Ethics Books

All of Grace was a wonderful book. It was rich with doctrinal truths that believers at any stage of their growth in Christ will appreciate. Spurgeon always humbly directs the focus on God and His word and brings the reader greater understanding into the riches of God's grace. He makes it very clear that God's great mercy and grace is not earned, but given freely - Eph 2:8,9 The chapters dealing with Salvation and Faith are extremely helpful. The book is written in devotion form, so it is excellent for bible studies or for your personal devotional time with the Lord.

Good book about the grace of God and salvation to everyone that believes in Christ Jesus.

We need to believe in the forgiveness of our sins. God gives us a new heart and a right Spirit through salvation.

Recommend to those that want to understand what salvation is all about.

As with all works done by Spurgeon, this is a timeless classic. First printing in 1894, it is still in print. Simple yet profoundly true, Spurgeon explains the true Grace of God with a heart desire that many will come to know Christ through this work. I actually bought a whole case of 120 of these in paperback to give away from Moody Press. The audio version is awesome. I loaded it onto my iPod to listen while on the go.

There are three great strengths of this book; 1)the ability to make the gospel so clear that even a child can understand, 2)it is written in modern english, and 3)the chapters are very short and to the point. Asking someone to read this is one of the easiest ways to introduce the subject of Christ. The book provides a basis of discussion and followup that many can not deny.

Charles Haddon Spurgeon is considered by many to be the greatest preacher of the 19th century. This book, subtitled, "An Earnest Word with Those Who Are Seeking Salvation by the Lord Jesus Christ," is Spurgeon's great explanation of salvation and God's grace. He explains what God has done and why, and what we must do to be saved and to persevere in the faith.

This is a great book, showing the power and intelligence that form the bedrock of Spurgeon's reputation. But, even more, herein you really see his earnest concern for those who are unsaved and dying in their sins. I found this book to be enlightening and uplifting.

It's a truly wonderful book, a true classic of Christian literature - as much alive and relevant to today as it ever was. I highly recommend this book!

I wish I could give half star ratings sometimes. This book would have gotten a 4 and 1/2 rating if I could.
The only thing that I did not like about it was the Bible passages. To me they do not lift my spirit, but that is just because I am not of that faith. Otherwise this is a great book.

I've purchased many copies of this little book over the past year. They are great girl friend books or for any quote lover. I've keep one on hand for myself and often reference it when I need some inspiration. Buy two, one to give away and one for you!

I definitely enjoyed this quote book. I also recomend A Treasury of Spiritual Quotations, A Collection of Wisdom, and The Book of Positive Quotations

we write a quote in our elementary class each day and use this book as one of our references.

This is one of those purchases where I really felt like I got my monies worth. I refer to the quotes within this book on a weekly basis as I offer a "final thought of inspiration" to my yoga students. Since my family is a group of bathroom readers, Ive also been thinking about doing a bathroom wall of quotes. This book offers a variety of quotes nicely arranged in categories. Great to sit, read and ponder!

Great choice for any manager or business administration student.

I read this a few years after I had been in senior management and wished deeply that I had discovered it earlier. One of the great challenges facing new managers is decision making where the choices all involve some positive and negative aspects. There are also many organization pressures that force individuals to consider suboptimal paths to "be a team player."

It's a slippery slope and one that is hard to navigate without a great deal of thought and a clarity of personal professional purpose.

This is a small book that easily engages the reader in a fascinating path to understanding these core management issues.

Management, especially senior management, starts to look like politics and turns into a soup of interests and circumstances that make the "right" decision hard to discern and possibly even harder to live with.

Given the impact to size ratio and high quality of the writing I'd make this book a must-read in the category.

When managers are making choices, we typically evaluate them by attempting to determine which choice is right and which is not. Many times both choices are "right" choices which makes the decision more difficult and more frustrating for managers.

Badaracco provides excellent examples of real life situations where managers had to choose between "right" and "right" in making a decision. The decision making process used by each manager in the examples was assessed from the philosophical prospectives of three prominant philosophers, Aristotle, Nietzsche, and Machiavelli.

A great read with valuable advice for everyone, not just managers.

The introductory chapters to this book were very good and gave me some good insights. The ending was quite weak and the author didn't have a definite direction in the book. However, I still consider it an interesting read and enjoyed some of his perspectives about ethics.

A few weeks ago a customer of mine asked my assistance to help his organisation to write an ethical code. I knew he had been "working" on this topic for the last 2 years and that he had been applying some of the principles I teach in my emotional intelligence classes. Apparently, this hadn't been enough to solve his problem, but it was enough to come back to me to seek my advice. This was one of the books I bought to document myself on the issue.

This book was a good resource by providing me different points of views concerning the question, and by pointing out that it's not a simple matter of making a choice (for instance, one lead by intuition and emotions, as is recommended sometimes). The cases presented point to several kinds of dilemmas: the personal ones (choosing between what's right for you and for the organisation), the managerial ones (choosing between the organisation and the people that ore working for it) and the social ones (choosing between the organisation and the larger social system it's a part of). The book also points out different sources we have for basing our decisions on.

The problem remains that values and principles often point into different directions. Ethical choice techniques such as the "sleep-test", the "golden rule" and other sources of inspiration do not solve this.

Learning from that, it becomes clear why one should not expect to find the answers to your ethical problems in this book. Finding "the" answer is "impossible". In a "defining moment", you will have to examine which values you are committed to, these values will be put to test (will you go for their implications) and they will shape your future. I believe (with the author) that there are no easy answers to the *real* issues we are faced with. That's why this book shows in what way you have to search for your answer. Reading this book will at least allow you to ask the right questions and to look at various aspects in order to make a personal choice.

