Charles Dickens post #2

Okay, I just had the oppertunity to sit down and read the rest of Christmas Carol today, so I will probably review the whole thing really soon. Christmas is tomorrow, so I have been banned from certain rooms of the house until everything is wrapped. Well, everything has certainly been busy considering Christmas is coming and us Western Washington State people have been freaking over all the snow that we’ve been having. It’s kind of rediculas considering all the snow other places get, but still it is a lot of snow for us, about 10-11 inches, some places in Western Washington 18 inches.

However, I may post some more later on today, but for now I’ll just review chapter two of my families favorite Christmas story. Since practically everyone knows this story already, I’ll just review it for the rest of this book.

The description of the first ghost, the ghost of Christmas past not Marley’s ghost, always struck me as very interesting in how the ghost was always changing in it’s appearance. The glimmering belt seems to represent the past as reflected in the eye’s of people’s memories as time goes on, I have heard it said that as our sweet memories get sweeter as time goes on and bad memories get worse as time goes on. Even though there is truth to the saying, I am convinced that bad memories only get worse if forgiveness has not taken place whether it be forgiveness of someone else, or self forgiveness. Anyway, I believe the whole theme of chapter two is centered on Scrooge’s lack of forgiveness for himself and other people. As the spirit continues to take him to one memory after another, he cannot handle the truth about himself, so he snuffs out the light in the same way many people would try to suppress painful memories rather than face them. Even after Scrooge rids himself of the first ghost, his heart still seems troubled by what he knows to be true of himself and his past.

MerryGrace Book Review

Hi everyone, I’m sorry for the delay on my first review, but in furture I hope to review every two to four days to give everyone a chance to read and comment on my posts. So Merry Christmas everyone! And I hope you will all enjoy my posts in the future

Charles Dickens Review of the First Chapter

Well, sorry everyone I have not been able to get on and post in a while.We just got a heavy snow fall and my mom and I have been baking Christmas goodies.

Well, anyway, since I do not normally make reviews on books, I will have to learn as I go along. So please bare with me and make any suggestions you like on techniques for reviews, I’d appreciate that.

For a start on my first book review I am going to review Charles Dickens most popular book, “A Christmas Carol.” This book is only five chapters as well as a Christmas favorite, so it should be easy for a first go.

The setting of the first chapter is a cold winter day, Christmas eve, in London. We are told about the gloomy character of Mr. Scrooge, he is described as a very dis-likable fellow who seems to be shrouded in gloom and shadows. Scrooge’s work partner’s death, which dominates a lengthy description in the beginning of the book, has been dead for quite some time, but that fact does not bother Scrooge in any way and that fact is reflected in his ownership of everything that once belonged to his late partner.

Scrooge seems to live for pinching money and being cruel to everyone around him. The only person not intimidated by Scrooge is his nephew Fred, who invites his Uncle to have Christmas dinner with him and his wife, which of course is yearly refused.

Scrooge also refuses to give any charity whatsoever to anybody including those anywhere near him, such as his clerk, Bob Cratchit. Bob is a family man with a loving wife and several children.

The story starts at Scrooges office where the fire is a mere lump of coal and the frost nips at a persons nose. Scrooge’s nephew comes with the yearly invitation to eat Christmas dinner with him, but gets his yearly refusal as well as several negative remarks about his wife. Next we observe two gentleman come to the office asking for donations for charity, being refused they leave with a Bah Humbug! following their footsteps.

Late that night, Scrooge finally let his Clerk go home and reluctantly agrees to let him stay home from work on Christmas day. As Scrooge goes home, he sees his partners face appear on his door knocker! A very scary thing considering Marley’s death never bothered him before. However, the shock was enough to make him lock all his doors and windows. As Scrooge eats a cold supper, however, all of the bells in his house ring and then stop, then the inevitable clank of a ghost’s chains sound on the stairs followed by the ghost of Marley himself!

Marley’s ghost warns Scrooge about the terrible consequences his life style will have on him after he dies and farther tells him three ghosts will visit him at one o-clock three nights in succession and from them he will find out how to change his life style. Scrooge is very shaken at this point and says he would rather not have anymore ghosts haunting him. Marley lets out a screech, which freaks out Scrooge even more, then takes him to the window to show him other ghosts whose lives were wasted by greed.

Scrooge then retires to bed with his clothes on and hopes it was all a dream. End Chapter 1

Anyway, my personal opinion on the first chapter of this masterpiece, is the word Toll! (German for cool) With the chilly setting and dark and gloomy street of London, Dickens portrays the character of Scrooge very well by these surroundings. I always loved it when Scrooges Cheery nephew Fred came into his office and fearlessly invited the ogre to a Christmas party! Scrooge repeatedly says the words ” Bah, Humbug!” Which is a phrase made popular and known by everyone because of this book.  Later Scrooge try’s to say it when Marley’s ghost starts to him creep him out, but he cannot get the words out because he is to scared.

However, with a merry tumble into bed, Scrooge tries to forget everything and go to sleep, but only succeeds in peeking out of the covers later for the start of our next chapter.

Reviewing Novels written by Charles Dickens

Hi everyone, I’m MerryGrace, Jahothanan’s sister. I promised Jahothanan I would post on his blog one day and I decided that today would be that day.

I wondered what I would write about on this blog and I decided on reviewing books. Being a Dickens fan I am going to read and review all of his novels, (except for the ones that are not in our library system) and review them chapter by chapter and give you some opinions I have about them. If anyone would like to look up historical facts about Charles Dickens, feel free to comment about them. I know that a lot of people do not like reading Charles Dickens because he gets wordy, however, since I read Jane Eyre in four days, a 400 page book, I will hopefully be able to get through them all without boring everyone. Some of Dickens books are almost a thousand pages long, so it will take me a lot longer to read them than it took me to read Jane Eyre.  I may review a couple chapters at a time rather than make myself ridiculous in reviewing one chapter at a time. I love Dickens stories and  hope that my reviews will encourage others to read his books as well.

