And once again I was jüst greedy and quickly clicked the „free book“ without looking at the description as „critical commentary“... my bad. The very first sentence in the first chapter reads: „The Masoretic book of Isaiah is composed of two distinct sections written by two different authors at different times.“ Yeah sure...At least the author doesn't try to hide his view in this book. To make things short: Don't buy this if you believe in God's word, you would just waste your time with factless propositions like in that first sentence.

Reading this: „The sequential order of incidents in Genesis 1–11, the kind expected in a history, is also deceptive. Several episodes presented as sequential—the man and woman in the garden, Cain and Abel, the mating of superhuman males with human females—were originally distinct origin stories in their own right which have been linked together into a sequence to serve the author’s agenda. In somewhat the same way, the chronological order of the seven days of creation is in counterpoint to a logical order which is non-sequential, thus obviating the need to ask questions of a ‘scientific’ nature, for example, how there could be light before the creation of the sun.“ For me, that was enough to know, that this is standard liberal verbiage with tons of out-of-thin-air assertions but without evidence. The only real evidence, we have (God's word) is ridiculed thereby. Don't waste any time with this.

Just flew over chapter 8. It's full of hidden premises (religious conservatives = religious rights = bad/fascists) and plain oversimplifications. Example: „...he did not succeed in carving out a political stance that was distinct from the Christian Right. Rather, he became the movement’s intellectual guru.“ Hopefully the other chapters are better and not so biased against „Christian Right“ or whatever the author may call bible-believing Christians who are not sleeping...

Parts of this conversation-style (socratic method) book are really helpful if it is understood as an „apologetic toolbox expansion“. But one needs a good portion of discernment, so beware of: Thomistic apologetics applied. It all is pretty mixed up and has all flavors of apologetics in it (even some sort of presuppositional). But sadly there are even some unbiblical/false teachings in it, at least it's on the edge of it. After looking at P. Kreeft's bio, this apologetic work might make sense from his Catholic viewpoint.