Greg's previous book was written mainly as reponses to evangelical Witness critics such as Rhodes ("Reasoning From the Scriptures With JWs"), Bowman ("Understanding JWs") and the like. The 2nd edition, like the first, dealt mainly with issues related to trinitarianism, the NWT, and arguments over which scholar said what and who is mispresenting whom. Greg also included some words on Fred Franz, 1975, and blood.
I was having several private discussions with Greg and a few of his friends a few years ago and they encouraged me to get the book, since at that time I was rather anti-JW, always criticizing JWs, and using many arguments I learned in those evangelical anti-JW books. Greg's book did some to reverse my attitude, albeit not completely. However, Greg makes some very good points about certain texts like John 8:58 which are scholarly and sensible, as opposed to the broad, sweeping criticisms of fundies.
The thing I appreciated most about Greg's book was not so much the information as the style in which he presented it. True, the book sort of lumbered along, but that was not so much Greg's fault as simply the massive amount of detail he put into it, and of course that is also the very nature of a scholarly presentation. What I mean by saying I appreciated Greg's style is that he resisted the tendency to be extremely dogmatic, or to take jabs at people, like the Watchtower does (and certainly did if you read articles from the 50s and 60s written in response to criticism).
Regarding the new book, I have not had a chance to talk to Greg about it. I haven't spoken much to him since I was DF'd last year. We exchanged a few emails after that event, however, that isn't why I've lost contact with him. The main reason is that I do not spend any time on AOL any longer, and that's primarily where I would catch up with him. So I don't know much about this new book. However, I have a good feeling about what I'm going to read.
The first dissertation is going to define the word prophet as a biblical term, explain how JWs use the term, consider the comparisons to the JW anointed class and prophets such as Ezekiel and Jeremiah, and deal with that 1972 Watchtower which claims JWs to be prophets. Greg will find lots of Watchtower quotes which reveal the WTS' admissions of fallibility and so forth, to prove that JWs do not claim to be inspired prophets. He will also deal with Maria Russell's claim that Chuck T. was "that servant," the Finished Mystery and 1922 Watchtowers will call him "that servant," and Russell's private claim to have been "that servant." I couldn't care less about JWs as prophets, but I am interested to see how Greg answers critics about Russell having been clearly labeled "that servant" by the IBS community.
The second dissertation is going to be a response to COJ's "Gentile Times" book. COJ gave a history of the adventist movement from which Russell got his chronological ideas. It appears that Greg will do the same, probably with a Watchtower-induced slant ("Earnest students of the Bible sincerely attempted to calculate..."). Greg will deal with statements such as "there is no validity to assign times as years" or the criticism about the 360 day lunar year being prophetically significant. He will most likely refer to some of Rolf Furuli's material regarding 607 BCE. He will deal with the 20-year gap problem, missing tablets, Ptolemy, Nabonidus, VAT-4976 and so forth. I guess that only 4 or 5 pages will be dedicated to 607, but they will perhaps include the most powerful language of the entire book (judging from the title of the section, questioning whether the Gentile Times needs reconsidering at all). I think it is likely that Greg will admit that 1975 was promoted by COs and others, verbally, but he will deny that the Watchtower ever officially printed that 1975 would be "it" and that the WT has always maintained a sense of urgency about the times we live in. He already dealt with 1975 in his previous book, so I don't expect much new material here. As far as the last days, he will likely deal with the common belief that the last days started in 33 CE and continue to today, instead of starting and ending in the first century and jump-starting again in 1914 (or thereabouts). I doubt greatly that he will respond to COJ's book or other non-religious essays that attempt to show that our times are not biblically significant (but he might, and that would be welcome).
The third dissertation is going to explain why God reveals truths and interpretations progressively, it will discuss Trinity issues (!), it will try to explain _why_ JWs believe what they believe about the relationship between Christ and God and about the usage of the name Jehovah, and why criticisms against JWs are unwarranted. It will talk about JW neutrality, voting, and common worldly celebrations such as holidays, birthdays, maybe even school sports and proms. It will make the presentation that Witnesses can decide for themselves whether or not to participate in such things. You'll see the word "some" or "many" quite often, indicating that not "all" JWs must exercise their conscience in only one way. Of course, it is my belief that since Greg lives in NoCal, a very liberal JW area, that he is not personally familiar or experienced with how things are done in areas such as my own, where you are almost literally hunted down by elders for the smallest of infractions.
Greg will spend a lot of time on blood. He will make every effort to support the Society's notion of a governing body in Jerusalem that produced a universal decree against taking in blood. He will probably not mention Ray Franz by name, but he is going to try and tear apart Ray's analysis of Acts 15. He will call it unreasonable to suggest that the decree was merely a suggestion to the Gentiles, or a cause to keep peace between the races, in light of the holy spirit's involvement in the process. He will probably delve into the fractions issue only briefly, probably to suggest that the medical community recognizes four "main components" of blood, and blood is blood by means of having one of those four, it could not be otherwise. However, the proteins and minerals and so forth that make up those components are not an issue since they are not integral parts of "blood." Something along those lines. I do not know how or whether he will attempt to discuss the hemoglobin and Hemopure situation.
Since the book is only 160 pages, and many of us are familiar with how long-winded Greg can be (hehehe, sorry Greg, but you know it's true), I think this will be an easy read for most, and it might just be another step towards the mainstreaming of Witness culture as instead of focusing on Jesus issues, Greg is taking on life issues, which is evidently what most of us on this board care more about.