This book does not convey any new ideas, but is a good overall summation of some very sound wealth creation techniques and theories.

"If I were a rich man," goes the song. Well, if you were, this is how you would invest. Michael F. Lane draws on the advice of top money managers and financial planners to help readers in five key areas: 1) wealth planning, 2) wealth accumulation, 3) wealth without tax, 4) wealth transfer and 5) wealth protection and preservation. The book is aimed at the individual investor with a relative lack of experience in the financial marketplace. The broad overview includes basics of planning your portfolio, E-trading, making investments more tax efficient (for U.S. investors) and estate planning. This solid guide emphasizes fundamentals, although sometimes the discussion becomes repetitious. And, when different advisers give contradictory advice, the diversity of opinion can seem confusing. Lane might have done more summarizing and synthesizing, but we [...] recommend his solid book as a generally good guide for prospective and new investors who want a reason to sing.

I have read them all, and this is by far the best.

This is a beautifully written novel. Love, with all its glory and pitfalls, anchors the center of the universe in The Unfastened Heart. The women characters are so wonderfully written. Mariela, the daughter who falls in love with the boy next door, is like a flower in bloom. Her steadfastness in loving Addison is gloriously revealed. Anna, her mother, is a magical creature, seeing and having faith in love and in her daughter. Even the mother of Dr. Ettinger is a crusty old gal, full of spice. The guys are the complete question marks, however. How can Dr. Ettinger so fully fall in love with Anna, and yet so strongly cling to the notion that the girl next door is not good enough for his son? It's a contradiction in character that is never fully explained, and makes the spine of the plot center around something which didn't fully make sense to me. Given the difference in worlds of economics between how the rich and near-poor conduct their romances, I still wondered why it took so long to open this man's eyes. From Addison, the son, to Cristobal, the two-timing stud Anna fell in love with, all the men are faithless; and all the women are faithful. Given that gender lapse, this is still a beautifully written novel. The language, Von Herzen's control of pacing as the plot unfolds gives the book a lyrical ballad-like tempo. Seek this jewel out for its women. Keep reading despite its men. It weaves a wonderful spell of magic and leaves you wanting more!

The Unfastened Heart leads you through a tribulation of winding gates and doors to be opened. Mariela, the enchantress, has a magical glow to her, and brings a small sometimes sad smile to your lips. It is a modern day romance, and yet it has nothing like the other 'romance' novels do, it posesses heart, and detailed writing. So I guess you could say its not just a romance, but more of a book about the understandings of life.

This book is so good it's too good to be true. There is of course no wonder that it was been included in the literary guild. It is full of creative and enjoyable imagery. The story speaks mainly about Anna and her life evolving around the problems other people face. Romance is described well throughout the book when they talk about Mariela's love life and Anna's love life itself. It's wise, poignant and one you cannot forget.

This book is a historical exploration into the question of how the deaf should be educated, through sign or through oral speech. I wouldn't call it "a comprehensive history of the deaf" as advertised on the back of the book, and I wouldn't even call it "the history of relations between the society of hearing-speaking people and the community of deaf-signing people" as Lane suggests in his foreword. The book stays almost exclusively on the topic of education for the deaf, which in itself is quite interesting.

To me, the book had a unique and rather odd approach, in which the author related the history through the vantage point of Laurent Clerc (the French deaf teacher brought to the US by Thomas Gallaudet). Throughout the first part of the book, the story is told entirely in the first person, as if Clerc wrote it, and Lane simply was the translator. But judging from the extensive footnotes, only a 20th century author could have had access to so many primary sources, so Lane must have been the author after all. But I was never 100% certain about the authorship, and that was a bit annoying. In addition, if Clerc wasn't the author, then Lane stretched his historical research a bit far in projecting attitudes and opinions into Clerc's voice that we really have no way of confirming, and would probably be unlikely for people in the 19th to have. Overall, the historical details are incredibly rich, often perhaps too much so, yet there is not a great focus on dates or chronology, making it difficult in places to identify when specific events took place.

The book makes an extremely strong argument for educating the deaf through sign rather than orally. More than that, the argument is that the deaf are best educated in residential signing schools, at least from a 19th century vantage point. It would seem that Clerc would most likely argue against modern-day mainstreaming as well.

