shelfreflectionofficial's Reviews (844)

So. I'll be honest, I wasn't very invested in this story. I had to complete the duology but I wasn't loving it. It was a chore to read. I like that Dekker was trying to incorporate Scripture in an allegorical way, but it really felt New-Agey and applied a bit sketchily. And the theology is so embedded and central to the plot and the dialogue that you can't really just ignore it and read it for the story. It got exhausting and repetitive. If you take out all of Talya's teachings and explanations and descriptions of what the Seals were and how Rachelle felt about them the book would probably only be 10 pages long. Plus, it would seem this is the fiction companion to Rob Bell's Love Wins campaign which I find a little alarming. The Bible is pretty clear that hell is real and people will go there. I now question all of Dekker's theology and handling of Scripture. If he writes any more books along this topic I won't be reading them. Even if his theology was kosher, his writing was not accessible or easy to follow. A lot of times I had to reread paragraphs to understand what he was trying to get at, and other times I didn't even bother to try. I'm a bit surprised by his decision to write it in the way he did, because I think it will pretty quickly alienate a lot of his readers. All that to say, it pains me to say, because Dekker has always been my favorite author (one I've committed to owning all his books) but from now on I'll have to specify 'early-Dekker' books and find a new favorite author.

See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!

I'm always hesitant when non-fiction writers decide to write fiction, especially theologians ha! (Well, I guess Wilson had already written Otherworld but I had not heard of it until after reading this one.) I was overall impressed with the book. I read it alongside several others as part of a book club- half of them being high school boys. Considering their interest and takeaways from the book I would say it hit the nail on the head as a YA book.

It was thought-provoking and suspenseful. The descriptions and dialogue, well-written. Four boys return to their island from the mainland after a short camping trip to find the island deserted. Family and friends are gone. No electricity. Cars and batteries don't work. Where did the people go? What's going on? [A smidgeon reminiscent of the series 'Limetown.'] They run into another girl and her violent father which doesn't answer any of the questions and only adds more. Wilson does a good job of building the suspense as the characters explore the island, make discoveries, and try to figure out what happened.

The most surprising thing for me, as an adult reader, was that he decided to tackle the complex discussion of God's sovereignty and our free will. Without getting into details that could spoil the story, I'll just say that his method of introducing this topic and exploring a tangible way of grasping the relationship between these two things was really interesting and, I think, very helpful. While that sounds theologically intense for a YA novel, I wouldn't let it scare you off. It is very accessible and doesn't detract from the story being engaging.

The reason I subtracted a star from my review is this:

Spoiler

Why do they have to be dead?? I spent the first half of the book really trying to anticipate what could have caused things to stop working. If it was a sci-fy book, was this some sort of alien invasion? Could it be a government operation? Was this a supernatural encounter? Was this like the matrix and it was all in their heads- after the car accident they were taken by scientists or techies to experiment on? If it was a psychological thriller, maybe all the characters were manifestations of Jason, his different personalities, and it was some sort of schizophrenic thing going on? I mean there are a lot of ways this could go. But nope. They're just dead. It seems too easy. [Maybe I read too much??] And they're not in purgatory. They're not in heaven or hell. Yet their mysterious guide tells them there are things they need to learn or figure out.

It would seem there is something to be found or achieved. However, after finishing it was not clear what that is. It felt like a build-up, then the big reveal, and then... now what? What's the point? Where are they going? Did the characters solve a problem as you would expect in any novel? Sure, it ends on a cliffhanger which is fun, maybe a second book in the works, but it just felt like there was a little something missing from book one. Something solid to hold on to. He gave interesting things to think about but no real answer to the question- 'Why?' Unless he intended for it to be that way?

Spoiler

Also, at the end, they sail off into the distance. But we have no idea where they are going or to what end. Jack stays on the island with Archer, but the others continue on. They don't need their guide anymore? All they really know is that they're dead and there is an Author writing their stories. Are they trying to get undead, get to heaven, just checking things out...? Is Archer just going to catch up later? Will Archer die (again) like Tim? Does it matter? We don't know. We just have a lot of questions.

