shelfreflectionofficial's Reviews (844)

Calling all Office fans!

Here is a happy little book about one of the best shows to have been created!

Andy Greene has compiled snippets from lots of interviews with cast members, writing and production, and executives of The Office into a book that discusses the origin of the show and it’s transformation and growth from Season 1 to the finale of Season 9.

‘Compilation’ speaks to the choppiness of book’s formatting. There is no flowing narrative other than blurbs from a variety of people talking about the same general topic. It is not in QA format either. In some ways I liked this because Andy Greene isn’t the one with all the insider info, it’s the people involved with the show, so we are essentially cutting out the middle man and just hearing directly from the insiders. What I didn’t like about this formatting is that it got to be a bit repetitive or superfluous. He might include 4 different people basically saying the same thing, you just now know that all these different people thought or felt the same thing.

I had no expectations going into this book except that I wanted to learn a bunch of random or behind-the-scenes info about the show and the characters. In that regard, I feel like it delivered.

We get to learn a lot of the ‘whys’ behind the show. Why they cast who they did. Why they shot and edited scenes the way they did. Why they chose the storylines they chose. Why Michael Scott left the show. Why they hired James Spader. Why they stopped at nine seasons.

Knowing the whys really elevated my opinion of the show and helped me see just how brilliant it really was. I suppose as the audience I might not have cared whether they included one thing and not another or went a different direction than they did, but hearing them explain it makes a lot of sense and speaks to the cohesiveness of the show (at least the first 5-7 seasons).

When you’re watching the show you don’t realize what goes into each episode and how tightly they tried to hold the line of making it like a documentary. They couldn’t just do whatever. It had to make sense within the documentary context- why are these people here, why or how was this caught on camera, etc. It’s a little mind-blowing.

So here are a few of the funny or interesting things I learned while reading this book:

- Creed was never originally cast on the show but had a connection with a friend to get him on as a background character with no lines or purpose until he was able to show production that he had a character worth showing.

- They were going to have Peter Dinklage read for a midget character they were going to cast but never ended up including.

- They got a lot of Scranton, PA paraphernalia (signs, certificates, pizza boxes, etc) from the real Scranton Chamber of Commerce.

- They modeled a lot of the office or characters from another paper company they toured. Dwight’s mustard colored shirt and tie came from here.

- Many of the lines or things that happen in the show are based on the writers’ personal lives. For example, Michael Scott falling in a koi pond on the way to an important meeting was based on a writer’s experience. Or when Jim and Pam walk in on someone going to the bathroom while interviewing preschools for Cece and that person happened to be the interviewer—that happened to a writer when they were applying to a school. Or the playing of Call of Duty.

- The guy who played Mose was Michael Schur, one of the main writers.

- The fire safety episode where Angela throws Bandit into the ceiling was actually a ‘cat thrower’ disguised as Angela and they threw a real cat up into the ceiling and dropped an identical one down in a different place. And they were only allowed to shoot this scene a couple times because of the rules around the cat.

- James Spader was broke and needed money and so when he expressed interest in the show and they reciprocated he said he wanted to do a whole season. They agreed. I was not a fan of Robert California, so this fact actually just annoyed me.

- The feel of the show shifted after Season 5 because Greg Daniels and Michael Schur (mostly) left to produce Parks and Rec (a show that, in my opinion, is completely underrated)

- The rest stop where Jim and Pam meet where Jim proposes to her was actually a built set and the store is only 8 feet deep, everything inside is photographs of food etc, and they had rain cranes hooked up to water tanks. And there was much debate about whether or not we should be able to hear what they were saying to each other.

- The Niagra Falls episode where Jim and Pam get married almost included a grand entrance of Roy on a horse and later Dwight riding and abandoning said horse in the river where said horse falls down the waterfall in the background of Jim and Pam on the boat. But no one agreed with Greg Daniels that this would be funny.


So if those are the kinds of things you care to know about, this book is for you.

There is a chapter dedicated to each season. Then they include chapters regarding specific/influential episodes such as Dinner Party, Beach Games, Threat Level Midnight, etc. They also include a few chapters on specific people like Steve Carell and Greg Daniels.

One thing I thought was missing was more blurbs from Steve Carell. There were really only a few. Then a tad more from John Krasinski, Jenna Fischer, and Rainn Wilson. But most of the blurbs that came from the cast came from the people who played Jan, Meredith, Oscar, and Creed. I don’t know if Greene just didn’t interview the others as long or what but I thought that was disappointing to not have as much from the main characters.

In some ways, this book is a biography of Steve Carell. Everyone sings his praises as a person and as an actor. I was happy to know that he is really good human being that everyone liked to work with. It’s always disappointing when a favorite character in a show turns out to be a jerk or egomaniac in real life. I’m glad to know Carell is one of the good ones!


If you enjoy the office, I think you’ll enjoy this book. But if you are looking to hear more from the specific cast members or a lot of details, you might not find what you are looking for here. It’s fairly general and writing/producing heavy.

You may want to check out Mindy Kaling’s books or Jenna Fischer’s book, The Actor’s Life: A Survival Guide to get other tidbits about the show from their own point of view. I enjoyed all three of them.

“May your hats fly as high as your dreams!” - Michael Scott

I enjoyed this read.

So I was surprised to see that the 4 most popular reviews of this book on Goodreads were 1 star.

Instead of spending too much time on the story itself, for this review I’ll spend most of it addressing the 1 star reviewers’ thoughts and giving my own opinion.


First of all, why did I read this book?

Well, I received an ARC for book #11 in this series (called An Extravagant Death which btw has a way better cover than this one) and really liked it. Enough to go back and check out the rest of the series!

I personally do not think the qualms of the aforementioned reviewers for this book were worth the 1 star ratings they gave.

It would seem some of them must be British or familiar with British vernacular and customs because they criticized some of the American lingo and the familiarity and friendliness with some of the upper class to the servants or lower class people.

But as an American, it still read very British to me. I did not feel as though any of the language jarred me out of the Victorian London era. Clubhouse vs Club… Woodpile vs Coal scuttle… Figure out vs work out… Really? I guess if you’re British— beware, you’re going to be annoyed…? But if you’re American… I think you’ll be able to read this without being overly distressed by the word choices.

Also, maybe there was some ‘class mixing’ that diverged from cultural customs during this time, but do we really want to read a book where they are indifferent or condescending to their ‘inferiors’? I don’t believe that in our more progressive culture we would find ourselves rooting for upper class protagonists if they didn’t care about people.

You’re telling me, it would make you happier to read a book like this: “Lady Jane heard her former maid of several years committed suicide or was murdered. But in fact, Lady Jane did not care. She skipped the funeral and requested her new maid bring her another sandwich while she prepared for a ball with rich people whom she loved. Meanwhile, Lenox, who would never stoop so low as to address his butler by name, even though they were friends in college said, ‘Butler, fix me tea by the fire and then don’t speak to me.’ Lenox never once even wondered if his butler was tired of making tea so many times that day because it was in fact the butler’s job and that was that.”?

So what if the main characters aren’t entirely uppity?? Accuracy here would not enhance the story. Finch wrote it correctly. Move along.


Besides the language and class issues other reviewers had, the other main problem regularly mentioned by other reviewers was just the writing style, the descriptions, the slowness of the book, and the similarities to Sherlock Holmes.

And to these I say: Duh…

For one- look at the book cover. (One reviewer said they were ‘suckered in by the beautiful cover’ so can we really trust any of their opinions on what is boring…?) (Update: after writing this review I discovered an alternate book cover that is a bit better than the one I was working with so I’ll assume this reviewer saw that one instead)

If you’re coming into this book expecting a high-octane, edge-of-your-seat murder investigation, then yeah, I guess you’ll be disappointed. This is not in the suspense genre— it’s a mystery. And further, it’s a historical fiction mystery that was (I believe) intended to parallel Sherlock Holmes. Because people LIKE Sherlock Holmes. And Arthur Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes books are ALSO not high-octane.

This well-liked detective trope uses a methodical and pensive process to solve the mysteries. Complete with pipe. I think if this book DIDN’T have a pipe we would probably be concerned.

To address the Sherlock similarities— I think Finch also wrote this correctly. There are enough similarities to attract the audience that likes a Holmes investigation but with enough differences (at least to me) that give it new life.

The main similarities: London. Lenox being an amateur sleuth who smokes his pipe to help him solve cases. He has an equivalent of Watson in his doctor friend, McConnell. And he has an equivalent to Mycroft in his brother, Edmond, who works in politics.

The main differences: Lenox has a lady friend— Lady Jane, a young, childless widower who lives next door. And this is set-up to become a romantic interest which adds a dimension to Lenox’s character that we don’t get with Sherlock. Also, both Lenox and his brother are not as angsty, arrogant, and rude as Sherlock and Mycroft. They are more friendly, congenial, and humble. So the social dynamics are pretty different as well.


To address those who were annoyed at frequent talk of tea, toast, rain and boots. This didn’t really bother me that much. I mean… it’s London. I very much expect this. Plus, since it’s a series, I feel adding in Lenox’s thoughts, habits, or errands helps us see more of his personality as we get to know him from book to book. If it was a standalone novel I agree it would have been unnecessary and superfluous. In this context I was not annoyed. And again, I think this is pretty in-line with Doyle’s books and other Sherlock ‘copycats.’

Don’t get me wrong, I do love a good suspense book and I could see how these could get tiresome if you just read straight through the series, but I think it would be a great series to periodically bounce back to from time to time to get a little era-centric mystery in between other reads.

To the tune of mystery, this book holds up very well. I didn’t have it figured out and I thought the clues were clever and interesting.


In case you just wanted to know what this book even is…

Here’s a short summary— Lady Jane requests amateur sleuth, Charles Lenox, to look into the untimely death of a recently transferred maid of hers who went to work in the same house as her fiancé. After looking at the scene Lenox suspects foul play. She was killed by a poison called ‘Bella Indigo’ (beautiful blue… the title, hint hint) He must investigate the evidence and motives of those living in the house to figure out who would commit such a crime and why. When another murder happens (of one of the prime suspects) in the house shortly after the first, the case intensifies.