I think most deaf people who read this book would agree that sign language is extremely important for all facets of life, especially education. Nevertheless, hearing parents of deaf children who are trying to decide how to educate their children may still cling to the idea of oralism in the hopes of helping their child better adapt to majority society. But as argued in this book, a deaf child who is mainstreamed and taught lip reading is handicapped, having curtailed abilities to interact with peers. Meanwhile, a deaf child who attends school with other deaf children is completely normal within deaf society. The choice between oralism or sign is really no less than choosing between making the child normal or handicapped - which would you want for your child?

As a hearing person, I was fortunate enough to have the opportunity to do a college exchange at a school which had a large number of deaf students. In fact, most of the students in my dorm were deaf. Almost immediately upon arrival, I began to observe the importance of sign language for communication. Deaf students who had not been exposed to sign language until their teenage years had obvious communication difficulties, and I was told that many of them probably never would develop the language skills that native signers had. It was obvious to me how much the deaf students at the school enjoyed being there and succeeded in their studies because they were supported with sign. These experiences convinced me that the best place for a deaf child to study is in a school with many other deaf children to sign with. On this point, I agree completely with Lane (and Clerc).

As a deaf person who has struggled long and hard to get my PhD in science and science education, this book with its history comes as no surprise to me. Harlan Lane is a hearing person who has taken up the cause of those in the deaf world with a vengence, and I do mean with a vengence! Dr. Lane has a tendency to write with immense vigor and sometimes his books tend to go overboard in stating the case. However, this book is a classic and is definitely one of his best written ones.

The history of the deaf in the United STates is strewn with great minds and small minds. We have had people who supported our education, and those who mistakenly viewed us as being less worthy of the normal needs and desires of life. This includes having a life, getting an education, living in society, being able to find gainful employment, getting married, and having children. The research of Dr. Lane is impeccable, and I have found it useful to refer to him in papers and use his references/bibliography for my own work on discrimination against the deaf in science education. Even if I sometimes do not agree with Dr. Lane's biased outlook on history of the deaf, I certainly appreciate all that he has done to bring the sometimes terrible prejudices and misdeeds to the attention of the hearing public. Yes, the deaf were and continue to be discriminated against, just as other differences are whether a disability or racial/cultural minority. Those who wish to understand the extent to which this discrimination went, should definitely read this book. To an extent, those of us with life-long hearing differences are learning to advocate for ourselves, and take pride in our accomplishments. It is thanks to people like Dr. Lane that we have been able to reach this point over the past 40 years. Karen Sadler, Science education, University of Pittsburgh

I picked this book up after reading Oliver Sacks's When the Mind Hears, and I am very glad I did. Without it, I might very well be blind to one of the world's most infuriating injustices: the attempt to gloss over deafness and discredit sign language. Moreover, the book is beautifully written and provides tons of information on the people and places involved. Everyone should read this book, because everyone who does will be motivated to help right the situation.

I know officially love Elizabeth Lane and plan to start stocking up on her novels. While the murder mystery was blantantly obvious, her characters were filled with life. The culture clash between a half-white, half-Apache man and the white widow to a rancher was beautifully done. Though it was occassionally frustrating when their stuborness and pride came between them, this seems to be a common theme with romance and was not difficult to ignore, so beautiful was the story on the whole. While "Shawnee Bride" was better, I would still recommend this story for anyone seeking a good historical romance. I love the ones with the culture clash like this one.

Although dead, John Colby's character was definitley in question.
Rose Colby was married to John for near on nine years and was running a ranch that didn't seem to have many riders near by.
Bayard Hudson was certainly a pushy, ambitious man and was very sure that he could have Rose for his wife. I wonder what he planned to do with her son, Mason?

"Latigo" was thirty three and half Chiricahua Apache and in dire need of John Colby's help. He knew he was taking a chance in approaching John's ranch but it would be hard to survive in the desert wounded as he was.

Rose was not sure that she should befriend "Latigo" as there was no one around to protect her and Mason. She did prove to be a stubborn woman

Burford soon showed up with his vigilante riders and accused the half-breed scout of murder. Rose was already forming her own opinion on whether she should help John's rescuer or not. And Burford sure didn't leave Rose with any good opinion of him when he tries to force her to agree to marry him. Yuck!

The plot thickens when "Latigo" hints at the dangerous "Ring" and that John may have had some connection with it. Rose had to know the truth for the sake of her son and thereby begins an appealing romance.