To his credit, it spurred a lot of good conversation. We were all trying to figure out what different things meant. Did the events or characters represent something theological or psychological or mythological? It's quite possible we were over-analyzing it, but he alluded to the connections to Greek mythology and C.S. Lewis. So how much was allegorical and how much was coincidental? Is Jared C. Wilson a purposeful or accidental genius?! Or am I just too dumb to see what he was doing? Haha! I don't know!

To reiterate then-- it was a great read under the YA genre. If you are an adult, you might have some questions about it but I think it will still be an engaging read for you and give you a few things to ponder. It does make for a good book club read though because you will want to speculate with someone!

See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!

Here we go. [I moved my conclusion to the top in case you don't feel like reading ALL of my observations]

In summation: it's a super relevant, important, and interesting premise that derailed pretty quickly and explosively into an unhelpful, sketchy, politically charged dissertation with no real solutions. You're probably better off finding a different book on empathy, but if you're interested in VR and the Democratic platform, you'll probably love this.

"Without tone of voice, facial expressions, or any real accountability for what we say, even those of us with the best intentions can have a hard time remembering the humanity of people on the other side of the keyboard."

This was the sentiment I was looking forward to reading about. After having read this book I find the book summary highly deceiving in what it actually talks about. I absolutely agree that technology has decreased empathy and our ability to communicate well with others. I was hoping this book would explore all the ways that happens, explain the psychology and sociology behind it, and offer practical solutions to help rectify this alarming knowledge.

However, the author spent at least half of the book detailing a variety of VR endeavors, some not even clearly connected to empathy. The other half was spent largely on AI and robots. It was interesting to think about how those could help build empathy, but frankly, the research isn't very convincing. It was obvious that she wasn't convinced either and was quick to offer disclaimers or pose questions challenging technology's ability to do what it intends to infallibly.

I found her writing polarizing, somewhat irresponsible, pushing an agenda, and lacking in credibility. I was skeptical of much of the research and statistics she presented and wouldn't be surprised if she misrepresented it to skew and support a particular point. She seemed to stray from her proposed thesis and got bogged down in tech exploration instead of helping us be better empathizers.

One big hang-up for me was how politically charged this book ended up being. The way she presented all of her examples was very pointed and came across like: people who disagree with her viewpoint need to work on their empathy so that they will eventually realize that they were wrong- in particular... Republicans/Trump supporters.

Understanding people's feelings is vital to compassion and treating people well. We absolutely need to try to understand other perspectives and recognize how other people are feeling. That is empathy. But Phillips (and I believe a lot of society as a whole) goes too far in placing feelings as the authority to truth and beliefs. We need to care about people's feelings but we can't form our basis of morality on feelings- for a number of reasons.

Empathy is still our interpretation and perception of what other people are feeling. Feelings are too complicated to know if you are truly understanding someone; feelings are deceptive and often lead us astray, we can't always trust them; feelings are highly individualistic. My feelings on any number of issues will almost always oppose someone else's feelings- how can you determine right and wrong based on feelings?

And yet, all of her writing seems to indicate that she equates feelings with morality. One example that stands out to me is her description of the Planned Parenthood VR that places you in the position of a woman entering the clinic to actual audio of protestors outside yelling obscene things. She experienced the VR and said that she wondered whether an experience like this would really change someone's mind if they were truly opposed to Planned Parenthood's activities. I have so many things to say about this, but will attempt to condense. First of all- the VR was really targeting the lack of empathy of the protestors- and I don't think any decent human being would support the things the protestors were yelling- it was rude and evil. Empathizing with women who go into Planned Parenthood would cause you to care about their feelings and want to support them emotionally or financially, to reconsider how you generalize women who go there, and realize how alone they probably feel, but why would it cause you to all of a sudden abandon the belief that abortion is the killing of innocent babies? What about empathy for the unborn life that is terminated? Would people who support Planned Parenthood change their beliefs if they experienced a VR depicting how a baby feels as it is killed?