I just read Castle Shade which is part of a different Sherlock fan-fic series and I would highly recommend this series over that one. The writing style is similar but if you think this book was slow, that one is even slower! What I appreciated about A Beautiful Blue Death is that Finch wastes no time letting us know where the book is going. Castle Shade took half the book to really get at what the mystery even was. Here we find out right away about the murder and can then sit back and watch it unravel instead of turning pages thinking we must have missed something important.


Please don’t let the one star ratings sway you. If you want a mystery in the vein of Sherlock, you will enjoy this series. I am easily bored with books but I like these. Granted, I’ve only read two of them, but I plan to continue reading through these so keep following my blog and I’ll let you know if I hit a dud.

Cheerio!

For more book reviews of a variety of genres, check out my book review blog Shelf Reflection!

“Sometimes the dead are easier to find than the living.”

I am a huge fan of Brian Freeman’s books! This wasn’t his best, but it was still good and definitely worth reading.

What is different about this book compared to most of his others is that it’s not as dark or psychologically intense, which may be more what you’re looking for.

More of a mystery than a thriller, in my opinion.


This book is told from the POV of Shelby Lake, left on the doorstep of the sheriff as a baby and now grown up to be the sheriff’s deputy in a small ‘wilderness’ town.

Shortly after a woman is murdered, a little boy appears to have been kidnapped. Two rare occurrences in a town like this. Are they connected? People who thought they knew each other might have more secrets than everyone realized. A safe town is now in the throes of crime and distrust.

The book is told in two parts. The first part happens when the abduction first occurs. The second part happens 10 years later. New evidence is unearthed to correct what was theorized and (partly) legally carried out.


I admit, I was somewhat disappointed by the ending. I can’t tell you why without giving too much away. Maybe because it felt like once you have the answers it doesn’t really feel like justice was/can be served. It’s more sad than vindicating and I like stickin’ it to those bad guys…

But again, it’s not really a thriller like I was expecting considering his other books so maybe it was also just a case of unmet expectations.

Regardless, it’s still a well-written book that keeps you guessing and should be on your to-read list.

“It’s hard to predict, isn’t it? The things that will make us happy?”

This book was a Goodreads’ 2020 Choice Award Winner for Fiction and a generally well-liked book.

The premise drew me in: a library between life and death filled with books that allow Nora Seed to ‘try on’ other lives, picking ones where she made different (and/or better) choices than her ‘root life’ which she so desperately wants to end. A quest for the perfect life.

[I guess in that way it’s a smidge similar to The Invisible Life of Addie LaRue, except better and less of a devil love story]

Nora lives in Bedford—yes, think Bedford Falls from ‘It’s A Wonderful Life’ because Nora, having just swallowed a bunch of pills, has embarked on an existential journey— not so different than George Bailey— where she learns about how the little things she does or does not choose to do could be important things that greatly affect her and others’ lives.

“Never underestimate the big importance of small things.”


Many refer to this as a self-help book. I suppose because the message of the book is to show how life is worth living. Nora, who is suicidal (and also very into Philosophy), goes through an interesting journey of her alternate lives and starts to realize what’s important in life. I’m sure this resonates with a lot of people and many readers found this story to touch their innermost struggles in a way a lot of other books do not. And if this book helps them see the light in their life, I am for that.

For me, personally, though, I didn’t find this book ‘helpful’ as much as ‘thoughtful’ or ‘insightful.’ I think it falls short in offering true and lasting meaning and purpose in life that’s outside of ourselves, but I do think it was a perceptive depiction of the inner turmoil and thought process someone who does not desire to live goes through. Especially knowing Haig experienced severe depression himself, it adds authenticity and understanding to Norah’s character.

I have not experienced severe depression so I found it helpful to understand people better who do. I realize I just used the word ‘helpful’ but in this context it is different than ‘self-help’ which is more about becoming a better person and/or overcoming a problem instead of just increasing understanding. I see the difference…


And so we have a contemplative fiction story about parallel universes. An infinite number of constantly changing storylines for our lives that contain every decision and alternate choice we could ever make.

[If you like this idea and would be interested in a more action-packed/thriller version of alternate-lives-chaos, I would highly recommend Brian Freeman’s book Infinite.]

Nora’s intermediary library is run by a replication of Mrs. Elm, a librarian who played an influential role for Nora in a life-altering moment— when young Nora found out her father had died. Mrs. Elm coaches Nora through the process of acknowledging her regrets and checking out lives that attempt to correct a particular lament.

From big decisions to minute ones, Nora experiences a whole host of other jobs, lifestyles, locations, and relationships.

Grad school, getting married, having kids, staying in the band, having an alive cat, studying glaciers… Which ‘perfect’ combination of fulfilled hopes and dreams will make Nora happy enough to desire to continue living instead of throwing in the towel?


I think the premise of this book is brilliant because it is undeniable that the world is set on a course to discover and achieve happiness— whatever it takes. Our choices, our jobs, our relationships, our homes, everything is sifted through the filter- “Does this make me happy?” And not only that but “Does this make me the happiest?”

We think we know what will make us happy. And if we could just get that right combination, we’ll be good. “I’ll take 2 orders of ‘The Best’ with some ‘Extra Best’ on top. If it comes on the side, I send it back.”

I don’t think The Midnight Library goes quite as far as my beliefs in terms of the source of joy and lasting happiness, as it is a secular novel, but it does start the conversation and it triggers the philosophical thinking to challenge this ideal of ‘ideal.’ Hopefully it jars us out of our rat-race for the elusive perfect life and helps us gain a better perspective about what makes a “good life.”


Nora Seed feels trapped in her root life. Her parents are dead. Her cat is dead. She lost her job. Her brother is estranged. Her friendships are scarce and forced. What does she have to show for all her dreams and talents? She has nothing to give. The world is better off without her, she thinks.

But I love the progress she makes after sampling several other lives:

“The prison wasn’t the place but the perspective.”

Our perspective traps us. Our definition of happiness traps us. Our vision of paradise traps us. Our minds are imprisoned in a lie.

I’m pretty sure we could all see where Haig was going with this book as soon as we started reading, so these ‘spoilers’ are inconsequential. We are reading this story because we want to follow Nora on her journey and we want to see the character growth and to speculate vicariously through her that maybe our ‘regrets’ aren’t really what we think they are.


Nora chases happiness and her perspective is changed. Instead of despair, she finds the hope of potential. What could be.

Norah Seed is aptly named because she is, indeed, a seed. A seed with potential to grow into something great. She was put in the dark ground— rooted in her root life— and was watered with a little truth and now she is ready to grow and become what she was made to be.

Okay, that may be a bit extra and more headed toward the Gospel of my beliefs than Haig really intended with this story, but it still fits.


I think we live in a world that would benefit from reading this book. Let’s take away the filters of our lives and discover what happiness really means and stop selfishly chasing an illusion.

“There is no life where you can be in a state of sheer happiness forever. And imagining there is just breeds more unhappiness in the life you’re in.”

Escape the prison of your self-centered perspective and see the bigger picture of your life. A life full of contentment, gratitude, hope, outside of ourselves.



Annnnnnnnddddd………

Obligatory sidenote of British terms I learned or found interesting that I could have looked up but didn’t and here’s me using context clues, common sense, and creativity (the 3 C’s!!!) to define them for you:

- TV Vet- TV celebrity who also can do cat heart transplants and shots
- Compering- I didn’t write the context down so this is a complete shot in the dark: fighting with computers
- Quiz Night- we all know what this is but I just read in The Office book that they were surprised Quiz Nights weren’t as popular in American bars as English pubs. I can neither confirm or deny this, but I do love to win trivial things
- For ever- it kept throwing me off that they put a space here… and then I inevitably said it in my head The Sandlot way. Every. Time.
- Plughole- toilet drain. But should we really call this a plughole if we actively try not to plug it…?
- Racecourse- horse race or more philosophically: when we live life running in dusty circles and people yell at us and bet money that we suck
- Marmite- something gross you put on toast. Like Vegemite. But made with marmots instead of veggies. OR it’s actually the exact same thing and Australia and the UK joined forces to experiment if people would rather eat something from a squirrel or the ground. Hit me with these results.
- Double pushchair- a double stroller but said more literally. Can’t argue with that. But actually… what’s a wheelchair called then??

*If you are British, I 100% invite you to correct me. Except about Marmite. I refuse to accept any other explanation for that one.

For more stellar reviews please visit my book review blog-- Shelf Reflection!

“In God’s vast mercy, we live the stories of our lives one page at a time. For sometimes a chapter so painful will come, we are tempted to lament that we’d even started the story. But when we bear the sorrow, one sorrow at a time, honestly and with a measure of rebellious hope, instead of becoming paralyzed or mending crooked, we come through with a quiet strength, a peculiar beauty that only sorrow can forge.”

I found this book on Amazon and basically ordered it arbitrarily.

What a great find!

This is not only a telling of the story of an event that completely changed Kate's life, but it is much more than that. It is a gospel-centered, straightforward look at pain and grief and how we are called to live it.


Kate was playing with the children at recess at her kids’ school when a boy jumped from a play structure and landed right on her head. It crushed something in her spinal cord and paralyzed her from the neck down.

She tells us of the incident, the aftermath, the rehabilitation, and the spiritual journey her family walked because of it.

It is an incredible story, to be sure, but I love how, in sharing her suffering, she is true to her own words about grief: “its role is never that of the star, nor does it play the part of the savior.” We still hear her heart and journey from grief to hope, but none of that overshadows the gospel message.

Just look at the title: “Where I End.” At some point we recognize we are not writing our own stories, God has written us into His. When we come to the end of ourselves, often through pain and suffering, we find rest in God, trusting him with everything we have. We see our grief a little clearer.