Cover does not do "Latigo" justice. Does'nt look like a half-bred Native American. Surely the book companies could scout around and find some decent, rugged looking Native Americans to use on their covers.

Definitely RECOMMENDED - you will enjoy the story line and the characters and tidbits of Native American folk lore.

I wasn't looking for a mystery/murder. This romance historical
was great with poignant detail to era and area. If you are looking for strong frontier women, Rose Colby steps in perfectly.
She gives aid to a wounded man, Latigo and later learns that he is suspected of murder. Great, swift-paced tale.

That Breton was an innovative designer and artist and poet is well appreciated but this book shows him to have been a fine writer as well. It also shows how a member of a radical group of artists can be driven by the same passions that probably afflict all of us during our lives. This passion of Breton's is extraordinary in its own way but I suspect we all have these seemingly unusual encounters in our lives. It takes a creative artist such as Breton to bring it to life. But in some ways he only brings it half to life. While he does have a fascination with 'Nadja' - the name being the first part of the Russian word for hope - his wife remains firmly in the background and not withheld, and yet her involvement is completely untold, even unspeculated on. What type of relationship Breton and his wife had we can only speculate about. In the end this is quite a sad story, but then I suspect most of the passions we all feel for the 'extras' in our own lives are inevitably tinged with sadness and unfulfilment. So for me, Breton has captured something here that is quite magical.

as soon as people see breton's name on a book, they immediately feel indignation and privately exclaim, "the dictator of surrealism!" what they don't seem to realize is that, despite being a flawed and somewhat ambivalent man, he probably had more passion in his pinky than they do in their entire body. "nadja" is simply one more delightful proof of breton's genius and his infallible flair for the surreal, the mysterious, the mystical, and everything that is profoundly divergent. in this tale of intrigue and obsession he travels the streets of paris with a ghostly, clearly insane young woman who calls herself nadja, which is the russian word for hope. the most captivating parts of the novel are the bizarre and surreal conversations he has with her. even though he found her incredibly fascinating and almost an ethereal enigma, things start to turn sour between them and breton grows bored with her. at the end of the novel, nadja is put into an asylum after the police are called because of her incessant screaming and apparently incoherent behavior, some of which suggested that she was living in a world of hallucinations and irrational fears. we do know that nadja was a real woman and not by means some fictitious creation of breton's, and we also know that she came to a somewhat unfortunate end. it may be true that breton's behavior and attitude of indifference and deliberate ignorance about her truly wretched fate (she died of cancer, insane and completely alone) is indeed nothing to admire, but those who put too much emphasis on this admittedly accurate fact forget that while he may in a sense have betrayed her, he also made a truly admirable effort to make the world see nadja and those like her as no one has seen them before, and immortalized her in a book that is absolutely unforgettable and breathtakingly beautiful. breton was a profoundly hopeful and truly revolutionary figure who exhorted humanity, even while the second world war raged and reaped it's devastating results universally on all of mankind, to recognize the miraculous and wondrous nature of our very existence, however 'absurd' or meaningless some felt it to be after the horrendous events of the twentieth century. it is true that he occasionally goes over the top with his optimism, but his iron will and determination to fight 'miserabilism', the philosophical justification of human misery, at all costs can only call forth our admiration. his exaltation of the imagination as the highest of human faculties and the sole organ of man that will allow him to attain felicity seems to be verified by direct, concrete experience of life. as we grow older and we come to realize that sensual pleasure is a big part of life but essentially empty and hollow, our inner lives (hopefully) become more vivid and we end up spending more and more time there. breton knows this and wants us to cultivate it to the highest degree possible. don't be fooled by the 'anti breton' rhetoric and take a dismissive attitude toward him, because you'll be missing out on some of the most fascinating books (to my mind) ever written.

