The book is divided into chapters on important subjects, such as homosexuality, truth, post-modernism etc etc. One author will write the subject and the other will respond.
It was interesting that like most of Mclarens writing I felt like I was on the same wavelength. While Campolo was at times jarring. Revealing a more fundemental (In and Australian sense) theology.
For example, Campolo wrote the chapter on environmentalism. I couldn't help feel uncomfortable about a lot with what he had to write. Especially this line
In this hierarchy of life, there is nothing wrong with sacrificing lower forms of life in order to sustain higher forms of life. Vegetarianism or vegan-ism ma be a good idea, but it is not a biblical mandate for this present age.
I felt he missed the point completely! Its been proven that there is a link between poverty and environmental damage. He didn't mention this link or if he did it was just brushed. Just watch 'the story of stuff'.
Thankfully the reply by Mclaren was able to point out what I thought was and old style of evangelical understanding with Campolo's thinking and theology. Phew. This included the idea that Jesus came to save all of creation. Not just man.
Overall I wish that Mclaren had written the whole book. It was reminiscent of his 'Generous Orthodoxy'