Though not necessarily as meaty or witty as Jen Wilkin’s writing, I did find Kate’s writing style to be fairly similar. She is intelligent, easy to follow, and willing to challenge us bluntly. This was not a fluffy or high-emotion book. Emotion is not absent by any means— as a mom it broke my heart to enter into her grief thinking about the things she couldn’t do with and for her kids. To see your kids grieving your accident and not be able to hug them or wipe their tears. Man, if that doesn’t just rip your heart out. But she never got carried away with her feelings. She was transparent yet strong.


She rightfully illuminates two different, and equally wrong, responses to grief. One where our sadness becomes our best companion, our truest identity. Or one where we decide to skip over grief and shield ourselves from it, playing a game of make-believe that hardens our heart to feeling. Neither is biblical.

As Kate points out, we see lament in Scripture. Even as Jesus knew he would raise Lazarus from the dead, he did not skip over tears. He wept. There is a biblical place for sadness and grief where we recognize feelings that are real and true, but that don’t pull us away from our truest hope. We acknowledge the pain for what it is, but we don’t allow ourselves to be trapped in despair.


One part that really struck me was when she talked about her experience taking communion after her accident. Having endured months of physical therapy learning how to walk and do simple tasks, feeling the claustrophobia of a body that isn’t working properly, she accepts the bread and the cup as her husband says, “The body of Christ broken for you.”

Christ’s broken body. Broken for us.
He is with us in our pain. We share in his suffering.

She goes on to talk about how humbling it is when you must rely on others for everything, especially things like bathing and going to the bathroom. The vulnerability and loss of dignity.

But she says:

“What if Jesus had placed dignity above brokenness? If He had claimed His right to be right? Jesus could have rejected the suffering and humiliation of the cross. Yet he knew there was a flood of joy that would follow and swallowed His and our shame. He chose this joy over respectability, above what the world perceives as greatness and strength.”

Wow. Isn’t it incredible that a King gave up his dignity for brokenness? All for love of a people who rejected him. He turns worldly perceptions on their head. Grief, pain, and suffering are real, there is no doubt, but they aren’t what the world tells us they are. Can we learn from Christ’s example to endure what God writes for us— for joy and his glory?


One more thing I’ll share that I appreciated.

The question ‘Why?’ is always tethered to tragedy and suffering. But it’s not a helpful question! We don’t always get those answers. She shares what preacher Helmut Thielke (preaching in Europe in the aftermath of WWII) says we must ask instead- ‘To what end?’ She expounds,

“‘Why?’ turns us inward… Stuffing ourselves with self, we are ushered into a corridor of self-pity with its close companions, misery and bitterness. The question ‘To what end?’ however, turns our hearts back to our kindhearted Father who bids us come, to trust in Him, to rest in His promise that though sadness and grief, pain and hardship are ever with us now, He sees and is all the time working powerfully toward ends that are good, ends that are more beautiful and impossible than we could ever imagine… Rather than take the position of accuser, which leads us to discouragement and despair, we must set our eyes on Jesus and the ends for which He calls us.”


This is a gem of a book with a gospel-centered message from an author who knows pain and grief but has put it in its proper place. I highly recommend.


Two other books similar to this one that I loved:

Dark Clouds, Deep Mercy by Mark Vroegop- shares his story of grief in light of the biblical example of lament.

It’s Not Supposed to be This Way by Lysa TerKeurst- shares her pain with beautiful pottery analogies: sometimes we must be shattered to be made into something new


Here are a few more quotes from Where I End:

“In our distress, we either find solace by remembering who we need and to whom we belong, or we choose the path of despair, refusing to be gathered into the arms of the Father.” 

“God has not been trying an experiment on my faith or love in order to find out their quality. He knew it already. It was I who didn’t…He always knew that my temple was a house of cards. His only way of making me realize the fact was to knock it down.” - C.S. Lewis, A Grief Observed 

“Hope is the continuance, the expression of faith. It’s not the same as optimism where one closes her eyes, covers her ears, and thinks positive thoughts. Hope does not double as wishing, the whimsical tossing of pennies into a fountain. Forced or contrived ‘hope’ exposes its inferior underbelly with hope for rain, hope the cake turns out, that we miss traffic, or ‘have a good day’, biblical goodness is far more concrete. (Heb 11:1) Biblical hope speaks to the believer of assurance and expectation.”

“We are not necessarily doubting that God will do the best for us; we are wondering how painful the best will turn out to be.”

“You will have found Christ when you are concerned with other people’s suffering and not your own.” - Flannery O’Connor 

“There are moments in life when we must all come to terms with our smallness and fragility. Moments of truth when our hearts are recalibrated. Trifling anxieties and fears we’ve been collecting and hoarding lose their color. Folly is laid bare. The shallows of our heart make way for the deep. Our need for mercy and for someone to come and rescue us is brought into the light. In these moments, we are not, as some might presume, ashamed. Quite the opposite. Shedding the falsehood of autonomy and self-sufficiency, we can receive the love of Jesus and of others.”

Check out my other book reviews on my blog Shelf Reflection!

“She thought she was teaching them how to live, but now she realized that in many ways, she had been the student all along."

I’ve read two of Kristin Harmel’s other WWII novels: The Room on Rue Amelié and The Book of Lost Names, both of which are worth reading. This one is no different.

Part wilderness survival, part love story, The Forest of Vanishing Stars has a unique take on the typical WWII historical fiction we read. (Which speaks to her ability as an author seeing as WWII novels are a dime a dozen)

Most of this book takes place in a forest. There is no espionage or grand escape from occupied Germany.

It is just the daily grind of Jews surviving in the forest.


I’ll insert here the inspiration for this story. The forests around Poland are vast and many people fled to them to hide and wait out the Nazis. One particular group grew quite large— 1200 strong— led by the Bielski brothers. It was basically a settlement in the Nalibocka wilderness that largely survived the war and attempting many missions to thwart the Germans.

[Their story is depicted in the 2008 movie Defiance that is streaming on Netflix right now and appears to have good ratings. I plan to watch.]

Though The Forest of Vanishing Stars is about a fictional group (not the Bielskis) their experiences would be similar.


Yona is our protagonist. Stolen from her home in Berlin at the age of 2 by an elderly woman, Jerusza, she grew up in the forest. Jerusza claimed she was rescuing Yona. She made it her mission to teach Yona all the things: reading, math, science, history, self-defense… but most importantly— how to survive in the wilderness. (This was a bit of a Mother Gothel/Rapunzel relationship.)

When Jerusza dies and Yona unexpectedly encounters a Jewish refugee in the forest, Yona goes against the principle of isolation Jerusza drilled into her and, compelled by compassion, decides to offer them her assistance.

This is the story of how Yona helps a growing group of Jewish escapees survive years in the Nalibocka Forest, and develops a romantic relationship with one of them.



However, it is not a story void of danger, violence, and heart-wrenching loss. One example of what a Nazi did to a woman’s baby is seared into my brain. I don’t think we can ever read a WWII novel without feeling the immense cruelty, hardship, and losses suffered.

Harmel included this shocking statistic in the informational author’s note at the end: More than 3.3 million Jews lived in Poland— the highest percentage of Jews anywhere in Europe. Between 2.8 and 3 million Polish Jews were murdered during the war, amounting to between 84% and 91% of the entire Jewish population of Poland. I can’t get over this devastation.

I read Where I End at the same time as this book, and this quote below speaks to such tragedy:

“Sin makes no sense. To explain and come to an understanding of sin is to justify it, to reconcile what can never be reconciled. Sin is illogical, irrational, impossible, absurd by creational categories. It is humanity unhinged, humankind decisively breaking from the One who gave them life, the One who has only ever sought to bless His created with every good gift. And we are deep in it. The darkness, the sadness, and wickedness is felt from without and within.”


To change gears—I am not one for wilderness survival stories. I read My Side of the Mountain in grade school and kinda feel like I got all the distressing wilderness hypotheticals, skinning rabbits, hollowed trees, and berry-foraging that I need. So I thought this story would be a bit boring for me.

But while the pace is indeed slow, I still found it to be a captivating story!

I think knowing it is based on real experiences during real events, I don’t view it as a distressing hypothetical but both an act of sharing in their grief and witnessing their triumph. For, as we read, to survive is the best kind of revenge.


I don’t have much to critique of this book, just these bits: Harmel incorporating the slight supernatural element of “visions” and “premonitions” of approaching danger didn’t do much for me. Jerusza predicted the years of both of their deaths—what am I supposed to do with that? I don’t know how I was supposed to feel about Jerusza—Yona didn’t either. Was she good or bad? Or just odd? I just feel like the premonitions take away from the characters and diminish their other qualities. But at the same time, I can recognize its place in the story; I just didn’t really like that part.

The other bit came in the author’s note when Harmel relates some of her conversation with an elderly Aron Bielski to us. She had asked him what message he would like to share with the world today and it began “Be nice if at all possible…” Harmel emphasizes this part suggesting if we all did this every day we could be the change in the world. It’s a nice sentiment and I’m sure it wouldn’t hurt anything, but I don’t think this is the true change we need to see in the world.

Aron does mention that there is too much hate, and that is closer to the target, in my opinion. ‘Being nice’ is artificial and disingenuous if we still hold contempt for people or people groups in our hearts— no ‘intersection’ gets a pass. We need to start seeing every person as an image-bearer of God. A created being by the Creator. Failure to recognize this leads to contempt which leads to every kind of evil. Jen Wilkin talks about this in her book Ten Words to Live By.This bit doesn’t affect the quality of this book at all, but was a relevant message the author gave in the end that I wanted to counter here.


I did think it was interesting how much Harmel included of the people questioning God and displaying their faith even in the midst of such tragedy.

Yona questions: “Was faith futile in times like these? Where was God in all of this, in this world where people starved to death or perished at the hands of cruel and heartless men? Where was God when neighbors turned against each other?”

We can’t help but ask ‘Where is God?’ when we encounter such evil. And we don’t always get the answers we want. Evil doesn’t make sense. But we do have this answer: God was there. He doesn’t always share the why’s with us, but he promises his presence, his love, his peace. However hard it is to grasp sometimes.