Nadja has far more to offer than just a simple love story. Superficially it is an account of Breton's wandering through the streets of 1920s Paris with his eponymous mad heroine. Paris becomes a magical, fluid reality, peopled with sphinxes and shaped by extraordinary events and coincidences. But dig deeper and you will find a rewarding, if sometimes complex, commentary on time, space, memory and the city. Bearing in mind Breton's interest in psychoanalysis and Marxist revolution (in Nadja he even tells us of his purchase of Trotsky's latest work from the Humanite bookstore), the novel may be read as a conscious subversion of bourgeois conventions. Everything in Nadja, from the narrative to the intriguing photographs supplied by various surrealist photographers such as J.A. Boiffard, intervenes to challenge and disrupt conventional reality and the status quo. It seems to me that Nadja is all about the creation of alternative realities, a sur-reality. Some would call this Breton's form of escapism from the harsh realities of post-world-war Paris in the era of high capitalism, but Breton's surreal Paris always carries the promise of revolution and change. Nadja is a work that can be enjoyed on so many levels, and is definitely worth re-reading.

This follow-on tale from This Earth of Mankind has some interesting stories woven throughout -- for instance the tale of the young maiden who willingly contracts smallpox to avoid a life of shame as a concubine. However, the book lacks the momentum (and uniqueness) of his first novel. It also lacks subtlty and tends to be somewhat preachy. In this book the reader gets beaten over the head mercilessly in contrast to the gentle pats from This Earth. It just wasn't as fun. That said, it still has some interesting angles on a life and culture so very foreign to a turn-of-the-21st century American. And it has some poignant fragments, particularly those insights on the life of Minke's strong-willed concubine mother-in-law. It's still worth reading even though it's not of This Earth. I'm looking forward to Footsteps.

"Child of All Nations" is excellent reading for those interested in history, more specifically, the history of the Dutch East Indies. The reason I gave this novel four stars, however, and not five is because with all the historical references in the novel, it masks the underlying plot and also does not allow the reader to connect personally with the characters. The writing style in this novel, like it's predisessor,"This Earth of Mankind," is impressional, and moving.The message in the story is also very moving. The novel makes you think and helps the reader come to understand humanity more effeciently than they did before reading the novel. This set of novels (The Buru Quartet) are a comprised collection of intellectually stimulating and touching peice of literature.

Sorry, being so late, but you've done the job. The writer of this book, twice nominator for Nobel Prize, the victim of Buru exilement--without trial, the so called communist by Soeharto regime--but widely known as humanist is an Indonesian. So, read geography. Read history. I am--uhmmm--insulted, (a little bit) by such LITTLE ignorance.

this story is really intresthing. it is just like on the banks of plum creek. i dont understand why they traveled west. But molly is the only 1 watching the baby while david travel back west to find a job i dont now why she and the baby didnt go with him.

R.W. Lane was a writer LONG before her mother ever picked up a pencil. While The previous reviewers found Let the Hurricane Roar to be very similar to the LIW books, there is a reason. R.W. Lane based her novel on her grandparents' experiences in homesteading. (It's not surprising, then, for people to find similarities....) What is surprising to most people is the fact that the Little House Series was virtually unpublishable in its original form -- until Ms. Lane edited her mother's very basic manuscripts, giving them style, flow and poise. Her own career ended up suffering terribly from this devotion to her mother. I found Hurricane to be vastly superior to the LIW books (which should rightly be credited to RWLane, as well); the content, pacing and structure were far better developed, as were the characterizations. Brilliant depiction of the trials of homesteading on the plains.

This is a good book but if you are expecting it to be written in the style of Laura Ingalls Wilder's series, you have a surprise coming. Rose Wilder Lane is a good writer, but in an extremely different style from that of her mother...

Here's a quick review of Mills Lane's new book "Let's Get It On":

(Let me cut right to the chase and point out the abundant inaccuracies that I ran across.)

1-(page 29)- Lane credits Oliver McCall with a First round KO of Lennox Lewis. It was the 2nd round.

2-(page 97)- Lane states that Bobby Chacon became the Super Flyweight Champ with a 15 round decision over Bazooka Limon. That was Super Featherweight/Jr. Lightweight.

3-(page 99)- Lane states that the second Livingstone Bramble-Ray Mancini fight was for the Welterweight title. It was the Lightweight title.

4-(page 101)- Lane states that Iran Barkley "TWICE knocked Thomas Hearns unconscious". Barkley Ko'd Hearns in the first fight, he decisioned him in the second. It should be noted that Barkley did knock Tommy down in the second fight though.

5-(page 122)- Lane states that the common opponent between Erbito Salavarria and Betulio Gonzales was San Sacristan. It was not. It was Natalio Jimenez. (No, I did not know that one off the top of my head. But guess what? I looked it up. Novel idea.)