If I would have read this book earlier, my own book would certainly have included a reference to it.

What will I tell my customer? Well, writing the "code" won't be enough, in stead we should focus on teaching people how to make an ethical choice.

Patrick E.C. Merlevede, M.Sc is the main author of "7 Steps to Emotional Intelligence"

Javed Mohammed did a great service to all people when he wrote his book. The Islam he loves and writes about is the Islam that I have experienced in many parts of the world. He and Rumi would have gotten on well.

It opened my eyes about all matters Islam and also validated something that I have always suspected -- there are very many similarities between faiths that on the surface appear to be vastly different. I particularly enjoyed the perspective on Silicon Valley, the Art of Marriage Part II, the wedding speech, and the After Word.
Chiara DiGeronimo

Javed Mohammed has written an inspired and inspiring book. It contains messages for all of us as we aspire to live meaningful and moral lives Alison Weir Freelance Journalist

I am a Muslim living in the United States, and this book is the first one in a long time that made me feel proud to be Muslim. It also made me feel good to be alive. If you need a small book to carry with you for daily inspiration, this is the one.

Javed Mohammed is a friend whom I have grown to respect and trust in our sporadic time together. He is a thoughtful man, one who is dedicated to his profession and his religion. In this book he shares some of the inspirational thoughts, readings, and speeches that he has come across in his life experience. He shares them with us, providing insights and introspection that is well worth our time.

We can, after reading this wonderful volume, be ready to gather our own gems throughout the day. Tom Campbell (US Congressman - R/CA) put it well: "A must read for all American youth and adults. This book informs and illuminates the way through inspirational Muslim literature."

A very thoughtful friend (who is a vegetarian) recommended this book to me. Though a meat-eater for nearly 30 years, I decided to give this book a try. I was pleasantly surprised.

First, Young writes in a cool, level-headed fashion that doesn't come across as angry or accusatory. Unlike other books on the subject, this feels more scholarly and balanced.

Second, Young takes you through the Bible with remarkable insight. It is a deeply Christian work throughout. His arguments mainly depend on understanding the whole story, and what he calls "directional markers." This is a very powerful idea that I think really illuminates many modern ethical issues. To his credit, he does not try to argue that Jesus and the apostles were vegetarians, and that this message was somehow corrupted later on. He brilliantly argues that the situations of modern slaughterhouses did not exist in biblical times, and that the fundamental values of Christianity are in opposition to them. He does point out that human history in the bible is bracketed by vegetarian behavior (cf Genesis 1-2 and the Isaiah description of the "peaceable kingdom"). Why then should we not move toward this goal?

My one cavil with the book is that it is not written for the evangelical Christian (which I am). His view of Scripture would certainly make many evangelicals uncomfortable (for example his understanding of several authors writing the Pentateuch, his sometimes fuzzy statements on the nature of Jesus ministry, etc.). Occassionally I thought he cited verses out of context such that their true meaning was obscured by his intentions. Despite these flaws, I think overall his biblical exegesis is sound (Professor Young is a professor of New Testament, so this is no surprise).

I do appreciate his numerous statements along the lines of "I'm not saying everyone must stopping eating all meat in all circumstances." Instead, he thoughtfully and gently tries to challenge the reader to reconsider their own practices. I know that my own meat consumption has gone way down and am contemplating becoming a vegetarian. He encourages the reader to make slow changes, such as finding one meatless main dish per week to add into your diet. Who cannot do that? I also think much more deeply about the conditions that animals are kept in today and how they should live. Would you eat that piece of chicken or beef if you could see the animal's death? What is gluttony if not eating on more than you need? These and more questions are powerful thoughts that will challenge you throughout the book.

Young's purpose in "Is God a Vegetarian?" is simple: to explore the biblical foundations for Christian vegetarianism. Young chooses to listen to "the entire story" of Scripture to make a case for Christian vegetarianism rather than relying on certain "proof-texts".

The core of Young's argument is that the story of Scripture reveals that God is moving humans and animals towards a "peaceable kingdom" where they live together in harmony. Considering this, Christians should structure their lives and daily practices (including their diet) in such a way that it reflects this ultimate destiny.

As a Christian who is exploring the theological and ethical issues of vegetarianism, I found this book to be extremely helpful and informative. Young manages to be balanced, and not biased; simple, and yet not simplistic.

I highly recommend this book to anyone who is searching for more information on the biblical basis for Christian vegetarianism.

The title of this book scared me. I thought it would be one of those fanatic books about how Jesus could possibly be a vegetarian, etc. However once I started reading this book I found myself laughing at the chapter titles: "Was God the First Tanner", "will there be slaughterhouses in heaven."

Young thoroughly answers questions that vegetarians and nonvegetarians alike grapple with in using the Bible as guide for life. While at times I felt he took passages out of context, the overall meaning behind his words seemed to speak the biblical truth. Young concludes that vegetarianism cannot be a universal moral truth, yet it is closer to God's vision. I highly reccomend this book for those questioning how Christians are to respond to todays treatment of animals.