The Forest of Vanishing Stars, in beautiful title, is both literal and metaphorical. The tiny beacons of light high in the sky shadowed by the towering trees of the forest. And the light of the men, women, and children, branded with stars and forced to flee. The struggle of darkness and light.

I recently read this verse and thought it fitting.

“Lift up your eyes on high and see:
who created these?
He who brings out their host by number,
calling them all by name;
by the greatness of his might
and because he is strong in power,
not one is missing.”
Isaiah 40:26

The tragedy was real. The answers are scarce. But each vanishing star was created, named, and not forgotten. The sovereign, loving Lord is in control and he sees and he has the final word.



Stupid sidenote: This book cover confuses me. The red coat seems more significant here than it did in the book. And there were no relevant planes… I would have liked to see a cover with a more ominous forest on it. Just sayin.

**Received and ARC via NetGalley**

To read more of my book reviews from a variety of genres, please check out my blog site: Shelf Reflection!

3.672- because I can't know my feelings.

“Like any biblical teaching, the truths about men and women can be misapplied, mishandled, or used as an excuse to mistreat others. This danger is especially poignant when the truths in question affirm the man as leader and head and the woman as helper and nurturer. The biblical pattern of male leadership is never an excuse for ignoring women, belittling women, overlooking the contributions of women, or abusing women in any way. The truest form of biblical complementarity calls on men to protect women, honor women, speak kindly and thoughtfully to women, and to find every appropriate way to learn from them and include them in life and in ministry— in the home and in the church.”


I have been avoiding writing this review.

I have loved every one of Kevin DeYoung’s books that I have read. However this one left me with a vague sense of dissatisfaction that I can’t put my finger on. There was nothing that I read that I necessarily disagreed with— it all seemed very thoughtful and sound.

My first impulse is to describe the dissatisfaction as part disappointment in what was left unsaid and part a general sense of feeling out of my element a bit, unqualified to evaluate it.

So my review may wander a bit as I parse through my thoughts. I may come back and update it as I discuss this book with others and hone in on what I think.

After reading Wayne Grudem’s book, Evangelical Feminism, three years ago, I feel I came away with a more solid understanding then than when I finished this. So maybe it would behoove you to read both! They agree theologically. Grudem’s book focuses more on how certain interpretations of these disputed verses undermines the authority of Scripture and leads you down a dangerous path of liberalism. DeYoung’s book is a simpler take and does not do as much comparing of egalitarian vs complementarian views.


My posture in reading this book is, I’m sure, different than a lot of readers. I was not coming with questions, doubts, or experiences of hurt, abuse, or suppression. I don’t feel a calling to something that I’m told I can’t do. The prominent men in my life have always been loving, sacrificial, supportive, and held my opinion in high regard. The churches that I’ve been part of have not, to my knowledge, belittled women, deemed them incapable, or ignored them—they’ve always respected women and included them in many different forms of ministry.

I recognize that that is not everyone’s story.

I appreciate that Kevin DeYoung implores us to keep this mind: “We should all be aware that we tend to assume our experiences are normative and the divergent experiences of others are exceptional. This should make us quick to sympathize and slow to accuse.”

To approach this subject, we must have a posture of listening and understanding and not of accusation or condescension.


DeYoung’s purpose in writing this book was to address a very relevant topic and provide a practical resource for the layperson. An intentionally (nonthreatening) short, concise, palatable book about men and women’s roles in the church that people in his congregation would actually read. To the ‘short’ and ‘biblical’ I think he succeeded. The ‘practical’ or ‘applicable’ part is possibly what I feel is lacking and could have been more robust.

DeYoung does much exegetical analysis of key ‘debated’ passages of Scripture that inform our understanding of men’s and women’s role in the church. (Worth noting here that this book is specifically in regards to church and ministry (some marriage), not work or social environments.) These passages are his chapter divisions in Part 1 and include Genesis 1-3, Old Testament survey, Jesus and the Gospels, 1 Cor 11:2-16; 14:33-35, Eph 5:22-23, 1 Tim 2:8-15, and 1 Tim 3:1-13.

In Part II he answers common objections like “you are all one in Christ Jesus,” “submitting to one another,” slavery, women like Deborah, Phoebe, and Priscilla, and handling women’s callings. He also goes into detail about the differences between overseers, pastors, and deacons.

A lot of his exegesis and discussion of the original language, grammar used, etc was a bit overwhelming to me at times. He always gave a clear conclusion but some of his process felt muddled. (I think Grudem handled this a bit better) Also, I think if I was coming at this with a prior stance, argument, or question I may have absorbed and contemplated these differently.

A lot of the objections or interpretations he addressed were some I had never even heard of before, and so I found myself not spending too much time fully grasping all of his exegesis. I didn’t realize there were such different ‘tiers’ of complementarianism. It’s quite possible Grudem acknowledged them, but after 3 years I just didn’t remember them.

Hence I feel somewhat unqualified to review this. Several reviewers have commended his critique of ESS— which I don’t even know what that is!

So my opinion of this book might not be that valuable if the doctrine of men and women’s roles in the church is something you’ve done a lot of study on and are well-versed in all the facets.


Though some of it seemed more confusing than clarifying, there were a lot of things that stuck out to me as good and helpful.

For one, DeYoung is very clear that the Bible teaches that men and women have different roles but their worth is the same. God didn’t arbitrarily choose these roles. And he didn’t assign teaching to men because women are incapable or unstable. I think in our culture it’s hard for us to accept that. In our minds roles are assigned by competency. And if we can do the job better than someone else, it should be our job for the taking. But that’s our culture, not God’s design for the church. Just because God has designed teaching and ministerial headship to men does not mean he thinks we are unable to do any of it. And that doesn't mean all men are qualified to teach either. The Bible's job description for pastors excludes incompetent and domineering men.

DeYoung runs through most of Scripture showing us all the passages that place women in high-esteem. How Jesus’s countercultural interactions with women show how he saw them, cared for them, and valued them.

“Jesus never ‘put women in their place,’ but neither did he try to dislodge men from theirs. Jesus takes a back seat to no one in being pro-woman. And yet his being pro-woman never necessitated being anti-men or against sexual differentiation.”

The concept of willing submission and sacrificial loving and leading pervades every chapter of this book. This relationship is essential in understanding biblical gender roles. It is a picture of Jesus’ own submission to the Father and his sacrifice done out of love. It is easy to submit to authority that puts your needs ahead of their own.


God has reserved for women a unique ability to bring life into the world. I think a lot of feminists today push back against childbearing and feel like women are ‘reduced to’ having babies and that’s it. But could it be that instead of trying to ‘elevate’ women to doing men’s ‘jobs’ we have demeaned the elite role of bearing life that we already have. To carry and deliver a baby into the world is not insignificant; it is not a reduction. And to be sure, women are more than childbearers, and our worth is not attached to our wombs, but we can’t downplay the role God has given women in designing our bodies for life.

“A woman’s worth is not tied to the children she has or her ability to have any children at all. We’ve seen all sorts of ways women in the Old Testament serve God and save God’s people from harm. And yet there is a unique God-given purpose that women find in bearing and caring for children.” 

I love the example DeYoung pointed out about the story of Moses, one of the most prominent figures in the Old Testament: The midwives save him from death, his mother fashions a basket and puts him in the river, his sister watches over the basket and when Pharaoh’s daughter raises him as her own, his sister offers Moses’ mother as a wet nurse. “This great narrative of God’s paradigmatic redemptive work has been moved forward by women, and specifically by women looking after children. (And only one was the birth mother)”

Unfortunately, sin’s curse has affected this realm for women, just as sin has affected the men’s realm in leading. Not all women can or do bear children. But the Bible, and this book, both show many other ways that women can still, in obedience to God, do significant ministry outside of being a biological mother.


When we, as women, push back on God’s design for us, what is our motive? Do we feel undervalued and unappreciated? Do we want what the men have? Do we not think our God-given role is important or impactful enough? To really search our hearts and answer these questions is not easy.

But it’s worth pondering that maybe we need to change our perspective of different roles from seeing lack in what God has given us and instead see the worth. Both men and women represent the image and character of God. Men alone cannot express all of who God is and neither can women. But each gender has specific characteristics and roles that work together to image God and I’m thankful that God has expressed both distinct genders as valuable and necessary.


“Let’s not make the heartbeat of our message, ‘Women, sit down,’ when it should be ‘Men, stand up.’”

I thought this was an important theme in this book as well. DeYoung calls men out for passivity. That a lot of times when women are functioning in the church like men that it is not out of an attitude of rebellion but because the men did not step up to do it. He mentions several times that it’s not so much what women can’t do as much as it is what men should do.


Another aspect he briefly mentions is the biblical passages addressing appearance. That men should look like men and women should look like women. This is tricky in application when cultural differences are considered. He clarifies that these verses are not a prescription on hair length, clothing, and jewelry, but that in your own cultural context, men and women should be differentiated in appearance. God could have created humans however he wanted and he chose to create a gender binary of men and women. Gender difference is his design.

This is an offensive position to a lot of people today. There is much to be said and discussed in such a sensitive area and this book (intentionally) does not try to address it all here. There are other books that would do a better job on LGBTQ topics.

But I found this acronym useful that he has created to explain to his kids what godliness looks like as a girl or a boy:

Appearance (1 Cor 11:6, 13-15)… clear that stereotypes are not our standards and we must be thoughtful about this in practice, but, for example, transgender and drag would both fall outside of God’s design for gender appearance

Body (Lev 18:22)… our bodies were designed to fulfill the creational mandate of multiplying and filling the earth, to do otherwise would be rebelling against the Creator’s order

Character (1 Pt 3:1-7)… he gives men the crown of true strength and women the crown of true beauty (with clarifications on what those mean in anticipation of typical counters to this)

Demeanor (1 Thess 2:7-8, 11-12)… everyone has a unique personality but generally speaking women are known for affection and gentleness and men for exhortation and charge 

Eager Posture (Gen 2:18)… willing to be led or willing to lead sacrificially


One thing I’ve needed to recognize is that I believe there has been some cultural conditioning for women to associate a certain feeling with some commonly used words when talking about gender roles. Some of these buzzwords you will find in this book are: submissive, quiet, obedience, helper. These are not bad words. But it’s hard not to feel a little trigger of defensiveness or indignation when we hear them. That does not mean we should, but with so much pushback on traditional gender roles, we can’t help but be influenced by our culture’s hatred for these words.

