The main characters grab you from the moment they are introduced and the story just flows like the river after that! Although the directions each character takes is predictable; the story unfolds so smoothly that I had a hard time putting the book down! Georgina Gentry is one of the best writers of historical romance!

I've read Warrior's Prize several times and I can't get tired of it. What a shame that there aren't more men out their that can love a woman like Keso did Wannie. You won't regret spending time reading this wonderfully written book.

Though not as well known as the novels that established the author's name (Pride and Prejudice, Emma), Persuasion is certainly worth your time. It's extremely well-written with superb characterization. The plot isn't too original by today's standards, but is interesting nonetheless. Anne Elliot, the smartest and most pleasant by far of three upper class sisters, is 28 and still single. At 19 she fell in love with and almost married a dashing naval officer named Frederick Wentworth. However, great pressure from her family and relations "persuaded" her to reject Frederick due to his lower station in society. Frederick was greatly hurt and promptly went off to engage his energies in naval action.

Eight and a half years later, Anne still hasn't met another guy she likes as much as Frederick and remains single. But now Frederick returns from war, retired, extremely wealthy from privateering with mercenaries, and more mature. He's ready to settle down and a chance family connection puts him back in the same neighborhood as Anne! He's still upset with Anne. And this time, other women are catching his eye too...

While not up to the standards of Anne Bronte's outstanding The Tenant of Wildfell Hall, Persuasion is a good classical romance novel. I think it beats out Thomas Hardy's Far From the Madding Crowd on plot and characterization, though Hardy's prose is generally more powerful. Nevertheless, Austen can be quite poignant when she wants to be: Wentworth's shocking letter to Anne at the end of the book moved even me, a generally left-brained emotionless creature!

A highlight of the novel is the illuminating social commentary that Austen subtly inserts into the prose. Clearly, she felt that the class system entrenched in British society at the time had its shortcomings. The endnotes in the Penguin edition do a good job of explaining the finer points of Austen's many jabs at class-conscious folks including Anne's self-absorbed father Walter and hopeless sister Elizabeth. Anne's other sister Mary is rendered superbly by Austen as a basically good-natured woman unfortunately marred by a touch of vanity. I personally know a Mary or two.

Recommended to all adult readers!

I thoroughly enjoyed this novel because of Jane Austen's lyrical prose, her timeless subjects of family relationships, love (and/or the search for it), her heartwarmingly drawn characters that I think any reader anywhere and at any time can relate to easily, and her usual witty and critical social commentary. I find it amazing to think that she wrote this novel nearly 200 years ago! I can think of several people in my own family and among friends, colleagues, and acquaintances who match her descriptions of Anne Elliot, her father and sisters Walter and Elizabeth Elliot and Mary Musgrove, Lady Russell, Captain Wentworth, etc. Times and mores may have changed in 200 years, but human nature has not changed! Reading her descriptions of these characters and well imagining Anne's reaction to them, whether it is with resignation, amusement, or exasperation mirror my own thoughts on them.
Austen has created a wonderful character in Anne Elliot. I found that I liked her more and more as I read the novel, and, had she been real, would liked to have had her as a sister, friend, or relative. She is such a wonderful character because readers have a chance to see how she has grown up, has changed, and is willing to go for what she wants now that she is older and wiser (much like anyone else).
The story is not like Austen's other novels (Pride and Prejudice, Emma) because it deals with the issue of a true rarity in life--a second chance at love. Anne Elliot met and fell in love with Captain Frederick Wentworth, a naval officer, when she was 19 years old. Against her better judgment, she is "persuaded" by family in the form of family disapproval of her choice. Her mother is dead, her father and her elder sister Elizabeth (who have a very strange, almost-marriage-like relationship themselves) are social snobs and do not consider a mere captain in the British navy good enough to marry into their family because they are ranked above him socially. Anne's feelings, Frederick's feelings, and the possibility that he could earn a great deal of money by capturing privateers and enemy ships, or be rewarded with a title for distinguishing himself in battle does not occur to them. Anne is also strongly influenced by Lady Russell, a close family friend and a particularly close friend to Anne. Lady Russell, since the death of Anne's mother, has become a mother-figure/friend to Anne (since Anne is ignored by her father and sister Elizabeth). Lady Russell also disapproved of Anne marrying Captain Wentworth, and Anne, because she was young and easily influenced by those around her at age 19, breaks off her engagement to Captain Wentworth. She has regretted it ever since, and has not met anyone (her father and sister went out in Society, but did not take Anne with them; her younger sister Mary is married, but spends her time complaining about non-existent ailments and about all the wrongs and hurts she has suffered at the hands of family and friends to take any interest in introducing Anne to eligible young men) she would consider as a husband. Eight years pass, and, by chance, Captain Wentworth (now considerably wealthier though not titled) re-enters her life due to the temporary lull in the Napoleonic Wars. He too was very hurt by Anne's breaking off of their engagement, but, like Anne, he has not met any other women who compare to her. Both are wary of eachother--and Austen handles both their introspection and their gradual establishment of a stronger, more mature love for eachother with sensitivity and passion. I loved this story because it clearly shows an older (though still young) heroine who is offered the rarest of all things--a second chance at love with the love of her life. She is wise enough to reject the opinions of her family and Lady Russell this time, accepts the love offered, and offers her own love in return! Captain Wentworth's letter to Anne at the end of the novel is the kind of love letter every woman would cherish. Wow! What a beautiful letter! It warms your heart, touches your soul, and nourishes your spirit. The story is all the more poignant because Anne and Captain Wentworth appreciate eachother and their relationship because they know what they have and what they could have missed had they followed social conventions.
For the die-hard Austen fans, there is plenty of social commentary, and I thought that Austen illustrated the snobbishness of the upper classes very well in her characterizations of Anne's father and sisters. The criteria they use to accept or reject a person are based on such things as whether the man owns property and how much, how many servants he has, title, family background, connections, and, in her father's case, physical appearance is very important. None of these things have any intrinsic value compared to whether Anne is loved and respected by Captain Wentworth, how he treats people, his ethics, morality, etc. Austen's subtle humor and way of poking fun at these values contribute to the tone of this novel.
Give this novel a try. I do not think that you will be disappointed. I highly recommend it.