I agree with the author's overarching view of biblical hermeneutics -- searching for "directional markers" that build an internally consistent perspective, rather than (non-contextual) "proof texting," a generally paroxysmal and frivolous approach to scriptural study and application. But it seems unfortunate that, given this broadly impacting issue of meat production and consumption, Young has 'hung his hat' so specifically on the concept of 'cruelty' against animals, and of their 'rights', as these issues are, at best, an aside to the far larger moral/ethical, logical, economic, ecological, health related, theological, and human stewardship considerations attached to flesh-foundering. The real ethical questions cannot be reduced sloppily to 'was Jesus a vegetarian?' or 'did Noah eat meat?' (Young sees this much). The deeper ethical issues of today relate to the 21st century world we live in, and should not be reduced to 'muskrat love', they are larger than that, and ask to be considered with 'the wisdom of serpents' (Matt 10:16).

Many in wealthy western culture, uneducated in the science and ethics of meat, think most easily of vegetarians as being equally soft hearted and soft headed; that vegetarians are teary-eyed cow huggers. But the 'animal rights' approach to the meat market culture is the least relevant and persuasive tack toward dealing with the truer, larger picture. In terms of Christian ethics urging the world toward a proactive "peaceable kingdom" (I have no argument against this), the 'animal rights' focus is rather like 'the tail wagging the dog.' More significant moral/ethical issues, relative to vegetarianism, are:

1.) Environmental degradation concomitant to the modern animal-based diet may be the most significant (and popularly overlooked) global assault on nature; an assault featuring deforestation for the production of commercial livestock, loss of biodiversity (plant and animal, terrestrial and aquatic), unnecessary burning of fossil fuels, air and water pollution, loss of topsoil and arable land, desertification, the list goes on. A single east coast factory hog farm constantly produces more raw sewage than the city of Los Angeles, sewage containing harmful bacteria and disease that is simply introduced to ground water (the related ecological and public health problems were briefly presented on the television news magazine 60 Minutes). Neither laws demanding nicer treatment of little piggies nor regulations on the treatment of pig pee are going to alleviate the problem. The only solution is for Americans to rethink their diet of bacon double cheeseburgers and pork sausage. The ecological issues of modern meat are far too large to discuss adequately here, they stretch from the factory farm to the open ocean to the upper atmosphere.

2.) The moral/ethical problems of meat eating are not only environmental, they are economic. Pandering to the palette of the wealthy beefeater demands [anti-human] misdirection of economic assets. Generally speaking, it takes 16 pounds of vegetable protein to produce 1 pound of animal protein. With that comes much more than 16 times the water and fuel! At the height of the 1984-85 Ethiopian famine, while more than a million people were dying of hunger, European meat producers were buying feed grains from -- Ethiopia! Will humanity's natural, agricultural, and economic assets serve humanity, or will they serve the gluttony of the wealthy? Along these same lines, the respected Christian author Richard J Foster touched very briefly on important aspects of the meat focused diet in his book Freedom of Simplicity (1981): "A million hogs in Indiana have superior housing to a billion humans on this planet." And those "million hogs" are degrading ground water, proliferating disease and ultimately creating cancers and premature human deaths (see below). Lest you think there'd be a net deficit of jobs if we eliminated meat packers and cowboys' livelihoods in favor of a plant based diet, assuredly that is not the case. No industry provides fewer jobs per unit of land used than does cattle ranching; a nation with a vegetable based diet would have the potential to create more net jobs while actually reducing costs for the consumer. That may sound contradictory, but federal meat industry subsidies prop up this meat-mad system. Here's one maddening example of these subsidies: If I go for a hike in nearby Cleveland National Forest, I won't see any of the once native pronghorn antelope, instead I'll probably see cows, ranching long ago extirpated the antelope. And guess who pays for these cattle grazing on public lands. As an American taxpayer, I do! The US government builds access roads, digs wells, pipes water, and provides other products and services for the cattle industry that uses public lands. Ranchers theoretically "lease" these land accesses, but the "leases" are laughable, do not cover the public expenditure that underwrites them, and amount to government giveaways. I may not eat beef, but as a US taxpayer, I pay for wealthy beefeaters to eat beef!

3.) The animal based diet is finally a disease and death centered diet. Billions of Chinese have a long tradition of a vegetable based diet, and they have virtually no incidence of obesity, heart disease, GI tract cancers, osteoporosis, or scores of other meat-related maladies -- UNLESS they move to the west and take up the animal based diet. Several excellent medical studies make the point clearly, meat kills (not just cute little lambs, meat kills people!). The health-related issues of the animal based diet are obviously bound to the economic issues as well (for example, health care asset allocation). Will we feed starving people or spend our financial assets first supplementing and then trying to deal with fat people's self-inflicted meat-based sicknesses? The human health issue looms as large as the ecological and economic issues, and is too great to be treated adequately here. These are all highly moral and ethical Christian stewardship questions. How can Christians turn a blind eye?

There are still other ethical issues tied to the animal based diet, and "animal rights" MAY be one of them. But this is not so clear. Is it rational or meaningful to suggest that because animals sense pain that they have any sense of "cruelty"? That they have any sense of their "rights" being violated or of some "injustice" being imposed on them? These are surly sentient concepts well beyond the ken of the animal mind, whatever it may be. The "animal rights" approach to the question of meat appeals to 'warm fuzzy' ideas but what is needed is a serious, hardheaded treatment (by the way, if we begin to do the right things, for the right reasons, the "animal rights" question will begin to go away!). Excepting perhaps Adventists, most Christians have been sadly silent on the matter of meat-mongering (some have even embarrassed themselves with goofy "proof texting" attempts to define vegetarianism as a biblical heresy!).