Even though I agree with DeYoung’s stance on it all, I could still feel myself react to these words at times. I can’t let that dictate to me what is true but allow the Bible to be my authority even when the culture wants me to be outraged. What they think ‘submissive’ is, does not square with the biblical context and the sacrificial headship it is partnered with. The same goes for other words—quiet and helper are not what our first impression of these words are. The biblical context is essential.


The most confusing part of this book for me was his chapter called Of Heads and Hair. I don’t know if it was just that he wrote it in a confusing way or if it felt like he was overcomplicating what seemed simple to me or what, but I didn’t find that to be the most clarifying chapter. The most important part I gathered from this chapter was that it was not about having long hair or a physical head covering to qualify a woman to be able to pray in church. But I wasn’t super clear on what it actually did mean today.

I wish he would have given more examples of what he believes is a biblical way for women to speak publicly in front of men or biblical ways that men can learn from women. For example, is it biblical for men to read theological books written by women? I realize there are a lot of nuances or factors to consider in day-to-day decisions on biblical roles, but I felt like I wanted some sort of chart or list of do’s and don’ts.

To be fair, he did list a whole bunch of things women can do but several reviewers have noted his inclusion of ‘sewing curtains’ to be a bit out of touch.

There were several places he talked specifically about/to women but did not offer the equivalent of the ‘man’ side of the topic and vice versa. I think there was a lot more that could have been said in certain areas but I know that he was trying to keep the book short.


IN SUMMATION:

I’m still processing everything but…

It’s a valuable read and a good introduction as it is properly subtitled, but a full study of gender roles would require further reading (see below for references).

It’s hard to do justice to a book in a short review. I’m assuming many of you reading this were upset by things I’ve said or related here. It is a topic that benefits from defining words, clarifying meanings, and acknowledging tricky applications. I can’t disclose everything here that DeYoung did in his book. Don’t judge his arguments based on what I’ve presented to you.

Especially considering my ‘unnamed dissatisfaction’ I would encourage you to read this and Grudem’s book for yourself and give yourself access to all the same information I had in writing this. I do not claim to have authority or specialized knowledge of this and would not want to lead you astray.

I don’t think this is the best book you could read about men and women in the church, but I don’t think you will find anything unbiblical here.


Some quotes:

“The one feature of human existence that shapes life as much or more than any other—our biological sex—was God’s choice.”

“We should not equate male leadership with female passivity.”

“Most of the positive and negative examples of women in the Old Testament are positive or negative based on how they influenced men for good or for evil.”

“What we can say from verse 3— and this is all we really need to say— is that headship does not have to be harsh (for God is the head of Christ) and to be under the headship of another does not have to be demeaning (for Christ is under the headship of God).”  (1 Cor 11:3)

“His plan is for a watching world to look at husband and wife and see such gentle, joyful submission and such self-denying, loving leadership that it gets a picture of the beauty that is the relationship between Christ and his church. Nothing less than God’s full glory is at stake.”

“Though a call may be honestly felt, making such an appeal the decisive factor is dangerously subjective. I have no problem with people referring to their vocation, pastoral or otherwise, as a ‘calling’ if by the term they simply mean to acknowledge a spiritual purpose in their word. But as a decision-making tool, trying to discern one’s ‘calling’ by internal feelings and impressions is an unsure guide. God’s objective revelation in Scripture must have priority over our subjective understanding of God's will for our lives.” 


An inconsequential sidenote: I read an advanced reader’s copy and was assured that all spelling and grammatical errors would be corrected in the published copy. But the use of ‘woman’ for ‘women’ and vice versa is one of my greatest spelling error pet peeves and it occurred quite frequently. So let’s hope their editor finds all of them!!!

**Received an ARC via Amazon**

Further Reading:
- Evangelical Feminism: A New Path to Liberalism? by Wayne Grudem
- Designed for Joy: How the Gospel Impacts Men and Women, Identity and Practice by Strachan, Owen (& Jonathan Parnell)
- a(Typical) Woman: Free, Whole, and Called in Christ by Abigail Dodds

Three books Kevin DeYoung recommended in this book that I have not read yet:

- God’s Design for Man and Woman by Andreas and Margaret Kostenberger 
- God’s Design for Women by Sharon James 
- God’s Good Design by Clair Smith 

To read more book reviews on a variety of genres and topics check out my book review blog: Shelf Reflection!

“Pursuing the unity of the church does not mean that we should stop caring about theology. But it does mean that our love of theology should never exceed our love of real people, and therefore we must learn to love people amid our theological disagreements.”

Gavin Ortlund, brother to Dane Ortlund (Gentle and Lowly), has written a great book reminding us that we must be careful not to battle doctrine at the expense of people- God’s image-bearers, and the very souls we are trying to save with our theology.

His plea to us is to exercise theological triage as we interact with other people and churches with differing theological viewpoints.

This term, coined by R. Albert Mohler, plays on the medical term of triage and poses a system of theological prioritization. Ortlund presents us with these four tiers:

1. Doctrines that are essential to the gospel
2. Doctrines that are urgent for the health and practice of the church such that Christians commonly divide denominationally over them
3. Doctrines that are important for one branch of theology or another, but not such that they should lead to separation
4. Doctrines that are unimportant to gospel witness and ministry collaboration

[An alternative gradation mentioned is: absolutes, convictions, opinions, and questions.]


He gives a couple examples for each tier and briefly discusses the opposing sides, but his goal for this book is not to convince you of his viewpoint (though sometimes his writing turns persuasive). He desires unity in the body of Christ and wants to help us understand how to use wisdom, discernment, and humility to determine what differences are hills worth dying on.

“In this book I am less concerned with convincing others of the particular judgments I have made, and more concerned that, even where we disagree, we do so in a spirit of trembling before the word of God.”

The learner in me just wanted him to provide a nice handy little chart I could reference with every doctrine imaginable placed into the correct tier, but of course, it’s not that simple. And that would be missing the point. If we are too honed in on the letter of the law, checking the list and delivering ‘the truth’, we lose sight of the people it affects. We will have discarded humility for pride.

And so, in that way, this book was really good for me.


He begins the book by acknowledging two basic camps we tend to fall into: doctrinal sectarianism and doctrinal minimalism.

“There is no doctrine a fundamentalist won’t fight over, and no doctrine a liberal will fight over.”

The source of this quote is unknown and technically unfair to both fundamentalists and liberals, as Ortlund concedes, but is somewhat helpful in seeing the difference between these two camps.

It points out that we either tend to fight over doctrine too much (sectarianism) or too little (minimalism).

And further, we then, based on these groupings, form opinions and perceptions of others.

“If our identity is riding on our differences with other believers, we will tend to major in the study of differences. We may even find ourselves looking for faults in others in order to define ourselves.”

“Too often, each side assumes the worst of the other or associates everyone who holds a particular view with its worst representations.”


Ortlund is clear that first-rank doctrines are worth fighting for:

“Biblical authority is one of the most pressing issues for the life and health of the church: it ensures that we remain the judged, not the judges, in our relation to God and truth… One reason first-rank doctrines are worth fighting for is that their denial weakens the authoritative, corrective role that God’s word is supposed to have over us.”

There are dangers when we start using ‘secondary’ synonymous with ‘doesn’t matter’:

“One consequence of downplaying the importance of nonessential doctrines is, however inadvertently, downplaying Scripture itself… Whenever we ask whether something is essential, we must also ask, ‘Essential for what?’ Everything God reveals in Scripture is essential for something, or it wouldn’t be there.”


For me, I lean to the side of fighting too much. So this book was challenging to me some ways. I was good with the chapter on first-rank doctrines but as we progressed I found myself resisting to agree to disagree and saying, ‘But isn’t that still important?’

And to this Ortlund would say- Yes!

Just because it is second or third ranked does not mean it’s not important! And so there are nuances even within each tier as doctrines vary in importance and vary in how it relates to gospel comprehension/adherence and church health. It all must be taken into consideration.

I liked this quote he gave from Kevin DeYoung:

“We should steer clear of theological wrangling that is speculative (goes beyond Scripture), vain (more about being right than being helpful), endless (no real answer is possible or desired), and needless (mere semantics).”

Oof. How easy is it to focus so much on being right that we are no longer being helpful?


Because I know you’re wondering by now what doctrines fall where, here are some examples he gave for each rank and what our attitude should be in handling them:

First rank: the Trinity, virgin birth, justification by faith alone
Attitude: Courage and conviction

Second rank: baptism (infant vs believer), spiritual gifts (cessationism vs continuationism), women in ministry (egalitarian vs complementarianism)
Attitude: Wisdom and balance

Third rank: millennium (a-, pre-, post-), creation days (old vs young earth etc)
Attitude: Circumspection and restraint

Fourth Rank: musical instrumentation during worship
Attitude: More drums and electric guitar (Just kidding. I don’t think he gave one for these, but as a bass guitarist, I tend to side with the drummer.)


I’m sure I’m dying on too many hills and I need to knock it off. I think this book helped me recognize some doctrines that are okay to disagree on, especially in his notation of the various theologians on each side. But there were two places that made me wonder- should this be more important than Ortlund makes it out to be?

The first is the doctrine of women in ministry. I just finished Kevin DeYoung’s book, Men and Women in the Church and, having already read Grudem’s book, Evangelical Feminism, I feel like I’m on an interesting path to discovery. I had not realized all of these different nuances of this debate. It had seemed much simpler to me before.