6-(page 172)- Lane states that Octavio Meyran held his ground and his integrity, in the Douglas-Tyson fight, by (Meyran) insisting that he did nothing wrong with regards to the bogus "Long Count" in the 8th round, in which Douglas hit the canvas from a Tyson uppercut. In fact, in a press conference right after a meeting involving Don King and the heads from the WBC & WBA (Suliaman and Mendoza), Meyran said the following: "I don't know why I start my count and make my mistake. Yes, he (Douglas) was down longer than 10 seconds". This followed a comment by Don King stating that the "first knockout obliterates the second one". After that comment King turned directly to Meyran, who then showed the world he had no backbone. Note: Before this "meeting", Meyran defended his actions. After the meeting, it was a different story.

7-(page 179)- Lane states that Chavez retained his Jr. Welterweight title after his controversial Draw with Pernell Whitaker. The fight was for Whitaker's Welterweight title.

8-(page 182)- Lane refers to Matt Fleischer, as opposed to Nat Fleischer. Come on now.

9-(page 189)- In a fight that Lane refereed, he states that Gerry Cooney was knocked down by Larry Holmes in the "third or fourth round". It was the Second round.

10-(page 246)- In another fight that Lane refereed, he states that "Donald Curry hit Milton McCrory with a tremendous right hand early in the third round and McCrory went down". He goes on to state that Milton was kayoed with another right hand, after he got up. Curry kayoed McCrory in the Second round. And the first knockdown was with a Left Hook.

11-(picture between 118 & 119)- Lane states Mike Tyson retained his WBC title against Trevor Berbick. Tyson Won the title from Berbick.

12-(picture between 118 & 119)- Lane states that: "Once he was released from prison, heavyweight contender Mike Tyson had all he could handle from Razor Ruddock,winning a 12-round decision on June 28, 1991. Tyson faced Ruddock BEFORE he went to prison.

Lane is brutally honest and the book reads like a friendly conversation that you might have with him over a beer and a stogie. He tells it like it is and I find it refreshing to read a book when I know that no punches are being pulled. But Jesus! The inaccuracies fly off the pages like crazy. And I'll guarantee that I didn't even catch all of them.

I respect Mills and think he is one of the best refs in the business. And I was eagerly anticipating his book. But if I read something that I am familiar with and find the information to be inaccurate, when I read something new, how am I to know if what is said it is true or not?

As you can probably guess, I am a stickler for detail. The correct information for the "flubs" that I listed, is easily accessible. And the fact that this book was written by a former D.A. and Judge, professions where detail is a critical part of the job, makes these inaccuracies even more infuriating. I find the laziness as it pertains to this book, totally inexcusable. What could have been a very good read, turned out to be very disappointing.

If it sounds like I'm being too harsh, well, I'm merely echoing the tone of Mills' book. I'm sure he'd find the seemingly half-assed approach to the research done in this book as annoying as I did. I'm just here to point it out to him. He'd do the same to us.

Mr. Lane put everything in perspective with his down to Earth angle on life. He lives by what he learned from boxing and the marines. It's an inspiring book and a real kick in the butt! It's a pep talk on life and inside look at the world of boxing. Thank you Mr. Lane.

On page 216, Mills Lane says of his wife, "She knew that I am consumed by my job, referee prizefights as a hobby, and am hardheaded and highly opinionated." Is he ever! And that is what makes this book so refreshing. Here is a man who says we are all responsible for our own actions. Imagine that. Judge Mills Lane and writer Jedwin Smith have combined their experience and talents to give us a glimpse of a human being we see all too rarely: a man of great honor. By the time you finish this book, you will know who puts the grit in integrity.

If you are looking for an historical 'readings' text for topics in the philosophy of religion, then this book is not for you. However, if you are looking for writings about certain philosophy of religion (or contemporary 'readings') topics then go no further. Craig has assemble some first rate analytical thinkers of the 20th century to cover a wide gamut of topics in the arena of the philosophy of religion.

However, any reader should keep in mind that this is not an historical text of the issues of the philosophy of religion, it is a contemporary text. But, this is actually one of its greatest strengths, since it provides the reader and student some of the most up to date writings available. The topics themselves are 'historical' (for lack of a better way of putting it), but the work is very contemporary.