If there is a book anyone would like me to start with, let me know.

Book Review: “Do Hard Things”

Oh boy, I wish I did not promise to review this book. In fact, I am tempted to not even write about it, not because it is necessarily that bad, but because I dislike criticizing people who are on my side, or at least should be on my side. Unfortunately, there are a lot of things I could take issue with in this book, but I will refrain from most of it and focus on the main points. Also, to keep from being too critical as I go through each section in the book, I will try to mix in positive elements of the book with my criticisms. At the end, I will write a section on what I would have liked to see covered in a book like this. Just so that you know why I chose this book to review, I decided on it mostly because I hear it mentioned a lot among teens, especially Christian home schooled teens, and their parents. As I am a teen (for only a short time longer) and very close to the Harris twins’ age, I thought that it might be interesting to know exactly what youth my age and younger are reading and being influenced by.

So, without further ado, here is my review of “Do Hard Things.”

Main Review

The theme: First, I would like to say that the book has a good overall theme with some interesting sub themes. The main theme of “rebelling against low expectations” is certainly good for teens to hear and certainly something Christians especially need to be willing to do, however, I do not think it is necessary to always do them in some of the ways the book prescribes. Certainly, we are not called as Christians to live an easy life, as a matter of fact, we are called to stand up for the truth, proclaim the gospel, and live lives of righteousness and holiness (salt and light so to speak). This is not easy and requires a lot of effort on our part. The book addresses this and that is good. I am pleased that they do, but it is important to make a distinction between that and Pharisaicalism. In many ways, this book crosses the line and demands certain action in a way that is very Pharisaical. For instance, their five “hard things.” Let me list them and explain them.

Content: The book is broken up into three parts, “Rethinking the Teen Years” (p. 3-62), “Five Kinds of Hard” (p. 63-166), and “Join the Rebelution” (p. 167-224). As stated above, let me start by listing the “five kinds of hard” and explaining them.

“Five Kinds of Hard”

• How to do hard things that take you out of your comfort zone. The book explains this as “anything that takes you outside the rut of your normal day-to-day, week-to-week activities” (p. 57). Okay… well sometimes the best thing is to stick to one’s day-to-day, week-to-week activities. I think that one of the problems with this is not necessarily stretching oneself, which the book rightly says helps us grow, but thinking that one has to continually do this with everything, which the book incorrectly assumes. Let me give an example, they tell us a “comfort zone is a miserable place” (p. 70), then they continue with saying that if we do not leave our comfort zones, “by our actions, we’re also saying that God isn’t good and powerful enough to help us do what we can’t comfortably do on our own” (p. 71). They also say, (in another person’s words) “that shyness is a form of selfishness” (p. 72). Perhaps they are right and perhaps they are not. It depends on the situation. Again, the problem is the universality of many of their claims. I can think of a lot of people (even shy people) who work for Christ inside their comfort zones or their day-to-day activities in a righteous Godly manner. I will let them off the hook on this one and just say that yes, most of us do need to stretch our comfort zones at some point before we can fully live our calling for Christ. One last thing in this section though, they say that “You can’t get to success unless you risk failure” (p. 78). You want a bet? I do not find in the Bible where it explicitly tells us to continually risk things to achieve success. Sometimes God tells us to rely on him and to risk all, but not in every case and there is something else called prudence. If one is smart, you will find a way to risk minimal failure. It is just smart living. If I am correct, I seem to remember a whole book in the Bible on smart living (Proverbs). Maybe I am overbearing on this, but reading one story after another with the comments made in the book makes one think that they are demanding certain actions and do not account for the exceptions, which are plentiful.

• How to do hard things that go beyond what’s expected or required. Again, there are certain elements in this that are true and good, like doing well and seeking excellence. They talk about doing better in school, work, home life, etc, etc. Fine, but the problem comes in when they, for instance, with a story of a girl in college who can get good grades and keep her job, say that there is a cost of complacency (p. 87). What? This is not good enough? Hold on. They say that being labeled above average “reduces the chances that you’ll ever live up to your actual potential.” They continue, “Before long you’ll become blinded by complacency, which is defined as a smug feeling of satisfaction with who you are and what you’ve done… we’re learning that smug satisfaction leads to genuine disappointment before long” (p.90). Whoa, wait a minute. This should be the case only if you are leading an obviously contrary life to Christ, but all the time? My pastor once spoke on the subject of contentedness. He said that in many instances, to not be content is the same as sin. We are called to be content with who we are in Christ and with what he has given us. It is to slight what Christ has done for us to think that we are never “good enough” so to speak. We rely on who Christ is as Christians, not on who we are in and of ourselves. Okay, but maybe they will explain. They continue by saying that to fight complacency we should “1. Do what’s hard for you, 2. Be known for what you do (more than for what you don’t), and 3. Pursue excellence, not excuses” (p. 92-93). Alright, some of that is good and right, but these things are not always what we should focus on. Again, you should not continue to find discontent with what you do and are, unless you are finding that you are not following Christ and need to change. With some things, it is good to stretch ourselves, but like I said before, there are a myriad of exceptions that are just plainly overlooked in this book. Okay, I am almost done with this section, but I have to mention this one last thing just because it bothered me so much considering the twins’ brother’s work (Josh Harris). They tell a story of a girl who is known as a “good girl” because she does not participate in many of the sinful things other teens her age are doing. She maintains that she will not watch R-rated films, she wears a promise ring, and cares more about what adults in her life think of her than what her peers think. But, the impression in the book is that this is not good enough because she is known for what she “doesn’t do” rather than what she does do (p. 96-97). I am sorry, but this makes me so upset, I am not going to talk too much about it. If you cannot see the problem with what they are saying in this then there is no way I could explain it to you. Get a clue, some things are “good enough.” These things are not the problem and do not criticize them as though they were.