"Persuasion" is a great literary work, and, to my mind, Jane Austen's finest book. This was her final completed novel before her death, and was published posthumously. As is often the case with Ms. Austen's fiction, "Persuasion" deals with the social issues of the times and paints a fascinating portrait of Regency England, especially when dealing with the class system. Rigid social barriers existed - and everyone wanted to marry "up" to a higher station - and, of course, into wealth. This is also a very poignant and passionate story of love, disappointment, loss and redemption. The point Austen makes here, is that one should not ever be persuaded to abandon core values and beliefs, especially for ignoble goals. There are consequences, always.

Sir Walter Elliot, Lord of Kellynch Hall, is an extravagant, self-aggrandizing snob, and a bit of a dandy to boot. He has been a widower for many years and spends money beyond his means to increase his social stature. His eldest daughter, who he dotes on, is as conceited and spoiled as he is. The youngest daughter, Anne, is an intelligent, sensitive, capable and unassuming woman in her late twenties when the story opens. She had been quite pretty at one time, but life's disappointments have taken their toll and her looks are fading. She and her sister are both spinsters. Anne had once been very much in love with a young, and as yet untried, navel officer. A woman who had been a close friend to Anne's mother, persuaded Anne to "break the connection," convincing her that she could make a much better match. After much consideration, Anne did not follow her heart or her better instincts, and she and her young officer, Frederick Wentworth, separated. She has never again found the mutual love or companionship that she had with him. Anne's older sister never married either, because she hadn't found anyone good enough! She still hopes, however, for an earl or a viscount.

The Elliot family is forced to financially retrench because of their extravagance. They lease Kellynch Hall to...of all people...Wentworth's sister and her husband. Elliot, his oldest daughter and her companion, move to a smaller lodging in Bath for the season, leaving Anne to pack up their belongings before joining them. She gets the Cinderella treatment throughout the book. Anne decides to first visit with her middle sister, an abominably spoiled, whiny hypochondriac, Mrs. Musgrove. She has made a good, but not brilliant match to a local squire. Her husband, Charles Muskgrove, his parents, and their two younger, eligible daughters, Louisa and Henrietta, are delightful. They all tolerate Mrs. Muskgrove, barely, and adore Anne. It is at the Muskgrove estate that Anne meets Frederick Wentworth again, after his absence of seven years. He is in the neighborhood, because his sister is now in the area, residing at Kellynch, of course. Wentworth is now a Captain in the Royal Navy and quite wealthy. When their eyes meet for the first time, you can absolutely feel Anne's longing and remorse. He is aloof with Anne, although civil. The man was hurtfully rejected once before and it appears that he still feels her snub. Now Wentworth is on the marriage market and Louisa sets her cap for him. Accidents and various adventures ensue, from the resorts of Lyme and Bath to the Muskgrove estate, bringing Anne and Wentworth closer together. The passion between the two is sooo palpable, although Very understated, (this is Regency England after all). I think this is Ms. Austen at her most passionate. Some scholars say that she modeled Anne Elliot after herself.