Some of the topics (or sections) in this text include: Religious epistemology; the Existence of God; Coherence of theism; the problem of evil; soul and immortality; and Christian theology. Some of the philosophers contributing to this volume include: William Lane Craig; William P. Alston; Alvin Plantinga; J.P. Moreland; Eleonore Stump; Quentin Smith; Alfred J. Freddoso; Keith Yandell; Richard Swinburne; Peter van Inwagen; William L. Rowe and many others. This text is a great reference tool, it emphasizes the Christian tradition, it has some first rate introductions, and offers the reader a list of suggested titles for further study. The only downfall, if you could call it that, is the fact that this text is geared toward the student of philosophy and the reader who already has a background in the issues at hand. Some of the articles are quite advanced, but this makes for a great challenging read and will only aid the reader in expanding his knowledge.

...way too advanced for an undergrad like me. This book is an excellent resource for intelligent Christians. Don't get me wrong, I eventually get what is being discussed in the essays, it just takes me a long time.

I don't really understand what the criticism of the earlier reviewer was with regard to Dr. Craig's opinions concerning morality. Dr. Craig has successfully defended his beliefs on morality against his foremost opponents. (I don't know how you can argue for an objective and non-arbitrary morality if you hold a naturalistic worldview.)

I recommend this book to anybody interested in current discussion of philosophy of religion topics. Just be warned if you are not already well versed in elite philosophical terminology: it may take you a while to make it through!

William Lane Craig does a masterful job in his section on Natural Theology. He presents a cumulative case for God's existence by including Alvin Plantinga's modal version of the Ontological Argument. ( Although some philosophers have corectly pointed out that his argument is really Cosmological in nature because it presupposes that something exists. One can only know that a poissible world exists on the background knowledge of an actual world.) Plantinga believes that if it is even possible that a maxamally great being exists, then it is true and necessarily true that he does exist. The only question is what warrant exists in thinking that there is a possible world in which a maxamally great being exists. Here is where Craig hammers the nails in the coffin. Based on the other arguments and evidential considerations one may come to the justified conclusion that it is at least possible that a maxamally great being exists. That there is a possible world in which an eternal necessary being exists. Since this being exists necessarily, then he must exist in every possible world. And since the real world is a possible world, then it follows that God exists.

For a more detailed and better treatment on this subject I would recommend Craig's section on Natural Theology in this text. See also Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview by Craig and Moreland ( 2003 ).
The rest of the book is pretty good also. Although it is a little rough at times.

_The Only Wise God_ is a defense of freewill (in the face of divine foreknowledge) and Molinism. Craig turns his attention to the age-old dilemma of human freedom and divine foreknowledge, and attempts a solution. Through a series of discussions on time travel, psychic precognition, and logical fatalism, Craig tries to show that people have freewill even though God knows what they are going to do tomorrow. The strengths of this book include its Biblical defense of divine foreknowledge, and its amazingly clear presentation of the Molinist doctrine of "middle knowledge." However, I do not think that Craig proves his point. His entire case rests upon the reduction of theological fatalism to logical fatalism. That is, Craig thinks that the existence of an omniscient God poses no more of a threat to libertarian freedom than it would if no God existed. But this reductionistic presentation has been sharply critiqued by Nelson Pike and others. I was unconvinced by Craig's book, and I suspect most people will be. The strong intuition that God's past belief about what I will do tomorrow is somehow "fixed" and "unalterable" is hard to deny, and Craig doesn't deal with this issue in any real detail, since he sees it as superfluous.

Furthermore, Craig attempts to refute the major lines of D. A. Carson's argumentation in his book, _Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility_, but in doing so he does not fairly wrestle with the actual Biblical passages. Having read Carson, this severely disappointed me. Craig claims that the Bible says men have freewill, but he produces no clear-cut verses that establish this fact, and he brushes aside the counter-examples given by Carson without any discussion.

I recommend this book for a good defense of Molinism. But for a Biblical critique of Craig's belief in libertarian freewill, I recommend Carson's book mentioned above, and the site,

www.freewill.doesntexist.com

This site offers a storehouse of arguments and Biblical passages used by Calvinists and Arminians alike.

William Lane Craig's book, The Only Wise God, is probably the best introduction to the topic of molinism for beginners of the subject. That is not to say the book is easy reading; it is not. But his clarity and abundance of examples brings out his points nicely such that any casual reader with some intellectual capacity can comprehend his work. There are several positive and negative points of this book. I will highlight each in turn.