Young's thesis aspires to a robust view of biblical hermeneutics, which is a good thing. It aspires to treat an important topic. But the "animal rights" focus is misplaced. An outstanding book on the moral/ethical and health issues surrounding the animal based diet is Howard F. Lyman's 'Mad Cowboy'. Christians should have been publishing books like Lyman's decades ago; being shining beacons of conscience in the material darkness, not hiding in that darkness in blissful ignorance and self-indulgence. It's not too late to start doing the right thing.

I must say that I was initially put off by the title of this book. I assumed from the title that this must be another one of "those" Christian arguments for vegetarianism--you know, the ones that use out of context prooftexts to argue that Jesus really was a vegetarian. However, one of my colleagues did his Ph.D. work with Richard Alan Young, and he told me that Young was not only an excellent scholar, but a person who lived his convictions. So I decided to give the book a try, in spite of the title.

I am so glad I did. Young deals with the major issues and texts which arise when the question of vegetarianism is posed. Each chapter heading is a question which leads the author into a discussion of the relevant texts and historical background. He addresses questions like "Was Jesus a Vegetarian?" "Didn't God Permit Us to Eat Meat?" and "Didn't Paul Condemn Vegetarianism as Heresy?" with honesty and theological integrity. He does not try to force intepretations out of the texts, but lets them speak for themselves, offering a balanced and evenhanded treatment.

Most importantly, Young offers one of the best arguments for Christian vegetarianism I've read to date. He does not resort to prooftexting or spurious arguments based on scant biblical evidence. Instead he builds the case for vegetarianism upon a much broader biblical perspective--the peaceable kingdom. In sum, Genesis 1 and 2 offer the ideal view of human existence: humans and animals are vegetarians, humans are the caregivers of God's creation, the world and all creation are at peace. Unfortunately, all that is shattered in Genesis 3. However, the biblical material looks forward to a reinstatement of that original harmony. Examining the prophets vision of the peaceable kingdom, Young concludes that the role of Christians is to do God's will on earth as it is in heaven. In other words, Jesus' vision of the kingdom of heaven is a here and now concept, not a concept that will occur only in heaven. "The peaceable kingdom encompasses the full range of human moral aspirations, depicts peaceful coexistence between humans and nonhumans, and represents the goal toward which God is guiding history" (150).

Our job as Christians is to envision the peaceable kingdom and work to bring it about. Christ's act on the cross was an act of restoration, not just between humans and God, but between humans and other humans, and humans and all creation. Thus, Christians are to be actively involved in that restorative vision. If the peaceable kingdom is to be established, one fundamental step toward that outcome is refraining from eating meat. There can be no peace between animals and humans if we continue consuming animals.

Additional touches set this book apart as well: each chapter concludes with a wholesome vegetarian recipe; the last chapter offers a basic discussion of how to "go vegetarian;" and Young provides a bibliography for further reading.

Don't be put off by the title of the book--I found out that the publisher insisted upon it to make the book more "provocative." This book is a must read for any Christian who desires to investigate Christianity's relationship to animal rights and vegetarianism. It is well written, thoroughly researched, and easily accessible to anyone interested in the subject.

As a longstanding and rather hefty vegetarian, I also firmly felt that my aversion to killing animals, birds and fish for food was rooted in reverence for God's creatures. Richard Schwartz bolstered my spirituality with this compelling and irrefutable book. Genesis One clearly asserted that man was created vegetarian before our fall from grace and plunge into strife. Fortunately, the Prophet Isaiah envisions Messianic times to be an idyllic era wherein men and all creatures will live in peaceful coexistence devoid of bloodshed. Schwartz answers his detractors and accentuates the ecological, moral and human rights benefits of a meatless diet. He also salutes vegetarian advocates including Rav Kook, Rabbi David Rosen and Isaac Singer. If you love this book it will be imperative to purchase and read David Sears' brilliant "Vision Of Eden".

This book is excellent. It is beautifully written, exceptionally complete, and very fair-minded in its tone. The arguments are compelling and clear. I expected a diatribe, but that was not the case at all. Even though I will continue to eat meat, the author raised many pertinent questions and answered them in a thoughtful, well-reasoned way.

Schwartz's treatment of vegetarianism and Judaism is remarkabley thorough. He approaches the topic from the multifaceted avenues of Jewish thinking: Torah, halakhah, values... it's all there. This book is a complete compendium on all the issues and argument pertaining to vegetarianism, concerning for animals, the environment, and more. Schwartz's style is highly readable. He is passionate about his topic, but not emotional. I highly recommend the book to everyone, and certainly for Jews who take our traditions seriously.

I wrote a review on this book for the newsletter for the winter 2001 newsletter for the animal rights group, Last Chance for Animals. I am including my review here:

Richard H. Schwartz's Judaism and Vegetarianism is a useful reference for refuting claims that humans and animals do not deserve equal consideration. It effectively explains and elaborates upon the Bible's stance on vegetarianism and explores other moral and societal issues with which non-religious people can identify; Schwartz even includes a section on how vegetarianism can promote awareness and ultimately resolve these issues. The book also contains answers to common questions, nutritional suggestions, discussions of Jewish vegetarian groups and their activities, biographies of famous Jewish vegetarians, an annotated bibliography, ideas for promoting vegetarianism, and a detailed index. In sum, Schwartz has produced a well-documented, well-reasoned, and very convincing work which ends with a query to Jews who plan to continue eating meat: "In view of strong Jewish mandates to be compassionate to animals, preserve our health, help feed the hungry, preserve and protect the environment, conserve resources, and seek and pursue peace, and the very negative effects animal-centered diets have in each of these areas, will you now become a vegetarian, or at least sharply reduce your consumption of animal products?".

