This book could be described as two liberals departing the "Babel" of Big Government Socialism looking for the "Promised Land" of Small Town Grass Roots, Feel Good, Ben & Jerry Socialism. While they've given up on "Big Government" solutions, as true liberals they can't for the life of them endorse home schooling as at least a possible solution or see that federalism as defined in the Constitution (not the mess we have now) WAS the decentralized state they now long for! While the quote the Bible to prove their point "sort of", it's really just to justify the cover illustration of the tower of Babel. It's as if the Bible were silent on anything else related to their subject! I guess the sorta-religious Eerdmann publishing house wanted to go "mainstream", but Amy Grant these guys ain't.

I will take what they say about not buying things at Wal Mart and those nasty mail order houses to "Save America" if they give all the royalties earned from sales of their book here at the "dreaded" amazon.com over to charity!

Some good stuff here. This work is another symptom that Big Government liberalism is falling apart and people who thought they were "politically correct" are becoming "Buchanan Democrats" who are "socially conservative" yet can't swallow the Republican worship of the "free market diety".

If you also believe the answer to many of our social woes is a return to "community" and a reverse course away from impersonalization, the arguments in this book will appeal to you. More than an emotional cry for "smaller is better", rather one based on deep intellectual and rational thinking.

Naylor and Willimon offer a simple yet challenging suggestion to our churches, schools, universities, and government: grow smaller, not bigger. In so doing, the authors manage to make a credible case for seccession for states.

This book will make you reinvestigate your constitutional views and actually ponder the plausibility of a peaceful breakup or splitoff of the United States. These radical ideas are apt to gain a mainstream following, particularly for those disenfranchised with the state of our current welfare, social security, and public school systems. My only complaint with the book was that the end came too soon.

This book is a good primer or intro, as it is marketed. My only problem with it is that it is heavy on large pictures, and limited on true text.

This is one of the best college-level introduction, easy to read and excellent for its content. The terms are cricial and scholarly, to serve the academic and serious readers. Please check the updated sequal of this book: Discovering Computers 2003 Concepts for a Digital World Web and XP Enhanced, Complete
Gary B. Shelly, Thomas J. Cashman, Misty E. Vermaat. ISBN: 0-7895-6514-5© 2002, Publish date: February 13, 2002, 840 pages. This is my choice for the course that I am teaching...

I have used this text for 2 semesters for my Introduction to Computer classes at Grand Valley State University and find it a very excellent text and instructional guide for instructor as well as for the students. The information is current and very relevant to what our students need to know. I highly recommend this text.

Ordeal by Sea does not feature great writing -- the character portrayals are weak, the suspense is almost non-existent, the narrative rambles. What this book does have in its favor is that it was written twenty years after the sinking of the Indianapolis, while the event was still relatively sharp in the public's mind, and in the survivors' minds as well.

As I've mentioned, the dramatic aspects of this book are weak. These guys were in the Pacific five days with sharks pulling them under the water, and Helms makes it seem almost like a swim meet. Helm was not a great writer, but he does tell this horrifying story reasonably well: the Indianapolis delivers materials for one of the bombs to fall on Japan in the summer of 1945, the ship is sunk by a rogue Japanese sub, the survivors float for five days in shark-infested waters, some injured in the sinking, their bones pushing through flesh, the unfair court-martialing of McVay, the ship's captain. This is one of the best stories of surviving the worst conditions out there.

One caveat: The publisher does not present this as a classic, as an older book brought out again. You find that out in the new introduction. I thought that this was a brand new book when I purchased it. That dings the book's rating.

Truly a remarkable story, however.

I've read several books about the sinking of the U.S.S. Indianapolis, and I would rate Ordeal By Sea as only average. Mr. Helm does a good job of explaining the sinking itself, and the story of the survivors in the water is well-done, but some aspects are either complelely left out, or they are barely mentioned. These events, such as McVay's request and subsequent denial of a destroyer escort, failure to alert McVay about the recent sinking of an American destroyer along his proposed route, the ignoring by the navy of an intercepted message from the I-58 stating that she had sunk an American battleship, and the huge mess up regarding the departure and arrival of the Indianapolis are barely touched upon. Also, Mr. Helm devotes only a few pages of text to McVay's court martial procedure. While the book does a good job of telling about the sinking, abandoning, and struggle of the survivors, I was disappointed about the omission of the vital events leading up to the sinking. However, the author of the afterword, William J. Toti, does a good job of bringing the reader up to speed on the recent efforts by the survivors to get McVay's name cleared. I would recommend "In Harm's Way" by Doug Stanton over this book.