So no, feelings cannot be a basis of morality. Empathy is not an authority for truth but rather a tool to better care for and relate to others.

In a book on empathy, the author was actually pretty bad at empathizing with people she doesn't really like. She presented it as her empathizing but it was obviously not genuine. Here is her being 'empathetic' to tech giants like Bezos and Zuckerberg having helped create something potentially detrimental to socialization: "it didn't release them from their responsibility, but it released me from expecting something different... if I had their demographics, background, experience, and privilege I might never even think about the impact AI could have on my resume or rap sheet." Apparently empathy is pigeonholing someone based on their demographics and background, passive-aggressively blaming them, and then saying 'Oh, they couldn't help it so I can't be mad at them. They're not as woke as me.'

There were almost no directives to help us be more aware of how we interact with people using technology or in the presence of technology; instead she focused on tech companies- either blaming them or describing how they are all trying to 'fix' the problem by tweaking existing products or creating new (mostly VR) experiences. But doesn't she see that the cure for empathy is in individuals ? I'm going to go out on a limb and speculate that she doesn't operate from a worldview that believes in people's sin nature and need for a Savior, but I would argue that pursuing what I would call biblical empathy is more effective because we have to look at others as image-bearers of our Creator who loves every single other person the same amount He loves me. It humbles you and puts you on the same plain as everyone else. It provides the 'why' for empathy in an already established framework of morality that frees you to focus on caring for people on a foundation of truth.

Another concern in the research she presents is the aspect of manipulation. While she does address the dangers of particular tech options, I don't think it was stressed enough. VR may create empathy for other people, but are the environments real, are the situations completely accurate? Or are the creators trying to evoke the feeling or belief they want you to have? How could you ever regulate that? She says, "Could it be fake if the emotion it evoked in you was real?" Uhhh….. YES! Evoking an intended emotion in someone does not make the means to that end genuine, truthful, or moral.

Also, and obviously, in VR you can't really grasp everything that person is feeling. There are way too many factors, experiences, and motivators that influence our feelings.

Welp.
Turns out I'm bad at condensing.

I'll stop now.

See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!

This is a book that will no doubt result in polarizing reviews. People reading this book are most likely coming to it with their belief already established, and thus, will either like this book or reject it. However, I believe, wherever you fall on the issue, this is a highly valuable read. It is widely undisputed that Wayne Grudem is highly regarded as a Bible scholar and highly qualified to teach on Bible doctrine, theology, and interpretation. If you disagree with him, he provides a detailed bibliography- go study it for yourself and evaluate its credibility.

In this book, Grudem sets out to unpack the arguments presented and published in support of evangelical feminism, what Grudem defines as “a movement that claims there are no unique leadership roles for men in marriage or in the church.” I can’t cover all of the material in a short review but here are my overall thoughts.

My stance on this issue was formed before I read this book, however, it was mostly based on how I was raised, both in family and in church. I had never had to defend my stance and because I have never felt called into ministry as a woman, I have also never had to feel challenged in accepting my belief of complementarianism.

I found it very helpful to learn how egalitarians approach certain Scripture passages. I can understand both sides of this issue now, and feel more informed on how to defend my belief and what questions to ask of those who disagree.

Grudem’s ultimate premise and conclusion of this book could be summarized by his quote: “I am not saying that all egalitarians are liberals, or are moving toward liberalism. But I am saying that the arguments used by egalitarians actually undermine the authority of Scripture again and again, and in so doing they are leading the church step by step toward liberalism.” I think this was an important quote to add to address others’ concerns that Grudem writes this book without grace or to demonize egalitarianism. Those claims are simply not true.

