Category: Non-Fiction Page 11 of 54

I’m about to re-read this book, so I figured it was a good idea to remember what I thought about it.

The Trinity: An Introduction

by Scott R. Swain
Series: Short Studies in Systematic Theology

Paperback, 133 pg.
Crossway, 2020

Read: January 17-31, 2020
Grab a copy from your local indie bookstore!

What we find in later Trinitarian creeds, confessions, and doctrinal summaries are not improvements upon a latent or undeveloped biblical Trinitarianism but, rather, the church’s attempt to fathom the depth of the riches of biblical Trinitarianism for the sake of various liturgical, pedagogical, and polemical ends. Some of the church’s creeds, confessions, and doctrinal summaries represent such faithful expressions of scriptural teaching and enjoy such wide-ranging ecclesiastical consensus that we dare not transgress the lines they have drawn. Rather, taking them on our own lips, we gladly join the church’s chorus of Trinitarian praise.

What’s The Trinity: An Introduction About?

It’s kind of there in the title, right? This is an introduction to the classical Christian doctrine of The Trinity. He’s not trying to re-invent the wheel, he’s definitely not trying to innovate, but to provide a concise (it’s a Short Study, after all) jumping-off point into deeper studies by providing a solid foundation.

He spends two chapters looking at the primary Biblical texts demonstrating the Doctrine. Chapter 3 is about the Simplicity of God—something too many overlook in a discussion of The Trinity. The following three chapters each focus on a Person of the Trinity. The final chapters are about the “external works” of the Trinity, the “appropriation” of specific works to particular persons, the beneficiaries of God’s work, and assorted topics.

All of that is a lot to ask of 133 short pages. Swain pulls it off by being concise, but he never seems to be leaving out details or avoiding the complicated ideas (although he obviously has to).

Touching on Controvery

This isn’t a polemical work—Swain is here to inform and educate, not combat. Still, he does talk about some Christological errors, including the contemporary dust-ups over EFS/ERAS—Eternal Functional Subordination/Eternal Relations of Authority and Submission.

Swain briefly (again, it’s a Short Study) addresses this error. He’s calm, he’s fair, yet he’s firm. It’s one of the best short treatments of the controversy I’ve seen, and in the context of the larger discussion of the Person of the Son as well as the larger discussions of each of the Persons, it’s incredibly helpful. It also fits where he put it and doesn’t seem like Swain used the opportunity as a digression just to beat a pet theological peeve.

Helpful Supplemental Material

Maybe it’s just me, but I rarely find the post-text material all that helpful. This book was one of the pleasant exceptions—there’s a brief glossary of some of the technical terms. Also, the “Further Reading” suggestions look great and my “To Buy” list grew a bit.

So, what did I think about The Trinity: An Introduction?

Because the persons of the Trinity are internal to God’s life, not external works of God, we can know the persons of the Trinity, as well as their ultimate plan for creation (Eph. 3:9), only if they stoop down and open up the depths of their inner life to us. Only the persons of the Trinity know the persons of the Trinity. Therefore, only the persons of the Trinity can make known the persons of the Trinity. The revelation of the Trinity is a matter of divine self-revelation, divine self-presentation, divine self-naming.

While this is a theological book, drawing on the teaching of the Church, Swain is careful to never lose sight of the source of this Doctrine, the Word of God. We know this, we understand this (as much as we do) because it is revealed to us. That’s vital to an understanding of the doctrine, and vital to the teaching of it. Swain doesn’t let his readers stray from the text.

This is one of those books where my notes keep saying “Chapter X is likely the highlight of the book,” “the section on X is likely the most valuable in the book.” It appears 60-70% of the book is a highlight—and I may not have written all of those parts down. Which is to say, there’s a lot of gold here, very little (if any) dross.

Helpful, insightful, and useful—it also achieves its end for leading on to further study for me. It’s accessible, but not easy, reading. At the same time, it’s a challenging, but not difficult, text.

Also, I like the looks of this series as a whole, I’ll most likely be grabbing more/all of them if they’re all about this quality.

5 Stars

This post contains an affiliate link. If you purchase from it, I will get a small commission at no additional cost to you. As always, opinions are my own.

REPOSTING JUST ‘CUZ: The Excellencies of God: Exploring and Enjoying His Attributes by Terry Johnson: Not Quite as Good as Its Predecessor but Worth Your Time

By HCNewton

On October 8, 2023

In Non-Fiction, Theology/Christian Living

The Excellencies of God:
Exploring and Enjoying
His Attributes

by Terry Johnson

DETAILS:
Publisher: Reformation Heritage Books
Publication Date: October 23, 2022
Format: Hardcover
Length: 347 pg.
Read Date: October 23-November 20, 2022

The Excellencies of God‘s Jacket Copy

God’s attributes is the most practical of subjects, inspiring and shaping the entire Christian life. Contemplating who God is and what He has promised to do can bring great comfort to the most despairing soul. Moreover, it brings immense delight to all those who recognize their chief end as the glory and enjoyment of God. In The Excellencies of God, Terry L. Johnson explores several aspects of the divine character and shows how they play a crucial role in our Christian experience. May God’s mercy and grace, His patience and wisdom, His truth and faithfulness, His spirituality and blessedness prove to be a blessing to all who peruse these pages.