Helm does a good job discribing the sinking of this heavy cruiser
and the five days the survivors spent in the water facing the
hazards of sharks, sun, no food or water, and the negative effects on the crew. With the new forward and summary by the
skipper of the sub Indianapolis, their research and wording was
quick and to the point. The skipper of the cruiser may have
warranted a court martial, but was it fair--probably not. The court martial was more a bow to public pressure and focused on how the Navy was itself to blame for the sinking since no escort
was sent to protect the ship, and nobody noticed the ship missing
at Leyte. Better to throw someone to the dogs, than let the Navy assume blame for the 800 odd deaths at sea.

I found this book to be very informative,it made me take look at my life and realize that I need the Lord's help to combat the remaining evil or sins in my life. With God's help I have already eliminated smoking, drug abuse and alcohol abuse, but I still have a long road ahead of me. Lately I have been going astray, and this book gave me a push back in the right direction.

I thought the book had alot of insite on spritual warfare surely a book you can read over and over

In our generation, every incident or event has to be explained with scientific instruments. Computers are being used to explain almost everything. Yet, there are certain issues in life that the so-called science cannot explain. Psychologists may give their views, physicists may calculate the probability, politicians may enact laws, yet the problem(s) persists even with hellish effects. Rev. Thomas D. Williams in his book 'Deliverance Manual: Spiritual Warfare Manual', exposes the deceit and tactics employed by the devil to kill, maim and destroy humans. The book is an eye opener. It has helped me to understand the world in which we live. It has also given me the assurance of God's promises to every person who obeys Him. Satan is real but how do we deal with him? Rev. Thomas D. Williams has the answer is his book.

Easum and Bandy make excellent points regarding the difficulties of traditional churches. Who can argue with the reality of decline; the substitution for institutional maintenance for evangelism? Unfortunately their response to the challenge is gimmicky and shallow. For example, they envision "worship" consisting of chats with a holographic Jesus and Mary on the challenges of family life. Is such a retreat into entertainment the only way to reach today's generation? Is it even possible for such entertainment to be authentic worship, or have we settled for a Disneyland version of reality? The authors don't consider such questions, nor do they address the question of resources, envisioning the megachurch, with its wealth, to be the only option for the future. Current trends indicate the future is not quite so monolithic. There are other books tackling these issues with far more practical advice.

Authors Easum and Bandy suggest methods and concepts for the growth of churches of the future using the organic metaphor of the redwood tree. The contemporary language used is user-friendly and potentially mentally stimulating. It reflects the author's in-depth knowledge of the most recent cultural changes affecting, to varying degrees, each church. The approach is outreach oriented while suggesting that spiritual redwoods are not born or built but grown. Far and away the best, and longest, chapter of the book is the author's discussion of indigenous worship and the role such worship plays in church growth. I suggest purchasing the book because of this chapter. Unfortunately the authors' suggestions and analysis are often simplistic. While they say they value diversity and a multiplicity of options for growing churches, apparently not included in either are the practices and conceptuality of what they label "declining" (read "traditional") churches. They also pit spirituality, experience, and communities as the positive polar opposites of that which they label as negative: dogma, understanding, and institutions. Do these have to be opposites? Are the latter negative? A wise philosopher once said, "It is more important that a proposition be interesting than it be true....but truth adds interest." The insights which emerge out of this interesting book may allow the reader to discover truths the authors have either overlooked or dismissed in addition to those that have been plainly presented.

I picked up "Growing Spiritual Redwoods" not long after reading Bill Easum's "...Gourmet Burgers". Bandy and Easum continue his analysis of the problems dragging down "traditional" churches as they encounter the new century. Bandy adds a "nuts and bolts" element that was missing in "Burgers". Traditional churches have let spirituality slip while they pursue better ways of doing church work on a corporate model. The authors want us to return the focus of the church to worship and specifically "indigenous worship"... matching worship style to the community-especially the unchurched community. Many churches are surrounded by spiritual searchers who feel alienated by the "old-fashioned" music and liturgies of traditional worship. Some of their suggestions for styles and environments are hard for me to swallow, but they do encourage thoughtful consideration of how our worship styles have become as dated as knickers. I am not sure that the overwhelming sensual assault of much of modern culture is absolutely necessary to relate to the Under-30 crowd, but I can see where it could provide a way to communicate the transformative power of Jesus to the MTV generation. Beyond worship, they advocate building strong, spiritual individuals to replace the ineffective and energy wasting committee structures of the past. Church leaders become coachs, inspiring rather than directing each individual's ministry. Teams of desciples coalescing around natural leaders who share their vision will do the work of Jesus, rather than the work of the church. This is not a book of instructions, but it does point out the elements necessary to make the kind of transformation they feel is required for the survival of the larger church in the post-Christendom, pre-Christian era. Even if you disagree with the methods that Bandy and Easum suggest, this book will stimulate serious thought and conversation with others in your church community about how we do the work of our Lord.

