Customer Reviews

The Last Word and the Word after That: A Tale of Faith, Doubt, and a New Kind of Christianity

5 star:		(46)
4 star:		(16)
3 star:		(6)
2 star:		(6)
1 star:		(44)

 

 

In "The Last Word and the Word After That," Brian McLaren completes his "New Kind of Christian" trilogy. Since McLaren describes his writing as "creative non-fiction" readers of this review are hereby warned--if you don't want to know how his narrative ends, stop reading now. I'd hate to spoil the plot for you. . .

"The Last Word" arrived today after lunch. I fully intended to return to my sabbatical Church history research, but couldn't resist reading the back jacket, then skimming the book, then reading the introduction. The next thing I knew, the afternoon was over and so was the book. In other words, agree with him or not, McLaren can write. His narrative is compelling and gripping.

I found myself hunting for tissues when reading about Pastor Dan, his wife Carol, and the spiritual abuse that they suffered at the hands of their church board. I also found myself hunting for scissors at the biased portrayal of those who believe in a literal hell (more on this to come). And I found myself searching in vain for any closure to the discussion (I know, that's his point and his style, but still . . .).

If you want permission to think deeply about God, life, judgment, grace, and doctrine, then "The Last Word" will be a breath of fresh air. If you want to be given the research and resources necessary to intelligently ponder the doctrine of hell, then "The Last Word" will leave you wanting.

McLaren clarifies that his book is not truly about hell, but about what kind of God we believe in and what kind of purposes this God has for His creation. Still, for the first half of the book, his characters explore the doctrine of final judgment. Through their journey, McLaren provides a fair introduction to the more commonly held views about the final judgment, as well as introducing his own provocative perspective.

McLaren offers the caveat at the beginning of the book that "The Last Word" will purposefully under-represents the "traditional" view of hell as literal and eternal. Unfortunately, it not only under-represents it, it tends to misrepresent it. Three main characters hold to the traditional view. Carol represents the, "I don't want to think too deeply about it; I just want to love God" characterization. Gil epitomizes the, "I'm a cruel fundamentalist, ignorant Bible-thumper" depiction. Chip portrays the, "I'm a recovering fundamentalist; please be gentle with me while I find my brain and soul" caricature. The reader is left to assume that for the past 2000 years of Church history no thinking, loving Christian has ever held the "traditional" view of hell.

Other characters, presented with much more color-with mind and soul, life and personality-offer a composite view of what the final judgment might really be about. In the eyes of these favored characters, "hell" is not a literal place of eternal torment, but a motivational warning about a coming final judgment in which every human being stands stark naked before God to give an account of how well or how poorly she or he loved God and others and thus contributed or not to fulfilling God's shalom kingdom purpose of reconciliation. Though the intricacies of this view are difficult to summarize, at times they seem to border on a mingling of justification by works and justification by faith. After all, McLaren says that he is "post-Protestant."

Though I, and much of Church history (majority and minority report), happen to disagree with Neo's proposal about the nature of hell, one of his insights represents brilliant philosophy, accurate theology, and practical spirituality. Neo explains that when we do stand before God, because God is timeless, His judgment of us will be based upon and integrate together every nano-second of our existence. Assuming this is to be applied to Christians who are judged, not regarding entrance into heaven, but for rewards, it is a potent caution against a believer who might think, "I can wait until near the end of my life, reform, and then God will judge that mature, final me." No. God's evaluation of our Christian pilgrimage covers the entire journey. It is required of us that we walk faithfully and lovingly (though not sinlessly) day by day, even second by second.

The second half of "The Last Word" offers "The Word After That" which reads and feels like a separate book altogether. McLaren somewhat abruptly shifts from eschatology (the "doctrine" of the last times, especially of the final judgment) to ecclesiology (the "doctrine" of the Church). His characters speak of and participate in "deep ecclesiology."

One of the greatest gifts in the entire book is found here as McLaren shares the "five queries" that his spiritual formation group ponders together. They are well worth repeating: "How is your soul? How have you seen God at work in and through your life since we last met? What are you struggling with? What are you grateful for? What God-given dream are you nurturing?" As one of his characters would say, "That dog will hunt!"

This section also includes two questions worth repeating. They are questions that arise when we look at salvation not only as individual, but corporate: "If you were to live for another fifty years, what kind of person would you like to become-and how will you become that kind of person? If Jesus doesn't return for ten thousand years or ten million years, what kind of world do we want to create?" As another of his characters would say, "That'll preach!"