Even when presenting faulty arguments of well-known professors or scholars, Grudem points out when he knows those people are upholding other conservative theological stances. He does not make generalizations or unfair statements. He also calls on those who oppose egalitarianism to do so with gentleness and compassion. If the ‘grace’ you are looking for in this book means allowing people to do whatever they want because it feels right or sounds good or out of ‘love’ then, no, you won’t find that here. Because that’s not biblical grace. I commend Grudem for publicly standing against that which undermines Scripture. As believers, we are not showing love if we idly stand by while professing Christians are disobeying, twisting, or nullifying the very words of God. This is not a soft book, but it’s not a harsh or demonizing book either.

I would also like to challenge that Grudem is not promoting a ‘fear of liberalism.’ What he is fighting against and urging others to reject is theological liberalism as defined as: “a system of thinking that denies the complete truthfulness of the Bible as the Word of God and denies the unique and absolute authority of the Bible in our lives.” If you truly study the methods of interpretation that egalitarians use, you will find that they are, as Grudem argues, close to, if not already, implementing liberal ideology which goes against what the Bible claims for itself- absolute truth and authority. And the urgency in which he writes, is thus, well-grounded because without the ultimate authority and truthfulness of Scripture, what do you have?

One way this book has affected my thinking is realizing the depth and gravity of this issue. It’s not just a simple challenge of ‘Well, if a woman is gifted and called to be a pastor, why can’t she do so?’ When we get the answer to this question wrong, the very authority of Scripture and God’s Word in our lives is at stake. And like Grudem says in every chapter, if we were to apply the methods of interpretation posed by most egalitarians to other parts of Scripture, we would be doing what Scripture specifically warns against- “You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it.” (Deut 4:2).

With every argument discussed, Grudem makes convincing objections to the egalitarian interpretations. He provides a solid bibliography and rightfully upholds the authority and inerrancy of Scripture. It is quite disturbing how many egalitarian interpretations are presented as facts without any legitimate sources and with no disclaimer on alternative points of view. When scholars (complementarian and egalitarian alike) are writing books, they have access to a lot of manuscripts and research that we, as readers, do not. We rely on their skills and knowledge to inform us on things we are no qualified to study to the extent that they are. It is irresponsible to present theories or interpretations as facts without sufficient scholarly evidence or disclaimers to the contrary.

As a woman, I support this book and understand that God’s design for women’s roles in marriage and in the church are not based on God viewing men as more capable, more intelligent, or more stable than women, nowhere does Scripture support that, but it is a very reflection of the Trinity itself- the Son, Spirit, and Father having differences in roles but equality in being. God’s view of women is very high and we still have a very valuable role in ministry (after all- how much of the population is made up of women and children who need to be ministered to?!) This is how God designed it and laid it out in Scripture and if we believe that God’s Word is inerrant and authoritative truth, we must accept his design even if it feels uncomfortable. We cannot allow feelings, experiences, church tradition, culture, prophecies outside of Scripture, or circumstances to supersede the authority of the Bible.

He poses two questions we all should ponder- “Is the authority of the Bible really primary for egalitarians? Or is there a deep-seated mentality that actually puts feminism first and the Bible second?”

Whether you identify as complementarian or egalitarian, let this book challenge you.

See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!

Sure, it’s a clean read, and I do appreciate that, but I just can’t get to the five stars so many others can. Feel free to read my reasoning below. I know it seems like I’m writing spoilers, but I’m really not.

Mills doesn’t waste any time getting into it. We immediately find out a virus has been unleashed on passengers of an airborne flight. Considering our current Covid situation, I was intrigued by this premise and wanted to give this book a chance, even though I’m fairly picky about my Christian authors (due to hokey-ness or preachy-ness).

And here is Mills’ first major mistake: the FBI’s first major suspect in this act of bioterrorism. The main character, FBI agent Heather Lawrence, is on the plane. By herself- because her husband has been begging her for a divorce. Her husband also happens to work for the CDC researching and studying viruses and is passionate about helping people and finding cures. Which this all apparently makes the perfect storm. Clearly he MUST have released the virus to kill his wife so he can finally be free from her. And even though there is no other evidence linking him to the crime, and even though his life work is stopping viruses, it makes perfect sense that he has turned so evil that he is willing to kill hundreds of people (no, not the thousands that Covid has, just hundreds because we’re going BIG on this story) just to kill his wife who won’t sign divorce papers. I mean if that’s not 0 to 100 in 2.5 seconds I don’t know what is.