• How to do hard things that are too big for you to do alone. This section is alright. They tell probably my favorite story in the book about a girl whose big dream is to pursue modesty in fashion for Christian teen girls. They explain how they helped her accomplish some of this by getting a team together to set up an online survey for Christian guys (as to what they liked in girl fashion) and then organize the results into a format for Christian teen girls on Valentine’s Day. Basically, they talk about how greater success can come when many people work together and some things, which are impossible for one person to do, can get done.

• How to do hard things that don’t pay off immediately. This chapter is also not necessarily so bad, but there is an underlying message in it that is problematic. I had hopes for this chapter since the subject was the minor things in life that do not seem to matter, but unfortunately, they never delved into the eternal purpose of such things as they could have. They talked about being prepared for the future so that we can do great things, but never realized (or at least never stated) that for some people, God has called them (and they can be content with it) to a life of simple things. It is assumed that everyone will do something “great” and “big.” I am reminded of a talk by a black pastor named Voddie Baucham (very good if you ever get a chance to hear him speak) on putting one’s house in order. He mentioned that his daughter would not go to college because it was not her role to be out in the world in that way and do these so called “big hard things.” He said that her dream in life was to be a stay at home mom and raise 8, 9, 10, 12 children. This is where she wants her life to be and to stay. I think that is great and in so many ways she could be fulfilling God’s calling on her life. This chapter completely ignores that sort of thing or perhaps thinks that this sort of life is not all someone can be called to. I do not know, but either way, it is absent from the book, which to me is greatly disappointing because it is so important.

• How to do hard things that go against the crowd. This last chapter on the five “hard things” basically explains that we are called to take a stand for what is right. Great! They also inform us that there are some things worth standing for and others not worth standing for. They provide some good principles to help us, “1. Start with the Bible. 2. Examine yourself. 3. Listen to your conscience. 4. Seek Godly council. 5. Be humble, loving, and bold. 6.Be part of the solution” (p. 157). Obviously they go into more detail, but you can get an idea from this list. The one part I do want to take up though is concerning the fifth point on that list. Humility, love, and boldness are all good things that we should practice as Christians, but, and this is something I often have trouble with when many people use the term, they do not define love. They say, “our standing should always be done with loving humility” (p. 160). Um… that’s nice, but it is not as cut and dry as they seem to think. What do they mean by love? Many people have their own definition of love and even the Bible uses the word love in many different ways. What way do they mean by it? Look what else they say, and this is where I have my problem. They say “We must hate the sin, not the sinner” (p. 160). Okay, maybe they do not realize this, but that is not in the Bible and is never taught in the Bible. As a matter of fact, Gandhi was the man who coined the phrase “love the sinner, hate the sin.” The man who looked for an excuse for his own sinful state. No, in the Bible we read Christian prayers like “And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?” (Rev 6:9-10) and “Pour out thy wrath upon the heathen that have not known thee, and upon the kingdoms that have not called upon thy name. For they have devoured Jacob, and laid waste his dwelling place.” (Psalms 79:6-7). Tell me, are these prayers loving toward unbelievers and persecutors of the church? I do not think so. The Bible is full of like passages. I understand that we are called to love our enemy, but please take this in context with Scripture. There is a time and place for graciousness and love and there is a time and place for the opposite, even though predominately we find that the former normally takes precedent. I am not advocating we all go around hating people, but this love thing is taken way out of context and often time used to abuse rather than to edify. Otherwise, this chapter was okay and pretty good.

Things that should have been (in my opinion)

More appropriate, complete, and doctrinal use of Scripture: First, and as a King James person, I have to say this, the Harris’ use the NIV, which seems contradictory to their theme of setting higher standards. Should they not be calling teens to a higher reading of Scripture too since they are calling us to higher everything else? Anyway, back on track, some Scripture passages used to prove a point or present an idea are used out of context and even false claims are made from them. To try to keep this review from growing too large, I will only give one example (probably the most prominent), but bear in mind that many passages are used in the same strange manner as to kind of warp it for the particular point being made (likewise, not all the passages used are this way, but some are and it is worth noting):

• 1 Corinthians 13:11 (p.42)-”When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I was a man, I gave up childish ways.” (NIV) “When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.” (KJV) The point made by this passage in the book is that teens, adolescence, or a “period of time between childhood and adulthood” (p. 42) is not mentioned in the Bible. To quote the book, “God does not hold two standards: one for young adults and one for adults” (p. 42). That is nice, but they are wrong. There is a different standard for young adults opposed to older more experienced adults.

Proverbs 20:29 says “The glory of young men is their strength: and the beauty of old men is the gray head” (KJV).

Isaiah 40:29-31 says “He giveth power to the faint; and to them that have no might he increaseth strength. Even the youths shall faint and be weary, and the young men shall utterly fall: But they that wait upon the LORD shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; and they shall walk, and not faint” (KJV).

Titus 2:1-7 says “But speak thou the things which become sound doctrine: That the aged men be sober, grave, temperate, sound in faith, in charity, in patience. The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed. Young men likewise exhort to be sober minded. In all things shewing thyself a pattern of good works: in doctrine shewing uncorruptness, gravity, sincerity” (KJV).