So my question is this. Based on Grudem’s work, which I tend to agree with, many of the egalitarian viewpoints are based on an interpretation of Scripture that uses trajectory hermeneutics or undermines the authority and inerrancy of Scripture— a method of interpretation that would be detrimental to be applied anywhere else. Wouldn’t that be classified as a first-rank issue? And I’m sure not every counter argument to a complementary viewpoint denies the authority and inerrancy of Scripture, but if it does, would we raise a difference regarding women in ministry to a first-rank doctrine in order that we uphold the very Word of God?

The second is the doctrine of creation. My qualm is not necessarily with an old vs young earth viewpoint. I personally believe in a young earth that God created with age. But for those who believe in an old earth and that God used evolution to bring about humanity, how do they explain and view Adam and Eve? Allegory or historical?

I think it is a first-rank doctrine to believe in Adam and Eve as real historical people who were the first humans. If you don’t have this then how do we understand in Romans that “as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men.”? (5:18) This seems paramount to understanding salvation— Adam being our literal representative in sin and Jesus being our literal representative in righteousness. Since it pertains to matters of salvation wouldn’t we elevate the importance of this divergence?


The more I think about this book the simpler theological triage becomes and the more complicated it becomes. I think I have my mind wrapped around it, and then I think of a new hypothetical. I kinda wish he had provided more case studies in how this has played out in various churches. Though I understand he probably intentionally kept it from that lest readers take it as prescriptive. But the pessimist in me comes away from this book thinking ‘Will this actually unify the church? Can we really stop dividing over differences? Does this book truly teach us how to do that? Or will we just find all the ways the issues should be first-rank as I’ve done above?’


Even as I disagree with Ortlund in some places or pose my questions in others, I still think this is a very important and good book. If humanity can polarize an issue, we are going to do it. Us vs Them mentality is rampant and is fueling outrage on any topic with more than one viewpoint. So the idea of theological triage is absolutely necessary in maintaining a unified church.

“If maintaining the unity of the body of Christ is not costing you anything—if it doesn’t hurt— then you probably are not adjusting enough.”

An important consideration Ortlund points out is when defending our viewpoint supersedes the presentation of the gospel. We should be wary if any doctrinal ‘fight’ begins to displace the gospel from the focus of our ministry.

At the end of the book (and throughout) he places due emphasis on humility. I love this quote from Augustine:

“If you should ask, and as often as you should ask, about the precepts of the Christian religion, my inclination would be to answer nothing but humility, unless necessity should force me to say something else."

And Hans Kristensen said, ‘It’s not just about what you fight over but about how you fight.'

I am always due for another dose of humility and this was a good reminder to exercise this in every doctrinal disagreement we have. Satan loves to see divisions in God’s church. He will have no problem championing a specific doctrinal stance in our minds until we’ve ostracized another child of God to maintain it. Let’s not give him a foothold.

“If you can devise any such strictness of opinions, or exactness in church orders, or strictness in worship, as will but help to kill men’s love, and set the churches in divisions, Satan will be your helper, and will be the strictest and exactness of you all... [be not] deceived as to the author of your zeal…” - Richard Baxter

For the health of the church, we must humbly, wisely, and graciously utilize theological triage.


**Received an ARC via Amazon**

Book Review Blog: www.shelfreflection.com
Pinterest: @shelfreflectionblog

“Because we live in a created world, our bodies are a gift. But because we live in a fallen world, they might not be the gift we would have wanted.”

Are you thankful for your body?

Maybe our knee-jerk reaction is yes, but it’s a tricky question when we’re really honest with ourselves.

We all have parts of our bodies that we wish looked or functioned a little differently. Our bodies can cause us a lot of pain— physically or emotionally. They can be the source of shame or ongoing struggle. Our bodies have certain limitations, some more than others.

I think we can all agree that our bodies are not perfect in every way.


So, how then, should we view the body?

Something to be escaped? Something to be perfected? Something to be ignored?
Worthless? Pointless?
A hindrance? A trophy?

Sam Allberry has written this fantastic book sharing with us what God says about our bodies, helping us understand this necessary but at times uncomfortable thing. It is thoughtful, gospel-oriented and very pertinent to today.


To start- our bodies are not inconsequential.

Our bodies matter and what we do with our bodies matters.

Paul Tripp sums up the book pretty well in his foreword to this book:

“Your body––my body––is not just there, happening to exist. It means something to God. He knows it. He made it. He cares about it. And all that Christ has done in his death and resurrection is not in order for us one day to escape our body, but for him one day to redeem it.”


Allberry has appropriately split his book into three parts:
- Created Bodies (why our bodies are good)
- Broken Bodies (how our bodies feel bad)
- Redeemed Bodies (when/how our bodies will be perfected)

He broaches many topics in discussing our bodies including gender, identity, sex, self-harm, illness, aging, death, disability, dysphoria, and empathy. And he does it all gently, with both compassion and conviction. I believe his primary goal in this book is to lay out how important and purposeful our bodies are, how they can be used to glorify God, and how we have hope that all things will be made right.

We can think too little of our bodies, believing we can do whatever we want with them because it doesn’t matter. Or we can think too much of them, believing our worth and identity is wrapped up in our bodies’ appearances and capabilities.

But to think biblically about our bodies we must recognize that what God has created is good and so our bodies matter. Further, our bodies are broken and we need redemption. And so we live in this tension between two gardens— Eden before sin corrupted bringing pain and brokenness and Eden restored where we will finally walk unblemished with our Lord. We yearn for rightness but we must wrestle with wrongness until we are redeemed.


One of the more controversial claims of this book (though rooted in Scripture) is how gender and identity is shaped by our bodies, especially in terms of gender identity, sexual orientation, and gender roles. I venture to guess that his discussion of this might be a driving factor in your opinion of this book. It is not the primary focus of the book in message or in page real estate but let’s go ahead and address the elephant in the room.

Increasingly, our culture is separating our identity from our bodies. A body is merely the transportation or casing for our ‘selves’ or ‘spirit’ or ‘soul’ or what have you. It cannot tell us anything about who we are and is a blank canvas on which we paint the version of ourselves that we feel is best. But is this thinking right?

“Theologian Tom Wright puts it this way: ‘The great controlling myth of our time has been the belief that within each one of us there is a real, inner, private “self,” long buried beneath layers of socialization and attempted cultural and religious control, and needing to be rediscovered if we are to live authentic lives.’”

Carl Trueman explores this in-depth in his must-read book, The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self, which tracks the historical influences that have led to the shift in how we view the self and how that change interacts with our culture. He says,

“Satisfaction and meaning—authenticity—are now found by an inward turn, and the culture is reconfigured to this end. Indeed, it must now serve the purpose of meeting my psychological needs; I must not tailor my psychological needs to the nature of society, for that would create anxiety and make me inauthentic… The era of psychological man therefore requires changes in the culture and its institutions, practices, and beliefs that affect everyone. They all need to adapt to reflect a therapeutic mentality that focuses on the psychological well-being of the individual.”

‘Authenticity’ is the mark of fulfillment. If our bodies don’t ‘match’ our authentic selves in appearance or practice, we must do what it takes to be in harmony with our ‘true self’ and that is deemed celebratory.

Allberry points out the shift in cultural and moral values that tags along with this concept:

“In our culture, the hero today is not the person who risks his body for the sake of others, but the person who lays aside anything and anyone for the sake of being authentic. We most esteem not self-sacrifice, but self-expression.”

Self-expression elevated over self-sacrifice and at the expense of our given biological bodies is a rejection of God’s design and his example in Jesus Christ. We are taking what the Creator made and deemed “very good” in Genesis and are telling Him, ‘No, you didn’t do this right. I know better than you.’

“…[but] if we have been created, then our body is not some arbitrary lump of matter. It means something. It is not peripheral to our understanding of who we are. For all the difficulties you may have with it, it is the body God wanted you to have.

This can be a hard thing to bear. We’ve already established that our bodies can cause us physical and emotional pain. But we can be comforted that the bodies we were given are not worthless, pointless, or wrong. They are loved, purposed, and good.

“We’re not just the outcome of God’s activity; we are the product of God’s intention.”


And yet, we do experience brokenness. When sin entered the world, it affected our bodies. We get sick, we get hurt, we get old, we die. Our bodies don’t look or feel the way we want them to. Further, our bodies also experience pain that is caused by the sins of other bodies. This speaks to our inability to separate our bodies from our 'selves.’

“However much we might privilege the mind or soul over the body as the “real” us, we know deep down that the body is an essential part of who we truly are. When people hurt your body, you know that they have not just damaged some of your property; they have violated you. What you do to someone’s body, you do to a person.”

We cannot deny our God-given biological gender as it pertains to who we are and who God designed us to be.



To the question of gender roles, Allberry critiques the church for adding to Scripture by trying to define exactly what it means to be masculine or feminine too specifically. This is a long excerpt, but essential:

“We each have our own deep sense of what constitutes true masculinity and femininity, and we can all too easily assume that sense has come from the Bible, especially if we’re holding it in contrast to what a wider, secular culture around us might be saying. But what seems obvious and instinctive to us about the nature of men and women might reflect our own cultural prejudices more than what the Bible actually says…

…we must be careful about saying that all men or all women should be this way or that way, or that men should be interested in these things and women in those things. More often than not, we will not find these views in the Bible…

…And while we mustn’t overdefine what these differences are, neither must we deny they exist at all. This is especially important given that it is increasingly common to think that being equal must mean being the same in every respect––that equality cannot properly exist where there is any kind of difference.”

There is more to be said on this, and I would suggest Men and Women in the Church as a good starting place or a(typical) Woman if you’re a woman. (I’ll be reading more on this topic so check back regularly on my blog for more content).

But the main point on gender roles/differences is that, as Allberry says, men and women aren’t meant to be interchangeable. For example, there are differences in appearance and demeanor between men and women. God has designed us to be equal yet different in function.