I have read this book thoroughly, and I think it is the most informative, most complete and most readable book about vegetarianism I have ever read. The book is very well structured, the information given is presented clearly and is up to date. Since I am a vegan, I have paid extra attention to what is being said about veganism, and I found the author is objective, accurate and gives sound advice. The B12 issue is dealt with in a responsible manner and I think it is very wise to present the transition to vegetarianism and from there to veganism as a process of growth, where every step counts. The author gives many practical suggestions on how to make changes in your lifestyle without losing touch with family or friends and manages to be firm and friendly at the same time. These things alone make the book a purchase well worth the investment. For me, however, the particular merit of the book lies in the spiritual values that have inspired it. Reading the book from a non-Jewish perspective, what struck me most was that the author has chosen focal points which are relevant to people from all kinds of different backgrounds, Jews, Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists and people who are not religious in the 'traditional' sense. In short, all those who are concerned about the way we relate to our environment from a spiritual point of view. The first focal point is that ethical considerations are more important than habit, convenience, or tradition, and the second is that there will be a price to pay if we chose to ignore the ethical imperative to change our ways. There are many books explaining why it is better for your body to become a vegetarian; there are not many books explaining why it is better for your soul. Richard Schwartz makes the reader see how the themes of inclusion and compassion towards animals are woven all through the Torah. Having read theology at a fairly orthodox Christian college, I have often heard the argument that `since Man was created in the image of God, he was given dominion over all creation' as an excuse for the maltreatment of animals and their reduction to `meat-producing units'. Guided by Richard Schwartz, we are shown that according to the Torah both man and beast are creatures of God, and that our being created in the image of God is not a given, but rather a potential; something to be brought into manifestation by following the pattern God has laid out for us, and that one of the qualities we must manifest is compassion. Instead of feeling very proud of ourselves and thinking that we are like God already, we should realise that we are asked to imitate God in love and concern for all living beings. Instead of 'dominion' we should read 'compassionate stewardship', and that is something else entirely. From the idea of our potential for goodness and compassion, the theme of responsibility is developed. The author shows us how we are responsible, in the sense of being accountable for the wrongs we do not try to stop. By means of the voice of Amos and other prophets he poignantly asks how we can be content and comfortable while others are in great distress, humans or non-humans. I feel that now Europe has recently been plagued by BSE and foot-and-mouth disease, and we have watched the horrors of what is happening every night on television, this question is more pressing than ever. How are we to answer for these things? That is one side of responsibility. The other side is that human beings are called to do justice, to liberate the oppressed, to care for every living being and that it is the way we act in this world, the choices we make and the goals we chose, which form our answer, our response, to God. For me, our human capacity to answer to this call is the basis of faith in a better future for all beings and Richard Schwartz's book has given me every reason not to give up believing. Human beings have the potential to be compassionate and just, and they can learn how to express these qualities. And they will learn more willingly if they are given the facts about oppression and hunger and are shown ways how to change. This is exactly what Richard Schwartz has done. Like the good teacher he is, he shows people what their calling is, where they go wrong, and what they can do to change for the better. This calling is not just for Jews; many people feel that they have a responsibility for the planet and for all that lives there; they just don't know what exactly is going wrong and how to make it better. By enumerating the facts, by showing the consequences of present practices, and by showing the way out, Richard Schwartz makes a very strong case for the vegetarian imperative, no matter what the reader's religion is. I sincerely recommend the book.

"Just Be Honest" is a great resource for home and for work. It's a little book that provides a punch right from the start. You don't have to read page after page of filler. I found it useful immediately.

The company I work for paid for our entire division to attend his seminar. It's simply amazing how much we don't know about effective communication. Just last night I utilized his strategy and it worked flawlessly. I HIGHLY RECOMMEND this!

Steve Gaffney has captured the essence of communication and he shows, in simple terms, how to effectively deal with the most common problems that affect our professional and personal relationships. His vivid examples and practical suggestions come together in an easy-to-read book full of helpful information. I would recommend it to anyone who regularly communicates with others!

This book is awesome!
We'd have a lot less problems in this world if everyone read this and implemented the simple steps Steven points out.
The book will help you in all facets of your life!

With this new book Steve Gaffney takes a quantum the leap from run-of-the-mill, motivational, cheer-leader to foundation shaking visionary. The chapter on Columbo should be required reading for anyone interested in succeeding in corporate America. Using Mr. Gaffney's easy to understand strategy I was able to obtain a position in my company that I was woefully underqualified for. As an added bonus I have been able to parlay Gaffney's "Authentic Communication Strategies" into a very active sex-life. Needless to say my "calendar" is full...With quite a bit of variety...If you know what I'm saying.

A very moving book. I knew Joel from a distance, all we would say is "Hi" to each other. Nothing more. Reading this book should be a school requirement. It does not get any better. What a fascinating man he was. He will be MISSED!

Who ever suspected Joel Siegel led such an interesting life? I couldn't believe all of the experiences he wrote about and the funny insights into his family. He included a chapter on Yiddish words which was informative and amusing. Of course throughout the book was the touching message to his son.

A man, approaching fatherhood late in life finds that he has cancer. What can he give his very young son that would impact the child's life. This book is Joel Siegel's legacy to his young son.

It could have been overly-sentimmental or morbid. Instead it is funny, profound, and deeply moving. Those of us who have faced the same eventuality that Joel Siegel has faced, will find great wisdom here, and solace.

The only quibble I have with the book, is that there are a few chapters that seem to have been added to flesh out the size of the book. A chapter on Yiddish phrases, for example, seems a bit "fluffy," though quite funny.