The Table of Contents

That’s kind of vague, so let’s look at the TOC.

Preface
Introduction: The Christian and the Attributes
The Mercy, Grace, and Patience of God
1. The Mercy of God
2. The Grace of God
3. The Patience of God
The Truth and Faithfulness of God
4. The God of Truth
5. Liberating Truth
6. Pursue and Proclaim the Truth
The Blessedness of God
7. The Blessed God
8. Our Blessedness in God
The Fatherhood of God
9. God Our Father
10. Pleasing Our Father
11. Our Father’s Children
12. Our Father’s Care
The Spirituality of God
13. The God Who Is Spirit
14. Serving an Invisible God
15. Spiritual Mindedness
16. Spiritual Worship
17. True Worship
The Wisdom of God
18. God Only Wise
19. Wisdom and Folly
20. Seeking and Submitting to God’s Wisdom

So, what did I think about The Excellencies of God?

I struggled to write a post about Johnson’s The Identity and Attributes of God two years ago, and I find myself in a similar position now with this follow-up. I went with the bare minimum above because it fits the book—Johnson lays things out very matter-of-factly, and you get exactly what the TOC lists. He takes each thought and explains it using citations from Scripture, the Fathers, Reformers, and some contemporary writers—with some illustrations of hymns.

I have the impression that Johnson gives 50-60% of the text, and the rest are quotations (mostly a sentence or less). I did not (would not) try to verify that—and I’m pretty sure I’m wrong, but that’s my impression as a whole. I wanted more of Johnson and less of everyone else. I think this is about the same as the previous volume, and I had a similar thought about it—but overall it was so good, I didn’t care. This book was a little less impressive so it stuck out to me more.

I don’t think I get the selection of the major topics and how they flowed one from the other—the chapters within each topic, on the other hand, flowed nicely.

Is this a decent read? Yeah, but it tends to the dull-side with the repeated quotations. But beyond that, it’s a pretty straightforward and thorough look at the topics. It’s helpful, it should push you to look more into some of the ideas that you find more provocative (and the footnotes will help with that). It’s sound and measured, majoring on the majors and not really spending time on minor issues.

It’s a good book that I can recommend without hesitation, I just wanted more from it.

4 Stars

This post contains an affiliate link. If you purchase from it, I will get a small commission at no additional cost to you. As always, the opinions expressed are my own.

Who Chose the Gospels?: Probing the Great Gospel Conspiracy by C. E. Hill: Robert Langdon Might Have Been on the Wrong Track (shocking, I know)

By HCNewton

On October 1, 2023

In History, Non-Fiction, Theology/Christian Living

Who Chose the Gospels?:
Probing the Great Gospel Conspiracy

by C. E. Hill

DETAILS:
Publisher: Oxford University Press, USA
Publication Date: April 7, 2012
Format: Paperback
Length: 247 pg.
Read Date: September 10-24, 2023

All this presents a rather sticky problem. Recall that in Professor Ehrman’s political interpretation of church history it isn’t until the fourth century that the ‘orthodox’ party finally ‘sealed its victory over all of its opponents’, At that time ‘it rewrote the history of the engagement’, claiming that its views were passed down from Jesus’ apostles. And yet here is Irenaeus, nearly two centuries earlier, already ‘rewriting history’ long before the victory was sealed. At a time when, many prominent scholars insist, the issue was still very much in doubt, Irenaeus writes as if the church had been nurtured by these four Gospels from the time of the apostles.

The problem with Irenaeus is that he simply wrecks the popular paradigm. His views about the emerging New Testament canon, and about the four Gospels in particular, are simply too well-developed, too mature, to fit the scheme that many have invested themselves in today. As a second-century Christian author who argued that there are, and can only be, four legitimate Gospels—because they alone teach the truth about Jesus and because they alone had been handed down in the church from the time of the apostles—Irenaeus lies like a fallen Redwood in the path of those who would see the choice of the four Gospels as a late and politically motivated manoeuvre of the fourth century.

How do you solve a problem like Irenaeus?

What’s Who Chose the Gospels? About?

That last question in the quotation would work pretty well as an alternate title for the book—how do you solve a problem like Iraneaus? Or, more to the point, how do you ignore his (early date) recognition of only 4 gospels—Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John—despite what we’re told about the state of gospel availability and canonization by so many today.

Hill examines some of the time frames, uses, content, and provenance of some of the so-called competitor gospels (i.e., those that never were considered canonical) to compare them to both the canonical gospels and those early figures of the Church we see discussing the gospels. But primarily, Hill is concerned with the use of and testimony regarding the canonical gospels—and the evidence regarding their use by the Church and when it started. The overwhelming bulk of the book is focused there.