No, I haven't read the book. I saw the play put on by The Shakespeare Theater in Washington. Tessa Auberjonois was an absolute darling in the title role; you couldn't help but feel glad for Margery's odd-but-happy ending.

If Wycherley was no Shakespeare, he did this sort of play better than the Bard. Nothing is quotable, the characters are one dimensional and only the "China" scene got real laughs. But Wycherley did a neat and nasty take on Restoration mores and made it enjoyable, too.

Far from being a silly comedy, The Country Wife is a work aimed at lashing Seventeenth Century loose morals. We laugh, of course, but through the alluring yet disturbing character of Horner, we perceive that something must be done if Restoration society wants to survive.

Wicherley presents us with unhappy wives and brutal or indifferent husbands who are utlimately fooled by Horner, the man who knows how to exploit the misery produced by mercenary unions. Poor Margery Pinchwife, the heroine of the piece, eventually brings tears in our eyes when we realize that she shall never be free from a violent man that considers marriage a cheaper substitute for keeping a mistress. Margery is the victim of both her husband and her careless lover. She is looking for love, but she keeps on coming across men who are interested in sex only. They can see her body; they can't see her delicate, naif soul.

However, Whycherley (who, we must remember, was the spiritual son of the great moralists Graciàn, Larochefoucault and so on, whose maxims are easily detected in the whole bulk of Wycherley's works) is able to see a way out in the honest, disintrested love between Alithea, Margery's brilliant sister-in-law, and Harcourt, Horner's dashing best friend. (these characters' names symbolize the perfection of their union: her name means "truth", while his name is significantly "Frank".)

This comedy is at its best when performed; however, it is well worth reading, especially if you have a lively imagination. don't miss the notorious "china scene": fifteen minutes of laughter that will make your sides ache.

Be careful: The Country Wife merely "looks" like a stupid, shallow comedy, but it is in fact a deep reflection on society, marriage and, why not?, even the situation of Seventeenth-Century English women.

I recently reread this play for the third time and taught it in a British Literature survey at the University of Texas. Not only do I find it more entertaining and more brilliant with every reading, but I was shocked to find that the vast majority of my students really enjoyed it and preferred Wycherley to Shakespeare. If you want a smart, hilarious, and dark comedy that plumbs the depths of jealousy and sexual possession, this is a must-read play. If you're easily offended or have a hard time following complicated plots and catching bawdy puns, you'll certainly want to avoid it.

English class has never been my favorite class, but poetry has always been one of my better topics. This year - Sophmore High School English - I was required to buy Sound and Sense for class. This is the worst poetry book I have ever read. While the collection of poems is wonderful, the text written by Arp is terrible. Arp comes off as condescending and mean spirited, making the reading of the book a chore. His definitions of the various poetical terms are solid, but you could just as easily get them out of a dictionary. Arp tells the reader that poetry cannot be beautiful unless it concers the perfect love, flowers, or fuzzy animals. He equates the reading of poetry to listening to a radio, and says that if one does not like a critically aclaimed poem, one's tuner is on the wrong station. He leaves nothing to free will, preferring to lead a flock of sheep into an abyss of bad writing over allowing someone to disagree with him here or there. Chapters on "Good Poetry and Bad" do not leave the reader with a love of poetry, nor does the book as a whole make me want to spout sonnets. There are many better collections of poetry around. The poems within Sound and Sense can as easily be found in the Norton or another anthology. As for its educational value, I find that it offers very little by the way of insight, and instead gushes half baked opinions. Do yourselves a foavor and skip this one. You'll learn more about poetry from Dr. Seuss.

My first exposure to Sound and Sense was in high school, and, at the time, I found the book so valuable a resource that I later purchased a copy. Post-college, my views have changed somewhat.

If the tone of the writing was not so condescending, this could be a great book. It defines most of the terms necessary to understand critical texts on poetry, including those analyses related to meter, style, and tone. I find the questions after each poem to be helpful and thought-provoking. That said, it is frustrating to me that the author presents ideas and arguments in absolutes (must, must not, never, always, etc.) and then asserts that the logic that MUST be applied to point A CANNOT be applied to point B (but maybe I have spent too many hours working with lawyers).

My suggestion would be to read the text with a grain of salt. Glean the terminology, answer the questions posed at the end of each poem, follow their suggestions of rereading and considering the many facets of poetry, and try to overlook the condescending manner in which the authors display their opinions as fact.

I've been nibbling away at a 20 year old edition of this book for a few years in my spare time, and almost every bite has increased my abitity to appreciate poetry. I like the examples, most of them seem pretty old, Frost is about as modern as he gets, but thats ok with me. You might find this book a little annoying if it was required reading in a course, sometimes it asks more questions than it answers.