There are some traits or tendencies that more typify men than women and vice versa. He gives the example of men being quarrelsome (1 Tim. 2:8) and emphasizes that it doesn’t mean we view this statement: “universally (all men, without exception), absolutely (all men to the same extent, with no variation), or exclusively (only men, as if women couldn’t be quarrelsome), but generally, typically.”

He reminds us that as men and women, we exhibit the fruits of the Spirit in “differing proportions between the sexes and within them.” We are not assigned 4 or 5 because we are women and the other ones get to be for the men.

Men and women both pursue godliness, and we must use wisdom when we teach how this is exhibited differently— as to not add nor take away from what the Bible tells us or prescribe where we merely see patterns.


[One thing I’ll add here: I wish Allberry would have addressed in this book the prevalent idea in the Western world that women’s bodies are empowering. He doesn’t talk at all about modesty, which gets tricky considering cultural differences, but this idea that if women reveal their bodies or use them in certain ways that it is empowering to women baffles me— I believe this idea to be damaging rather than empowering and I think it would have been beneficial to include in this book about our bodies.]


To the question of gender dysphoria- it is real. And I can’t imagine how it feels to feel like you’ve been assigned the wrong biological gender. It is not something we should sweep under the rug, shame, or gloss over with platitudes. There are really hard struggles with our bodies, like gender dysphoria, that may or may not get easier. That is a heavy weight to bear.

We don’t really have the answer to the question ‘why?’ but we are shown time and again in Scripture that Jesus sees you and he desires you to bring your bodily burden to him for rest.

I love the truth that Tim and Kathy Keller share with us about dysphoria: “To have your feelings sharply out of accord with your body is a life-dominating grief. As Christians, we of all people should be able to show understanding and compassion, knowing how the fall has twisted what God pronounced “good” when he made humanity into a binary-gendered reflection of his nature.”

When Jesus took on flesh “it was the ultimate experience of being in the wrong flesh. There was no greater dysphoria ever experienced. And he went through all of that for us… Only through being in Christ’s body—through the change in identity that comes from being a child in his family—does anyone find ultimate relief from their sense of dislocation in the world.”

There are burdens God has asked us to carry— physically and emotionally— with our broken bodies. But he has not asked us to do it alone. He beckons us to come to him and trust him with these burdens. We can trust him with our bodies—after all, he made them!

Katherine Elizabeth Clark, who experienced her own story of a broken body, says this in her book, Where I End, as she challenges us to stop asking ‘why?’ and instead ask ‘to what end?’:

“The question ‘To what end?’ however, turns our hearts back to our kindhearted Father who bids us come, to trust in Him, to rest in His promise that though sadness and grief, pain and hardship are ever with us now, He sees and is all the time working powerfully toward ends that are good, ends that are more beautiful and impossible than we could ever imagine… Rather than take the position of accuser, which leads us to discouragement and despair, we must set our eyes on Jesus and the ends for which He calls us.”


Again, I’ve focused on gender identity in my review of this book, but Allberry covers so much more. I wanted to also share what Allberry talks about in terms of how we, then, use our body to worship the Lord.

1 Corinthians 6:19-20 says—"Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body."

The Wailing Wall in Jerusalem is a place of pilgrimage for Jews to go and mourn the loss of their temple, God’s dwelling place. But the Bible tells us our bodies are now temples because God has chosen to give us His Spirit to dwell within us. That is significant! We did nothing to earn this, but it is a gift. One that came at great cost. We don’t like the idea of ‘being bought’ but in this context it means freedom, dignity, and worth. Jesus died for us and to belong to him is a blessing.

So when Paul says in Romans 6:12-13…

“Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, to make you obey its passions. Do not present your members to sin as instruments for unrighteousness, but present yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life, and your members to God as instruments for righteousness.”

…we understand that to glorify God with our bodies means we turn away from sin. We don’t use our bodies (meaning all of ourselves) to sin. And we willingly do this out of love and gratitude for the unmerited grace and gift of life he has given us. Not to earn his love but because he loved us first.


Allberry goes through three ways shown in the New Testament of how we can honor God with our bodies: stewarding, consecrating, and disciplining them.

This includes mention of the expected sins that we need to avoid, but he also talks about food, sleep, self-harm, our words, and our posture in prayer. I think we often reduce our bodies’ sinfulness to sexual sin because it gets the most publicity but there are many other ways that we use or treat our bodies against God’s design.

“…we do have bodily wants and desires that need to be constantly resisted if we are to move forward with Christ. If we go with our physical instincts, without questioning and resisting them, we will drift away from the prize. Paul’s final words here are a sober warning: ‘I discipline my body and keep it under control, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified.’ (1 Cor. 9:27)”


And of course, I would be remiss if I didn’t bring up hope!

God is in the business of redemption.

We endure the bodily burdens we have. We push through the pain of our broken, disappointing, and hurting bodies. And we rejoice because God has promised to make all things right. If we are in Christ, we will be given new, glorified bodies.

“But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep.” (1 Corinthians 15:20)

Jesus was resurrected in bodily form and so will we. Just like a seed buried in dark soil dies in order to grow new life, we too will die an earthly death, be buried, and will rise to new life. "…growth can only happen because the plant first dies. Leaving the seed in its packaging leads to nothing. It has to die first."

“Death used to be an executioner, but the Gospel makes him just a gardener.”— poet George Herbert


So yes, we can and should be thankful for our bodies, created with love and purposed for godly worship.

Our life on earth is not our best life; the best is yet to come. But that doesn’t render our life or body useless. We wait patiently and confidently knowing our bodily struggles will not be in vain. God will redeem our hearts, minds, souls, and bodies.

And this is, indeed, good news!


Some other quotes:

“Ultimately the pains and struggles we experience in our bodies are not a sign that our bodies have no value but that God hasn’t finished with them yet.”

“Color-blindness is not uncommon—you may in fact experience it… But just because some struggle to distinguish red from green doesn’t mean that the colors red and green do not actually exist. They clearly do. They are objective realities. [like binary genders] That some confuse one for the other does not change that. In fact, when we drive, our lives depend on the fact these two colors really do exist and are not subjectively determined.”

“We are not meant to be interchangeable, so that all one can do, the other must also do in exactly the same way. It is not always helpful to compare one with another, as though we are pitted against each other in a zero sum competition. G. K. Chesterton hits the nail on the head in this short poem: ‘If I set the sun beside the moon, And if I set the land beside the sea, And if I set the town beside the country, And if I set the man beside the woman, I suppose some fool would talk about one being better.’”

“Today we all collude in upholding an expectation of beauty that is virtually fantastical. No wonder we view our bodies as increasingly flawed. We’re not comparing them to the best of our species but to the best of our species’ imagination.”

“When we disparage people because of the way they are physically, we are not just disparaging them; we are disparaging the God in whose image they have been carefully made.”

“Sin is not just wrong in some abstract sense. It is wrong in that it contradicts how God has meant us to live. Not every sin is directly and immediately harmful in a way that is obvious to all. Many sins are more subtle. But they can set us on a course that we might never have intended to go, and now we’re doing things we never imagined doing and find ourselves feeling powerless to stop doing.”

“[Jesus] knows what it is to be thirsty, hungry, despised, rejected, scorned, shamed, embarrassed, abandoned, misunderstood, falsely accused, suffocated, tortured, and killed. He knows what it is to be lonely.”— Dane Ortlund

**Received an ARC via NetGalley**

Book Review Blog: www.shelfreflection.com
Pinterest: @shelfreflectionblog

Dear Alabama,
You’re kinda the worst.

This is one of those books that infuriates you because it seems insane that injustices like this exist in the world.

[It’s worth mentioning that this book was published in 2014 so I’m not up to speed on what changes we have seen since then. Certain information/stats found here may not be accurate anymore.]

Just Mercy is a book with two purposes:
1. to share the story of Walter McMillian, wrongly convicted man on death row
2. to bring awareness to the dangers of capital punishment and the overall brokenness in the criminal justice system, especially in treatment of racial minorities, the poor, children, and the disabled

[Much of this book, in content and in writing style, reminded me of Jemar Tisby’s book The Color of Compromise— especially in terms of opening our eyes to injustices that have been ignored, hidden, or downplayed.]


To the purpose of sharing Walter’s story, Stevenson did a fantastic job of drawing the reader in—we feel Walter’s pain and have an almost visceral reaction to the gross injustice blatantly conducted on his case.

However, I wasn’t a big fan of the formatting of this book and the way they inserted somewhat unrelated chapters and split up Walter’s story. I understand the purpose of the non-Walter chapters as they speak to purpose 2 of this book, but it was disjointed and I think took away from the punch of Walter’s story. Intermixing all the different people and cases in conjunction with the legal jargon was often hard to follow and keep straight, often requiring a few minutes to get my bearings.

I’m not sure if I could propose a better suggestion as probably a lot of people read this book specifically for Walter’s story, so by mixing the material, it forces people who want to finish Walter’s story to read through the rest of the book in the process. I get it. I just didn’t like the flow.

To the purpose of bringing awareness to an unjust justice system, I have mixed feelings about it. Of course, my gut reaction reading this book is outrage. How are these things happening?! Where is the accountability?! How could authorities let these fools get away with this or, themselves, purposely hide the truth?! Why are children treated this way!? Everything is corrupt!


There are many shocking things I learned about mass incarceration, prison, and the law. Capital punishment is a common ‘debate’ topic in high school debate or speech classes. But I realize now as an adult how little we know in high school about the implications of many of the arguments. Plus you argue a side without seeing the humanity of those it affects.

That’s one thing I think Stevenson whole-heartedly accomplished— to help us see the humanity of people who are considered convicts. Whatever convictions you have about the death penalty or the justice system, this book will cause you to really think about it all and to consider all the factors.

If this book does nothing else but to force you to think about the criminal justice system and prison and the people subjected to them, then I think it’s worth reading because those things are worth thinking about.

He says, “The true measure of our character is how we treat the poor, the disfavored, the accused, the incarcerated, and the condemned.” And I agree that it is all too easy, to dehumanize “criminals.” Instead we need to see each and every person as an image-bearer of God.