This remarkable novel, and the issues it tackles, is just as germane today as it was when written. And the romance...well, no one does romance better than Jane Austen.

Curt Gentry's book is about J.Edgar Hoover(JEH), the most powerful, most durable U.S.bureaucrat ever and about the KGB-, Gestapo-like organization (the FBI) that he created. Since JEH held his position for 55 years - he served under 8 presidents and 16 attorneys general- the book offers a multitude of extremely interesting historical moments involving the interplay between JEH, the FBI, and elements and major personalities of our government and society. While Gentry never resolves the issue of JEH's sexual orientation, he does adequately document why JEH can rightfully be described as ambitious, puritanical, vain, loquacious, cold and unemotional, neat, organized and resourceful, articulate, devious and manipulative, prejudiced, effective, smart, vindictive, energetic, feared, and, on some rare occasions, humorous.
The FBI's methods and techniques -legal and illegal- by which the FBI acquired the information and the secrets that filled FBI file cabinets - the secrets that constituted JEH's real power- are fully described: telephone (wire) taps/recordings, 'bugs' (surreptitiously mounted miniature microphones in the homes, offices, vehicles, organizations, etc., of FBI targets), 'black bag jobs'(breaking and entering operations to collect info, membership and mailing lists, etc.), burglaries (forced, illegal entries to steal or to plant incriminating evidence), mail openings (to and from targeted individuals and organizations), infiltrations (using FBI spies who are or become members of targeted organizations), paid and unpaid informants, 'news' leaks (to embarrass or discredit individuals or organizations), anonymous messages (to intimidate or coerce targeted individuals or organizations), and counter-intelligence programs (active measures and strategies implemented to generate family feuds, or internal conflicts between individuals or within organizations).
Also very interesting are those historical moments that Gentry identifies when JEH's responses and actions impacted upon the nation both significantly and negatively - like, for example, his long time policy that organized crime did not exist in the U.S., his secret but indispensable aid to Sen. McCarthy's anti-communist campaign, his failure to provide FDR with available intelligence that could have altered the events at Pearl Harbor, and his on-going advice to LBJ that anti-Vietnam protests were communist-inspired (vs. a true manifestation of genuine American opposition to the war).
In short, if you enjoy U.S. history - and you want 'the rest (or at least more) of the story' - you'll enjoy this book.

A candid and thoroughly scrutinized synopsis of the life and times of J. Edgar Hoover and his FBI. It is with a hint of cynicism that the author states that Hoover was a blackmailer, a common embezzling thug, and a thief. I could not disagree with Mr. Gentry's narrative, nor could I have imagined a story as fascinating and apalling as JEH's being compacted into less than the book's 800 pages.

I recommend this book over any other FBI/Hoover biography currently available.

J. Edgar Hoover: The Man and the Secrets by Curt Gentry is a biography of J. Edgar Hoover one of the most powerful men in Washington, D.C. In his time, Hoover kept files on everyone in power, he trusted no one and his paranoia isolated him further.

Hoover was a bachelor and a private man, but he was not a particularly honest man. He blackmailed, threw his influence around, used illegal wiretaps, and was seroiusly flawed as a human being. America's "number one cop" loved to use sexual slander as his favorite tool to destroy all who crossed his path.

This book reveals Hoover as a man who was frighteningly obsessed and had the power to change U.S. History and wasn't afraid to use it if it made him a national hero. Hoover was director of the FBI and during his tenure he manipulated presidents, the Supreme Court and Congress. No one was immune to him and his incorruptible FBI.

I found this book to be written well, as the narrative flows, the reader in enveloped into intrigue and into Hoover's web of paranoia. J. Edgar Hoover spread his political cancer far and wide making him virtually untouchable. A shocking tale of a man for nearly fifty years who would destroy anyone with his virtually unchecked power.

A very good read that will fascinate the reader and keep your intrest throughout.

I am angry I wasted money on this book. The book description IS the book. I found very little here to apply to my life. Anger is not good for you. Duh! Why would I even bother to buy a book. The anecdotes were more annoying than anything. Save your money.

I have lived with anger my entire life. I was fianlly able to recognize my problem through this book. I felt like someone finally understood how hard it was to let go of the anger.

It was a great source of reference for me and helped me start a life free of anger. I feel so much better....thanks.