1 John 2:13-14 says “I write unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I write unto you, young men, because ye have overcome the wicked one. I write unto you, little children, because ye have known the Father. I have written unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I have written unto you, young men, because ye are strong, and the word of God abideth in you, and ye have overcome the wicked one” (KJV).

Emphasis was added. Now, to be fair, I do not think that the mistake was purposeful in the book, but it is important to note. It is true that there is no “adolescence” so to speak, but there is a very important distinction between young and old adults. It is too bad,  but I think there is a lot of material in these passages for the Harris’ to use in their book that they overlooked. The problem comes in that the Harris’ do not really give a good distinction between the proper role of the teen years opposed to that of adults.

More emphasis on mentorship and submission to adults: The Bible says “Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right. Honour thy father and mother; (which is the first commandment with promise;) That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth.” (Eph 6:1-3). The Harris’ do not discount this in their book, but in many ways they do not address the fact that teens are still “children” in this case and under the authority of their parents. They cannot go doing whatever “big hard thing” they please, even if it is a worthy cause. For teens there is an opportunity to strive for greater things, especially learning, and learning from experienced adults, not just other youth necessarily. For me, and I will mention this again in my conclusion, my learning comes from pastors, great theologians, and great thinkers (whatever field they may be in) both past and present. Their expertise is what I admire (important to differentiate from their credentials which is not the same). These people are adults in the truest sense. These are the people youth today should be looking to learn most from, but unfortunately, much of the church discounts the people of the past and even other great men of today. Because of this, youth are not encouraged to learn from them. For me, I was highly disappointed that the Harris’ had such an opportunity to encourage youth in this way, but they did not.

Conclusion

Some parting thoughts: In conclusion, I do not mean to nit pick in my criticisms of this book. There were so many opportunities that were missed and many things said that show a lack of experience on the part of the Harris twins. The book was not that bad, and in many ways just fine. I hope that Alex and Brett will grow through their experience in writing this book and that someday, they will be able to write something more significant and of great substance and edification to us. It is obvious that the book was written as something to hawk at the conferences the twins hold and something to put on their resume. The substance of the book is not great or complex and the book could easily be classified as Christian Kitsch. Their real work is what they did through the website forums and their conferences, networking teens and providing lots of encouragement. That is the greater work.

One last disappointment: I have difficulty that they are said by many (including by their own jacket cover) to be “leading the charge” for teens today. As they openly admit, this change among youth started long before they came around and for myself, I am a little offended that they want to take credit and piggyback off of my labor and others’ labor for Christ to propel themselves into more fame. I do not think that they realize this or intended this (as a matter of fact they would probably be horrified themselves to think that they are doing this) when they wrote their book, but the fact of the matter is that they did this through their book, perhaps and probably unwittingly. I am not a “rebelutionary” even though I have higher standards for myself than the culture sets and many Christians set. I do not have a problem with doing great things for Christ (called in the book “hard things” or “big/little hard things”). As a matter of fact, anyone who knows me well knows that I have done a lot of such things, but I am no “rebelutionary” and I will not call these things I do by the catchphrases used in the book because by no means am I a product of their work, but only and solely the product of Christ’s work in my life. I do not mean to appear defensive in this way, but I do have this particular problem with this book’s presentation of the Harris’ work. Maybe others do not have a problem with this and if that is you, forgive my little rant on this subject, but I will stick by it and continue to give credit to Christ.

Conclusion: Going back to the main theme of the book, I would like to direct you to two people. Ravi Zacharias and his message “Lessons from Royalty” and Pastor Voddie Baucham (especially his messages “Children of Caesar” and “Putting your house in order”). Ravi Zacharias talked in his message “Lessons from Royalty” about king Solomon, how he had more wisdom and wealth than any king on earth, knowing clearly right from wrong, and yet, he fell into a life of debauchery. The question is posed, how is it that a man who could have everything, even more wisdom than anyone throughout history save Jesus Christ, could fall so far from God’s commandments and God’s pleasure? Let me say this, trying to do our best at what we do is not enough. Voddie Baucham once said of homeschoolers that they had on average 5.2 outside activities, more than making up for their “lack of socializing” in public school. He then followed up by saying to the affect of “if this is you, then you need to cut back.” Why would he say this? Why is trying to do our best not enough? Why is going far beyond, doing everything, and pushing ourselves to our limit not necessarily the best thing? Well, here is why, Ravi Zacharias continued in his message and said that Solomon of all the kings in Israel, including the evil kings, did not have a prophet like Nathan to shake his finger and say “Thou art the man” (2 Samuel 12). The problem with the message in this book is that the Harris’ left little room for the real working of the Holy Ghost in our lives. Often, and as young people it is easy to do so, we get caught up in all the “good” things we could do and accomplish with and for ourselves and others, forever stretching and reaching to something higher and better, but the question that is always lacking is, “Of what ultimate, eternal, significance does this have?” Even in things that are of importance to our normal life and success we are not called to necessarily stretch ourselves to our limit. We are called to always try to be like Christ. Let that be our goal and let us submit ourselves as young people to not only the study of holy Scripture (the most important thing), but also reading and studying great Christians of the past and present. Let our knowledge and wisdom gathered from these people now help us later in life when we can fully do some of these greater “hard things” that are mentioned in this book. If you have the ability to do some of these things now, then by all means go ahead, but do not feel discouraged when you feel that you do not have adequate knowledge or understanding to do them. Continue to grow in Christ and when the time is right (God’s timing) you will be allowed to do these things.

Next Book

The next book I hope to review will be the Harris twins’ book “Do Hard Things.” So far, I must admit, I haven’t been too impressed, but we will see. Keep checking back. I hope to have it up in the next few weeks, maybe days.

