Take a photo of a barcode or cover
shelfreflectionofficial's Reviews (844)
(3.5 rounded up)
“The dice are on the carpet!”
The six code words broadcasted far and wide alerting people across Europe that the invasion of France was on the way.
June 6, 1944 was D-Day. When over 150,000 Allied troops landed on the beaches of Normandy, France— one of the largest amphibious military assaults in history. It’s often been called the beginning of the end of war in Europe.
There is an endless supply of WWII novels out there. What makes this book unique is that it focuses on one 24 hour day.
All the Lights Above Us— titled for the thousands of aircraft lights and bombs that lit up the sky that day—follows five different women in Europe and how they were affected and challenged by the events of D-Day.
The Cast of Characters
- Mildred, Berlin, Germany- (denounced) American actress at a German radio station responsible for broadcasting propaganda on the airwaves, trying to convince herself she’s not doing anything wrong. Nickname: Axis Sally, real historical figure.
“Germany gave her fame and fortune, where America gave her scandalous headlines and terrible scorn. Germany fed her, while America starved her. Germany transformed her from a nobody into an icon.”
- Theda, Portsmouth, England- independent woman who hated the idea of marriage and feels like she doesn’t belong since she cares more about books and traveling than homemaking but finds herself caring for soldiers at the hospital.
“A very sad truth, Theda Brown. Sometimes the biggest roadblock to women is the judgment and criticism of other women.”
- Flora, Caen, France- stubborn daughter of deceased parents of the Resistance who has taken up their mantle and tried to prove her usefulness to the Resistance by doing whatever secret tasks she can, like delivering encrypted messages.
“She just couldn’t understand why no one ever took her seriously."
- Adelaide, Sainte-Mère-Église, France- traditional elderly woman billeting (and mothering) German troops in her home, struggling with her usefulness in old age and the tension with her daughter (who views motherhood differently) and wishing she could be with her daughter and granddaughter out in the country.
“Day in and day out, all Adelaide did was mother. But no one had ever called her a good mother, at least not to her face. She couldn’t even say the words to herself in the mirror, because without the validation, she didn’t know if they were true.”
- Emilia, Caen, France- beautiful woman who was destined for the ‘birthing houses’ of Lebensborn to produce more Aryan offspring with German men until she made her escape and ended up working with the Gestapo typing up interrogations.
“She admired those women who had bucked male authority, who made their own mark on the world. Women who never felt the need to run away.”
Themes
All the Lights Above us shows us the terror, the panic, and the danger of that infamous day. It shows us how women from a variety of ages, stations, loyalties, and locations handle the impending invasion. How they muster the courage to do what needs to be done.
Another major theme of this book is the roles and expectations of women during that time. Each character has a male counterpart and an important moment in which they must decide whether they stand up for themselves or ‘fall into line'.’
A less admirable theme is the gore. If this was a movie, it would definitely be rated R for violence and gore. It’s different when you read it than when you see it, but there are a lot of descriptions of destruction, injuries and death.
To give you an idea if you think you can handle it, some of the wording is like this:
“Germans tackled paratroopers to the ground like wildcats. They shredded them to Swiss cheese with bullets.”
“Putrid, rotting algae mixed with the sharp odor of decaying flesh.”
“Teeth cracked, blood spattered, and the jaw broke.”
It’s not super graphic, but it’s enough to make you cringe.
Recommendation
Because there are so many WWII books out there, it’s hard for me to recommend this over some of the other books out there. The idea of focusing on a variety of characters while looking at one day in history is interesting. But I felt like we didn’t get enough time with each character.
I thought that the author was going to intersect all of their stories in the end somehow as we see done in Cloud Cuckoo Land, but only Flora and Emilia interact. I think it would have made more sense of the larger cast of characters if their stories intersected or culminated at the the end.
Instead it feels a bit shallow. It seems like more time was spent describing the war movements/actions/violence than each character’s story. I’m not sure what I would have rather had because there’s only so much ‘character development’ that can happen in the span of one day and to do more back and forth between past and present to create historical depth would only have added to the complexity and flow of the chapters.
I would say if D-Day in particular interests you, or books with many characters, or you just want to read all the WWII stuff there is, then I think you’ll like this book.
If you’re just looking for a really good WWII novel, I’m not sure this is the one I would hand you. It’s not a bad book and I don’t discourage anyone from reading it— there were parts that were gripping— it just didn’t keep my attention like other WWII books I’ve read.
“Wrapped in each other’s arms, they watched the dizzying light show out the window. Flares, antiaircraft fire, bullets, and shells. Liberation.”
**Received an ARC via NetGalley**
Book Review Blog | Facebook | Pinterest
“The dice are on the carpet!”
The six code words broadcasted far and wide alerting people across Europe that the invasion of France was on the way.
June 6, 1944 was D-Day. When over 150,000 Allied troops landed on the beaches of Normandy, France— one of the largest amphibious military assaults in history. It’s often been called the beginning of the end of war in Europe.
There is an endless supply of WWII novels out there. What makes this book unique is that it focuses on one 24 hour day.
All the Lights Above Us— titled for the thousands of aircraft lights and bombs that lit up the sky that day—follows five different women in Europe and how they were affected and challenged by the events of D-Day.
The Cast of Characters
- Mildred, Berlin, Germany- (denounced) American actress at a German radio station responsible for broadcasting propaganda on the airwaves, trying to convince herself she’s not doing anything wrong. Nickname: Axis Sally, real historical figure.
“Germany gave her fame and fortune, where America gave her scandalous headlines and terrible scorn. Germany fed her, while America starved her. Germany transformed her from a nobody into an icon.”
- Theda, Portsmouth, England- independent woman who hated the idea of marriage and feels like she doesn’t belong since she cares more about books and traveling than homemaking but finds herself caring for soldiers at the hospital.
“A very sad truth, Theda Brown. Sometimes the biggest roadblock to women is the judgment and criticism of other women.”
- Flora, Caen, France- stubborn daughter of deceased parents of the Resistance who has taken up their mantle and tried to prove her usefulness to the Resistance by doing whatever secret tasks she can, like delivering encrypted messages.
“She just couldn’t understand why no one ever took her seriously."
- Adelaide, Sainte-Mère-Église, France- traditional elderly woman billeting (and mothering) German troops in her home, struggling with her usefulness in old age and the tension with her daughter (who views motherhood differently) and wishing she could be with her daughter and granddaughter out in the country.