If you have ever considered your problem may be anger, this is the right book for you. I am 30 years old and was the type that would be firm when upset, but not (I thought) too angry. I also had occasional violent blow ups.(3-5 time per year, for about 15 years) I was on course to destroying my relationship by casting blame and not assuming any. This book does two things well. First it enables you to determine what type of anger you have and secondly how to deal with it. This book is very well written and by the end of the first chapter I felt confident that I could defeat my anger. It has been several months now and I am able to express my anger constructively and have regained my life. Having dealt with this problem has lifted a load I never even knew existed. Even my co-workers say I seem much happier and they now enjoy working with me. This book will help you or your loved ones live a happier, healthier life at any age. You can do it!

Three Views on the Millenium and Beyond is not a book that you should begin your studies in eschatology with. It is a rather difficult book but not impossible to work through. One needs to be at least minimally familiar with each of the positions and some of the arguments if the book is to be completely gratifying. For instance, if you are not familiar with Revelation 20, then you might as well put this book down until you have scanned it through a few times.

Nevertheless, the authors impressively articulate their positions and their reasons for believing what they do. This book will provide you with an intermediary starting place for being able to better understand each of the three positions (which are to be taken broadly since there are disagreements within each of the camps). I will not comment on who "won" the debate, partly because I am largely agnostic about it at this point (though I do favor one position). But each did provide thought-provoking arguments and responses that need to be more fully considered (at least for myself).

Darrell Bock's closing essay was helpful in pointing out both areas of agreement and disagreement. Despite his admonition of a possible bias towards premillenialism, I did not find that it was largely evident. I was also impressed to find that Robert Strimple admitted that he had changed his opinion on one section after reading another writer's argument in the book: certainly a rare case! Interestingly, the contributers would often respond with comments like, "that position is not necessarily indicative of the such and such view." Quite often, the writers agreed with eachother. But don't be fooled, for there are many disagreements as well.

Overall assessment: this book was very-well written, edifying, and educational in my eschatological studies. I recommend that others read a few books by Blaising (premil), Hendriksen or Hoekema (amil), or Gentry (postmil), prior to reading this book. That way, you will be more familiar with the terminology and the arguments. But if you are interested in the eschatology discussions, then you must read this book.

I have read a few comparison books on eschatology in general and the millennium in particular. This one is the best yet on the millennium. I would have given it five stars, except for the mediocrity of the premillennial presentation.

Gentry, as usual, expresses himself very well and is very convincing, both in his own essay as well as in his responses. Strimple, considering the limitations of this work, does a fine job of covering various Scriptures that address the amillennialist position. The worst essay of the three is penned by Blaising, who takes entirely too many pages to explain the premillennial stance. He gets bogged down in the history of premillennialism, and then is so technical in the actual presentation of his own view that he is very tough to follow. The reader comes away scratching his/her head wondering what in the world did Blaising actually say! Premillennialism, however, is so commonplace that it requires the least explanation of the three positions.

Bock provides a very cordial, conciliatory conclusion, touching upon points that are crucial to formulating one's own view of Revelation 20:1-6. I was rather surprised when he revealed his own position near the end of his essay, for I certainly did not detect it through his earlier remarks.

This book gives a great presentation of the postmillennial and amillennial views. The presentation for premillennialism pales in comparison, but other readers may find Blaising's essay more helpful than I did.

Overall, this work is a good investment for anyone wanting to compare the three basic millennial views.

This book is a great place to start for those trying to understand the millennial kingdom issue in Christianity. I would recommend this book over the Clouse's book because it is more recent and updated (especially with the rise of hermeneutical and theological developments in evangelical circles in the past twenty years). I thought this book would question my premillennial approach to understanding eschatology, but having read the articles by Gentry (postmillennialist) and Strimple (amillennialist) I have a firmer standing on premillennialism. Here is an overview of the three essays:

1. Kenneth Gentry (Postmillennialism):

This is the worst essay by far of the three. Gentry's hermeneutical and exegetical method is flawed and absurd. I don't know how and why anyone would still want to be a postmillennialist after reading this essay. Trying to argue that the Edenic, Abrahamic, and New Covenants support some sort of postmillennial progressivism and reconstructionism of society is totally lacking in Biblical support. Also, his expositions of Psalm 2; Isaiah 2:2-4; Matthew 13; John 12:31-32; Matthew 28:19-20; 1 Corinthians 15:20-28; and Revelation 20 (especially this one) to support a gradual increase of Christ's reign on earth now is laughable. I don't see how the angel who binds Satan in Revelation 20:1 can refer to Christ, and how the "first resurrection" in verses 4-5 can refer to spiritual regeneration at conversion. Gentry pretty much shot down his own view with this one.