Book Review: “Refuting Evolution”

This spring quarter, I am taking a chemistry class and so as it is drawing to an end I thought I would read this particular book, knowing that the author, Dr. Jonathan Sarfati, is a highly accomplished chemist as well as a creationist. The book is, however, not really about chemistry, but about refuting the claims of a book produced by the National Academy of Sciences titled Teaching About Evolution and the Nature of Science.

Personal feelings about the book: Generally, I enjoyed it. It is easy to read and understand (possibly readable in a couple hours) and would be good for someone without a very great understanding of science (although such an understanding would help, I think). The book keeps things logical and attempts to explain whenever possible the science in everyday terminology; although, often the scientific jargon is necessary, but this is rarely a hindrance to the reader.

Scientific validity: Sarfati did an excellent job with his research, obtaining resources from both the evolution camp and the creation camp to validate his argument. He has footnotes on the majority of the pages referring to journals, articles, books, and so forth. He is fair enough to admit when the evolutionists are correct in their science, but shows constantly how it does not contradict the creation model. In many ways, this book is not conclusive about the science, but one must remember that he is only rebutting Teaching About Evolution and the Nature of Science and is not dealing with a single scientific topic. For instance, Sarfati writes briefly about radiometric dating (pages 107-110), but does not provide the complete scientific data that has been obtained on it. Rather, and to his credit, he directs the reader in an addendum to John Woodmorappe’s book The Mythology of Modern Dating Methods. Mainly, Sarfati is attempting to prove that “Facts do not speak for themselves, but must be interpreted according to a framework” (p.135). On this, he does an admirable job.

Content: Sarfati uses nine chapters covering the following topics to prove that conclusions on scientific data are reliant on interpretation (The topics are put in my own words, not Sarfati’s):

1. Bias as something both creationists and evolutionists have.
2. Natural selection.
3. The “missing links” in the fossil record.
4. The “missing links” and falsely claimed links from dinosaur-to-bird evolution.
5. The “missing links” and falsely claimed links from mammal-to-whale evolution.
6. The “missing links” and falsely claimed links from ape-to-man evolution.
7. Astronomy and the theory of relativity.
8. Dating methods.
9. The legitimacy of intelligent design.

As this book is refuting Teaching About Evolution and the Nature of Science, it refers to the work quite often and deviates from its content only on occasion (as on page 76). One aspect of this book that is refreshing is that it deals with particular claims one by one and not so much with vague generalities. Often in debates over creation vs. evolution, general claims are made in attempts to prove/disprove the other sides arguments while throwing the factual scientific data out the window. In this book, some of these generalities are addressed, but always in correlation with quoted claims about the data (and rarely are generalities given).

Throughout the section dealing with the “missing links,” Sarfati provides many pictures (both artistic renderings and photographs) of the “link” being addressed or the fossil being discussed. This is helpful, not only as a picture for the unscientifically minded people, but also to show what is being presented in school classrooms and in textbooks as fact. Ken Ham, in the forward of the book, points out that many of the text books and information that teachers and professors have is wrong or outdated (p.9-10). Sarfati mentions that Haeckel’s drawings of different embryos are still used in the classroom even though they have been proven false. Sarfati shows that most science teachers and the public in general is highly misinformed about the scientific data.

A few theological matters: A few things concerning the beliefs of some Christians attempting to make evolution and the Bible compatible (theistic evolution) must be said. Sarfati states that “A God who ‘created’ by evolution is, for all practical purposes, indistinguishable from no God at all” (p.22). He explains that for evolution to happen within the first six days of the creation week (or as some would say, millions of years) it means that death, disease, and sin would have to be present in the world before the fall, contradicting the message and basic assumption of the entire Bible.

On a related note, Sarfati makes the claim that the first six days of the creation week were literal days (p.22). Some Christians (and some I highly respect) seem to think that there is no evidence for that and say that it could have been a period of time. I see no reason for such a belief as it does not contradict reality unless one were to hold to an evolutionary viewpoint. Again, some of these Christians also deny evolution, which causes me to wonder why a literal six day interpretation is rejected. This is something that I have not figured out.

Conclusion: In general, I recommend this book for everyone (and especially for self-identified unscientific people). It is particularly good for Christians and those who will be dealing with the subject of evolution in school classrooms. It may, however, not be very fulfilling to those who are looking for a more in depth consideration of certain issues, but I still recommend reading it at least once.

Teachers and professors who are willing to look critically at the facts and not write the book off just because it is creation based, should definitely read it. However, I do not think it is a particularly good evangelistic book to give someone unless they really seem open to the creation ideas and the gospel.

My favorite part (Spoiler warning):

“Many news agencies have reported (June 1998 ) on two fossils found in Northern China that are claimed to be feathered theropods (meat-eating dinosaurs). The fossils, Protarchaeopteryx robusta and Caudipteryx zoui, are claimed to be ‘the immediate ancestors of the first birds.’

“The two latest discoveries are ‘dated’ at 120 to 136 million years while Archaeopteryx, a true bird, is ‘dated’ at 140 to 150 million years, making these ‘bird ancestors’ far younger than their descendants!” (p.61).

Book Information: Sarfati, Jonathan Ph.D. Refuting Evolution: A Response to the National Academy of Sciences’ “Teaching About Evolution and the Nature of Science.“ Master Books, Inc., (Arkansas: Green Forest, 1999).

Book Review: “Through Many Dangers: The Story of John Newton”

I just finished reading a biography of John Newton. One of the elders at my church encouraged me to read more Christian biographies and to make it part of my daily spiritual growth along with prayer and Scripture reading. So, I started with this one, which he recommended.