So, we may now ask, how did the Christian church, apparent drowning in a sea of Gospels, finally end up with only four? The educated reader of today may already have come to the conch. sion that the story was attended with a good bit of bullying intrigue, and skullduggery. Many perhaps picture councils of bad-tempered bishops voting on which books to include in the Bible one minute, and voting to execute heretics the next. As now widely believed, in any case, that the four canonical Gospels emerged into prominence only fairly late from a long and drawnout battle within early Christianity, a battle finally won in the fourth century after the establishment of the church by Constantine the Great. While academics might not, as Teabing does Dan Brown’s novel, attribute the collation of the Bible to ‘pagan emperor Constantine’, many even in the academic community insist that the question of which Gospels the church ought to endorse was still up for grabs in the fourth century.

He also looks a little bit at contemporary theories (both academic and popular) about the development of the canon—insofar as it focuses on the Gospels. He finds it wanting, and somewhat self-contradictory—and talks about that, too. But even as he does so, it’s not the main focus of the book—which is, as said earlier, the four gospels and how the second (and possibly first) century church regarded them, and how that changed (and mostly didn’t change) in the two centuries following.

The Tone of the Book

You probably can’t read it in the image above, but that top blurb is from D.A. Carson and it says, “Not many books that are so informed are such a pleasure to read.” I really didn’t pay much attention to it—and just figured he meant something about how nice it is to have such an informative read or something like that. If for no other reason, it was from Oxford University Press, who are not known for fun reads. I was super duper wrong.

This was a blast to read. Seriously, I had a lot of fun.

Not—and I want to stress, not—because he’s making jokes, being silly, or outrageous or anything like that. There’s just something about Hill’s style. He’s charming (seemingly effortlessly), not in a way that calls attention to itself, but it’s there—a little mild sarcasm, some wordplay, some other bits of humor along the way—but it’s nothing I can point to, and say “there it is!” But time after time while reading this, I found myself grinning for no apparent reason.

That’s just his style—the subject is serious, and frankly, pretty dry. But Hill keeps it from being dry without tuning down the seriousness of both the positive case he’s trying to build and the criticisms he makes toward the other side(s).

So, what did I think about Who Chose the Gospels??

In short, we have no evidence that the church ever sat down collectively or as individual churches and composed criteria for judging which Gospels (or other literature) it thought best suited its needs. On the contrary, the key realization which best explains our inability to find an ultimate ‘chooser’, which best explains why the church didn’t take the easy way out with some kind of singular Gospel and why it never cobbled together a set of criteria to apply to all the Gospel candidates, is that the church essentially did not believe it had a choice in the matter! The question ‘why did you choose these Gospels?’ would not have made sense to many Christians in the second century, for the question assumes that the church, or someone in it, had the authority to make the choice. To many, it would be like the question, ‘why did you choose your parents?

A few other books/chapters that I’ve read on the subject talk about the conclusions Hill draws, and refer to some of the evidence, but Hill’s the first one I’ve read who’s actually “shown the work,” as my math teachers/professors would say. His answers match other scholars, but I can actually see how he got them. For that alone, I enjoyed reading this book and profited from it.

Add in his style? Oh, buddy—now we’re cooking with fire.

Hill is careful and thorough, acknowledging challenges to his position about the emergence of the fourfold Gospel to the place it holds today. But he’s consistent in showing how those challenges don’t have the weight and merit that so many in our culture assume they do. Not to keep picking on it—but the authors/editors of Church History in Plain Language should spend time with this book and others like it before they finish the Sixth Edition—it would really help out with its particularly weak chapter on the Canon.

I think the concluding chapter could’ve been beefed up a little bit. Maybe after a few more readings, I can figure out what it was missing—I just felt it was weak here and there. Or another reading or two will show me that I could’ve paid better attention this time (entirely likely).

Regardless, Who Wrote the Gospels? is a book well worth time and attention—and it’ll repay both.

5 Stars

This post contains an affiliate link. If you purchase from it, I will get a small commission at no additional cost to you. As always, the opinions expressed are my own.
Irresponsible Reader Pilcrow Icon

Nasty, Brutish, and Short (Audiobook) by Scott Hershovitz: Who Needs Calvin and Hobbes When We Have Rex and Hank?

By HCNewton

On September 27, 2023

In Audiobook, Non-Fiction

Nasty, Brutish, and Short:
Adventures in Philosophy with My Kids

by Scott Hershovitz

DETAILS:
Publisher: Penguin Audio
Publication Date: May 3, 2022
Format: Unabridged Audiobook
Length: 9 hrs., 31 min.
Read Date: September 21-25, 2023

What’s Nasty, Brutish, and Short About?

The official description is:

Some of the best philosophers in the world gather in surprising places—preschools and playgrounds. They debate questions about metaphysics and morality, even though they’ve never heard the words and perhaps can’t even tie their shoes. They’re kids. And as Scott Hershovitz shows in this delightful debut, they’re astoundingly good philosophers.

Hershovitz has two young sons, Rex and Hank. From the time they could talk, he noticed that they raised philosophical questions and were determined to answer them. They re-created ancient arguments. And they advanced entirely new ones. That’s not unusual, Hershovitz says. Every kid is a philosopher.

