The TLDR of this book's agenda is to sacrifice the wellbeing of the unmarried for the sake of keeping homosexual single. (yes, this is better than in a wicked homosexual relationship). This is a roundabout means of justifying gay celibacy. Gays need to truly repent. their desire is a disgusting abomination in and of itself. there's no way around it. i am not saying there can't be lifelong struggle and the homosexual in question be saved. absolutely there can be. but this book serves the purposes of promoting the side b heresy and it tells Christians desperate for marriage to remain content in an unmarried state which causes them to burn with lust and their heavenly rewards will be reduced. I can't expressed how destructive this book and the ideas it peddles are. details: This book is an exercise in mental gymnastics trying to shoehorn a presumptuous belief into Scripture. It's just bad hermeneutics. 1 Corinthians 7 is plain: either you have the gift of celibacy or you don't; if not, seek marriage; maybe consider postponing it due to circumstantial crisis. Don't waste your money on this borderline gnostic nonsense that downplays the physical and over emphasizes the spiritual. Ra McLaughlin at reformedanswers has a far better exegesis on the topic that falls in line of the Reformed historic understanding.

The premise of this book is understandable. His argument boils down to "the Bible exaggerates the slaughter of Canaanites because it uses stock ANE language." I don't disagree entirely with this premise. Unfortunately, God's goodness is not subject to review. It's fair to suggest at least some people not mentioned in the conquest account where spared either by circumstance or simply by Joshua's army. I argue this myself. But the problem is he takes this too far, describing the destruction of the cities as simply disabling military fortresses which probably had limited civilian casualties. This simply cannot be true. Scripture is clear God was pouring out his wrath upon very evil nations to the point where they would at least effectively, even if some survived, but blotted from the face of the earth. Copan's general premise flows at least to some extent, from anxiety about unbelievers' opinions about God. Even though I understand that heat is hot, this isn't good practice because it influences the interpretation of scripture in response to the invalid bad attitudes of unbelievers. I don't think this book is useless, but in general, I don't recommend it spitting out the bones..