In all, a wonderful legacy for Dylan... and us all.

This book is a treasure in the fact that a man who has a young son (who should have been his grandson) at that age realizes that he may not be around to share all of these stories and this valuable insight to Dylan in person, and he put in print the things he would have told him (maybe) had he been a young father. The last twenty-five (27) years were a trial for him, as they were for me, as a divorced woman with a son the same age at the time of the divorce. You feel that you've just got to be there to see that son grown, then get on with your life.

He is funny. The Jewish jokes were okay, and the one he had Bobby Kennedy tell about the price of meat was okay, but this whole book is written in the joking way he thinks. Serious times about lowering the flag to half-mast on the UCLA campus the day JFK was assassinated. He was there when brother Bobby died and heard the shots. He and Dylan's mother lived in an area of New York where they were able to watch the Twin Towers burn on 9-11. This is history he passes down to his son in intimate terms.

He writes fondly "some of my best memories of my father are of him laughing while he and I watched TV. We didn't go to movies much; most families didn't in the early '50s." My sister Evelyn took me to my first movie about that time (before she ran off and eloped, ending up spending the rest of her life up North) and I marveled at the beauty and splendor of Tennessee Theater. I don't remember the movie, but I will never forget how I felt looking up at the mural on the interior dome. In the middle and later Fifties, I went to many movies there and even sang in a local talent show on that stage. It was no big deal.

As a film critic, he explains that movies are a fraud and goes into detail about how they are made. But, those he chose for viewing with Dylan were a varied and motlely group, not my choices at all. He tells how old he was when he saw them and how he felt. He dishes the dirt about some of the big movie stars. The index is full of big names. You think of one, he has met him or her and has a funny anecdote to share. TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD, I can understand why he would want to explain to his son what is happening and why. Since he is such a funny man, I guess he would choose the Marx brothers' films. I did enjoy Groucho on the t.v. game show!

Of course, he wants 'I Love Lucy' and 'The Honeymooners' to be available for Dylan to enjoy and share a few laughs. His remembrance of live t.v. in Los Angeles, 'Time for Beanie,' brought back memories of 'Your Startime' hosted by Bob Lobertini for me as I was one of his regulars, and later he had a 'Popeye' show in Nashville where I took my sons. He told them on the air that he and I had appeared on t.v. together in Knoxville; that was stretching it -- he was the star, I the adorer.

During the 1958 Winter/Spring, one of my best friends was the young Jewish usher, Joe Feldman, at the Tennessee Theater. I had moved to the YWCA to finish high school and, that Easter, he took me to eat Easter dinner at the S&W Cafeteria on Gay Street. I still have his senior picture from Young High School.

Dylan is a darling child and so much like Ken Young when he was younger. I sincerely hope they will share many good times as he grows up -- and away. That time will come before you know it.

There are no athiests in foxholes or in an oncologist's office. Siegel, an entertainment critic for ABC's GMA, faced a terminal illness, and created this story of his first 58 years of life. (He passed away on June 29, 2007 at the age of 63).

At the age of 54, Siegel became a father for the first time and learned that he had cancer. In "Lessons for Dylan," Siegel shares all the things he wants his son to know, in case he is not around to tell him, things about his family history and Jewish heritage, life's pleasures and disappointments, the challenges of growing up (at any age), and, most important, who his father is and what Joel values. As Joel and Rabbi Larry Rafael discussed, Joel wants his son to be normal (but not average).

Siegel was born in East Los Angeles in 1943. His Romanian Jewish grandmother survived the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire in March 1911. (Her father banned her from going that day.) His father, a Levite, was an electrician, and he got the first African American and the first Mexican American into his local IBEW union. In 1965, Joel delivered a bag containing $800 in cash to a minister named Martin Luther King at a UCLA luncheon. ("Dr. King, I've come with dessert.") He ended up spending the Summer working for King. Siegel says he invented the names of several Baskin Robbins flavors, including German Chocolate Cake (my favorite) and Pralines and Cream. Siegel was nominated for a Tony Award for his work on a musical about Jackie Robinson. Siegel was a joke writer Senator Robert F. Kennedy in 1968, and witnessed Kennedy's assassination in the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles. He is co-founder (with Gene Wilder) and president of Gilda's Club, a non-profit support facility for cancer patients.

Only Siegel can make the story of his chemo sessions and a colostomy funny. Siegel candidly writes about the end of his marriage (his third) to Dylan's mother and the experience of having cancer. The famous ad man and partier Jerry Della Femina bought pot for Siegel during his chemotherapy. Siegel also shares great stories from show biz (featuring Orson Welles, Marlene Dietrich, Paul Newman, Brad Pitt, Stevie Wonder, all four Beatles, and more); lays out the History of the Jewish People in Four Jokes ("Why make trouble?"); and offers fatherly advice on sex ("ask your mother"), work, what to cook for Rosh Hashanah (recipes included), and a list of movies he would like to see with his son.

One of his letters:
Dear Dylan,
One day you might remember--maybe triggered by a photograph, or a sense memory of a texture or a color--the soft, grey cashmere sweater I bought for you for your second birthday. As an adult you may wonder, "What kind of schmuck buys a cashmere sweater for a two year-old boy?"

The answer is: A schmuck who tempts fate.

Intended for popular consumption, Zitrin & Langford provide a riveting, accessible exploration of the ethical ambiguities posed by the adversary theorem in legal practice.