Following an agenda set by Rex and Hank, Hershovitz takes us on a fun romp through classic and contemporary philosophy, powered by questions like, Does Hank have the right to drink soda? When is it okay to swear? and, Does the number six exist? Hershovitz and his boys take on more weighty issues too. They explore punishment, authority, sex, gender, race, the nature of truth and knowledge, and the existence of God. Along the way, they get help from professional philosophers, famous and obscure. And they show that all of us have a lot to learn from listening to kids—and thinking with them.

Hershovitz calls on us to support kids in their philosophical adventures. But more than that, he challenges us to join them so that we can become better, more discerning thinkers and recapture some of the wonder kids have at the world.

The book is broken down into three sections: “Making Sense of Morality” (covering ideas like Rights, Revenge, Punishment, Authority, and Language); “Making Sense of Ourselves” (surely non-controversial chapters covering “Sex, Gender, and Sports”; and “Race and Responsibility”); and “Making Sense of the World” (Knowledge, Truth, Mind, Infinity, and God—the easy bits of philosophy). While discussing these, Hershovitz will describe the idea(s) he’s focusing on—or the aspects of them, to be more specific; he’ll then illustrate them with questions from or discussions with his sons; give us a brief history of philosophy on the topic; and then his personal take on them. Usually with more input from his sons along the way.

How was the Narration?

Hershovitz was fantastic. If he gets tired of the whole professor/philosopher gig, he could have a new career in audiobook narration. I can only imagine that his classes are great to sit through.

He delivered the material that in the wrong hands could’ve come across as super-dry, or really jokey and kept it engaging, entertaining, and informative—with a little bit of the persuasiveness needed to keep someone listening to a book about philosophy.

I was quite impressed.

So, what did I think about Nasty, Brutish, and Short?

Oh, I have some serious issues with some of the philosophy here. The chapter on “God” (to the surprise of few who read this blog regularly) really bothered me—but it did underline the importance of Special Revelation to go with General Revelation.

The Conclusion, “How to Raise a Philosopher,” was fantastic. Truly some of the best parenting advice I’ve heard/read in ages (and I don’t even need that any more and I still found myself taking notes). For raising more than just philosophers.

Sure, I disagreed with some of his conclusions—but I loved hearing the way Hershovitz thought through the ideas he was proposing and/or discussing, the way he dealt with his kids and their questions, I appreciated the way he explained concepts both basic and complex in a way that non-philosophers could understand, and he managed to be entertaining all along. Some of his witticisms did cause me to react audibly. There’s a good deal of so-called common sense mixed in with the profound as well—always nice to see for a layman like myself.

This book is a strange alchemy of parenting advice (even if largely given by example rather than by precept), Philosophy 101, and humor. It works so well that it’s hard to explain. I can only hope there’s a sequel or three as Hank and Rex age.

All in all, I heartily recommend this for parents, people who want to get a start in philosophy but aren’t sure where (and don’t want to admit that to anyone), and others. The print version might be nice for easy reference, but the audiobook format is a real winner.

3.5 Stars

American Idolatry: How Christian Nationalism Betrays the Gospel and Threatens the Church by Andrew Whitehead

By HCNewton

On September 24, 2023

In Non-Fiction, Politics/Current Affairs, Theology/Christian Living

American Idolatry:
How Christian Nationalism Betrays
the Gospel and Threatens the Church

by Andrew Whitehead

DETAILS:
Publisher: Brazos Press
Publication Date: August 15, 2023
Format: Hardcover
Length: 192 pgs.
Read Date: August 27-September3, 2023

Both parts of my identity* have led me to the same conclusion: Christian nationalism betrays the gospel and is a threat to the Christian church in the United States. It is from this perspective that I write this book. I want to make clear to my fellow white American Christians how much Christian nationalism threatens our faith—not only our individual expressions of it but also our organizations and institutions. It threatens our capacity to love our brothers and sisters in Christ who are minorities. It threatens our capacity to love and serve our brothers and sisters in Christ from countries around the world. It threatens our capacity to love and serve fellow bearers of God’s image at home and abroad who don’t share our faith at all. And it threatens how our organizations function, causing them to reproduce inequality and further harm the marginalized.

I am convinced that Christian nationalism makes us bad Christians.

* Those parts are a follower of Christ and a social scientist.

What’s American Idolatry About?

Essentially, this is an attempt to demonstrate the subtitle: “How Christian Nationalism Betrays the Gospel and Threatens the Church” (the above quotation does show he’s not talking about a threat to the throughout the world—or the future—but the contemporary church in the U.S., an important distinction).

It’s also a follow-up to the work he co-authored with Samuel Perry, Taking America Back for God: Christian Nationalism in the United States—this is a less-technical book (from what I can tell), to appeal to people who don’t enjoy digging through social science analysis and graphs. It also seems to be a “so what now?” response to that book—the earlier volume presented the data, and this is Whitehead’s suggested reaction to that data. I haven’t actually read the previous book, but from what Whitehead says in these pages and what I’ve read about the previous book, that’s my impression.