“Day in and day out, all Adelaide did was mother. But no one had ever called her a good mother, at least not to her face. She couldn’t even say the words to herself in the mirror, because without the validation, she didn’t know if they were true.”
- Emilia, Caen, France- beautiful woman who was destined for the ‘birthing houses’ of Lebensborn to produce more Aryan offspring with German men until she made her escape and ended up working with the Gestapo typing up interrogations.
“She admired those women who had bucked male authority, who made their own mark on the world. Women who never felt the need to run away.”
Themes
All the Lights Above us shows us the terror, the panic, and the danger of that infamous day. It shows us how women from a variety of ages, stations, loyalties, and locations handle the impending invasion. How they muster the courage to do what needs to be done.
Another major theme of this book is the roles and expectations of women during that time. Each character has a male counterpart and an important moment in which they must decide whether they stand up for themselves or ‘fall into line'.’
A less admirable theme is the gore. If this was a movie, it would definitely be rated R for violence and gore. It’s different when you read it than when you see it, but there are a lot of descriptions of destruction, injuries and death.
To give you an idea if you think you can handle it, some of the wording is like this:
“Germans tackled paratroopers to the ground like wildcats. They shredded them to Swiss cheese with bullets.”
“Putrid, rotting algae mixed with the sharp odor of decaying flesh.”
“Teeth cracked, blood spattered, and the jaw broke.”
It’s not super graphic, but it’s enough to make you cringe.
Recommendation
Because there are so many WWII books out there, it’s hard for me to recommend this over some of the other books out there. The idea of focusing on a variety of characters while looking at one day in history is interesting. But I felt like we didn’t get enough time with each character.
I thought that the author was going to intersect all of their stories in the end somehow as we see done in Cloud Cuckoo Land, but only Flora and Emilia interact. I think it would have made more sense of the larger cast of characters if their stories intersected or culminated at the the end.
Instead it feels a bit shallow. It seems like more time was spent describing the war movements/actions/violence than each character’s story. I’m not sure what I would have rather had because there’s only so much ‘character development’ that can happen in the span of one day and to do more back and forth between past and present to create historical depth would only have added to the complexity and flow of the chapters.
I would say if D-Day in particular interests you, or books with many characters, or you just want to read all the WWII stuff there is, then I think you’ll like this book.
If you’re just looking for a really good WWII novel, I’m not sure this is the one I would hand you. It’s not a bad book and I don’t discourage anyone from reading it— there were parts that were gripping— it just didn’t keep my attention like other WWII books I’ve read.
“Wrapped in each other’s arms, they watched the dizzying light show out the window. Flares, antiaircraft fire, bullets, and shells. Liberation.”
**Received an ARC via NetGalley**
Book Review Blog | Facebook | Pinterest
Just read “You Who?” by Rachel Jankovic instead. Please. I don’t even care if you read the rest of this review.
I do have a few positive things to say about “Girl, Wash Your Face,” and those are listed at the end. I first wanted to explain the 1-star rating. If Hollis wasn’t a Christian, this book would make perfect sense and I wouldn’t really have any basis of judgment on the content (or lack of content). However, she does claim Christ and attempts to reference God and the Bible a few times in her book, thus I feel compelled to point out how she missed a GIGANTIC opportunity to share the gospel, and frankly ends up doing the opposite.
I didn’t even get past the intro before she says things like: You have control of your own life. You choose your own happiness. Your life is a creation of your own making. In fact, her entire book is filled with these statements. You are your own hero. Your dreams are essential to who you are and don’t let anyone stop you from achieving all the success and wealth you want. You just have to try hard enough, believe enough, and never accept ‘no’ as an answer and you will have everything you want. Because you DESERVE it.
These sentiments, however, are not found in Scripture. The Bible teaches the OPPOSITE. Jesus is our hero. We are his workmanship, not of our own making. God is in control. We are to die to ourselves. We are not worthy. God directs our steps. Our identity is not in our achievements.Self-sufficiency is in direct opposition to God-dependency.
Hollis says, “I believe the Lord gave me this platform to be a good shepherd to this diverse and beautiful flock.” And she is correct to say that she has a huge and diverse platform to encourage people in TRUTH. But instead of following the example of the Good Shepherd, Himself, she teaches people, not to follow Christ and die to self, but to do everything you can to promote yourself, give credit to yourself, and love yourself above all else. To encourage people to live for themselves and to live as if their best life is here on earth. But that’s a LIE. Our best life is not here. It’s in eternity with our Creator. To settle for the success and wealth of this earth, to encourage people to strive after our worldly passions instead of Christ and Him crucified, well I venture to say, whether she has the most righteous intentions or not, she’s sneaking like a wolf instead of guiding like a shepherd.
Luke 9:23 “’Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow me.’”
Romans 6:6 “We know that our old self was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin.”
1 Corinthians 6:19-20 “You are not your own. You were bought with a price. Therefore, honor God with your bodies.”
Ephesians 2 “we all once lived in passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us…made us alive…by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing…not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.”
Matthew 6:33 "But seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be added to you."
As I mentioned before, to someone who doesn’t believe in God, her book would make perfect sense- the most important thing you could do would be to take control of your life and make something for yourself. But as Christians we have a hope for something more. We have freedom and power in Christ and are not bound by our sinful desires and the meager offerings of a broken world. Jesus died so we could die. He rose so we could live. And live for Him. And Hollis clearly did not find that worth sharing.
I also felt discouraged by this: she writes, “Just because you believe it doesn’t mean it’s true for everyone. We decide that our religion is right therefore every other religion must be wrong… I don’t know the central tenet of your faith, but the central tenet of mine is ‘Love they neighbor.’” It’s a nice sentiment that is unpopular to disagree with, but it’s not logical and it’s not biblical. God can’t both exist and not exist. Jesus can’t be both ‘the only way’ and ‘one of many ways’ and ‘not the way’ all at the same time. Truth is not relative. She is not wrong to say we are to love our neighbor. But she skips right over the first tenet ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength’. She doesn’t tell us that Jesus claimed to be ‘THE way, THE truth, THE life’ and that no one comes to the Father but through HIM. She doesn’t tell us that the path to life is narrow and few find it. It would seem she thinks it’s noble to allow everyone to do whatever they want because we all have our own ‘truth.’