Overall, for a narrative of the story of life on planet Earth, McLaren's story-line sometimes rings a little Pollyanna. Do all, or even most, church conflicts end so perfectly for the "good guys"? I understand that McLaren's final vision for history moves toward reconciliation, but in this life?

By this tidy ending, and by what happens to and is said about "the good guys" and "the bad guys," an implication seeps out: "Anyone who disagrees with the outcomes of these theological probings is a witch-hunting, Pharisaical, hyper-fundamentalist, harsh, heretic-burning, unloving, unthinking, arrogant loser." That can feel a little like reverse spiritual correctness. As with the doctrine of final judgment, is it possible that thinking, loving Christians could actually disagree with the thought processes of the book in a thinking and loving way?

The same overly positive story-telling can be found throughout the trilogy in how people respond to Neo. As some "seeker" reviewers have noted about the first two books in this series, they would love to dialogue with Neo and don't think that they would "cave" so fast, or be nearly so enthralled.

Again, there seems to be a message here, a point being made by how people fawn over Neo. "This new kind of Christian stuff is incredible. It is so intelligent, so sensitive, and so unique. Brilliant. One in a billion." That doesn't quite convey the epistemological humility that post-modernism relishes.

So what do I REALLY think? Is McLaren a breath of fresh air and a post-modern Reformer? Or is he a little leaven and a post-modern heretic. Or something in between? Or neither? Or both?"

In the genre and spirit of "The Last Word and the Word After That," I'm not telling. Develop your own interpretation. Construct, deconstruct, and reconstruct your own view of McLaren and "The Last Word and the Word After That." That's certainly what Brian would want you to do. It's also what the Bible calls each of us to be-Be Bereans who use God's Word to evaluate human words, including "The Last Word and the Word After That."

Reviewer: Bob Kellemen, Ph.D., is the author of "Soul Physicians," "Spiritual Friends," "Biblical Psychology," "Martin Luther's Pastoral Counseling," and "Beyond the Suffering: Embracing the Legacy of African American Soul Care and Spiritual Direction."

This is the third book in McLaren's trilogy of narratives involving Pastor Dan and "Neo," here called by his given name Neil. Thankfully, this book drops the near-worship of Neo that was so irritating in the previous volumes.

Although not a scholarly work per se, I do appreciate the research behind it, just as I appreciate a sermon that shows solid research and is not just a bunch of half-baked ideas based on unrelated scriptures taken out of context and strung together. There is a simplified synopsis of the possible origins of the belief in hell. There is the interesting idea that Jesus was using the Pharisee's doctrine of hell and turning it on its head. There is a helpful table on scriptures from the Gospel that indicate either hell or some type of judgment that people have often contrued as hell, and boils them down to the actual point. If you think that Christianity needs the threat of hell to win converts, this might be considered a dangerous book. Even more dangerous are the hints that evangelical and reformed Christianity might have it wrong, and that the book of Romans has been misinterpreted over the years to support a concept of cheap grace while devaluing works. If there is a fourth volume to this "trilogy" (I know that's an oxymoron), that may be a fleshing out of the concept, as one character put it, that salvation is by grace but judgment is by works.

However you come down on the issue of hell (and if you read this as the narrative that it purports itself to be, you'll notice that not all characters agree, particularly the pastor's wife), it's important not to miss the main point: that the preoccupation with heaven, hell and the afterlife has resulted in an unfortunate de-emphasis of the quest for justice and God's righteousness here on earth. A serious reading of the teaching of Jesus will lead to the inescapable conclusion that his main concern was the Kingdom of God breaking in to the here and now, and not just the sweet by-and-by.

Although I consider this by far the strongest book of the trilogy, it is not perfect. There is a superfluous character named Pat early in the narrative who must have been borrowed from Julia Sweeney's character on Saturday Night Live, except Sweeney's Pat didn't write awful poetry. The issue of homosexuality in the church is not the point of this book and could be dealt with better in some of McLaren's other writings. The narrative itself has an almost unbelievably happy, sappy ending. And most irritating of all is in the chapter where McLaren quotes scholarly works on the doctrine of hell. He actually INVENTS phony sources for some of the quotes. I was scrambling trying to find the original quotation, only to read in the ending commentary that he made these up. That borders on dishonest, and is almost insulting to the serious reader.