The adversary theorem, the core of American legal practice, asserts that zealous advocacy on behalf of clients will serve the ultimate cause of justice even if lawyers engage in otherwise questionable behavior because the competition between lawyers who engage in the same practices ensures that justice will ultimately prevail.

Folks looking to denounce lawyers lightly will find little sympathy for lawyers by reading the cases in this book. Rather than consider the implications of the billable hours or the justifications for Frank Armani's interpretation of confidentiality, they'll rush to denounce. It's always easy to pre-judge. That's why lawyers exist.

Zitrin & Langford are less interested in denouncing the adversary theorem than in examining its effect in the real world. The proposals they offer mesh with developments that occurred after their book. The American Bar Association revised its model rules in 2002. Harvard Law School added a pro bono requirement for all students. Law firms tout their pro bono service prominently on their websites, sometimes more prominently than they tout their client list.

Zitrin & Langford add considerably to serious discussion about the application of ethics to legal practice - a perpetual discussion that will last so long as humans disagree.

The only moral compass I've seen yet is whether or not they can get away with justifying their acts with regard to clients. Much of that depends upon the nature of their confidence and where they sit in the "pecking" order of human beings, a.k.a., to whom they were married (denoting family power), where they went to school (usually denoting family power), and what firm they are with (often denoting family power), or who they know (as a result of family power). Therefore, the ethics displayed say a lot more about who's who in family power than about the topic of morality - since it is family power not God who governs the universe. For example, if you come from the right family, you can be a judge, and many have, or even a President, provided you are not a woman. This has been the history for most professions since the nation was founded.

I am a paralegal, and have worked in the legal field for 23 years. I could not put this book down. I have been talking about it since I turned the pages of the first chapter. I recommend it to everyone; I plan to read it again, and when it is not in use, I place it in plain sight of the lawyers with whom I work. Langford and Zitrin have written an important commentary about the practice of law that is easy reading for non-lawyers without being condescending. But their book should be required reading for every lawyer. It is as if someone finally mentioned the elephant in the center of the room.

How did the profession get this far afield? Clients are served less and less while more lawyers are churned out of law schools, and competition is fierce. Money talks; clients at the lower end of the economic scale get less effective counsel or simply try to solve problems without representation. The legal profession has evolved into a business to survive; but, along the way, its vision has deteriorated with regard to justice, public service, and what is morally right.

The fact pattern presented at the beginning of each chapter had me guessing about its outcome as I read on regarding actual, related cases. The anecdotal evidence of injustice and moral dilemma is overwhelming. These are not just occasional news items. They are things that happen every day to lawyers and ordinary people.

I loved their straightfoward and common sense proposals for solutions to make the practice of law better for everyone involved. If only the legal profession, which, as they point out, largely regulates itself, had the courage to implement them.

Just read it, okay?

Richard Zitrin and Carol Langford have written here a book that will not only introduce the law student to the sleazier side of law practice, but also warn the "law consumer" what to watch out for (or perhaps what to look for by way of "zealous representation").

But this is not only a catalogue of egregiously unethical practices by real-world lawyers. It also contains interesting tidbits of great relevance to those who want to know what's wrong with the legal profession.

(For example, here's a point libertarians will enjoy. Lawyers once tried to get around the silly practice of accounting for everything in "billable hours" by settling on standard fees for certain common legal tasks. What stopped them? Antitrust law. It seems adopting industry-standard fees is a form of collusion in restraint of trade. Thank heavens; the current system is _ever_ so much better.)

Not long on solutions, this volume is still a solid overview of the sort of nonsense engendered by the adversarial system. It's also a list of good reasons to look into alternative dispute resolution the next time _you_ have a legal problem.

For law students, I'd personally recommend supplementing it with any or all of the following: Mary Ann Glendon's _A Nation Under Lawyers_; Deborah Rhode's _In the Interests of Justice_; and Philip Howard's _The Death of Common Sense_.

I am afraid that I don't share other reviewers' enthusiasm for this book. Others have noted that it is rather short on solutions to the problems that it outlines. However, it seems to me that this book doesn't know which audience it is aimed at.

My instincts tell me that it is aimed at the general public - not least because of the breezy, senasationalist tone it adopts. There's an awful lot of scaremongering of the "Gee - isn't it awful what these lawyers are doing?" variety. Indeed, I don't take issue with the factual accuracy of the behaviors instanced by the authors. However, my gripe is that the authors do not put these acts in proportion - the lay reader will come away from this book without any idea at all as to how common are these practices that the authors catalog.

The reputation of the legal profession in the United States is at a pretty low ebb. This book will do nothing to improve public perceptions of it. I do not claim that all is well and the public has nothing to worry about - however, the public does deserve to know just how widespread are the practices that the authors describe. The subtitle for this book might just as well be "lawyers are bad for your wealth" yet the public cannot do without legal services. We can expect those who read this book to view their visit to a lawyer's office with as much enthusiasm as a visit to a dentist or a proctologist. Frankly I think the public deserve to be better informed than this on the issues raised by this book.

Lawyers will find little surprising here - other than the impression that the temple of the law is falling about heads and we know nothing, or care nothing, about it. Zitrin and Langford produced a useful casebook on legal ethics - although not as good as Professor Rhode's - but their legal scholarship has taken second place to legal journalism with this book. The book is short but its scope is all encompassing. The inevitable result is a superficial treatment of important issues and a general lack of reflective insight.

If lay or professional readers want to know just how thought provoking and readable a good reflection on the "state of the profession" can be, I urge them to read Michael H Trotters's "Profit and the Practice of Law: What's happened to the legal profession?" and compare that with Part Two of this book.