SO THE POSITIVE: Hollis gets the feelings. Her writing is funny. I can see how she inspires so many people. I resonated a lot with her chapters on motherhood- the mom-guilt, the fears, the panic, the judgment. I also ached with her adoption journey. Though I have not adopted myself, I can relate with the pain of losing a child you thought would be yours. I appreciate her encouragement to pursue a more diverse community, something I know I need to work on. I also think she recognizes a lot of the problems we have with our identity. She rightly targets the tendency we have to compare ourselves, to be lazy, complacent, aimless, to be the victim, and to think we are worthless. I believe she loves Jesus and I believe she thinks she is doing the best she can to help people see their potential. Her intentions to invest in others’ lives is admirable. She just misses the mark when she presents her solutions. She misses the opportunity to truly change their lives everlasting.
Here is a quote from “You Who?” that I think is appropriate to share here: “If we try to write our stories like the world does, composing our little plot points and shaping ourselves into what we think it would be neat to be, but we love Jesus, this is just making him one more interesting plot point about us. We put our bumper sticker that says ‘Jesus-lover’ on our little lifestyle car…But Christ will not be managed or contained like that. If he truly bought you with his blood, he did not do so in order to get a sponsorship position in your life. He’s not here to look good next to your brand. He bought your life, and you are His.”
And that is what is achingly missing in this book. I can’t advocate for someone to read a book that’s missing the point by such a large margin. Hollis writes that she never reads reviews anymore, so she probably won’t read this, but I hope she can recognize her mission for herself is pushing God out of her life. Don’t let this be true of you.
Book Review Blog | Facebook | Pinterest
I do have a few positive things to say about “Girl, Wash Your Face,” and those are listed at the end. I first wanted to explain the 1-star rating. If Hollis wasn’t a Christian, this book would make perfect sense and I wouldn’t really have any basis of judgment on the content (or lack of content). However, she does claim Christ and attempts to reference God and the Bible a few times in her book, thus I feel compelled to point out how she missed a GIGANTIC opportunity to share the gospel, and frankly ends up doing the opposite.
I didn’t even get past the intro before she says things like: You have control of your own life. You choose your own happiness. Your life is a creation of your own making. In fact, her entire book is filled with these statements. You are your own hero. Your dreams are essential to who you are and don’t let anyone stop you from achieving all the success and wealth you want. You just have to try hard enough, believe enough, and never accept ‘no’ as an answer and you will have everything you want. Because you DESERVE it.
These sentiments, however, are not found in Scripture. The Bible teaches the OPPOSITE. Jesus is our hero. We are his workmanship, not of our own making. God is in control. We are to die to ourselves. We are not worthy. God directs our steps. Our identity is not in our achievements.Self-sufficiency is in direct opposition to God-dependency.
Hollis says, “I believe the Lord gave me this platform to be a good shepherd to this diverse and beautiful flock.” And she is correct to say that she has a huge and diverse platform to encourage people in TRUTH. But instead of following the example of the Good Shepherd, Himself, she teaches people, not to follow Christ and die to self, but to do everything you can to promote yourself, give credit to yourself, and love yourself above all else. To encourage people to live for themselves and to live as if their best life is here on earth. But that’s a LIE. Our best life is not here. It’s in eternity with our Creator. To settle for the success and wealth of this earth, to encourage people to strive after our worldly passions instead of Christ and Him crucified, well I venture to say, whether she has the most righteous intentions or not, she’s sneaking like a wolf instead of guiding like a shepherd.
Luke 9:23 “’Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow me.’”
Romans 6:6 “We know that our old self was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin.”
1 Corinthians 6:19-20 “You are not your own. You were bought with a price. Therefore, honor God with your bodies.”
Ephesians 2 “we all once lived in passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us…made us alive…by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing…not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.”
Matthew 6:33 "But seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be added to you."
As I mentioned before, to someone who doesn’t believe in God, her book would make perfect sense- the most important thing you could do would be to take control of your life and make something for yourself. But as Christians we have a hope for something more. We have freedom and power in Christ and are not bound by our sinful desires and the meager offerings of a broken world. Jesus died so we could die. He rose so we could live. And live for Him. And Hollis clearly did not find that worth sharing.
I also felt discouraged by this: she writes, “Just because you believe it doesn’t mean it’s true for everyone. We decide that our religion is right therefore every other religion must be wrong… I don’t know the central tenet of your faith, but the central tenet of mine is ‘Love they neighbor.’” It’s a nice sentiment that is unpopular to disagree with, but it’s not logical and it’s not biblical. God can’t both exist and not exist. Jesus can’t be both ‘the only way’ and ‘one of many ways’ and ‘not the way’ all at the same time. Truth is not relative. She is not wrong to say we are to love our neighbor. But she skips right over the first tenet ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength’. She doesn’t tell us that Jesus claimed to be ‘THE way, THE truth, THE life’ and that no one comes to the Father but through HIM. She doesn’t tell us that the path to life is narrow and few find it. It would seem she thinks it’s noble to allow everyone to do whatever they want because we all have our own ‘truth.’
SO THE POSITIVE: Hollis gets the feelings. Her writing is funny. I can see how she inspires so many people. I resonated a lot with her chapters on motherhood- the mom-guilt, the fears, the panic, the judgment. I also ached with her adoption journey. Though I have not adopted myself, I can relate with the pain of losing a child you thought would be yours. I appreciate her encouragement to pursue a more diverse community, something I know I need to work on. I also think she recognizes a lot of the problems we have with our identity. She rightly targets the tendency we have to compare ourselves, to be lazy, complacent, aimless, to be the victim, and to think we are worthless. I believe she loves Jesus and I believe she thinks she is doing the best she can to help people see their potential. Her intentions to invest in others’ lives is admirable. She just misses the mark when she presents her solutions. She misses the opportunity to truly change their lives everlasting.
Here is a quote from “You Who?” that I think is appropriate to share here: “If we try to write our stories like the world does, composing our little plot points and shaping ourselves into what we think it would be neat to be, but we love Jesus, this is just making him one more interesting plot point about us. We put our bumper sticker that says ‘Jesus-lover’ on our little lifestyle car…But Christ will not be managed or contained like that. If he truly bought you with his blood, he did not do so in order to get a sponsorship position in your life. He’s not here to look good next to your brand. He bought your life, and you are His.”
