McKnight's review is more focused on the book than mine is. That's because he's actually reviewing the book from a theological perspective, while I, from my rather shallow, subjective and semi-universalist perspective, just write about how I feel about the book. (And how I feel about this book is that I don't think it's heretical enough, even though I didn't come right out and say that. I think Burke touches on a lot of issues that many of us wrestle with, but he keeps a respectful, reserved tone so as to not piss off the faithful.)
When you get right down to it, much of what I write in my freelance life is all about me. Even when I'm writing about someone or something else. I'm a writer, and I want your attention. I don't really care if you read the book; I just want you to read my review. So go read it now. And read McKnight's, too, because he does know what he's talking about. He raises some interesting theological points and concludes that Burke's "claim to follow Jesus’ teachings is not matched by letting Jesus’ teachings shape the central theses of the book."