Don't let the strange title throw you off, this is a great book by one of the best Christian thriller writers of today, James Scott Bell. Janice Ramsey is shopping in a grocery store when a man runs by and steals her purse. AFter briefly chasing after the man, she returns to find that her ten-year old daughter, Lauren, has been kidnapped. Janice is convinced her ex-husband, Sam, is behind it because they are involved in a custody battle.

A bounty hunter named Jed is searching for the killers of his brother Sterling Brown. Jed finds the man who killed Sterling and finds a connection to Sam on the killer's computer. Jed hooks up with Janice and they begin a trip to the East Coast to try and find the truth behind Laurnen's dissappearance and Sterling's killer.

That "thruth" is Bentley Davis, a Harvard Professor with designs on controlling the world through genetic engineering. Davis has designed a gene, the Nephelim seed, that can cause people to lose all emotional thought and to even doubt the existence of God.

The novel is basically a race agains time. Can Janice and Jed rescue Lauren before it is too late? While the plot was engaging, I found the characters to be what kept me turning the pages. Janice has faced the ultimate horror, having a child kidnapped. Lauren is the innocent child who constantly prays to God for guidance. Jed has fallen away from God after he felt God abandoned him in times of trouble. Bentley Davis hates God and thinks he has found the answer: an injection that takes away the need for God and emotion-based thought.

The religious message of the novel is hit and miss. Bell hints at spiritual warfare covered in his later novels. Characters also send mixed messages about why bad things happen. In one scene, when her father is threatening her, Lauren wonders "Why is God letting this happen?"

This is a fun novel full of riveting characters that have the depth needed to make this a page turner. Fans of Bell shouldn't hesitate to read this book.

The Nephilim Seed is one wild ride through Scott Bell's illustrious imagination. I gave it 5 stars because I couldn't think of anything I'd rather do than race to the finish line of The Nephilim Seed. I was hooked on the first page; swept into every scene by characters so well imagined I'll remember them forever. I wanted to protect Lauren, hunt down her father, encourage her mother and go to the police academy so I could personally arrest Davis and all those involved in UniGen. If this isn't a movie--I don't know what is. Man! James, where's the sequel? Facsinating! P.S. Circumstancial Evidence, Blind Justice are great reads too.

This was my first experience with James Scott Bell. If his other novels are as exciting and fast-paced as this one, then it will definitely not be my last.

As a former fan of James Byron Huggins who has been turned off by his recent nonsense which has been passed off as readable fiction, I was refreshed to read a Christian sci-fi thriller that was believable, enjoyable, and lacking in space wasting sentimental drivel.

The idea of the Nephilim has intrigued me ever since my first year Biblical Hebrew class when we studied Genesis 6 and the idea of the Nephilim. A friend and I in that class discussed a Christian sci-fi novel based upon the Nephilim, but not in the manner in which Bell did it here.

"The Nephilim Seed" touched moral themes which are ever encroaching on our post-modern society, and I believe that Bell addresses those issues in a laudable, conservative manner. As science and technology continue in their present course, Christian values and morals will likewise continue to be attacked as outdated.

Jim Bell has knocked one over the far fences with this one! The characters fairly leap off the pages and the plot is, as in all of Jim's books, relentless. His theme is torn right off today's headlines as he has explored areas new to Christian fiction. Can a movie treatment be far behind? Get the "Seed", and bring it home. But a caveat...prepare to lose sleep for a few nights; it's that good.
So move over, Grisham..."The Nephilim Seed" cooks!

I'm blown away. I just finished reading it seconds ago. I am completely blown away. "Christian Futuristic Mystery/Thriller" is how I'd classify it.

you know how you listen to a milestone of a music CD (something by Elvis, the Beetles, Led Zepplin, Iron Maiden, or Metallica - you know, something of that nature) and you wish you could give it about 10,000 stars on amazon? I wish I could do that with this book.

I'm not about to tell you about the story itself. I'll tell you that this author utilizes every word in the English language that he features in this book to perfection. The reader is left shocked countless times (ex. page 360 of the 375 page version - this shock is about as big as if... ... I really can't think of anything on that scale). I compare the first 90 or so pages to a "combination of My Cousin Vinny and Big Daddy." That'll give you a sense of what the plot is about. But the aforementioned page 360 is one of the biggest shocks I've ever seen in my life, turning a phrase said often throughout the book into... not what the ending deals with.

One surprise after another. Written to perfection. The last book I read was one a lot like this, so as I was on about page 40 of this book I was saying to myself "good move, moron - read the same kind of book back to back and automatically, the 2nd one sucks." based on what you've read thus far of this review, you think that's what happened?

Humor is intertwined in a way I've never seen it before. I never burst out laughing at the wrong times, though. In other words, if there's a gun in the current scene, expect dead seriousness. But if the characters are on a boat ride (something that actually DOESN'T happen in this book), expect to fall on the floor laughing.

Its a story for the emotional just as much as it is a story for one who's passion can drive them into dangerous situations (and I mean DANGEROUS), one who is interested in the everlasting battle between Christians and evolutionists, or someone who just wants a book to read. as long as you don't think you'd be offended by the Christianism (but you're not exactly going to feel a dying urge to become super-religious upon completion of the book, though such thoughts may appear suggested, particularly at the very (somehow and somewhat happy) ending.

bottom line: ask me if you think you should read this book and other than the hesitation with the whole Christian aspect, I will tell you: "Go read it." There's a lot more than just Christianness in this book.