This doesn’t mean that Whitehead assumes a thorough knowledge of or familiarity with Christian Nationalism (he frequently appends “white” to that term for reasons he makes clear) going into this book, he spends two chapters outlining the basics of Christian Nationalism and how that impacts the Church. The next three chapters focus on what he calls “the three most powerful” idols of Christian Nationalism—power, fear, and violence—followed by three chapters describing alternatives to these idols, ways that are more faithful to the calling to which you have been called.*

* These are not exhaustive chapters, for more along these lines—see What Are Christians For? Life Together at the End of the World by Jake Meador. Some of the ideas in these books will align, but they will diverge, too. Yet, I would predict neither author would object to being read together.

A Disclaimer of Sorts

We have to look straight into the mirror and not try to hide or diminish the imperfections we see. Only then can we begin to imagine something new. Part of this work is recognizing that the God we worship has no particular interest in the greatness of the United States. The survival of any one nation over another is not paramount. The kingdom of God needs no global superpower in order to flourish….recognizing that human flourishing in the kingdom of God and in the United States (or any other nation) are not synonymous does not mean that Christians should not invest in the flourishing of a nation and its people. We can work toward peace, justice, and care for all who live and work within the boundaries of our home country. We can collaborate with God and those around us to create a more loving and liberating country for all our neighbors.

Whitehead returns to the idea frequently, but stresses it in the first two chapters—he is not calling for Christians to be anti-American, or even apathetic about our country. He’s not calling for them to remove themselves from the political process. His concern is how we see the country, how we view and treat our fellow citizens, and how we’re involved in the political process.

The choice is not Christian Nationalism or godless anarchy, or Communism, or Sharia law—and so on. His vision is for Christians to work alongside those of other faiths (or absence thereof) for the civil betterment of us all. While I think Whitehead’s politics tend toward the Left, he’s not calling for all Christians to embrace that—conservative and Republican Christians can agree with his arguments on the issues this book centers on.

The Idols of Christian Nationalism

There are many “idols” of CN, claims Whitehead, but the three he focuses on are the biggest problems in his view are power, fear, and violence. The heart of the book is devoted to this section (it’s not the longest, but it’s the most important), here he demonstrates how the devotion to and use of these characterize the movement and put it at odds with Christianity.

In these chapters, Whitehead begins by defining what he sees as the CN’s use of/dependence on the various idols. Then he’ll show how throughout our history—but particularly in recent decades/years how both political figures and religious leaders have tapped into and exploited these ideas for their own benefit and the detriment of other groups in the U.S. He’ll then look at Christ’s and/or early-Christian teachings on the same ideas, contrasting them with CN’s use (this is particularly effective on the ideas of power and violence).

The shortcomings (to put it mildly) of CN are on full display here. Frankly, I think the definition work done in chapter 2 is enough to turn someone off of this ideology, but chapters 3-6 really put the nail in the coffin.

So, what did I think about American Idolatry?

Over years of academic study and personal faith journey, I have become convinced that white Christian nationalism in the United States is fundamentally opposed to the ethics and teachings of Jesus. Through idolizing power, fear, and violence, white Christian nationalism betrays the gospel, in which Jesus’s sacrifice liberates us from our enslavement to sin as well as the destruction it causes through systems of oppression It betrays the gospel that realigned the power structures of society.

As a whole, I don’t see people who aren’t at least suspicious of CN responding well to this book—I think most of those who are suspicious will become more so after this—and those who are already pretty against it will have new reasons and will be strengthened in it. I’m not sure that those who have leanings or sympathies toward it are going to respond well. I could be wrong, and hope I am. That I don’t think it would reach the CN-leaning is the biggest flaw with the book (but if I’m wrong about the effectiveness, that flaw wouldn’t be that big).

Based on what little he indicated about his own theological positions, I don’t think Whitehead and I would agree on much. I think we’d probably agree on less when it comes to politics. But when it comes to the impact that CN is having on churches, our gospel witness, and the public perception of the Christian Church in the US? Well, we’re pretty much on the same page—which I think fits some of Whitehead’s points. He’s not really that concerned with the areas where he and I would disagree, in fact, he’d probably defend that ability. Where he is focused is the negatives that CN brings to political discourse and the work of the church.

On those points, I think he scored big in American Idolatry—showing the flaws, errant presuppositions, and wrong emphasis—and non-Christian attitudes of CN. I’m less sure that he was convincing in the last three chapters about healthy alternatives, but I do think what he offers there is better than CN, and he’s convincing to that point. Maybe not as far as he wants to be, however.

Crisp and clear writing, the text moves with the assurance of someone well-versed in the subject and clear-eyed about what they want to say about it. I recommend the book and thinking about the issues it raises.

3.5 Stars

How to Stay Productive When the World Is Ending (Audiobook) by Reductress: Mara Wilson & Jay Aaseng: The “This is Fine” Meme, Expanded

By HCNewton

On September 21, 2023

In Audiobook, Humor, Non-Fiction, Politics/Current Affairs

How to Stay Productive When the World Is Ending:
Productivity, Burnout, and Why Everyone Needs to Relax More Except You

by Reductress; Mara Wilson & Jay Aaseng (Narrators)

DETAILS:
Publisher: Andrews McMeel Publishing
Publication Date: June 20, 2023
Format: Unabridged Audiobook
Length: 4 hrs., 49 min.
Read Date: September 20-21, 2023

What’s How to Stay Productive When the World Is Ending About?