I wonder at my colleagues in their discussion about Shakespeare's use of the Geneva Bible. Is that really the issue, and (to refer to my friend's observation that he does not "endorse" this version) does it really matter whether we embrace, endorse or otherwise subscribe to either the translation or the accompanying notes? This is a venture of historical proportions, the value of which is gauged, not in terms of endorsement, but in the availability of such a significant piece of Biblical history (even if the publisher's price is about twice what it should be).

For comparative purposes in drawing doctrinal conclusions, the Geneva Bible is of only cursory value (most of us wouldn't change a doctrinal position anyway; not even if Jesus Himself "endorsed" 1560. That is evident in that we have no intention of changing despite the revelational clarity of the hundreds of other translations. Why should 1560 be any different?).

As a publishing feat, it is significant. As a tool for research, it is invaluable. As another example of the profound processes by which Divine Providence vouched safe His Word to posterity, it is nothing short of remarkable.

Buy it if you can...but don't denigrate its place in the grand scheme of things.

To be short on words, yet provide useful content....this is a quality reproduction, and is a diamond among gems in my library.

imagine this: someone laborously and painstakenly translates and handwrites the Bible. Imagine the detail and craftsmanship that went into that task. Imagine further the days and nights and time that passed before its product was finished. Look at the bigger picture and wonder about what the ramifications were for this project (both political and religious). Envision that this work was protected by both a stroke of luck and the blessing of fate to be preserved for several hundred years--every page intact--and delivered into the hands of time and technology to be reproduced via a high grade scanner (and other technological accomplices) so that its beauty could be mass produced and distributed at an economical rate....and so that other fools would have the audacity to rate it with a few stars (as IF they even knew what they were talking about).

While I enjoyed this book, I felt the title was deceptive. The author, T. Harry Williams, trys to convince us, that Lincoln was a master strategist, and it basically was his strategy that helped win the war. ( I HAD thought this book would be about Union Generals, as Douglass Freemans- Lee's Lt's was about his. That may have been my fault, for misunderstanding)

I read this book with an open mind, yet with a good knowledge of the Civil War, and of McClellen, Meade, Grant, Hooker, Burnside, Pope and McDowell. McClellen stated many times, that Lincoln could not hold on to a secret, and that was his reason for not keeping him informed. Also, many of the plans McClellen devised, were later used by Grant. Hooker built the Union Military up, and did a fantastic job of organization, from the bottom ranks up. Meade, did much of the work, that we give Grant credit for, ( though Meade did make the newspapers mad at him, and refused to name him)

Lincoln is a very interesting man, but I feel it is a stretch to call him a master military strategist.

If you enjoy reading someone elses view, or opinion of the Civil War, this is a really nice book. But, that is why I can only give it three stars, it is good, but too much of the authors opinion.

Williams notes in the preface of my 1952 edition that it is not about the Generals of the Union, but rather about Lincoln and his problems with the Union military commanders. While much of the text is dry details about this letter or that between Lincoln and his generals, the Williams does interject some bits of interesting facts and educated theories on why Lincoln often acted as he did. This is a well researched book, with most pages having between about 3 footnotes, and it is very helpful in understanding the political climate of the American Civil War.

This book is a wonderful look at Lincoln and his relationship with his generals and why he went through so many prior to finally appointing Grant, he just couldn't find one that would not when under pressure find all the reason they could not to attack.
The book also does an excellent job of detailing Lincoln's involvement in strategic policy for the Union armies. Surprisingly for a man who'd never held a high military rank, Lincoln displayed an incredible grasp of strategy and frequently understood things generals such as Meade did not. Williams also expands into how upon the appointment of Grant to general in chief, the Union high command evolved into a modern military command, the first of its kind in the world, even more advanced than anything seen in Europe until Moltke the Elder, with the Union army high command consisiting of Commander in Cheif, General in Chief, and a new office designed for Halleck and to keep Grant from having to be in Washington, Chief of Staff. Williams also makes clear the different military culture of the 19th century, in stark contrast to most instances today, a general who disagreed with Lincoln or thought his plan to have dissatisfied the president or simply disliked somone they were told to collaborate with in a battle, instead of trying to work out differences, asked to be relieved of command.
The one major drawback to this book is its lack of maps. There are no maps to follow the action along, so its advisable to have a Civil War atlas at hand in order to be able to place some of the places the battles take place. Also, if you're looking for a detailed "what happend" in the many battles, in most cases you won't get it with this book. This book is purely about the command and control structure of the Union army and how the players interacted with each other. My one final and biggest grip with Williams is that he at many points assumes too much in my opinion. There are many instances where the documentary record when he wrote the book did not state what happend, so Williams assumes that things "must have" or "certainly happend" a certain way without in some cases anything approaching a clear reason why he draws this conclusion.
Other than these few gripes, this is a wonderful book and should be read by anyone wishing to understand why Lincoln went through so many generals.