The Green Cord Dream

Good writing style, quick/easy read on my iPad, some good points. Nevertheless, this book did disappoint. Its implied negativity/criticism toward church identity/history, and toward unique Adventist teachings, may be found many, many places--on this point there was nothing new. An incomplete picture of Jesus and His teachings.

My sisters name is Alex Bryan. Legit the only reason I bought it

I really enjoyed this book. Seeking Jesus and to long to be with Him in heaven is the foundation of who we are. Refreshing book in a time of flux in our church. We humans over-complicate things. Jesus. All.

Powerful book. I love the approach to the gospel. Compelling. Do you have any other Bryan Books forsale?Thanks,Cory Higgins(208)699-8024.

Odd, conflicted book. Disjointed writing with bizarre analogies and metaphors.

Not worthy.

Very satisfied

In a chapter titled "Human bodies" he states: "...the Oneida Community's founder, John Humphrey Noyes, struggled mightily, and unsuccessfully, to control his sexuality. He had a kind of sexual addiction. How does a man with godly sensitivities deal with the guilt of sexual sin? Complex marriage. Open marriage. When your body fails you, you have to find some way of "dealing."...We have misquoted Jesus' words to the sexually immoral woman, "Go, and sin no more"--too often saying instead to one another, "Go, and have fun with your body no more." At the end of the chapter he states the following: "The body is good. And just to prove it, God came down in the person of Jesus. In human flesh." Alex Bryan presents here an open permissiveness to sexual sin without a call to repentance as well as a false position on the reason for Christ's incarnation.In the chapter titled "The Great Controversy" he states: "God--as pure, intense, radiant light--determines to create. So He makes time, matter, height, depth, animals, minerals, and above all, human beings. And since God is light, life, and love, the creatures He makes are filled with light, life, and love." This, in addition to a previous statement made by the author online "God is, indeed, in all things. Even chaff-filled fields of wheat...", makes it clear that he still holds to a pantheistic heresy which informs his religious world view.For those that are Adventist, he uses a story of a dream Ellen White had before she was called as a prophet. (1 SM 62.4-64.3 Ellen White was not called as prophet until a time after 1844). He refers to this dream as a "mystical experience," which is similar to the authors he has steeped himself in as approaching Christianity with a mix of Eastern mysticism; basically New Age ideologies baptized with a garb of Christianity. In other words, Ellen White is just another mystic, enlightened one, or guru. He says of her, "I have found her to be inspirational." But does he consider her to be inspired?The authors cited, apart from those Adventist are, as far as I know, all adherents of or promoters of Spiritual Formation and/or Emergent Church. (Spiritual Formation has many degrees of presentation, but in its worst form is essentially a Spiritualistic doorway to demonic possession).Throughout the book his language toward Adventism is essentially contempt.In a chapter titled "Compassion" which has a theme of discussing slavery he includes a social justice reference to women in the church. Given his pro position on women's ordination, he is essentially, subtly comparing the rest of his faith that do not agree with his position to racist slave traders.Further still, he refers to the prophetic "Babylon" as the totalitarian states throughout history, rather than the religiopolitical entity of the Papacy and her fallen Protestant churches. In so doing, he is obfuscating the matter of the three angels messages (a central mission of the Adventist church).This man's writings and preaching should be avoided.

Much talk about Christ as the One, but really no more than a pretext. The book says little about Him, the real character being the author of the book himself. It contains a well calculated mixture of truth and error, particularly historical error. Some good diagnosis here and there, but seriously wrong therapy proposed.Had Noah listened to the main thesis of this book, instead of preaching God's message, he would have appointed feasts and social gatherings in the ark until the flood destroyed all, Noah included.Book intended to promote the growth of the church, but only at the expense of crushing its message and mission "at its best".Stay away.