People being compelled to choose between having money to buy food/shelter/necessities and health (all while maintaining a social media presence) in the midst of worrying about the immanent death of the earth from climate change and various and sundry pandemics—this is the book for you.

a collection of essays, how-tos, and “inspirational” phrases to help you laugh when staying both sane and productive in a commodified world feels impossible. From “‘Doing What You Love’ and Why That’s Bad,” to “Why I’m Prioritizing My Career Over Finding a Better Career,” this collection perfectly skewers the indignities, big and small, of living through late-stage capitalism.

The Narrators

Mara Wilson and Jay Aaseng did a great job—a very dry delivery (unless something else was called for) and earnestness really sold the satire. I can’t help but imagine that they had to do many takes of parts of this because it was difficult to get through with a straight face. Even for professionals like they are.

I think Aeseng got to show a little more range in his performance, but that’s just because some of the things he was asked to do demanded it—when Wilson got to do more than the straight, dry reading, she stepped up as well. Maybe if I wasn’t multitasking, I could’ve taken more notes and kept better track, and I’d see that the ratio was different.

Essentially, they did a great job—I’d listen to more audiobooks by them—and they thoroughly entertained me.

So, what did I think about How to Stay Productive When the World Is Ending?

The website for Reductress states that it’s

The first and only satirical women’s magazine, Reductress was founded in 2013 by Beth Newell and Sarah Pappalardo. The mission of Reductress is to take on the outdated perspectives and condescending tone of popular women’s media.

and that tone and direction are clear throughout this book. Thankfully, even when it’s not targeted toward me, I can still (frequently) enjoy humor and satire done well. And this book, reader, is done well.

Very little of the satire and humor was mean-spirited toward an individual, political persuasion, or most lifestyles (I honestly can’t think of an example at the moment that was, but I’m going to say this to be safe). It does skewer the lifestyles/thinking of those who promote/require people to have to hold down a side-hustle or three to make ends meet, for example. But even then, not in a mean way.

I don’t think people should grab this audiobook, however. (no offense to the narrators, see above) Or if you do, don’t listen from beginning to end in a sitting or two. Listen for 15± minutes at a time and then switch to a podcast or other audiobook. It’s just too much at once, and all the jokes blur together. Also, I’ve looked at some of the samples of the book online—between the graphics and layout, and the ease of picking it up, reading a bit and then putting it down; print is the way to go with this book.

That said—I thought it was frequently hilarious, funny at almost every point—each piece had something that made me grin or chuckle. Most had several lines that did that—and a good portion made me laugh out loud. I even played a couple of pieces to my wife and daughter (my chronically ill daughter really enjoyed the piece, “How to #Grind when your #SideHustle is #ChronicIllness”). It feels like cheating to mention this one in particular, but I have lived (and know others who have, too) “Why I’m Prioritizing My Career Over Finding a Better Career.” Reader, I laughed so hard. And cringed.

That’s pretty much my reaction to the book as a whole.

I would absolutely recommend this to anyone with the above caveat about format.

3 Stars

Some of the Guidance I Received on Giving Terry Pratchett Another Try

By HCNewton

On September 18, 2023

In Humor, Miscellany

Last week, I asked for some advice on where I should start with Discworld books, since my attempts with reading The Colour of Magic and The Light Fantastic didn’t really leave me wanting more.

I received some good input, and thought I’d pass some of it along (if only so there’s a central location for me to come back to later for reference).

The overall consensus was that I picked a couple of bad ones to start with. But beyond that,

bullet Mike Finn (you should read his blog, by the way), said (in part):

Here’s the best map I know of for showing the reading order of the various Discworld subgroups.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/12/Discworld_Reading_Order_Guide_3.0_(cropped)

My favourites are the Watch novels and the Witches novels.
The Watch novels start with Guards! Guards!
The Witches novels start with Equal Rites.

If you read those two and still don’t like Pratchett then he’s probably not for you.

bullet K.R.R. Lockhaven (you should read his books, by the way) admitted:

I…um…have to admit that I haven’t actually read ALL of them. Most, though. I’m partial to the City Watch books, starting with Guards! Guards! Maybe Small Gods would be good, too. It’s a standalone.

bullet Lockhaven also pointed me to Fiction Fans podcast’s “Bonus Episode: Which Discworld Book Should You Read First?” It was an interesting chat–the episode notes include:

They… don’t really give a straight answer. But they DO know which book you should NOT read first. You’re welcome.

Possible First Reads:
Wyrd Sisters (if you like witches)
Reaper Man (if you like Death)
Small Gods (if you want a good standalone with religious satire)
Hogfather (if you like Christmas)
Monstrous Regiment (if you want a good standalone with scathing social commentary)
Going Postal (if you like con artists)

bullet wyrdsis (an account name that suggests they might know a thing or two about the series), chimed in with:

…I got really into it with the Witches (starting with Equal Rites), and Ankh Morpork City Watch (starting with Guards! Guards!), then Hogfather, Thief of Time, The Truth, the von Lipwig series….etc

bullet David Frew sent me to

A DISCWORLD PRIMER*

*or, why should I read this thing that everyone keeps going on about?

by Micah @rincewind.run (another account name that suggests they might know a thing or two about the series).
bullet Gary Hayenga chipped in:

The first two novels are very different than the subsequent novels. As the previous commenter mentioned there are several sub-series set on the Discworld. Based on the other things you’ve posted about liking here I would recommend that you start with The Watch series, starting with Guards! Guards!. The second book in that series is even better.