I must add this, also. I am very distressed to notice that the watchdogs of fundamentalism are on constant alert, giving helpful votes to reviews that just give a scripture passage and don't review the book at all, and giving non-helpful votes to thoughtful, serious reviews, all based on the star rating (and actually that pretty much go unread, I suspect.) Remember that the votes are for "helpful" and "not helpful," not "I agree" or "I disagree." Keep that in mind, Einsteins.

As my title says, I am not sure what to think of all the doctrinal points this book raises. Part of the confusion, of course, is that McLaren doesn't answer nearly all of the questions he asks. Therefore, it was slightly frustrating to be left with so many questions (although, on the positive side, it strengthens our analytical and research skills, rather than just spoon-feeding us readers.)

In defense of this book, I have to begin by saying that I think many of the negative reviews were based partly on the fact that readers assumed they knew McLaren's opinion just because he questioned things they (and even I) considered orthodox. In other words, it seems that many people simply assume that McLaren, by wondering whether the "orthodox" beliefs about hell are really biblical, is bashing these beliefs. You see, I'm not sure the book is that cut-and-dry. We need to take it for what it's worth: a book that gets us thinking about whether American fundamentalism (which, like it or not, is really the basis for many modern evangelical beliefs) is really as biblical as we've been brought up to believe.

This brings me to my next point, which also has to do with readers who, in my view, are reading certain incorrect things into McLaren's writing. "A new kind of Christian," which has become one of this author's catch phrases, has, I think, been radically and dangerously misunderstood by most of McLaren's critics. Nowhere in his writing does he seek to destroy the Bible or Jesus. In fact, he seeks to understand the historical and theological context of the Bible's writers and subjects. This is offensive to many conservative evangelicals, who understand the Bible as a codebook on doctrine whose every word was literally dictated by God. McLaren seems to understand the Bible as divinely inspired but also highly historically situational, which throws a wrench into the fundamentalists' works. Therefore, "A new kind of Christian" is not something that seeks to destroy the orthodox ways of being a Christian, but rather tries to do two things: First, make Christianity relevant and understandable to people in our society. And second, bring a greater understanding of what the early Christians, those before the Roman Empire's near-fatal corruption of the Church, believed and lived. Of course, many American evangelicals have little understanding of the early Church, and they seem to believe that what they've been taught is truly "orthodox." Until we're willing to accept that we may, in fact, not know the ultimate truth about everything, we'll never become as humble as Jesus clearly called us to be.

McLaren's newest book is arguably his best. He does a great job of bringing out into the open one of the great unanswered (unasked!) questions of Western Christianity: when we invite people to become followers of Jesus, why do many demur, fearful that becoming a Christian will make them a worse person? For many spiritual people who would not self-identify as Christians, and for many Christians, increasingly ashamed, not of Jesus but of the unChristian behavior of fellow Christians that makes the Gospel unappealing, McLaren's book is a great gift. He probes an area many will find uncomfortable - the way in which culture shapes religious expression, including the record of that expression in Scripture.

Two things make me sad:
1) That some - I don't want to say many - of my sisters and brothers are threatened by McLaren's writings. Is your faith so shaky that a few hundred pages of text can make it totter? Are God and Scripture so impotent that they need your defense? Is your theology so exclusivist that only those who believe as you do are "in Christ"? Please relax. God is not made anxious by any book, and neither should you be as his child.

2) That many of those who review McLaren's writings in this and other places demonstrate a hateful, judgmental and critical spirit that will be useful to the Evil One in his ongoing work of persuading those drawn to Jesus to avoid Christians and church because we're a bunch of spiteful bigots who tear and devour one another. In the words of an insightful nonChristian, "Your fish stinks!"

Repeatedly over the last four years, God has used McLaren's writings to renew my passion for Christ and my commitment to pastoral ministry. I am grateful beyond words for that. I have also known many who have been helped in their apprenticeship to Jesus by McLaren's writing and speaking.

Finally, McLaren is a faithful, compassionate pastor and a devoted evangelist. He seizes every possible opportunity in daily life and in his writing and speaking to winsomely invite people to apprentice themselves to Jesus and begin to follow him. My sense is that he sees one of the main goals of his writing and speaking as clearing away misunderstandings of Christ and Gospel that impede people from following Jesus. The fruit of his life, measured in people who are following Jesus because of his influence speaks for itself.