And that is what is achingly missing in this book. I can’t advocate for someone to read a book that’s missing the point by such a large margin. Hollis writes that she never reads reviews anymore, so she probably won’t read this, but I hope she can recognize her mission for herself is pushing God out of her life. Don’t let this be true of you.
Book Review Blog | Facebook | Pinterest
“God has given us everything we need for life and godliness.” (2 Pt 1:3)
I had recently read The Daily Grace Co.’s devotional on the The Fruit of the Spirit and wanted to do some further reading on it. I picked up this book and it was an excellent companion to the shorter study.
This book is gospel-centered, highly applicable, encouraging, and convicting.
[I’ll keep this review fairly short because I’ve decided to do a blog series on this that I will link once it’s done.]
I love how he begins his book talking about devotion to God and humility.
These two things tell us WHY we pursue the fruit of the spirit and HOW we pursue them.
We must have the right motive and the right source.
He rightly separates devotion to God from fear of consequences.
“The fear of consequences may keep us from committing the outward acts of murder or adultery, but only love will keep us from committing murder or adultery in our hearts.”
We desire to be loving, joyful, peaceable, patient, kind, good, gentle, faithful, and self-controlled because we love God and we want to be more like Him. We love him and therefore want to obey. Out of the love, reverence, and thankfulness for his character and his love toward us, shown sacrificially on the cross.
The transformation of the Holy Spirit is not merely behavior modification. It’s heart transformation and it should change our hearts and minds along with our actions.
Not only must we have the right motive, but if we don’t have the right source, it becomes a sinful endeavor of pride. If we think we can create these attributes on our own and achieve them if we work hard enough, we will fail.
The Holy Spirit is at work in us to produce His fruit. That is the only way.
“These godly qualities are not something we can manufacture, take pride in, or lay claim to as self-generated. Rather, they are the work of God, and their source is God alone.”
“Humility with regard to ourselves, then, consists in ascribing all that we are, all that we have, and all that we have accomplished to the God who gives us grace.”
Humility helps us stay plugged into the right source, but it also knows that sanctification is a lifelong process until we are finally glorified in heaven. The Spirit produces the fruit and also gives us endurance to continue growing.
There are only two directions. Either we are moving toward Christ or we are moving away from Him. There is no in between.
“Growth in godly character not only is progressive and always unfinished, it is absolutely necessary for spiritual survival. If we are not growing in godly character, we are regressing; in the spiritual life we never stand still.”
And we cannot cultivate love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control if we are not first humble before a holy God, aware of our sinful nature, and devoted to Him.
Bridges breaks ‘devotion to God’ down into three essential elements:
- fear of God
"If we truly reverence God, we will obey Him, because every act of disobedience is an affront to His dignity and majesty.”
- love of God
"The love of God has no meaning apart from Calvary, and Calvary has no meaning apart from the holy and just wrath of God… He died to reconcile us to a holy God who was alienated from us because of our sin.”
- desire for God
"[We are] satisfied with God alone, but never satisfied with [our] present experience of God. [We] always yearn for more.”
“The fear of God and the love of God form the base of the triangle, while the desire for God is at the apex. As we study these elements individually, we will see that the fear of God and the love of God form the foundation of true devotion to God, while the desire for God is the highest expression of that devotion.”
“To seek to grow in the fear of God without also growing in our comprehension of His love can cause us to begin to view God as far-off and austere. Or to seek to grow in our awareness of the love of God without also growing in our reverence and awe of Him can cause us to view God as a permissive and indulgent Heavenly Father who does not deal with our sin.”
The rest of the book goes through each attribute. The fruit of the Spirit is not just about ourselves, they are relational; they dictate how we treat other people.
Because we often learn the fruit of the Spirit at a young age, I think the depth of it in our lives is often over-looked. I found myself teaching my kids to be patient and turning around the next minute and being impatient with them.
I felt convicted to study these traits and really think about how they can be exhibited in my life right now. And not only how to produce this fruit but how to prune off the ‘bad fruit’ so to speak. To put off the old self as I’m putting on the new self. We need both things.
This is a really good book to read to remind ourselves that the fruit of the spirit is more than a cute song we teach our kids so they stop hitting each other and wait quietly for more than 30 seconds.
They are characteristics of our holy God that he has commanded us to exemplify with his help.
All of them are for everyone all the time. We don’t just pick the ones we’re good at and use our personality as an excuse to ignore the ‘hard ones.’
One thing that’s hard to get our minds around is that we are responsible to strive to exhibit these characteristics, yet also with the knowledge that it is not us at work, but the Holy Spirit. There is both responsibility for our actions and dependence on the Spirit.
“We need to learn that the Bible teaches both total responsibility and total dependence in all aspects of the Christian life.” (Phil 2:12-13)
Being successful in producing this fruit is not what saves us. We do not achieve our salvation. Yet they are evidence of our abiding in Christ.
It’s a weird line to walk but it is what the Bible teaches.
I highly recommend this book for all people! I’ll leave you with this quote, lest we feel overwhelmed or unappealed by the task before us. And remember to check back for a link to my blog series where I will flesh out each attribute.
“The practice of developing our relationship with God should never be thought of as drudgery. We are seeking to grow in our devotion to the most wonderful Person in all of the universe, the infinitely glorious and loving God. Nothing can compare with the privilege of knowing Him in whose presence is fullness of joy and in whose hand there are pleasures forever. From this joyful relationship flows the rich harvest of our transformed character.”
Book Review Blog | Facebook | Pinterest
I had recently read The Daily Grace Co.’s devotional on the The Fruit of the Spirit and wanted to do some further reading on it. I picked up this book and it was an excellent companion to the shorter study.
This book is gospel-centered, highly applicable, encouraging, and convicting.
[I’ll keep this review fairly short because I’ve decided to do a blog series on this that I will link once it’s done.]
I love how he begins his book talking about devotion to God and humility.
These two things tell us WHY we pursue the fruit of the spirit and HOW we pursue them.
We must have the right motive and the right source.
He rightly separates devotion to God from fear of consequences.
“The fear of consequences may keep us from committing the outward acts of murder or adultery, but only love will keep us from committing murder or adultery in our hearts.”
We desire to be loving, joyful, peaceable, patient, kind, good, gentle, faithful, and self-controlled because we love God and we want to be more like Him. We love him and therefore want to obey. Out of the love, reverence, and thankfulness for his character and his love toward us, shown sacrificially on the cross.