REPOSTING JUST CUZ:What Are Christians For? Life Together at the End of the World by Jake Meador: A View for Living in Culture and Nature

By HCNewton

On September 17, 2023

In Non-Fiction, Theology/Christian Living

What Are Christians For?:
Life Together at the End of the World

by Jake Meador

DETAILS:
Publisher: IVP
Publication Date: February 21, 2022
Format: Hardcover
Length: 170 pg.
Read Date: March 27- April 3, 2022

God looks at this world and loves it, which is why we can and should do the same. This world is not something we should seek to escape through conquest or bend to our will through technique, power, or control. Rather, it is a gift given to us by God for our joy and his glory. Because God is love and his law is good, we can look at our neighbor and love him or her. Because God gave himself to us, we can give ourselves to others. We can confidently and joyfully enter into these debts of love that we build up over a lifetime of living in the world, and we can dispense them with extravagance, trusting that whatever wrongs we might experience today as a result of such living will be gathered up and made right in the glorious and perfect love of God.

The Back of the Book

What does a Christian political witness look like in our day?

Politics ought to be defined by fidelity to the common good of all the members of society. But our modern Western politics are defined by a determination to bend the natural world and human life to its own political and economic ends. This wholesale rejection of the natural order is behind the dominant revolutions in our history, and defines our experience in Western society today—our racialized hierarchy, modern industry, and the sexual revolution.

In What Are Christians For?, Jake Meador lays out a proposal for a Christian politics rooted in the givenness and goodness of the created world. He is uninterested in the cultural wars that have so often characterized American Christianity. Instead, he casts a vision for an ordered society that rejects the late modern revolution at every turn and is rooted in the natural law tradition and the great Protestant confessions. Here is a political approach that is antiracist, anticapitalist, and profoundly pro-life. A truly Christian political witness, Meador argues, must attend closely to the natural world and renounce the metallic fantasies that have poisoned common life in America life for too long.

Faithful Presence

In his discussion of the Christian response to those revolutions, Meador borrows a scheme from James Davison Hunter describing the four postures Christians have taken: defensive against, relevance to, purity from, and faithful presence.

He doesn’t spend a lot of space—but sufficient space—defining and then critiquing the first three, but gives more space to faithful presence. And actually, everything he argues for in the remainder of the book could fit in this category. I want to say I’d heard of Hunter’s categories before this, but I can’t remember where (in print or lecture). But first off, I really appreciated the schema in terms of describing how the American Church has responded. But even more, I appreciated Meador’s explanation of faithful presence and then his application of it.

Influences

Meador builds the arguments in this book on the work of Herman Bavinck—particularly his book, Christian Worldview. But he’s drawing on several other thinkers and writers from across the theological spectrum (a methodology borrowed from Bavinck). You can see the fingerprints of Lewis, Tolkien, Wendell Berry, John Paul II, Solzhenitsyn, Martin Bucer—and others. There’s a breadth of influences here that’s impressive and adds a lot to the arguments (and makes narrow-minded guys like me a little uncomfortable).

So, what did I think about What Are Christians For??

What did [Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn] propose as a way through the revolution? We must turn, our eyes upward to the heavens, he said, not as a place to conquer, as his compatriots in the space program believed, but as a reminder that our lives exist as a vapor in the wind, and then comes the judgment.

We do not conquer the heavens; we are judged by them. And if we fail to discover the sources of spiritual health, there is nothing else for us. Our spiritual lives will continue to be trampled on by the weight of our age. And if our spiritual lives are destroyed, no amount of wealth or power can atone for such a loss.

This seems like one of those books that I need to read a handful of times and then read some scholarly reviews—pro and con—before I can really say I have a handle on the strengths and weaknesses of the arguments. Thankfully, this isn’t that kind of blog.

How did it read? Very nicely. Meador’s writing is strong, it’s clear, and he’s able to express complex thoughts in a very digestible manner. Sure, I think I need to read it a few more times before I could say I mastered the thoughts—but that’s on me, not the text, this is just not the kind of thing I spend a lot of time thinking about. I appreciated Meador being critical of both the American Left and the American Right (you rarely see that in Christian literature), while putting forth a vision built on the best of the Christian traditions.

I don’t think Meador offers a perfect solution to the situation we find ourselves in, but there’s a lot of insight and wisdom to be found in these pages. And even if it’s not perfect, it’s a whole lot better than anything else I’ve found.

4 1/2 Stars

This post contains an affiliate link. If you purchase from it, I will get a small commission at no additional cost to you. As always, opinions are my own.