I don't understand how some of the reviewers can give McLaren's book only a one star simply because they disagree with his words. Even if you don't agree with them, the book still deserves at least a couple stars for the way the ideas were presented - in a friendly, inquiring dialogue between friends that any layperson could make sense of. I'm troubled by these one star reviewers who slam the book because they disagree with it. What troubles me more is that these same people are really slamming the book because they don't want the rest of us to think for ourselves. Why are they so threatened by that? Jesus encouraged people to think by presenting His message in parables. Man is not infallible and it was men who came up with the fundamentalist interpretation of God's Word. What's so wrong with questioning this interpretation? Are they so sure the early theologians got it right? The one image I can't shake is how much the fundamentalist reviewers seem to be playing the role of the Pharisees of our day. In the New Testament the Pharisees were the ones most threatened by Jesus' message. They had the most to gain by keeping the status quo and they were prideful of their status. This pride puffed them up and blinded them to the truth Jesus presented to them. Jesus shook up the Pharisees world by including the despised and outcasts in the Kingdom of God. Before anyone makes any assumptions, I'm certainly not calling McLaren Jesus. I do see some parallels though in the ideas he presents and in the response he is receiving from the Religious Right. His ideas are radical but he does not claim to have all the answers in his newest book. He instead invites the readers to search the Bible on their own for that truth. McLaren is simply joining us on our spiritual path and suggesting to us a different fork in the path that we may not have seen before or we were too afraid to go down on our own.

I've always held the traditional views of hell. It wasn't because I couldn't let go of them; I just never questioned the interpretations of those who seemed to be the experts on God and His Word. It never occurred to me that it was o.k. to question these views until I began reading McLaren's books and listening to him speak. What I've found is a man who genuinely loves Christ and who walks in that love everyday. He has honest questions and a strong enough faith to ask them.

I started out reading this book feeling uncomfortable with it but I kept an open-mind and soon found the words making sense to me. They fell in line with what Jesus preached and the words, to me, mirrored the compassion of Jesus. I think McLaren's book is simply encouraging us to think about our beliefs. That's not a bad thing. Jesus' parables were meant to do the same thing. God gave us a mind to think and I don't believe He's going to feel threatened when we use it to question the meaning of His message.

The book echoes the themes of reconciliation and inclusion found in McLaren's previous books. Some don't like his idea of inclusion but I don't believe the Religious Right hold the keys to God's kingdom nor should they pretend they do. I believe McLaren's book presents to non-believers a more loving faith that welcomes everyone no matter who they are or where they are on their spiritual path. This message, like the story of Jesus with the woman at the well, is a loving invitation to the faith rather than the harsh "Got Jesus?".

Even if you don't agree with McLaren's ideas, the book will make you think and that, I believe, is a good thing and is McLaren's goal as well. Seeking truth is something we all should do, believers or not.

Thank you, Brian, for being such a great spiritual guide.

Brian McLaren's newest book, The Last Word and the Word After That, is a superb final book in his New Kind of Christian trilogy. My only regret is that the series is over; however, I hold out much hope that this trilogy will continue in other forms as the trilogy parallels his own spiritual development through the use of story. What I love about McLaren is his willingness to write about his doubts and the areas where he has divested himself of American evangelical thinking. What I get frustrated with McLaren about is that he seems to stop short of what the logic of his various arguments would require (his treatment of the Canaanite genocide in A Generous Orthodoxy is one such situation). But here I have to see the beauty I want others to see in me as I wrestle with my own doubt: I want those more mature or simply more gracious to let me wander, to encourage my seeking, and to love me while I go on my journey. I hope so much that he will continue to write about his spiritual journey, realizing that he is making more friends than he is losing, that he is touching lives the church has done a poor job of reaching.

McLaren's first book introduced us to Pastor Dan, who is wrestling with questions over pluralism, the argument that the Bible is infallible and inerrant, and general ideas about what Jesus meant when he talked about the kingdom. Dan meets Neo, a Christian who has been through similar questioning and has found a certain peace in these new answers. The second book in the series focuses on Dan wrestling with the debate between creationism and evolution, and again the underlying ideas about the identity of the Bible that are an implicit part of this debate. Within the second book, Pastor Dan is put on forced hiatus by his church because of some of his changing teaching. The final book brings the church crisis to a head but first forces Dan to deal with the most painful part of the Christian story - the teachings of Jesus on hell.