Personal feelings and thoughts: Overall, I enjoyed the book and the encouragement it brought me knowing that a great Christian like John Newton struggled so much with his faith and through his life, but was able to stand strong to the end. There are quite a few theological elements to Newton and doctrines he held that caused me to think, not saying that I necessarily agreed or disagreed, but that they were concepts that were good to ponder and consider in relation to my own beliefs and the living of my own spiritual life.

Flow and authenticity: The book was usually pretty good at making things factual and interesting to read. At a few points, I think that the author, Brian H. Edwards, may have embellished some of Newton’s experience, but that was rare and may only be my perception. Again, Edwards did a good job of making the story interesting and easy to read. It took me quite some time to get through it, but that is only because there were long periods of time that I didn’t even pick up the book. I think that someone could probably read it in two to three days if they were committed to getting through it. In the back, Edwards provides a lengthy and thorough bibliography.

Overview of Newton’s life (Spoiler warning: Most of the story is revealed in this part of the review): Newton was born in 1725. Newton’s mother died early in his life and he quickly claimed disbelief in spite of the fact that his mother had raised him to memorize Scripture, the catechism, and Isaac Watts’ Hymns and spiritual songs and Watts’ Divine Songs for Children. Newton’s father was captain of a merchant ship and rarely saw Newton. Newton himself ended up on a merchant ship and was then press ganged onto the H.M.S Harwich in the British navy. He suffered the hardships of a sailor including being flogged for desertion. Eventually, he ended up being traded with another sailor onto a slave trading ship because of Newton’s troublesome character. Newton was a blasphemous and riotous person, making songs mocking God and any form of authority and usually getting the other crew members and himself into trouble.

Although Newton had such a bad character early in his life, he fell in love with a woman named Mary Catlett whom he continuously tried to find a way to marry. She was not particularly religious either, but Newton still could not marry until he had a better settlement in life.

At one point, Newton found himself a slave in Africa and almost died because of the spite his master’s wife had for him. Eventually, he made it back onto a ship to England. Finally, he was converted when he was caught in a storm that almost killed him and the crew of the ship. Despite being converted, Newton became captain of a slave trading ship and married Mary Catlett. He was mentored by another captain in the faith and began to develop a rigorous set of devotions and services for himself and his ship’s crew. Eventually, Newton stopped being a sea captain and became a Tide Surveyor back in England.

During this time, there were a lot of revivals going on because of the preaching of people like George Whitefield. Newton decided to become a minister and had lunch with Whitefield and the two became good friends. Newton learned a lot about the Christian faith from Whitefield.

Newton did not become a minister immediately, but eventually did, taking on the role of parishioner of a small village called Olney. Newton was a good minister and lived the life that he preached, visiting the people in his congregation daily to encourage and counsel them in the faith. Newton also wrote about his conversion and began to gain national attention because of it. He ended up with people constantly writing him and visiting him from around the country so that he often had difficulty finding time to visit his congregation and prepare sermons. Newton also became friends with a poet named Cowper and the two of them wrote many hymns together and published them for Newton’s congregation to sing.

After serving years at Olney, Newton transfered his ministry to London at St Mary Woolnoth. Here, he continued doing what he had done at Olney, but he started to get some very sophisticated visitors, one being William Wilberforce, a member of Parliament. Newton advised Wilberforce, which lead to Wilberforce’s conversion at the age of twenty six. Newton also continually advised Wilberforce to continue on in politics and use his position to further to impact of the Gospel. This was mainly done in the form of abolishing the slave trade, which happened twenty six years after Newton died and six days before Wilberforce died in 1833.

Newton spent the rest of his days at Woolnoth where his wife died in 1790 and Newton died in 1807.

Some of Newton’s doctrines: Newton was a man who believed firmly in his professed set of doctrines and lived accordingly.

• Newton strongly believed in and preached the Calvinistic doctrines of the sovereignty of God and predestination (page 109), but would usually not debate them with those who wanted to challenge him, believing that if someone was converted, he/she would eventually have to come to a realization of their validity and embrace them as truth. Because of this, Newton always focused on the fundamentals of evangelicalism when talking to people who disagreed with him. This was evident in Newton’s witness to one, Rev. Thomas Scott, who continually wanted to debate, having already rejected his own sinfulness and need for a savior (many people of that time became ministers to be lazy, whether or not they really believed in the Gospel). (spoiler warning) In an encouraging part of the story, Scott sneaks into one of Newton’s services and is convicted by the passage Newton chose, believing that Newton had used the passage specifically for him. Later, when Scott is indeed converted and accepts the same doctrines as Newton, he found out that Newton knew nothing of Scott’s appearance at that service.
• Page 105 of the book describes Newton’s beliefs concerning prayer: “John was convinced that family prayers should govern the life of the household.” Newton also “condemned long prayers,” and “criticized prayers that give the promise of concluding and then starting up again, and prayers that were little more than a sermon to the others that were present.” He also opposed “talking to the Lord with the voice they use upon the most familiar and trivial occasions.”

A few questionable actions concerning Newton: Newton did a few things that in my opinion are questionable.

First, he said nothing to his friend Cowper the poet concerning the fact that Cowper was living with a woman he was not married to.

Second, Newton, although a Christian, continued in the slave trade until he became a minister. This however, can be understood since Newton was such a new Christian and knew little of what such a life entailed. But, this action was still wrong and needs to be condemned.

Lastly, and somewhat referring to the first objection as well, many times, Newton would not directly confront people about their wrong behavior. Again, his view that everything should be for people’s encouragement is admirable, but I think that he took it a little too far.

All of these considered, they are not particularly great objections. Newton was not and could not be a perfect man, but they are something to take into consideration.

