Horribly researched, use of circular logic, omissions and/or misstatements of fact, etc, etc. Many sources are either not present, not reliable, or biased. Need I go on?
I've written better things when I was a freshman in college. Anyone that calls this "scholarly," "concrete," or anything of the sort is either stupid or biased themselves. It's obvious on the subtitle ("evidences" is not even a word!) and throughout the text that this book didn't go through a rigorous editing process. On page 30, the author references the wrong part of his own book ("part 2" instead of part 3). The Documentary Hypothesis is explained wrong, and key facts of its formulation and history are either missing or misstated (Chapter 13). These example are only a few of the plethora I could cite.
In conclusion, if you value elevated discourse on theology and/or metaphysical studies, do not give this book a second glance. I wouldn't even use it for toilet paper.