And not only does the FBI strongly believe they have the culprit, and all the media, and every person who watched the news, but his own Christian wife who knows him better than anyone is wondering if he did it too. People fall out of love (unfortunately) all the time. But they either divorce or one of them kills the other in a far more normal and accessible way- not releasing a never before seen virus on an international plane with the potential for a global pandemic. Someone doesn’t ‘just become’ that evil.

And then! We are told Heather has a secret! Suspense! What could it be?! Well, all we have to do is read one more page to find out what it is! She’s pregnant! Exit suspense. And then she tells everyone. I guess she doesn’t need it to be a secret anymore. And also her evil terrorist husband doesn’t even care.

And then! Her husband claims innocence and seeks to clear his name. He uncovers way more convincing and practical evidence on another suspect than what they have on him, gives it to the FBI and they say, ‘That’s pretty far-fetched, man. We’re going to need more evidence than that that will stand up in court. Why don’t you let the professionals do their job?’

And then! Heather decides she was wrong about him and decides he could not have been so evil and actually maybe they should get back together. Oh, shoot, he hates God, though. Never mind, not an option.

And then! In the middle of all this terrible chaos, Heather has the NERVE to eat ice cream. And I quote:

“Had she lost her mind? People were dying. A virus had the potential to kill people around the world. And she was hungry? Embarrassing. Shameful. And true.”

And then! Heather is talking to her husband and lists off the three suspects who have died over the course of the investigation. Then says, ‘And a woman was murdered here but no one is investigating.’ Suspense! Just kidding. That’s the first and last time we hear of this murdered woman. She matters for nothing. Move along. No one wants to hear about an unidentified woman being murdered.

Let’s also mention Mills’ sentence structure. Way too many sentences structured like this one. Can’t stand these. Don’t have a subject. Or her sentences just don’t make sense, several times I had to reread things to understand. And so much of her dialogue was stilted. Vocabulary that was unnatural in normal conversations. People jumping from one topic to something completely different in content or tone one sentence later. Back and forth.

Sooo.... I’m landing on 2 stars, because clearly some people love this book, and if you’re one of them, more power to ya. I’m not going to say ‘no one read this.’ *shrugs*

But in the words of Randy Jackson, “It’s a no for me dawg.”

***Received an ARC via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review***

See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!

Excellent sequel to book one. There were less 'footnotes' in this book, unfortunately, but the adventure more than made up for it. Plus there was still some of the same humor. (i.e. a quote from the ever descriptive Oskar: "In the words of Vilmette Oppenholm in her essay on the decline of free cupcakes, 'How awful.'") The author did an awesome job of weaving this story. There were several 'stops' along the way of dangers the Wingfeathers had to get through. The whole time, you wonder 'how are they going to make it?' It was nice to feel that all throughout without being able to predict exactly what would transpire. There were surprises and traitors and heroes and new scenery to picture. It's the type of story you imagine would make a great movie! Looking forward to book three to see what comes next!

See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!

This isn’t real. This isn’t real. Trust no one.

[3.5 rounded up to 4] This was a really good psychological thriller (I wouldn’t classify it as sci-fy except for some futuristic tech). Memory therapy- implanting memories from one person’s brain to another. What could wrong?

Alex and her mother take part in a study where Alex has memories from her mother implanted in her brain. But is she experiencing reality or delusion? Her mother claims certain aspects of her visions are incorrect. Is something sinister taking place? Are they being watched? Are people who they say they are? Who can they trust- can they even trust each other? Everyone has their secrets and now they’re on the run and Alex has to decipher what’s going on in her head before someone gets hurt.