The strength of Newton’s faith (spoiler warning: this comes from the end of the book): Newton was a strong man in his faith and he stood strong when his wife was dying a painful death. She even had doubts about her own salvation, but Newton’s loved reassured her. Newton himself died seventeen years after his wife and he said some things on his death bed very powerfully. He said first in a joking manner that he was “packed and sealed, and waiting for the post” (191). He also said in a more somber moment “More light, more love, more liberty! Hereafter I hope when I shut my eyes on the things of time I shall open them in a better world” (191). Lastly, he said “My memory is nearly gone; but I remember two things: that I am a great sinner, and that Christ is a great savior” (191).

Conclusion: Newton was a great man who influenced more people than anyone can count. He is known for his hymns and his incredible conversion story. I highly recommend this book. Again, it is an easy read and quite enjoyable. I know that it has encouraged me to remain strong in spite of my struggles against sin and depression and to remember that Christ is my assurance. I apologize for not giving a more thorough review, but I took long breaks in between reading it and much of the book is vague in my memory.

A final note about the movie “Amazing Grace”: This movie has some facts wrong that this book has cleared up for me. First, that Wilberforce was converted because of Newton’s witness to him five years after Wilberforce had been elected to Parliament. His friend William Pitt and many others criticized him for his faith. Secondly, that Wilberforce was in constant communication with Newton and Newton constantly gave him advise all of Newton’s remaining days. Thirdly, that Wilberforce was married in his thirties and fought for thirty six more years before the abolition of slavery. Lastly, that Newton died long before the abolition of slavery and that Wilberforce died six days after the abolition of slavery. The time lines were a little messed up and their portrayal of Newton was inaccurate to say the least.

Newton’s hymn “Amazing Grace”: These are the verses from the book. The verse that starts “When we’ve been there ten thousand years…” was not part of Newton’s original hymn.

Amazing grace! (How sweet the sound!)

That saved a wretch like me!

I once was lost, but now am found;

was blind, but now I see

.

T’was grace that taught my heart to fear,

And grace my fears relieved;

How precious did that grace appear,

The hour I first Believed!

.

Through many dangers, toils and snares,

I have already come;

‘Tis grace has brought me safe thus far,

And grace will lead me home.

.

The earth shall soon dissolve like snow,

The sun forbear to shine;

But God, who called me here below,

Will be for ever mine.

Book Review: “The Barbarian Way”

So, as per my agreement with a friend, I have read The Barbarian Way. Here is my review and some thoughts:

Personal feelings concerning the book: I can honestly say that it is the most mind-numbing book I have ever read. Every time I picked it up to read a little more, I hoped it would get better, but unfortunately for me, it only got worse. By the end, my mind felt like Jello. I could almost hear (as my older brother would say) my little gray cells scream as they died in mass quantities. If you liked the book, I am sure you really want me to explain, so I will.

Ambiguity: First off, before I can thoroughly review the book, it must be understood that McManus never clearly defined his terms resulting in a very confusing read. Every example he used for the “barbarian way,” as he called it, seemed to me to be just the opposite of barbaric. He used Paul as one example, saying that Paul was civilized when he was killing Christians, but barbaric when he converted and was traveling and peacefully preaching to the gentiles (page 45-47). He used another example of his son who went to a summer camp and got into a fight, claiming that his son was following civilized religion when he was fighting, but barbaric when he apologized (85-89). I really, don’t think that McManus understands the English language very well or something. Many other words were left undefined like religion, Christianity and so on. In many ways this makes the book all the more dangerous.

Certain dangers with this teaching: First off, there is a lot of physical and emotional dangers (not to mention spiritual dangers) with this guy’s teaching, exemplified by his own children, his own life, and the way he leads his congregation.

1. He makes the statement that he and his daughter have been journeying together on what he calls the “barbarian way.” He continues by mentioning that they “revel” in being barbarians and that whatever they are doing, there is always some sort of medical/rescue team around (66-68). As he explained how his daughter got hurt, I realized it was because he was foolish enough to let her do higher adventure things than she could handle. Yes, I do make that judgment on his daughter because of how he says she handled herself. So far, none of this inspires me to follow Christ. Heck, it doesn’t even teach me anything about Him.
2. Secondly, McManus never answers any of his son’s questions that were in the book. The first one being “What does God’s voice sound like?” (84-85). The second being a series of questions of doubt concerning his son’s faith that McManus doesn’t even bother hearing (89-91).
3. Thirdly, McManus uses an example of a man in his church that he insists must be baptized in the ocean even though the man is afraid of the water (due to a traumatizing experience when he was younger). The reason? To “unleash” the “barbaric faith within” (95-99). That is abuse!
4. Lastly, and the most disturbing to me, was his account of his experience at Biola University. He was on the board of Intercultural Studies when some of the people of the university approached him with their desire to help foreign missionaries by providing counseling for their mental health. He replied that they shouldn’t “make our missionaries mentally healthy” because then the missionaries would all come home. (Not to mention his ludicrous statement that missionaries travel to countries to evangelize without any knowledge of the language). The man at Biola, to his credit, very politely responded “Erwin clearly has a different view of professional counseling than we do” (80-81). What does McManus think? That only someone crazy would be a missionary? Yes, he even says so (81-82). Heaven forbid that a person with a healthy mind would want to be a missionary! That’s impossible.

Well, I think that these examples are pretty self-explanatory about the emotional, physical, and spiritual damage that this teaching can cause.

Theological dangers with this thinking: To start this analysis, I will give a lengthy quote from the beginning of the book about the early church “barbarians” that really gives the best overview of the book’s teaching.

“They are not about religion or position. They have little patience for institutions or bureaucracies. Their lack of respect for tradition or ritual makes them seem uncivilized to those who love religion. When asked if they are Christians, their answer might surprisingly be no, they are passionate followers of Jesus Christ. They see Christianity as a world religion, in many ways no different from any other religious system. Whether Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, or Christianity, they’re not about religion; they’re about advancing the revolution Jesus started two thousand years ago” (6).