2. Robert Strimple (Amillennialism):

Good attempt, but doesn't meet the exegetical support. Trying to argue for an amillennial position using a Covenant Theology structure imposed on the text doesn't cut it (see his discussion on pp. 84-100 for a good overview of how Covenant Theologians interpret Old Testament promises). To argue that the Church has replaced Israel in the New Testament, that all the Israelite promises in the Old Testament refer to Christ, and that the New Testament should be given priority when interpreting the Old Testament is totally unnacceptable. This is typical Reformed interpretation of Scripture: as long as it fits with TULIP or the Covenant of Grace structure, it has to be true. Strimple's "Dutch" interpretation (a recent view) of Romans 11 is not convincing nor is his exegesis of Revelation 20 (he follows too much with Meredith Kline's double binary pattern to prove that the "first resurrection" is not a bodily resurrection). Of course, Reformed people say that if a new interpretation fits their system it must be Biblical, but if a new interpretation arises in another tradition it must be heretical. Typical of Reformed arrogance and myopism.

3. Craig Blaising (Premillennialism):

Very good essay. Proves his point well. The first section goes over the history and varieties of premillennialism. The only problem with this essay is that Blaising spends too much time on Revelation 20 (although a fine exposition) and too little time on salvation-history of premillennialism (especially dispensational premillennialism). He should have minimized his discussion of the history and varieties of premillennialism and focused on how God's program works in a premillennial scheme.

Overall, a good starter for those wanting a good understanding of the three millennial issues. I would also urge the reader to read Darrell Bock's summary essay. It is an excellent discussion on exegetical, hermeneutical, and presuppositional methods. How one comes to the Bible influences what kind of conclusions we come up with. Bock ends off his essay by arguing that the issue of the millennium is not merely an intellectual matter, it deals with how our position affects how we evangelize and work with our culture and society. This book should not disappoint anyone looking for a book on an important issue.

"How should one live?" is the fundamental question driving most of Chekhov's work, and it is very overtly laid bare in The Cherry Orchard. Should the aristocratic family in decline stick to owning their cherry orchard (representative of the grandiose trappings of Russian aristocracy), or give in to modern commercialization in order to survive? What is the value of tradition, and how many trees should one own? Chekhov will not answer these questions for you, but he poses them in most interesting ways. In addition to wise insights into such fundamental dilemmas, Chekhov also provides a lot of witty banter, and a great slice-of-life view at 19th century Russian high culture. But this is not just a Russian play or a 19th century play; its themes, questions, and prospective answers are relevant for individuals coping with society and history in any place, and at any time.

The Cherry Orchard was me first experience with Chekhov, and I was surprised at the depth in this 49 page play. By no means would I considered myself a "literary expert," but this was very readable and you can pull a lot of the deeper meanings and its context in Russian history by yourself. I was confused at a couple people who write that the simply couldn't understand it and it put them to sleep! It's not THAT tough! If I could understand and appreciate it, almost anyone can!

What I like most about Chekhov is that he doesn't simplify his characters. He's a realist in this sense. Lopahkin and Trophimof each have admirable and detestable characteristics, just like you and I. While it may be set in the tumultuous period prior to the Russian revolution, the ideas and the discussions this play provokes are timeless.

Highly recommended!

Anton Chekhov's play "The Cherry Orchard" has been published as part of the Dover Thrift Edition series (that's the version I read before writing this review). No translator is credited for this edition. According to the note at the start of the book, the play was initially presented by the Moscow Art Theatre in 1904.

The play takes place on the estate of Madame Ranevsky, the matriarch of an aristocratic Russian family that has fallen on financial hard times. She faces the possible loss of her family's magnificent cherry orchard.

The play is populated with interesting characters: Lopakhin, a wealthy neighbor whose father was the serf of Madame Ranevsky's father; Firs, an aged servant who longs for the "old days"; Trophimof, a student with lofty ideas; and more. There is a great deal of conflict among the characters.

"The Cherry Orchard" is about people dealing with very personal conflicts and crises while larger socioeconomic changes are going on around them. The orchard of the title is a memorable image that is well handled by Chekhov. The play contains some really effective dialogue, such as old Firs' reflection on the apparently lost art of making dried cherries. This is definitely one classic play that remains compelling.