So much potential here but it was a little too short. I read it in a day and I’m a mother of 4 under 4. I hated the ending (UNLESS there’s supposed to be a sequel).

Spoiler

Judith has some sort of operation going at the hospital where she was able to wipe Remi’s memory and Alex and Cassie are just like- We’ll help you remember! The End. What? Judith is on the run, no one can vouch that you didn’t shoot him, he doesn’t know he’s your father and lover respectively, Alex could still be charged with a different crime, Trina and Peyton are still under Judith’s tampering, and that’s just it? The end? Plus Alex talks about wanting to meet her dad and that maybe that would help her understand this ‘darker’ side to her but that storyline fizzles out. Also, Remi reveals that he knows how Judith messed with them saying it’s the generator, but then we are given no further explanation. If there is no sequel that’s the worst ending ever.

I’m disappointed that the author didn’t write more. She had so much to work with.

But the suspense and anticipation was definitely there. I thought I had it figured out and I did some of it because I was suspicious about everything the whole time but there are a few unexpected twists that were nice. I would read more from this author- as long as her other books have more resolution.

Side note: Could use a better cover; this one with the hand coming up from the water and the weird title font isn’t real appealing and doesn’t make a ton of sense to the story


**Received an ARC via NetGalley**

See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!

I read this book in 2 days if that tells you anything. After just one page I was hooked. It was very reminiscent of B.A. Paris's book 'The Breakdown' but I don't want to give anything away so I can't tell you exactly which parts. And I liked 'Woman On the Edge' better than 'The Breakdown' because it had a lot more plot movement, suspense, and a larger cast of characters. Bailey crafts a story with enough people and different pieces of the puzzle to create doubt and many plausible explanations to keep you grappling until the very end. I also liked the back and forth between Nicole (the deceased) in the past and Morgan in the present. In Nicole's chapters we see the situation escalate and the sequence of events slowly becomes clear. In Morgan's chapters we sort through the aftermath, trying to make sense of it all. It helped break up what could become monotonous and repetitive. It was a good move to have two women's lives connect rather than just following one person's psychological distress as 'The Breakdown' did.

This book evokes a lot of what I'll call: 'mom-feelings' The stakes are high when a baby's well-being is hanging in the balance. Add in the grief, loss, and desire around having and losing a child and it will grip your heart in real ways.

One teeny tiny criticism: there are infant well visits and post-partum doctor visits right after a birth to help combat the very things Nicole dealt with. I would imagine they would have changed the outcome of her life drastically- but as usual- then we wouldn't have a story!

Especially for her debut book, this book is a win. The story is a win, the title is a win, and the cover is a win. I will be looking for her next book!

**I received an ARC via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review.**

See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!

A short and essential look at how God's words are truly living and still relevant today. No matter our circumstances we can't help but speak the words of Simon Peter, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life." (John 6:68)

I think the most important part of this book on this topic is that it is clear from the sheer number of Scripture verses inside its pages that Piper opened his Bible before he wrote a single sentence. He did not approach this book with his own set of ideas and opinions and then find verses to support them. God's words are surely the author and meat of this book. He says, "Scarcely a page in the Bible is irrelevant for this crisis." And he proceeds to prove that in all 112 truth-packed pages of his reflections.

He relates to us all when he talks about the sinking sand we are all faced with today. The sinking sand of playing the odds against this virus. The sinking sand of being isolated in our homes and having to decipher from regular and social media alike what is true and what is false. The sinking sand of fear and hopelessness. But he says, "There is a better way. There is a better place to stand: the Rock of certainty rather than the sand of probabilities."

And that certainty rests firmly in the sovereignty of God. The first half of the book delves into what this means and what the Bible says of God's sovereignty. By very definition, he is either sovereign over all (including COVID-19), or sovereign over nothing. We think we need to 'rescue' him when it comes to pain and suffering as if he needs us to defend his goodness- we think we need to excuse him from the things we don't like, that it couldn't possibly be God's doing. But "If we try to rescue God from his sovereignty over suffering, we sacrifice his sovereignty to turn all things for good." and "Knowing that the same sovereignty that could stop the coronavirus, yet doesn't, is the very sovereignty that sustains the soul in it. Indeed, more than sustains-- sweetens. Sweetens with hope that God's purposes are kind, even in death-- for those who trust him."