Okay, so we are not supposed to be about religion or position? Well, then I should not be able to say what is right or wrong because that is taking a position. Also, unless religion is something other than what the dictionary says, I cannot have a belief concerning God (however that is possible) because that is religion. Both of these things McManus himself contradicts, so this statement is theological foolishness.

Next, we are not supposed to have patience with institutions or bureaucracies? Well, the early church (Paul to be specific) gave us forms for elders, counsels, pastors, and so forth, meaning that we have institutions. Paul also mentions in Romans 13 how we are supposed obey the governing authority. So McManus’ claim is obviously erroneous.

Lack of respect for tradition and ritual? Excuse me? What about communion, baptism, Christmas and Easter traditions and rituals? I think that McManus would be displeased if people decided to stop attending his church every week because of their lack of respect for that tradition. Sorry, this claim is also false.

We are not supposed to call ourselves Christians? Um… we are called Christians in the Bible. It is everywhere in the New Testament letters. Where does McManus get these ideas?

Seeing Christianity as any other world religion is exactly what the secular world wants and McManus just gave that to them. If this is not harmful to the church then I do not know what is.

Okay, what revolution did Jesus start? He came to bring us back to Him, to conform us to him that we might be more like him in holiness and righteousness because of our sins. “And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose. For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren” (Rom 8:28-29). He wants to conform us to himself. McManus says that “God’s desire for you is not compliance and conformity” (82). That seems to directly contradict Scripture to me.

Some more things that McManus says that are theologically wrong and dangerous:

• “A civilized faith relates to right and wrong as a moral obligation. A barbarian faith loves good and hates evil. There is no obligation fueling the actions of His people” (92). This particular view is exhibited many places in the book and is extremely dangerous because it can only mean that right and wrong is what ever the “barbarian” thinks is right and wrong without the obligation of following the Bible.
• When McManus was writing about “talking to God” (”Most of us would call this prayer” he says, indicating that he doesn’t call it that), he says, “God’s voice sounds a lot like my voice” (84). Oh my goodness! Is he really insinuating what I think he is insinuating? It sounds like he means that God’s voice within him is the same as his own thoughts. This gets way too close (and I am sure many will say I am generous) to saying that McManus gets to decide what is right and wrong and what God says.
• Lastly and somewhat ridiculously, McManus tells a story of him going to a session on leadership where he was going to speak with some other prominent speakers. The speaker before him made the statement “Don’t be an innovator; be an early adopter.” McManus continues “The speaker went on to explain that the innovator is the guy who eats the poisonous mushroom and dies. The early adopter is the guy right next to him, who doesn’t have to eat it. He can learn from the innovator’s misfortune” (50). Well… I don’t think that McManus has ever heard of the sixties expression to be a mushroom eater meaning to be a drug addict because he follows by describing himself as a mushroom eater. He says that “John the baptist was a mushroom eater, and it cost him his life.” McManus also adds quite blasphemously that “Jesus, too, was a mushroom eater, and He found Himself nailed to a tree” (53). Excuse me, Jesus, the all knowing God knew what was going to happen and didn’t need to try it as if he were randomly eating a mushroom. McManus, you are done. When you start using my God this way in your little pet metaphors about which you don’t even know, I am no longer listening to you.

An extra point about the author: Although McManus does not specifically identify himself with the emerging church, he holds exactly the same beliefs and I want to just point out what the emerging church is and says.

First, they put on equal level personal experience with Scripture (which McManus does as well). Secondly, they say that the historical church has gotten it wrong over the ages and that we have now gotten it figured out (which McManus says as well). Thirdly, they sacrifice clarity for mystery (which McManus does as well). They essentially pride themselves on their ambiguity. Fourthly, and worst of all, they are extremely critical of the instituted church and give the secular world a pass (which McManus does as well). Here is an excellent article from Answers in Genesis on this.

Conclusion: With all of these things in mind, I do not recommend anyone read this book. It is not worth the risk of confusing yourself about your own faith. McManus says many more things in his book that are just as or more ludicrous than what I have already shown. One could literally go through each page and give a long dissertation on why it is theologically wrong. If someone wants to read an inspirational book, I recommend reading a prominent biography of a prominent church father. Right now, I have been reading Through Many Dangers about John Newton. It is very inspirational and you will grow a lot more theologically, doctrinally, spiritually, and in your faith toward God than you will by reading The Barbarian Way.

New blog, new ideas

I’m starting this blog with the sole purpose of reviewing books from a reformed (or Calvinist) perspective. However, these reviews are not official in any way, but based solely off of the opinion of the writer. I personally try to keep them as objective as possible, but I admit to my own bias as a Calvinist and fallibleness as a human being. However, with God’s grace and through his sanctification, I hope to do some good by it.

All of that said, this blog is not for me alone, but for all of those out there interested in reforming our modern Christian culture and bringing it back to the old foundational doctrines and theology of both the early Christian church and the reformation (which I believe are very very close if not the same in their worldviews).

If you want, as a reformed Christian, to post a book review on this blog, please post a comment in the “Post a Review” tab with a brief discription of what makes you reformed. Be sure to fill in the e-mail section when commenting so that I can send you an e-mail, then you can send me your review and I will post it to the blog. If you have enough reviews posted and you are interested, I will make you an author on this blog so that you can contribute regularly with reviews.

Now, the point is not to review only reformed books, but all kinds of books whether secular, religious, political, or whatever. I encourage active participation and look forward to meeting and conversing with many of you. Thanks for visiting. I am going to post the book reviews of books on my other blog just to get things started.