I found this to be an enthralling page-turner, and I had to restrain myself from reading ahead, but after only a couple of chapters I had a strong sense of deja vu (deja lu?). That the book draws significantly from "Brideshead Revisited" is noted early and often by the author herself, in a disappointingly obvious manner. But "Other People's Rules" also seems to worship at a less-exalted altar, Dominick Dunne's semi-trashy "A Season in Purgatory," a roman a clef loosely based on the Martha Moxley murder and its Kennedy connection. As in "Brideshead" and "Purgatory," the first-person narrator in "Rules" is a middle-class but comparatively impoverished young person drawn in by the privilege and eccentricities of a wealthy family; however, "Rules" resembles "Purgatory" not merely in theme but in plot points as well. While the similarities may be entirely coincidental, they diminished my enjoyment of the book.

This book's grammar and sentence construction is absolutely excrutiating! What was the author/editor thinking? By way of example, check out p.53-54 (of the Harper Collins paperback) where 27 lines are divided into a mere three sentences. The sentence, "It was 1958 and he was hanging out in Soho and lodging with Lady Sadie McGowan, a bohemian grandee who had a large house in Tite Street, where, as Sissy confided to the bridge table, he was paying his way by playing his music at parties and meeting all the wrong kinds of people." is a particular favourite of mine.

That said, if you can grit your teeth through the grammar, the book's plot is gripping and keeps the reader's interest throughout. The last few chapters were a little odd - was there an editorial edit over the ultimate fate of Katie Grisham? It just seemed to me that rather a lot was left to the imagination. Perhaps that was the idea?

Overall comment - worth a read.

15 year old Lucy Diamond finds herself invited by her new friend, Sarah to be a guest in her home, one of the wealthiest and influential families of England. This family has rubbed shoulder with royalty! She is a little overawed by their elegance, extravagence, but is thrilled to be part of it all.

The family seems a little eccentric, with frequent trips away for the mother to 'dry out' and the father, Ivar seems to have a 'thing' for adolescent girls. Lucy finds herself being caught in his web. When the beautiful young heiress, Katie disappears one night from the Gatehouse family grounds, Lucy is shocked to realise that she may hold the key to the mystery. She, perhaps is the last person who saw Katie alive.

Despite her knowledge that the Gatehouse family have enough money and influence to have friends in all the high places, Lucy is brought forward to speak at the muder trial, when Katie's body is found. Will the truth win? Does justice apply to all? An engrossing read.

Is the second coming in the future? YES. So the tribulation is future also. It is clear from (matthew 24) (revelation) and (daniel) and (pauls writings like 2 thess 2) that a tribulation is BEFORE the second coming. THE TRIBULATION IS CLIMAXED BY THE SECOND COMING. So if the second coming is future so is the tribulation. Is the antichrist in the future? Is the resurrection in the future ( 1 corinthians 15) Is the rapture future ( 1 thes 4:17) ( 1 corinthians 15:51) YES to all!!! So the tribulation before the second coming is future also. I believe in pretrib as well. Ice is right, cool.

Evangelical Christianity's fascination with eschatology shows no signs of waning in the near future. Major political and social events continue to fuel the interest in "end-times" speculation, whether the Persian Gulf War, 9/11, or the war in Iraq. A significant indicator of evangelicalism's interest in eschatology is the infamous "Left Behind" series of books by Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins. This series of books has become something of a phenomenon in the publishing industry, and their popularity has not been limited to the evangelical world.

Through this series LaHaye and Jenkins have helped popularize an interpretive theological system known as Dispensational, and an eschatology of Pretribulationism. This eschatological framework undergirds the fictional story of the books, and may represent the "end-times" views of a majority of conservative evangelicals. Indeed, many of them have never heard of any other option, and those that have may likely consider other eschatological options as heresy!

_The Tribulation: Past or Future?_ provides a helpful introduction to another view of eschatology known as preterism or moderate preterism. Kenneth Gentry presents and defends the view that the events described by Christ in Matthew 24 are an example of fulfilled prophecy through the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. Gentry looks carefully at the internal evidence of this text (and others) in an attempt to practice genuine hermeneutics rather than forcing a particular interpretive scheme upon the text. Ice presents and defends the futurist view, particularly Dispensational Pretribulationism, arguing that the events described in the Olivet Discourse are yet future and unfulfilled. The format of the book is a back and forth presentation and response by the authors that allows them to both build the strongest case for their views, and to respond to common criticisms.

Written on a popular level, the reader need not have any formal theological training prior to engaging the text. Even so, this book can also serve as an introductory textbook in systematic theology at Bible colleges. Readers will find this book a helpful resource that provides food for thought in today's popular "end-times" speculation. Those who enjoy this volume will also benefit from a review of Gary DeMar's _Last Day's Madness_ (American Vision, 1997), as well as R.C. Sproul's _The Last Days According to Jesus_ (Baker, 1998).