The transformation of the Holy Spirit is not merely behavior modification. It’s heart transformation and it should change our hearts and minds along with our actions.
Not only must we have the right motive, but if we don’t have the right source, it becomes a sinful endeavor of pride. If we think we can create these attributes on our own and achieve them if we work hard enough, we will fail.
The Holy Spirit is at work in us to produce His fruit. That is the only way.
“These godly qualities are not something we can manufacture, take pride in, or lay claim to as self-generated. Rather, they are the work of God, and their source is God alone.”
“Humility with regard to ourselves, then, consists in ascribing all that we are, all that we have, and all that we have accomplished to the God who gives us grace.”
Humility helps us stay plugged into the right source, but it also knows that sanctification is a lifelong process until we are finally glorified in heaven. The Spirit produces the fruit and also gives us endurance to continue growing.
There are only two directions. Either we are moving toward Christ or we are moving away from Him. There is no in between.
“Growth in godly character not only is progressive and always unfinished, it is absolutely necessary for spiritual survival. If we are not growing in godly character, we are regressing; in the spiritual life we never stand still.”
And we cannot cultivate love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control if we are not first humble before a holy God, aware of our sinful nature, and devoted to Him.
Bridges breaks ‘devotion to God’ down into three essential elements:
- fear of God
"If we truly reverence God, we will obey Him, because every act of disobedience is an affront to His dignity and majesty.”
- love of God
"The love of God has no meaning apart from Calvary, and Calvary has no meaning apart from the holy and just wrath of God… He died to reconcile us to a holy God who was alienated from us because of our sin.”
- desire for God
"[We are] satisfied with God alone, but never satisfied with [our] present experience of God. [We] always yearn for more.”
“The fear of God and the love of God form the base of the triangle, while the desire for God is at the apex. As we study these elements individually, we will see that the fear of God and the love of God form the foundation of true devotion to God, while the desire for God is the highest expression of that devotion.”
“To seek to grow in the fear of God without also growing in our comprehension of His love can cause us to begin to view God as far-off and austere. Or to seek to grow in our awareness of the love of God without also growing in our reverence and awe of Him can cause us to view God as a permissive and indulgent Heavenly Father who does not deal with our sin.”
The rest of the book goes through each attribute. The fruit of the Spirit is not just about ourselves, they are relational; they dictate how we treat other people.
Because we often learn the fruit of the Spirit at a young age, I think the depth of it in our lives is often over-looked. I found myself teaching my kids to be patient and turning around the next minute and being impatient with them.
I felt convicted to study these traits and really think about how they can be exhibited in my life right now. And not only how to produce this fruit but how to prune off the ‘bad fruit’ so to speak. To put off the old self as I’m putting on the new self. We need both things.
This is a really good book to read to remind ourselves that the fruit of the spirit is more than a cute song we teach our kids so they stop hitting each other and wait quietly for more than 30 seconds.
They are characteristics of our holy God that he has commanded us to exemplify with his help.
All of them are for everyone all the time. We don’t just pick the ones we’re good at and use our personality as an excuse to ignore the ‘hard ones.’
One thing that’s hard to get our minds around is that we are responsible to strive to exhibit these characteristics, yet also with the knowledge that it is not us at work, but the Holy Spirit. There is both responsibility for our actions and dependence on the Spirit.
“We need to learn that the Bible teaches both total responsibility and total dependence in all aspects of the Christian life.” (Phil 2:12-13)
Being successful in producing this fruit is not what saves us. We do not achieve our salvation. Yet they are evidence of our abiding in Christ.
It’s a weird line to walk but it is what the Bible teaches.
I highly recommend this book for all people! I’ll leave you with this quote, lest we feel overwhelmed or unappealed by the task before us. And remember to check back for a link to my blog series where I will flesh out each attribute.
“The practice of developing our relationship with God should never be thought of as drudgery. We are seeking to grow in our devotion to the most wonderful Person in all of the universe, the infinitely glorious and loving God. Nothing can compare with the privilege of knowing Him in whose presence is fullness of joy and in whose hand there are pleasures forever. From this joyful relationship flows the rich harvest of our transformed character.”
Book Review Blog | Facebook | Pinterest
“This is my work, my grief to bottle up and dispense.”
The Plot
In 1791 “buried deep behind a cupboard wall at the base of a twisted alleyway in the darkest depths of London…” you’ll find a once popular apothecary shop.
The shop has not quite lost its popularity, but instead of tinctures of healing, the vials that leave that shop bring death.
Nella, the dispenser, shrouds her shop in secrecy. After taking on her mother’s occupation, a terrible betrayal leads her to rebrand her skills. She has taken up the banner of helping women dispose of men.
“Killing and secret-keeping… had begun to rot me from the inside out, and something inside meant to tear me open.”
Eliza, a twelve-year-old on request from her mistress, comes to Nella’s shop to retrieve a poison for her mistress’s husband who has shown a dangerous interest in Eliza. Her curiosity and fascination with magic draws her to Nella like a moth to a flame. She has come to London to seek a better life for herself than her mother’s and Nella’s shop looks like a good option.
“In a matter of days, the cocoons would turn black as soot, as if the animal inside had shriveled up to die. But then, the darkness would life, revealing the butterfly’s striking blue wings within the papery encasement. Soon after, the butterfly would take flight.”
The two face danger when one of Nella’s clients fails in her administration of her poison and the identities of all the women who have come to her for help are on the verge of discovery.
Caroline, in present day, comes across a vial during a mudlarking expedition while vacationing in London. Lover of history and research, Caroline welcomes the distraction from her newly-discovered unfaithful husband to find out the story of the vial and the lost apothecary of London.
“I needed a break from the grief suffocating me, the thorns of fury so sharp and unexpected they took my breath away.”
The three women encounter a crossroads. Where do they find freedom? What role does magic play? Is healing possible?
Themes
There is definitely a vibe of feminism in this book. Our three main characters are women, there’s only one good man in the book, and Nella’s whole life’s work involves killing men. Granted, the men portrayed in this book have done unacceptable things.
During the 1700s, women didn’t exactly have a lot of rights, voice, or power. The historical fiction aspect of this story is not only the setting of London during this time, but exploring one of the few options women had to protect or free themselves— slipping poison into the food or drink of their target.
