the US, Thomas Jefferson (eighteen references). While the latter was a leader in the struggle for independence and foundation of a new State following a revolutionary war against England, Ataturk managed to establish a new Republic after a most difficult fight against the same England, as well as France, Italy, Russia, Greece,etc. during the First World War and, in the same time, getting the country rid of a much weakened Ottoman Sultanate and the Caliphate. In addition,and within only fifteen years, he managed a long lasting revolution in education by switching from an arabic to a latin alphabet, civil and political rights to men and women as well as minorities, complete separation of state and religion,etc. One can easily state that Ataturk had achieved the military successes of George Washington, the political savvy of John Adams along the qualities of a Renaissance man such as Jefferson, all of it within less than twentyfive years.
Nevertheless, this is an important work that, hopefully, may stimulate further evaluation of Ataturk, who, it may be useful to mention,had been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize by the then greek prime minister Elefterios Venizelos, once his foe..
Not withstanding his deprecators acting on misinformation and personal hatred, he deserves to be placed among the greatest achievers of the 20th century..

I havent read this book yet but have breifly glanced over it and was impressed at how the 2 men can and were compared. With regards to the ignoramus who states that Turks don't give any rights to Kurds obviously has been living in a cave for the past 20 years or has no brain to speak of. I am Turkish and we Turks have given Kurds autonomy and the right to practice their own religion and culture. So anyone who says that we havent is not only hateful but ignorant and stupid as well and needs to get over his/her insecurities. Finally as for human rights against Kurds why dont you Mr. Reader from London tell that to the thousands of families of the Turkish Soldiers that lost their sons to the murderous PKK. I also dont think its appropriate for an ignoramus to critique a book about a legendary Turkish Leader. Go get some facts first before you speak ignorantly. I rest my case.

Although easy enough to read and laced with numerous Jeffersonian quotations, this book, on balance, is far more concerned with Professor Sheldon's appraisal of contemporary society than it is with the opinions of the nation's third president.

Sheldon's conservative Christian viewpoint is obvious throughout and gives rise to the legitimate concern that he may have been quite selective in his use of substantiating information, employing only those ideas which are consistent with his own stance on issues while creating the illusion that he is presenting the reader with an unbiased, factual perspective. Some of the supportive evidence for his conjectures is anecdotal at best and may well have little or no basis in fact.

For example, twice Sheldon mentions a comparison of surveys regarding educational problems in 1940 and 1990 in an attempt to prove a decline in educational and moral standards. These "surveys," however, are a fiction concocted by former Ft. Worth businessman T. Cullen Davis, an evangelical Christian who has openly admitted that he fabricated the polls years ago in order to advance his personal views.

Lack of precise documentation is the most disturbing feature of this book. Statistics are quoted and anecdotes are related, but virtually nowhere is it possible for the reader to easily verify much of what the author states. Given Sheldon's obvious bias, a reader who wants a more scholarly, objective, accurate overview of Thomas Jefferson's thoughts would do well to look elsewhere, for instance Joseph Ellis's "American Sphinx."

This work provides a good survey of Jefferson's political thought, as well as an excellent piece concerning the intellectual battle over the classical republican paradigm. This piece, by the way, is well worth the price of the book. Nevertheless, although this is a worthy work, it pales in comparison to David N. Mayer's "The Constitutional Thought of Thomas Jefferson." If you are truly interested in Jefferson's political thought, Mayer's is the foremost work on the subject.

Although easy enough to read and laced with numerous Jeffersonian quotations, this book, on balance, is far more concerned with Professor Sheldon's appraisal of contemporary society than it is with the opinions of the nation's third president. Sheldon's conservative Christian viewpoint is obvious and gives rise to the legitimate concern that he may have been quite selective in his use of substantiating information, employing only those facts which are consistent with his own stance on issues while creating the illusion that he is presenting the reader with an unbiased perspective. Some of his "supportive evidence" is anecdotal and may very well have no basis in fact. For example, twice Sheldon mentions a comparison of surveys regarding educational problems in 1940 and 1990 in an attempt to prove a decline in educational and moral standards. These "surveys," however, are a fiction concocted by former Ft. Worth businessman T. Cullen Davis, an evangelical Christian who has openly admitted that he created the poll out of his own imagination in order to advance his personal views. Professor Sheldon may very well have done much the same thing. Lack of precise supportive documentation is the most disturbing feature of this book. Virtually nowhere is it possible for the reader to easily verify the accuracy of what the author states or to learn the context from which quoted remarks are taken. Given Sheldon's obvious bias, a reader who wants a more scholarly, objective account of Thomas Jefferson's thoughts would be well advised to look elsewhere, like Joseph Ellis's "American Sphinx."

I have read over a 1/2 dozen books about Thomas Jefferson and "What would Jefferson say?" rates dead last. Sheldon's most poorly written chapters appear to be out of the area of his expertise. The book has some glaring errors in scientific discussions. It's obvious the author is not a scientist. He does a better job on chapters dealing with economics and Jefferson's character. He totally drops the ball in his chapter about Jefferson and science. Sheldon believes that Jefferson would reject evolution. He writes "...radical evolution holds that the world and it's species develop out of themselves, internally, not out of an external creator". Thus, Jefferson, who was a deistic scientist, would reject evolution. The quote is a false statement and shows the author's ignorance of science. True science does not have an opinion on things it cannot observe. It only attempts to explain what it can observe, therefore true science is open to the theory of natural evolution being born out of a creator. However, at this time such a theory cannot be tested or proved. Sheldon also quotes evolutionary scientist, Dr. Stephen Gould, grossly out of context. Gould would be furious to see how Sheldon has misused those writings. Something smells fishy. What is the author's hidden agenda here? I believe Jefferson, the true scientist he was, would side with the vast majority of scientists and accept evolution. In conclusion, I feel Jefferson would be proud that in only 200 years we have become the greatest nation on earth surpassing empires built over thousands of years. I do believe Jefferson, who hoped that U.S. citizens would eventually turn Unitarian would be disappointed that there is still so much superstition in the U.S. Jefferson saw knowledge as light, and superstition and ignorance as darkness. So what would Jefferson say about the book "What would Jefferson say?" I believe he would say the same thing he said about the Bible. He would call it a "dung hill." Sheldon corrupts Jefferson's beliefs in the same way Jefferson believed the Bible was corrupt. They were both put together to manipulate the uneducated. Sheldon makes Thomas Jefferson sound like Pat Robertson who, I have little doubt, Jefferson would have despised. For anyone who really wants to learn about Jefferson, I recommend reading "Jefferson and Religion" by Eugene R. Sheridan. Leave Sheldon's book to those who want to lie to themselves and make Jefferson into something he was not.

Attention! Sheldon's views of Jefferson's thought to not reflect on Jefferson's! I could not believe what I was reading when I opened up this book. I hought that Sheldon had at least a relatively firm grasp on Jefferson's thought after reading his book "The Political Philosophy of Thomas Jefferson," I was sorely disappointed. It appears that Sheldon may understand what he thought, but is not able to translate it to the events of today. It is a shame that Sheldon failed in his effort, because such a work as this, properly done, would be wonderful to see. If you truly interested in what Jefferson would think about current events today, let me sum it up for you. He would be outraged and saddened to see what happened to the once great nation that he helped to found. He would be enraged at the tyrannical activities of our government. As for his political leanings, he would most certainly be a radical libertarian.