For me, this third book may be one of McLaren's best. Christians who want to be honest about their struggle with the idea of a loving God sending those who have never heard of Jesus to an eternity of torment in hell will find this book provocative and helpful. I would caution those new to McLaren's writing to not begin with this book, but with the first book in this series. To begin with McLaren's teaching on hell builds a house of cards where a firmer foundation should be built with his teaching on the mechanisms by which the Bible should be interpreted. If we start with McLaren's third book we jump right in to his teaching on hell without dealing with the searching that led this point or the logic that makes his argument sustainable. Christians who see nothing needing to be explained within the doctrine of hell will find McLaren's book heresy. Upon publication of this book, McLaren is going to find out who his real friends are, who the real Christians in his midst are, and who he has helped the most with his teaching.

McLaren makes what I believe is probably a conscious choice to focus on what Jesus really said and as a result what Jesus really meant when he spoke about hell. Because it is a contextual evaluation, many will be frustrated that he sees a layer of complexity where the fundamentalist position on hell needs no such exploration (left largely unspoken in McLaren's book is why some are so comfortable with this idea - something our society may have to wrestle with implicitly in the coming years). This presentation allows him to avoid the more divisive question of why hell is such a central issue for contemporary Christianity. To me, these type of decisions folded delicately within the tapestry of his writing, suggests that his voice belongs most within the church. I believe that many people within the church do not really buy into much of the church's teaching on creationism, the environment, politics, the end-times, or hell. McLaren's voice echoes through the church graciously and eloquently stating that you can be a believer without accepting all that is held within the Christian faith. Does McLaren's voice echo as much outside the church as it does within? I believe that in large part, yes, it does. Many people, even those familiar with the writing of atheists like Bertrand Russell, will find that Russell's denial of Christianity (which he based in large part based on the fundamentalists' presentation of Jesus' teaching on hell) falls apart when McLaren's discussion on hell is presented. This is why McLaren needs to be encouraged to have a broader voice than he now does; this is why I buy his books and share them frequently with family and friends. People need to know that you can be a Christian without believing in eternal torment. People need to know that you can be a Christian without being comfortable in an idea of God that accommodates eternal torment.

I don't often write reviews but what I have read in many of the reviews before me makes me sad. The reviewers have clearly missed the point. They are so in love with their doctrines that they can no longer see the hugeness of God's love and of His Grace.

McLaren made it quite clear that the point wasn't the doctrines of heaven and hell themselves, but what is behind them and beyond them. He sums it up quite clearly at one point - we are saved by God's grace but we will still be judged by our works. If you believe that if you are saved you are not judged, think again. Everyone will be judged but that does not mean everyone will be condemned. Anyone who turns from God now, or after death, does so of their own free will and God mourns for them but that does not mean that he does not give them a second chance, and a third and a fourth...much like the parable of the prodigal son. It is up to each individual to repent and turn toward God, it is the role of each Christian to gently teach and guide others so that they become aware of God and wish to turn toward him.

For more on the subject of heaven and hell from a well-respect theologian I would suggest reading "The Great Divorce" by C.S. Lewis. I believe that you will find that McLaren's ideas are not all that new or all that radical. The point that both McLaren and Lewis are trying to make is to focus on the bountiful Grace of God. Let this grace flow from you as you love others no matter where they are on their path - God will take care of the rest.

I sincerely pray for all of those who have become caged by doctrine and cannot let the Living Waters flow freely.

I just finished reading this book. I feel like Brian thinks that he has some unique understanding of Scripture that nobody else, except for a few "radicals" like himself, is privy to. I feel like he paints a picture of Christianity that is just not true. I feel like he is not helping to right misconceptions about Christians, but rather adding fuel to the fire. Personally, I know no Christians who "are happy to see non- believers burn in the fire of hell". If there are large groups of Christianity who embrace hell and rejoice when sinners die, well then, yes, someone needs to address that topic. But I don't think that changing what Scripture states, and interpreting Scripture so that it proves your point is the way to do it. I believe that hell is a real place, which Jesus does talk about frequently in the Bible. I think to state that nobody will go to hell because of God's great mercy is discrediting and offensive to the Cross. Jesus endured the cross so that those who believe in Him would not have to. It's nice to think that everybody, especially my loved ones who do not believe in Jesus yet, will not have to face hell. That' s an amazing thought, but it's not true. That should break our hearts, not cause us to rejoice. The circles of Christianity I am in, embrace the whole Bible, but find a merciful loving God, too.
I gave this book three stars though, because Brian brings up a lot of other points about faith and Christianity that are true, and if nothing else, this book is a catalyst for a lot of dialogue.