I hope this review is helpful to those who read this review. The book is very intelligently written from both authors. They both state their cases (futurism and preterism) very clear. They then each of them have a rebuttal to the other ones stated case. I would have rated this book higher if it had a rebuttal to the rebuttal. For instance, I would have like to seen Ice's rebuttal of Gentry rebuttal to Ice's stated case, and Gentry's rebuttal to Ice's rebuttal of Gentry's stated case. I believe that would have answered even more questions that inquirer's have.

With that being said, I will attempt to review the book. Ice seems to make many claims that just do not seem to be answering anything. He will seemingly make a claim about one of Gentry's assertions, but then never really answers why he believes it is wrong. He will make a claim that really never is in contradiction with what a preterist believes.

Ice seems to spiritualize the time text, (Matthew 24:34 which is what really should be taken literally) and because he does this he must take everything else literal (the sign of the son of man, coming on great clouds of glory, sun moon and stars,trumpet sound, angels gathering together) and not symbolically. This seems to be the driving force behind this Medicine Bottle Eschatology (push down and turn). You either have to take the time text and spitiualize it and take everything else (at least between Matthew 24:1 and verse 34) literally, or you take the time text Matthew 24:34 and the second person plural of the YOU's (who is hHe speaking to) all through this text, literally and spitualize those events that need to be symbolized. You cannot have the time text, and the events themselves both be literal at the same time, nor can you have them both be spiritualized (or taken symbolically) at the same time. One has to be literal (i.e. time text), then that commands the other to be spiritualized (or taken symbolically, i.e. those events between Matthew 24:1-34 that would not make sense if we take the time text literally).

To take literal these events and to spiritualize the time text is to force the text to read unnatural. It is natural to read it with the time text being taken literal. This is where Ice fails miserably. He must hold to his view until he takes the time text seriously, then and only then will he see that he must abolish his futuristic view of this passage. As long as he does not take the time text literally he is NOT forced to change his view of a futuristic tribulation.

I once read a book titled "The Destruction of Jerusalem; an absolute and irresistable proof of the divine orgin of Christianity" Ice has stated that there is no meaningful purpose if the all this is past. I beg to differ, this little book the destruction of Jerusalem is proof positive that it has meaningful purpose.

I will state one meaningful purpose, I will not have to go through "The great tribulation" according to Gentry's position and I will according to Ice's position. Gentry's position does not to say that we won't have certain tribulations come our way. We do indeed. But that the GREAT TRIBULATION is past. I take great comfort in that.

One last thing. I could never make sense out of the futurist view when I was a futurist, now I can make sense out of many passages of Scripture concerning this debate being a (partial)
preterist.

May God bless all of you!

Soli Deo Gloria

If I had not read the Rama series, I would have been tempted to give this book 5 stars, although I probably would have resisted that temptation. The characters are well-written and fairly deep, and the plot is complicated yet coherent enough. What kept bothering me, though were the frequent parallels to the Rama books - parallel characters, parallel themes, and even parallel scenes. I could never decide if these parallels were stylistic and simply reflected the fact that Mr. Lee co-wrote the last three Rama books, if he was intentionally creating these parallels, or if he was just not original enough to really create a different story from the Rama story. If you have not read this book or the Rama series, I would advise you to read this one first, to avoid the overshadowing effect. I also found that, even though the characters were well-written, I had difficulty caring about any of them, except Sister Beatrice. Also, maybe I was dense at the time (or always), but I didn't realize that I was reading Part 1 of a sequel until almost the end, when I realized that nothing could get resolved in the fifty or so pages I had left. I hope the sequel answers my questions -- and is more original.

If I had not read the Rama series, I would have been tempted to give this book 5 stars, although I probably would have resisted that temptation. The characters are well-written and fairly deep, and the plot is complicated yet coherent enough. What kept bothering me, though were the frequent parallels to the Rama books - parallel characters, parallel themes, and even parallel scenes. I could never decide if these parallels were stylistic and simply reflected the fact that Mr. Lee co-wrote the last three Rama books, if he was intentionally creating these parallels, or if he was just not original enough to really create a different story from the Rama story. If you have not read this book or the Rama series, I would advise you to read this one first, to avoid the overshadowing effect. Also, maybe I was dense at the time (or always), but I didn't realize that I was reading Part 1 of a sequel until almost the end, when I realized that nothing could get resolved in the fifty or so pages I had left. I hope the sequel answers my questions.

