I have mixed feelings on this book, as both someone who was raised and educated thoroughly as a Christian and who has studied comparative religions in a formal, academic setting. While the entire book is well researched and most of the arguments hold water, I noticed quite a few "facts" that either were blatantly wrong, and parts of the writing style that just did not sit well with me.
There were multiple instances of circular reasoning, and nearly the entire premise of the book is a bit disconcerting. This is what I heard, multiple times: "I'll prove the Bible points to Islam even though I believe the Bible to be corrupted and untrustworthy."
There is quite a bit of immaturity shown in the writing style, something that definitely drives me away from recommending this book to other people. Under the ruse of a well-researched, academic book, we are exposed to repeated quotes from Alice in Wonderland, "ehem", "uh - no", and "like, total" scattered throughout the explanations.
The glaring mistake that had me throw up my hands in defeat was the two page spread where Brown was speaking of the Catholic idea of the infallibility of the Pope. As someone educated in comparative religions, the author should not fall into the common misconception that EVERYTHING the Catholic Pope does is considered infallible. The Pope is still fully considered human and is prone to human error, and even when speaking as the Pope, there have only been a large handful of times when those teachings have been declared "infallible".
On a positive note, I did enjoy the book enough through the consistent listing of multiple scriptural stories, drawing attention to various inconsistencies, contradictions, and confirmations of stories throughout Abrahamic scriptures. I will be reading the sequel, God'ed, soon.