'The Last Word' is the final part of Brian McLaren's 'New Kind of Christian' trilogy, and retains the preceding two books' characters, narrative flow, and 'creative nonfiction' style. Pastor Dan has been suspended by his church for being a potential heretic, his friend Neil ('don't call me Neo, I hated the last two Matrix movies') Oliver invites him to be part of a neo-monastic community, lots of people get married, and everyone is talking about Hell. Lots. Like men talk about sport: can't let go, despite the pain it causes.

I've really, REALLY enjoyed the first two books, cheering pastor Dan on as he loosens up and learns to enjoy a more progressive 'generous orthodoxy'. In retrospect, I've probably been a patronising to the main character. This time, however, as McLaren has Dan exploring new territory on the new creation, I found myself saying, 'Whoah, Dan, slow down, I can't keep up!' Dan's final view tends to correspond with NT Wright's 'realised eschatology', which basically means we need to think a lot more about the reign of God in the world today than whatever might happen in the future.

As with the previous book in the series, in which one of the main characters becomes a Christian on her deathbed, all threads are wound together in a way that feels just a bit too simple. How many heresy trials do you know of where nobody gets burned? Still, I found myself with a lump in my throat as I read the happy ending, which I think means that I really do care about these people who have helped me find a language for the journey that I, and so many others, are experiencing in these days.

The books itself is well written, given that it attempts the impossible: to marry a theology textbook and an airport novel. The story is simply and unobtrusively told, the narrative is on the thin side, but compelling enough at times that you want to skim the heavy stuff, and the heavy stuff is interesting and challenging enough that you never do skim it.

Sometimes the book suffers from the painful insertion of really deep theology into a story which groans from the effort of carrying so much meaning. You can push an illustration too far, like Alan Bennett's vicar opining 'Life is rather like a tin of sardines: we're all of us looking for the key.' McLaren takes us to the holocaust memorial in Washington DC to hammer home his main points about evangelical views on Hell: that they turn God into Hitler and Christians into little kommandants running around chucking everyone into the fire. So if Hitler was bad for disposing of everyone he considered not up scratch, why do we say God is good for doing the very same thing on a cosmic scale? A good point, but rammed home with all the subtlety of... well, that time when I mistook Marmite for chocolate spread...

I really like this book. It has obvious strengths and weaknesses, and if you take it for what it is, you will find you mind (and maybe even your spirit) expanded by the process. The story itself has a climax, but for me the abiding sensation as I put down the book, was a long, 'Hmmmmmmm'.

Reading through the other reviews, I struggle to see the character of Jesus shining through the bile, anger and vilification directed at the author. Having spent three days with or near him, he is truly a gentle and humble man who listens avidly (much like Jesus acted I reckon and don't forget the greatest command is to love, even your 'enemies' - shame on you ;-)

The book doesn't get 5 stars because the plot is weaker at the end of the trilogy. The book does get 4 stars for a very good attempt at a pithy deconstruction of the baggage attached to God's justice. I suspect there is so much anger about his writings because people fail to distinguish between the testimony of scripture and the meaning and significance we have laid on top of it. It takes a courageous theologian to travel across deeply rutted tracks but those who know their Bible will accept that the broad road doesn't always go where you want it to!

Two particular parts of the book I found most helpful. First was the section showing how visual metaphors become models on which we hang stuff, but that we can become too attached to the model without realising it was simply a vehicle for communicating a particular point and isn't roadworthy for longer journeys. Whenever the Pharisees brought up the subject of God's judgmnt (Hell), Jesus always turned it upside down. He never backed their view but he was happy to use their terminology, just with a reversed purpose.

The second thing was the compendium of references to hell/ judgment/ warning in the Gospels. He simply provided a table which showed the reference, the negative behaviour being warned about, the consequence of carrying on with the behaviour and a brief summary of his understanding of the point of the passage. He encourages us to do our own reviews of these passages and come to our own conclusions. Some honest Bible study shows that so much of what we ASSUME the Bible says really doesn't exist at all. But don't trust me, read the book (including the foreword) and then do the study for yourself. Enjoy and be prepared for a surprise. Those of you who read this and think there's no way you'll be surprised are probably reading God's Word in the belief you have nothing more to learn. Your God is too small.