We rest in these words: "As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good" (Gen 50:20)-- not "used" or "turned" it to good, but MEANT, implying original intent. God isn't just waiting to see how he can spin the bad things that happen. We don't have to cross our fingers and hope he's ready and able for it all. No, from the VERY BEGINNING, he is at work purposing things for good. That's true assurance. There is nothing outside of his control, therefore, we KNOW that he can make all things work together for good.

The second half is Piper answering the question, "What is God doing?" He quickly points out that compared to God's wisdom, [Piper's] (and our) opinion is worth nothing and that there are a billion things God is doing that we will never know this side of heaven, but nonetheless, God HAS spoken to us through his word. He is not silent about what he is doing in this world. He then lays out 6 observations about how to interpret what is happening right now.

I found his observation about physical pain being a representation for moral sin the most intriguing. "physical evil is a parable, a drama, a signpost pointing to the moral outrage of rebellion against God... Hardly anyone in the world feels the horror of preferring other things over God. Who loses any sleep over our daily belittling of God by neglect and defiance? But, oh, how we feel our physical pain!" Whether a follower of Jesus or not, we all need to recognize the ugliness of our sin and our need of Savior. Tragedy isn't a time to shake our fists at God but to fall at his feet and say, 'My sin is as terrible as every act of injustice and violence I see in the world. These things are a picture of my own rebellion against you.' It should drive us to repentance and refuge in the only One who can save us, not just from the Coronavirus, but from ourselves. It should not incite indignation at God but gratitude. It's an uncomfortable and maybe shocking thing to say but oh so necessary.

This book, though containing hard to hear truths, is full of hope! I came away actually kinda excited to think about what God is going to do next. Piper reminds us of how persecution and martyrdom in Acts advanced the gospel in momentous ways. God can use calamity, or a global pandemic, to position people exactly where he wants them to bring glory to his name. I can feel this anticipation of God orchestrating something so great and complex and unfathomable using this Coronavirus and it's exciting! Because nothing can thwart his plans. He WILL accomplish what he sets out to do, and we are all playing a part in it!

So trade in your sinking sand of probabilities and uncertainties for the Rock that is Christ and the security of his sovereign love. We are more than conquerors of the Coronavirus and every other thing that threatens us, even death, because of Christ's sacrifice for us. There is no better news than that!

See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!

I find this one hard to review. It definitely kept my attention and had me wondering what was actually going on. But I guess it all ended a little too neatly for me. I found the story a bit twisted but not twisty- and I’d prefer it the other way around. Not enough surprises for me.

There is some sexual content, including rape. It is somewhat of a #metoo story so it’s not as if it’s extra to the story (I guess except for the main character’s stalker) but I’ve already read a couple of these recently and maybe would have skipped a third if I had known ahead of time.

I was disappointed by lack of character depth. You really only get to know the main character, Celeste, even though most of it is told in the 3rd person. There are several other characters in the story but they’re all pretty shallow. We get into the stalker’s mind but his involvement toward the end seemed like a lazy way to handle it.

I also thought there was a lot of extra information/facts included that though a few times were interesting, I didn’t feel like it meshed well with the story unlike other authors’ attempt at this. It just felt a bit tedious to read through and move on.

I think there are a lot of people that this book might resonate with and find more appealing. I guess for me it wasn’t bad, but it wasn’t necessarily one that I’d be recommending to my friends.

My first thought when I finished was: “Okay....sooo...? Okay, I guess that’s just it then.”

I’d call this book average, but I won’t go so far as to say not to read it. It’s your call, bro.

**Received an ARC via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review**

See more of my reviews at www.shelfreflection.com!