The author’s note at the end informs us that toxins were not detectable in corpses during that time so it’s impossible to know how many deaths during the years before that discovery were actually due to poison and not natural causes as they appeared to be. And toxins were surprisingly accessible.
Another theme in this book is Caroline’s unfulfilled life. The discovery of her husband’s affair causes her to realize that she has lost a part of herself since they got married. She always took the ‘safe’ path and gave up on her dreams and her passions.
Now, I’m not a huge fan of this type of theme. I don’t like encouragement to not let anyone or anything get in the way of your dreams and your passions, especially when it means dropping your family. I’m not a proponent of always giving up on dreams either.
But there’s more honor and love in the decision to sacrifice for your family. Why can’t we accept that life might not look as we originally thought it would and figure out a way to incorporate our passions in a way that keeps our families together? I think the world’s definition of ‘fulfillment’ is lacking.
HOWEVER, the caveat here is that Caroline’s husband had an affair and we find out other ways that he’s not a good person. That is a different context than a woman walking out on her family on a whim to go achieve everything she always wanted. So Caroline thinking about what she wants to do with her life here isn’t the same selfishness I critique above.
A third theme is more obvious. Nella must wrestle with the morality of her work. Does killing men negate that she is helping women? Does her work truly atone for the betrayal that was enacted against her? Has she been fooling herself to justify what she does?
Recommendation
I love the setting of London in the 18th century. I liked Nella and Eliza’s storyline much better than Caroline’s.
The author uses Caroline’s story to help us learn what happens to Nella and Eliza but I wish she could have figured out a way to do that during the same time period. I was more interested in what they were doing than what was going on with Caroline.
Magic doesn’t play a huge role throughout the book. It’s mostly just part of Eliza’s perception of how tinctures work. But with an important twist….
So if you want a book about a world filled with magic, this isn’t it.
But I still really enjoyed this read. I read it pretty fast. It was mysterious and intriguing.
And I really liked the ending!
Penner also puts a lot of extras at the end of her book. She includes a bunch of book club discussion questions. She also includes the historical context for apothecaries, a list of plants and what they’re used for, a guide to creating your own in-home apothecary (think a lot of essential oils…), information on mudlarking (which I wish I had had the chance to do when I visited there several years ago!), and some recipes for remedies, teas, cookies, etc.
In conclusion, I would recommend this book. I think it deserves its nomination for both categories!
“The vial marked the end of one quest and the beginning of another; it represented a crossroads, the abandonment of secrets and pain in favor of embracing the truth— in favor of embracing magic. Magic, with its enchanting, irresistible appeal, just like a fairy tale.”
Book Review Blog | Facebook | Pinterest
The Plot
In 1791 “buried deep behind a cupboard wall at the base of a twisted alleyway in the darkest depths of London…” you’ll find a once popular apothecary shop.
The shop has not quite lost its popularity, but instead of tinctures of healing, the vials that leave that shop bring death.
Nella, the dispenser, shrouds her shop in secrecy. After taking on her mother’s occupation, a terrible betrayal leads her to rebrand her skills. She has taken up the banner of helping women dispose of men.
“Killing and secret-keeping… had begun to rot me from the inside out, and something inside meant to tear me open.”
Eliza, a twelve-year-old on request from her mistress, comes to Nella’s shop to retrieve a poison for her mistress’s husband who has shown a dangerous interest in Eliza. Her curiosity and fascination with magic draws her to Nella like a moth to a flame. She has come to London to seek a better life for herself than her mother’s and Nella’s shop looks like a good option.
“In a matter of days, the cocoons would turn black as soot, as if the animal inside had shriveled up to die. But then, the darkness would life, revealing the butterfly’s striking blue wings within the papery encasement. Soon after, the butterfly would take flight.”
The two face danger when one of Nella’s clients fails in her administration of her poison and the identities of all the women who have come to her for help are on the verge of discovery.
Caroline, in present day, comes across a vial during a mudlarking expedition while vacationing in London. Lover of history and research, Caroline welcomes the distraction from her newly-discovered unfaithful husband to find out the story of the vial and the lost apothecary of London.
“I needed a break from the grief suffocating me, the thorns of fury so sharp and unexpected they took my breath away.”
The three women encounter a crossroads. Where do they find freedom? What role does magic play? Is healing possible?
Themes
There is definitely a vibe of feminism in this book. Our three main characters are women, there’s only one good man in the book, and Nella’s whole life’s work involves killing men. Granted, the men portrayed in this book have done unacceptable things.
During the 1700s, women didn’t exactly have a lot of rights, voice, or power. The historical fiction aspect of this story is not only the setting of London during this time, but exploring one of the few options women had to protect or free themselves— slipping poison into the food or drink of their target.
The author’s note at the end informs us that toxins were not detectable in corpses during that time so it’s impossible to know how many deaths during the years before that discovery were actually due to poison and not natural causes as they appeared to be. And toxins were surprisingly accessible.
Another theme in this book is Caroline’s unfulfilled life. The discovery of her husband’s affair causes her to realize that she has lost a part of herself since they got married. She always took the ‘safe’ path and gave up on her dreams and her passions.
Now, I’m not a huge fan of this type of theme. I don’t like encouragement to not let anyone or anything get in the way of your dreams and your passions, especially when it means dropping your family. I’m not a proponent of always giving up on dreams either.
But there’s more honor and love in the decision to sacrifice for your family. Why can’t we accept that life might not look as we originally thought it would and figure out a way to incorporate our passions in a way that keeps our families together? I think the world’s definition of ‘fulfillment’ is lacking.
HOWEVER, the caveat here is that Caroline’s husband had an affair and we find out other ways that he’s not a good person. That is a different context than a woman walking out on her family on a whim to go achieve everything she always wanted. So Caroline thinking about what she wants to do with her life here isn’t the same selfishness I critique above.
A third theme is more obvious. Nella must wrestle with the morality of her work. Does killing men negate that she is helping women? Does her work truly atone for the betrayal that was enacted against her? Has she been fooling herself to justify what she does?
Recommendation
I love the setting of London in the 18th century. I liked Nella and Eliza’s storyline much better than Caroline’s.
The author uses Caroline’s story to help us learn what happens to Nella and Eliza but I wish she could have figured out a way to do that during the same time period. I was more interested in what they were doing than what was going on with Caroline.