Bright Messengers, while not having quite as believable characters as the Rama sequel trilogy, is a great book, and a must read. However, what most people ask is "Where the hell is 'Double Full Moon Night?'" Well, Gentry Lee got side-tracked with the Rama CD-ROM, and didn't quite finish it. He is once again at work on it, and is 70-90% finished. People have also asked, "What the hell does this have to do with the Rama series?" Okay, for those of you who didn't pay close attention, the baby born at the end is the same baby Nicole found at the end of the 2nd to last section of Rama Revealed. The creatures who constructed the ship, and the "zoo" on mars are the Octospiders, not the Ramans. The sequel will be about how the baby travels 120 years through time to Rama III. Presumably, then a 4th series of Rama books will detail what happens to Maria, Michael, Simone, Max, Eponine, Patrick, Nai, Benjy, Ellie, little Nicole, Marius, Kepler, and the eagle. I'm not sure what happens then, but I think it may have something to do with the "Prime Monitor", the super node at the center of the galaxy. E-mail me if you want to discuss this

Merry Gentry, sidhe princess and coheir to the Unseelie Court is back in this second in the series by Laurell K. Hamilton. As with all of Hamilton's books, it primarily centers around the relationship between our beautiful heroine and her bevy of gorgeous men. Oh, and by the way, these aren't just any ordinary guys, they're Sidhe warriors, elite fey bodyguards. Each one has the chance to be Merry's royal consort... if they can get her pregnant with the next heir to the throne. Let's just say there are some VERY sexy chapters in his book! The best thing about Hamilton's books would have to be the tantalizing interpersonal relationships (including romance!) that weave in and out of the narrative. The detective work Merry does as an employee of Grey Detective Agency almost seems to be an afterthought, not the focus for the plot. Even so, it was a great read and I sat down and read on into the wee hours of the night so I could finish in one sitting. I look forward to the next Merry Gentry book, and her upcoming confrontation with her cousin Cel as well as the Seelie Court. A great series, Ms. Hamilton-- keep them coming!

Last year, I happened upon Kiss of Shadows in my library. Ever since reading that book, I have read all of the Anita Blake Series as well. I had to wait for months for Caress of Twilight to come out, and needless to say, I wasn't disappointed. People that have not read KOS first will find this story a bit confusing because there isn't as much background history in COT. COT was written with the assumption that the first in the series was already completed. Ms. Hamilton does not take the time to review every single character (which I am grateful for, nothing is more irritating than having to learn the history of each character over and over again in a new book). COT picks up about three months after KOS ended. Merry and her men are still working for the Grey detective agency, and they are given a case to resolve for someone not only famous in the human world, but infamous in the fey world. For those that have a yearning for romance, there is plenty to be had. For those that are more into the paranormal/violent part, there is also a good amount of that. I found that the sex scenes in this novel are much less disturbing than the ones in the Anita Blake ones (at least in Narcissus in Chains), in fact, the sex scenes are not made to be a deviation from the norm, rather they are a part of the story (although one was a bit weird for me...but it was a height issue for me personally...if you've read the book, you'll understand, I don't want to reveal it because it is a surprise). I even discovered that I no longer have a favorite heroine between the two series. Anita's story is more about trying to keep true to herself, but there's so much torment in her life that it's very hard to do. I feel that Merry is much more secure in who she is and what she needs to do. I think that Ms. Hamilton does a fabulous job of weaving a story of a world that is much like our own, but vastly different as well. I think that my only complaint about this book is that it was much too short. The hardback is only about 350 pages long + or -, not over 400 as posted on this site. I would be willing to pay extra for one of her books if that's what it takes to get a longer story, especially now that we have to wait until next year (2003) for the next installment of either Anita or Merry.

"A Caress of Twilight", by Laurell K. Hamilton is fantastic! I love Ms. Hamilton's writing, her Anita Blake stories are great, but I must say I, (and I think the author) are getting a bit bored with her. So, I am thrilled to see a second book in a new series featuring Princess Meredith.

"A Caress of Twilight" shows Hamilton at her creative best. It is the ultimate in female fantasy. Princess Meredith, a half human fairy princess, must conceive a child before her cousin does to gain the fairy throne and keep her crazy cousin, who wants to kill her, from becoming King. To do that, she must sleep with all her guards, as often as possible, until she becomes pregnant. Cool huh?

There is a mass murder mystery to solve, a curse to overcome, and enough royal intrigue to rival even the House of Windsor. I can't recommend this book enough, it is a fun -- gobble it up in one sitting read - and I eagerly await the next installment.