I’m Curious: I’d Like to Give Terry Pratchett Another Try and Could Use Some Guidance

By HCNewton

On September 11, 2023

In Humor, Miscellany

Ten years ago (and yes, it feels strange saying that), I posted this (there’s a question coming at the end, but bear with me so this isn’t a 3 sentence post).
Received this e-mail today from someone submitting a comment to the “Suggest a Book” form:

Do have reviews on ANY Terry Pratchett book. Would love to “hear” your thoughts…

Thanks for the question! Not just because I like getting suggestions/e-mails, but also because I had nothing else to post today, having opted for sleep and time with my family over finishing a book.*

Pratchett’s a legend — almost universally praised and adored. I read the first two Discworld novels back in 2011, and didn’t care for ’em. Which I assume is an indictment of me, my taste, and very likely my morality, patriotism and love for my wife. So, readers, is it just these first couple of books? Should I start with a different Pratchett book? I’d like to bask in his particular brand of genius, just need a hand.

Anyway, I wasn’t going to bother dusting these off as they’re so short, but since you asked, here are my 2-star reviews for the first two Discworld novels.

The Colour of Magic

by Terry Pratchett
Hardcover, 183 pg.
St. Martin’s Press, 1983

It was amusing enough–chuckle-inducing in more than one place–but I never connected with it, not the story, not the characters, not the world. Left me pretty durn blah.

Probably just me, eh?

The Light Fantastic

by Terry Pratchett
Hardcover, 189 pg
Colin Smythe, 1987

I liked this one better than The Colour of Magic — it was better constructed, the characters were a touch more believable as characters, and I certainly laughed more. But, I had the same issues with this as I had with the previous.

I just didn’t care about anything or anyone, and saw no reason why I should.

Funny, clever stuff, and I couldn’t wait to be done with it.

—–

* Not that I didn’t try for all three

Here’s My Question

I’ve been thinking lately that I really should try Terry Pratchett again. Given the above…where should I start? Give The Colour of Magic another try? Start with something else? As I understand it, Discworld novels need not be read sequentially, do I have that right? So where would be a good place to jump in? Or what would be a good stand-alone-ish novel to try?

I know I have Pratchett lovers out there, and I’d love to hear your thoughts.

What Did the Cross Achieve? by J.I. Packer: A Beginning of an Answer to a Vital Question

By HCNewton

On September 10, 2023

In Non-Fiction, Theology/Christian Living

What Did the Cross Achieve?

by J.I. Packer, Mark Dever (Foreword)

DETAILS:
Series: Crossway Short Classics Series
Publisher: Crossway
Publication Date: August 29, 2023
Format: Paperback
Length: 109 pg.
Read Date: August 27, 2023

Some Thoughts on the Series as a Whole

The point of this series is to take classic short works—sermons, tracts, articles—package them attractively, edit a bit (modernize language, eliminate footnotes, tweak grammar, etc.), and make them widely available. Each is given a short introduction to help the reader get the context and a bit of information about the author.

They published seven books in this series last year, and I discussed them here. Three have come out this year (so far), but I’m hoping for more in this series soon.

What’s What Did the Cross Achieve About?

This essay was originally a lecture Packer delivered but it lives on far after that time. It’s essentially a defense of the Penal Substitutionary Theory of the Atonement—and a critique of some alternate theories. Which is not to say that Packer doesn’t have some words of correction for other proponents of substitutionary atonement, nor is he without appreciation for alternate theories.

Packer holds that when people like Socinius attacked the Reformation’s preaching and teaching on the atonement, the Reformed (in particular) responded to his rationalistic arguments on the same grounds—and spent centuries refining things along those lines, losing the declaratory, doxological, and kerygmatic power of the doctrine. For this “preliminary survey,” he states:

My plan is this: first, to clear up some questions of method, so that there will be no doubt as to what I am doing; second, to explore what it means to call Christ’s death substitutionary; third, to see what further meaning is added when Christ’s substitutionary suffering is called penal; fourth, to note in closing that the analysis offered is not out of harmony with learned exegetical opinion. These are, I believe, needful preliminaries to any serious theological estimate of this view.

So, what did I think about What Did the Cross Achieve?

Can we then justify ourselves in holding a view of the atonement into which penal substitution does not enter? Ought we not to reconsider whether penal substicution is not, after all, the heart of the matter? These* are among the questions that our preliminary survey in this lecture has raised. It is to be hoped that they will receive the attention they deserve.

* And other questions that I snipped due to lack of context.

This was a good reminder to me of just how good J.I. Packer was—it’s been a long time since I’ve read a much by him, and it’s easy to remember really liking his writing and learning a lot from him, but to forget most of the details. And then you read him and are reminded why I spent so much of the 90s immersed in his work.

His approach to the idea was great and easy to follow. This wasn’t for a popular audience, but the language isn’t that difficult to follow. I appreciated and benefited from his argumentation—and thought his analysis and argumentation were spot-on (and would still be pretty sufficient for what I’ve seen for people today who struggle with penal substitution).

Essentially, this was a great way to spend an hour or so, one of the best of this series, and one I’ll return to again and again. I’d suggest you do the same.

4 1/2 Stars