Magic doesn’t play a huge role throughout the book. It’s mostly just part of Eliza’s perception of how tinctures work. But with an important twist….
So if you want a book about a world filled with magic, this isn’t it.
But I still really enjoyed this read. I read it pretty fast. It was mysterious and intriguing.
And I really liked the ending!
Penner also puts a lot of extras at the end of her book. She includes a bunch of book club discussion questions. She also includes the historical context for apothecaries, a list of plants and what they’re used for, a guide to creating your own in-home apothecary (think a lot of essential oils…), information on mudlarking (which I wish I had had the chance to do when I visited there several years ago!), and some recipes for remedies, teas, cookies, etc.
In conclusion, I would recommend this book. I think it deserves its nomination for both categories!
“The vial marked the end of one quest and the beginning of another; it represented a crossroads, the abandonment of secrets and pain in favor of embracing the truth— in favor of embracing magic. Magic, with its enchanting, irresistible appeal, just like a fairy tale.”
Book Review Blog | Facebook | Pinterest
“Above all, a Christian view takes into account who God is… God rules history. Moreover, he has a plan for history, a plan that encompasses its overall shape and all the details.”
So. I think I came to this book with wrong expectations and so I had to try harder to find my takeaways.
I enjoy history and was interested in how this book talked about history.
There are many voices today that are ‘re-writing’ history, so-to-speak, to fit a particular cultural narrative.
I thought this book would maybe address that. Or would speak about specific eras or historical events and how Christians should look at them. (I mean… look at the cover…)
Instead, Redeeming Our Thinking about History mostly just discussed how Christians, and more narrowly, Christian historians, ought to look at and write about history. In a very general sense.
To be honest, I’m not sure if I really gained any new knowledge. Since I’m not a historian and I don’t plan to analyze history academically, this book probably gave me more information than I felt like I needed. My perception of history is already to view it in terms of God’s sovereignty and his purposes, without making assumptions.
The general principles of the book seemed familiar to me and the nitty gritty details seemed superfluous.
I read some other reviews about this book and I had to chuckle a bit because I don’t think I’m the target audience for this book. I had no idea how to evaluate their critiques. So take my opinion with a grain of salt. I maybe shouldn’t be here…
I think for people who spend more of their time in history, this would be a valuable read.
Maybe my opinion would be different if I knew better what I was getting into.
I think it would have strengthened his book if he had done some sort case studies using particular historical events and shown us in practice what the various perspectives would say about them. Or shown us a comparison between a flawed analysis and a ‘redeemed’ analysis.
Some of the principles just felt too abstract or general.
The book flows through his three aspects of history: events, people, and meanings.
The chapters are divided into five parts:
1. What we need in order to analyze history
2. History in the Bible
3. Understanding God’s purposes in history
4. What does history writing look like?
5. Alternative versions of how to think about history
He advocates for a providentialist interpretation— which is studying God’s purposes in history. He discusses the arguments for and against this stance ultimately landing on this: The Bible’s revelations give us guidance to help us make judgements about God’s purposes even though our interpretations are subject to abuse or corruption of overconfidence, bias, etc. God gave us the Bible for many reasons, but one of them is to apply it to our lives. We just do our best with what we have and write/speak with humility.
I guess I found his arguments convincing. I didn’t have a stance on this before reading it so maybe it wasn’t too hard to persuade me.
There is some jargon in this book that I had to look up. I would say it’s a fairly academic book.
I mean, c’mon, he casually uses the words ‘supralaparianism’ and ‘infralapsarianism’ without any definitions or context clues! (If you’re curious now… here’s an explanation of these terms.)
He also kept referring to his analogy of a prayer chain and I think I missed the relevance when he first introduced it in the book so every time he brought it back up I was confused.
Oh, and I got a kick out of so many of his footnotes being references from his other books! Gotta love the confidence!
All of that to say, I will provide some things that I liked or took away from this book:
- I liked how he emphasized the importance of history and how God commands us many times to remember and think back on where we’ve been, where we’ve come from. Seeing God’s hand at work in the past, praising him for his works, past, present, and future, is a way to worship God. Keeping history fresh in our minds also reminds us of humanity’s capacity for evil and helps us to resist the arrogant thought that we are any better than humans past. Reading and remembering history increases our wisdom and enhances our view of God.
- I appreciated how he cautions us not to assume too much of God’s purposes. Even we’re seeking to view history through a biblical worldview in light of God’s redemption of humanity and with biblical foundations for morality, we still have fallible minds and biases that can affect our views and perceptions. God’s ways are higher than ours and we cannot know all of his ways. Especially about historical events outside of the Bible in which God has not explicitly revealed his purposes.
- It’s interesting to think about how, truly, no person interpreting history is doing so neutrally. A lot of history deals with human motivations and what you believe about morality and humanity influence how you think about motivations. It would be hard to defend the idea that any analysis of history is actually neutral. Everyone worships. If it’s not God, it’s a substitute for him.
- He talks about how events, people, and meanings are all in harmony when we believe in a personal God who controls everything. But for non-Christian historians, that harmony dissipates if they remove God from the equation.
Conclusion
If you are studying to be a historian or plan to write about history, definitely read this book.
If you enjoy thinking about history, you will probably enjoy most of this book.
If you want an in-depth look at specific historical periods, events, and people viewed through a Christian worldview, you will not find that here.
It was not a bad book, but I feel like it’s a niche book. I’m not saying ‘don’t read this,’ but I will say, that you may find it hard to get through if you’re not really interested in the subject matter.
He teaches this material in his college course, so I wouldn’t say it’s a super accessible, everyone-should-read-this kind of book.
This was my first Poythress book, and I would say I would probably try another one of his books, but I’ll do a little more research before I pick the next one.
Some Quotes:
“The Bible does give us a framework for the whole of history. This framework is there even when we do not explicitly acknowledge it… Every event has significance not only because of God’s plan, which lies at the origin, but because of God’s purpose for the end. Every event contributes to a process leading to an end, the consummation in Christ, the new heaven and the new earth. Every historian has a background in a conception of universal history, because without some universal, meanings dissolve into pure subjectivity.”
“Christians must be on guard against merely drifting along with what “everyone else” does in writing history. The fact that omission of God is common, and the fact that this omission is superficially like the book of Esther, does not amount to saying that it is healthy. Surely it is not, because in many cases the underlying motivation is to suppress the presence of God— across the board.”