Positive Points: (1) The book does a great job explaining God's knowledge of future contingents. He deals with a number of objections, such as those posed by the open theists. (2) He does a nice job explaining Nelson Pike's argument, laying it out formally, and then providing and critiquing three ideas that philosophers have suggested to avoid theological fatalism. (3) In answering the problem with a more reasonable answer, he ties it to questions about precognition, Newcomb's paradox, time travel, etc. He also answers one of the traditional fatalist arguments raised through history about necessity. (4) Lastly, he offers tables to make his points more understandable and he argues his view well.

Negative points: (1) Craig, though I highly respect him, makes some disappointing moves. For instance, he interacts with D.A. Carson, who provides a number of scriptural citations to suggest that libertarian agency is not biblical after all; that is to say that LFW is not what grounds moral responsibility as Craig believes. Here's an excerpt: "Carson counters that there are many cases in the OT where human thoughts and decisions are attributed directly to God's determining (2 Sam. 24:1; Isa. 9:13-14; 37:7; Prov. 21:1; Ezra 1:1; 7:6, 27-28; Neh. 2:11-15). These references, however, are not very convincing and do not even approach a universal determinism.". This is what is called a waving of the hand. I doubt that Carson would find his reply sufficient. (2) There is often this talk about a "genuine freedom." Craig assumes that libertarian agency is genuine when compatibilists will assert that Craig's use of language is an extreme begging of the question. If we in fact do not have the type of control libertarians claim, then it is not genuine at all. (3) I also noticed a loose use of "fatalism." Anyone who apparentely denied the principle of alternative possibilities was rendered a fatalist. Calvinists such as Jonathan Edwards and Paul Helm were noted, along with even Martin Luther. But later, fatalism concerns necessity such that what we will do, we must do. In other words, my writing this review is and has always been necessary. There is no possible world in which I am not writing this review or that this state of affairs could be exemplified. But the "fatalists" mentioned above do not attribute the acts of men as necessary such as the proposition, "God is good," is thought to be necessary. Rather, they denied alternative possibilities and thus libertarian ageny (c.f. "genuine" freedom) because they believed our actions were logically posterior to God's decree and that God's knowledge of our actions were logically grounded in his foreordination. Hence, in the beginning of the book when he does note such people , he is incorrect. When he actually discusses theological fatalism later , I think Craig is on target. (4) The last main problem is that the entire book assumes the existence of libertarian agency. If libertarian agency is incoherent as some philosophers have suggested (i.e. Saul Smilansky), or if determinism (physical or even theological) is true, then the entire book would be completely out of touch with the relationship that actually exists between human beings and God. It would, however, still provide interesting work *if* we were to have libertarian agency. Thus, this book only appeals most strongly to those who already share Craig's assumption.

Though I think Craig is wrong for both philosophical and theological reasons, even if he and Alvin Plantinga state there is no cogent philosophical response (an over-stating of the case in my opinion), I think his work should be read: especially by those who disagree with him. Craig's work has been highly influential, both on the popular and academic level. Despite my vast number of negative comments, as far as I can tell, there is no better place to start than this book for understanding middle-knowledge. I highly recommend it.

If the God of traditional theism is omniscient, then he knows what choices we'll be faced with in the future and how we'll act on them. For instance, if God has always known that I'll write a review of "The Only Wise God" on November 21st, then I cannot do otherwise -- I am "fated" to write this review! For if God has always known that I will write it and I freely choose not to, then God was ignorant of the choice I made. But God cannot be ignorant of my conditional acts, as ignorance is an imperfection. So the question still stands: if God eternally knows our conditional acts, how can true freedom exist? This is the question William Lane Craig attempts to answer.

Craig explains that God's foreknowledge and determination are two different things. For example, I know that spring will occur on March 20th, but I don't "cause" it. My knowing that flowers bloom during this season doesn't "cause" them to do so. Thus God knowing, in His omniscience, how we will respond to His grace does not determine our response. He simply knows the response we will make (being out of time) to that which was necessary for us to act either way (either accepting or rejecting His grace). So although God knew that I was going to write this review before I was born, He did not directly cause my free action. This is a very elementary distinction. If I had chosen to do otherwise, then God would have already known that. This is middle knowledge in a nutshell. Thank you William Lane Craig.