I will share some of these shocking things I learned because I think awareness is essential to holding our justice system accountable. But I will disclaim that as much as we hold on to people’s humanity, we must also hold to wisdom and think critically when presented with this information. More on that later.

1. The US has the highest rate of incarceration in the world. 2.3 million people today. 1 in 15 people born in us in 2001 is expected to go to jail or prison.

2. The US is the only country in the world that condemns children to life imprisonments without parole: nearly 3000 juveniles have been sentenced to die in prison. [I believe this is no longer]

3. A 2011 poll of Mississippi Republicans found 46% support a legal ban on interracial marriage, 40% oppose and 14% undecided

4. Black people were regularly struck from juries for no reason other than to maintain all-white juries which led to unfair trials

5. Florida and Alabama allow judges to override jury sentencing and impose their own sentence

6. Electric chair and lethal injection executions can fail and it’s borderline cruel

7. By the mid-1980s nearly 20% of the people in jails and prisons in the US had served in the military

8. A correctional officer raped a female prisoner (age 16) and was only fired; he faced no criminal charges.

9. Today over 50% of prison and jail inmates in the US have a diagnosed mental illness, a rate nearly five times greater than that if the general adult population.

10. Mace or fire extinguishers were (are?) used on inmates having seizures so guards could “safely” go in and help.

11. Dr. Ed Seger made up his credentials. Before his fraud was uncovered, he masqueraded at a hospital for eight years conducting competency evaluations on people accused of crimes that often resulted in long criminal sentences, sometimes death

12. Confederate Memorial Day was declared a state holiday in Alabama at the turn of the century and it is still celebrated

13. A judge in Alabama asked when people were going to start protecting “the rights of Confederate Americans”

14. People with drug convictions are banned from public benefits and welfare aka public housing and food stamps. This affects many women with minor children.

15. Many poor women who had no health care and experienced stillbirths ended up convicted of killing their babies, being sentenced to life without parole or even death

16. The amount of sexual assault in prisons (both men’s and women’s) is astronomical

17. 22 states offer no compensation to the wrongly imprisoned. And prosecutors and judges receive special immunity from being sued for their, often times deliberate, miscarriage of justice and failure to do their job


So here’s what’s challenging to me reading this book. I know that Walter’s story is true. He was wrongly convicted and many people purposefully hid or ignored any and all evidence in order to carry out this conviction. I in no way question the veracity of Walter’s story. Or many of the other stories Stevenson included in this book.

But we have to use critical thinking when we start putting heavy weight on stats or using broad strokes about laws and sentencing. Many of the things listed above are straightforward and would be hard to view any other way, but some are not so simple.

For example, Stevenson calls out the US for their high incarceration rates. But we must consider all explanations. Maybe the US does incarcerate too many people, I find Stevenson’s critique of drug sentencing disparities compelling. But there could be other correlations to consider. Does the US have a larger police force to cover more ground and handle more arrests and investigations? Does the US have more money/space to have more prisons to house more prisoners while other countries don’t have the capacity to incarcerate everyone they would like to? Asking these questions is not excusing the injustices, but can better inform our understanding of the facts.

Another example would be the stat that says 50% of incarcerated persons have a mental illness. That sounds really bad. How can we incarcerate so many people that potentially don’t really understand what’s going on or not provide them with proper treatment? I think medical care for prisoners, especially with mental illness needs to be reformed, but we must ask the question of this stat- did these persons have this mental illness prior to their trial and imprisonment? Or did so many prisoners develop mental illnesses as a result of the experience and trauma of prison? The answer to this tells us whether the bigger problem is in failure to recognize the mental illness in proper sentencing and treatment during the trial or whether the bigger problem is the conditions and treatment after incarceration. Neither is excusable, but Stevenson doesn’t explain this caveat.

The point here is basically, I’m realizing that I need to do more research on the topic of sentencing, capital punishment, and prison reform. Just Mercy is a valid resource, but it’s not able to present the full story. I’d like to hear the ‘whys’ behind a lot of the laws Stevenson was fighting against. It would at least help us to understand which laws are blatantly discriminating or cruel and which ones were not intended that way but end up working out that way because of other reasons.


To this point of ‘the full story’ it would be hard to deny that the things being shown in the media today affect how we view trials and crimes. Walter’s story shows us firsthand how media’s coverage and narrative of a person or a crime can really truly ruin people’s lives. Irresponsible and biased reporting highly influences the public opinion and belief of what is true.

I think today’s media coverage has caused me to question everything more. There are always two sides to a story. That is why we have a prosecution and a defense. Hopefully by the end of a trial we get both the information trying to be revealed and the information trying to be hidden. And I think the media has done a severe injustice for stories like Walter’s because they are championing many people that were not innocent like Walter. We believe them to be innocent but then we learn more information and we see the complexities of the issue. And they are taking coverage away from the real injustices done to the innocent like Walter that need to be heard.

I know this is not a popular opinion but as Tisby proclaims on the cover of his book, ‘There can be no justice without truth.’ We must doggedly pursue truth, even if it means admitting things we don’t want to admit.

I think asking questions to these claims is important to determining the truth and identifying the real problems in order to fix the right problems. The book Confronting Injustice without Compromising Truth emphasizes this necessity of asking the right questions so that we are enacting social justice that actually helps.


This book was very eye-opening for me and it ignites a fire to fight for justice. At the same time, it overwhelms me to think about how we can fix it. As we read, how can we trust a justice system when judges can overrule a jury’s sentencing decision and impose the death penalty, when correctional officers can get away with rape with basically no consequences, when prosecutors can illegally fail to share evidence with the defense that would exonerate a defendant and then be immune from lawsuits filed against their extreme misconduct? This shows a purposeful pursuit of injustice. How can we hold the authorities accountable?


The question I keep coming back to as I ponder all of these things is this:

How do we maintain a proper picture and treatment of someone’s humanity and status of image bearer while still carrying out justice for crimes done (past/present/future) against other image bearers? Can we do both?

I’ve never had a passionate stance either way on capital punishment. For premeditated murderers that evidence can clearly convict, I don’t necessarily see a problem with that. But what this book has done is shown me that the method and process in which we’ve given people trials that have put people on death row have not been thorough or fair. I don’t know the full stats of how many people who have actually been executed for a crime they didn’t commit, but there’s been over 150 people freed from death row which seems significant. It has at least shaken my faith in trusting prosecutors and judges to acknowledge errors and seek truth free from their own biases.

The idea of the death penalty is to acknowledge the sanctity of life. This concept is found in the very first chapters of the Bible when God sanctions man to be killed for shedding the blood of another [not as a civilian right to carry out but as a governmental duty]. If the consequences of purposefully killing another person are too little, it would seem to be sending the message that life is not worth that much after all.

Our actions should rightfully have consequences. At some point people must take moral responsibility. We can’t displace all the blame on background, environment, circumstances, especially in the case of murder, though they aren’t to be ignored. There are conflicting studies on whether or not capital punishment is an adequate deterrent, partly because the appeal process can take years, affecting our ability to truly track it appropriately. And at some point we can’t really know how many lives are saved from potential future offenders or how many people are actually deterred from crime. We must weigh the benefits and risks.


On another note: the widespread and rampant rape and sexual assault found in both men and women’s prisons is just appalling to me. Both prisoners and correctional officers being frequent offenders. I don’t understand how this is allowed to happen. Rape is right up there with murder as far as violation of bodies go and there is no excuse for prisons’ inability to do something about it and treat it like the crime it is regardless of who the victims are.

I find this intensely relevant today when we hear groups passionately advocating for men who identify as women to be allowed in women’s prisons (and locker rooms, etc.) There has already been instances of violence and rape from men who have been moved into women’s prisons. Considering how uncontrolled rape is, especially in prisons, I find it completely and utterly unconvincing that this is a good idea. I think that is an injustice we can add to our list of things to fight against.


In this same vein, I found it interesting when Stevenson provides this information when he argued at the Supreme Court to ban capital punishment and life without parole sentences for children/adolescents. There are true injustices done to adolescents in sentencing that are appalling, especially in light of this:

“Contemporary neurological, psychological, and sociological evidence has established that children are impaired by immature judgment, an underdeveloped capacity for self-regulation and responsibility, vulnerability to negative influences and outside pressures, and a lack of control over their own impulses and their environment…Young teens lack the maturity, independence, and future orientation that adults have acquired…Young adolescents lack life experience and background knowledge to inform their choices; they struggle to generate options and to imagine consequences; and, perhaps for good reason, they lack the necessary self-confidence to make reasoned judgments and stick by them.”

This justly defends adolescents’ right for second chances and rehabilitation in terms of crimes committed. And I’ll do you one further— I believe this research also needs to be applied as we navigate the waters of adolescents claiming transgender identities. Abigail Shrier brings up these facts in her book Irreversible Damage. I think the protection of youth from their own [scientifically] poor judgement that Stevenson is advocating for in this book is significant to the gender identity and transgender discussion. It was not his intention when supplying this information in this book, yet I find it compelling to draw attention to in other culturally relevant ways.


There is so much to be discussed within this book. I have so many questions and comments but I’ve already gone on too long. I know I will be contemplating it for awhile and will continue to read more about these topics.

There are clearly lots of problems in our criminal justice system that are worth fighting. There is mistreatment of racial minorities, children, mentally ill, and disabled defendants. We must work to advocate for them and seek truth and proper treatment on their behalf. And we must do it all with a sober mind, critically thinking and asking the right questions.



[Sidenote: I’m still slightly confused about the title- Just Mercy. Mercy= not getting what we deserve. Justice= getting what we do deserve. I feel like most of what he was fighting was for people who didn’t deserve what they were subjected/condemned to. He says, “Mercy is just when it is rooted in hopefulness and freely given.” But I’m still not seeing the connection here… am I overthinking this…?]

Book Review Blog: www.shelfreflection.com
Pinterest: @shelfreflectionblog