“Neutralist advocates of Enlightenment history writing oppose Christian history writings because it brings in religious bias. Marxists oppose Christian history writing because it is deemed to be a mistake to think that there is a God…. Social-justice advocates oppose Christian history writing because it does not automatically and unreservedly take the side of the oppressed. Postmodernists oppose Christian history writing because, according to their viewpoint, it dogmatically claims to know things about God that no one can actually know because of the social, epistemically, and linguistic constraints of humanity.”
“We affirm the value of diverse perspectives— though not the value of the claim that truth is merely relative to each observer.”
**Received an ARC via NetGalley**
Book Review Blog | Facebook | Pinterest
So. I think I came to this book with wrong expectations and so I had to try harder to find my takeaways.
I enjoy history and was interested in how this book talked about history.
There are many voices today that are ‘re-writing’ history, so-to-speak, to fit a particular cultural narrative.
I thought this book would maybe address that. Or would speak about specific eras or historical events and how Christians should look at them. (I mean… look at the cover…)
Instead, Redeeming Our Thinking about History mostly just discussed how Christians, and more narrowly, Christian historians, ought to look at and write about history. In a very general sense.
To be honest, I’m not sure if I really gained any new knowledge. Since I’m not a historian and I don’t plan to analyze history academically, this book probably gave me more information than I felt like I needed. My perception of history is already to view it in terms of God’s sovereignty and his purposes, without making assumptions.
The general principles of the book seemed familiar to me and the nitty gritty details seemed superfluous.
I read some other reviews about this book and I had to chuckle a bit because I don’t think I’m the target audience for this book. I had no idea how to evaluate their critiques. So take my opinion with a grain of salt. I maybe shouldn’t be here…
I think for people who spend more of their time in history, this would be a valuable read.
Maybe my opinion would be different if I knew better what I was getting into.
I think it would have strengthened his book if he had done some sort case studies using particular historical events and shown us in practice what the various perspectives would say about them. Or shown us a comparison between a flawed analysis and a ‘redeemed’ analysis.
Some of the principles just felt too abstract or general.
The book flows through his three aspects of history: events, people, and meanings.
The chapters are divided into five parts:
1. What we need in order to analyze history
2. History in the Bible
3. Understanding God’s purposes in history
4. What does history writing look like?
5. Alternative versions of how to think about history
He advocates for a providentialist interpretation— which is studying God’s purposes in history. He discusses the arguments for and against this stance ultimately landing on this: The Bible’s revelations give us guidance to help us make judgements about God’s purposes even though our interpretations are subject to abuse or corruption of overconfidence, bias, etc. God gave us the Bible for many reasons, but one of them is to apply it to our lives. We just do our best with what we have and write/speak with humility.
I guess I found his arguments convincing. I didn’t have a stance on this before reading it so maybe it wasn’t too hard to persuade me.
There is some jargon in this book that I had to look up. I would say it’s a fairly academic book.
I mean, c’mon, he casually uses the words ‘supralaparianism’ and ‘infralapsarianism’ without any definitions or context clues! (If you’re curious now… here’s an explanation of these terms.)
He also kept referring to his analogy of a prayer chain and I think I missed the relevance when he first introduced it in the book so every time he brought it back up I was confused.
Oh, and I got a kick out of so many of his footnotes being references from his other books! Gotta love the confidence!
All of that to say, I will provide some things that I liked or took away from this book:
- I liked how he emphasized the importance of history and how God commands us many times to remember and think back on where we’ve been, where we’ve come from. Seeing God’s hand at work in the past, praising him for his works, past, present, and future, is a way to worship God. Keeping history fresh in our minds also reminds us of humanity’s capacity for evil and helps us to resist the arrogant thought that we are any better than humans past. Reading and remembering history increases our wisdom and enhances our view of God.
- I appreciated how he cautions us not to assume too much of God’s purposes. Even we’re seeking to view history through a biblical worldview in light of God’s redemption of humanity and with biblical foundations for morality, we still have fallible minds and biases that can affect our views and perceptions. God’s ways are higher than ours and we cannot know all of his ways. Especially about historical events outside of the Bible in which God has not explicitly revealed his purposes.
- It’s interesting to think about how, truly, no person interpreting history is doing so neutrally. A lot of history deals with human motivations and what you believe about morality and humanity influence how you think about motivations. It would be hard to defend the idea that any analysis of history is actually neutral. Everyone worships. If it’s not God, it’s a substitute for him.
- He talks about how events, people, and meanings are all in harmony when we believe in a personal God who controls everything. But for non-Christian historians, that harmony dissipates if they remove God from the equation.
Conclusion
If you are studying to be a historian or plan to write about history, definitely read this book.
If you enjoy thinking about history, you will probably enjoy most of this book.
If you want an in-depth look at specific historical periods, events, and people viewed through a Christian worldview, you will not find that here.
It was not a bad book, but I feel like it’s a niche book. I’m not saying ‘don’t read this,’ but I will say, that you may find it hard to get through if you’re not really interested in the subject matter.
He teaches this material in his college course, so I wouldn’t say it’s a super accessible, everyone-should-read-this kind of book.
This was my first Poythress book, and I would say I would probably try another one of his books, but I’ll do a little more research before I pick the next one.
Some Quotes:
“The Bible does give us a framework for the whole of history. This framework is there even when we do not explicitly acknowledge it… Every event has significance not only because of God’s plan, which lies at the origin, but because of God’s purpose for the end. Every event contributes to a process leading to an end, the consummation in Christ, the new heaven and the new earth. Every historian has a background in a conception of universal history, because without some universal, meanings dissolve into pure subjectivity.”
“Christians must be on guard against merely drifting along with what “everyone else” does in writing history. The fact that omission of God is common, and the fact that this omission is superficially like the book of Esther, does not amount to saying that it is healthy. Surely it is not, because in many cases the underlying motivation is to suppress the presence of God— across the board.”
“Neutralist advocates of Enlightenment history writing oppose Christian history writings because it brings in religious bias. Marxists oppose Christian history writing because it is deemed to be a mistake to think that there is a God…. Social-justice advocates oppose Christian history writing because it does not automatically and unreservedly take the side of the oppressed. Postmodernists oppose Christian history writing because, according to their viewpoint, it dogmatically claims to know things about God that no one can actually know because of the social, epistemically, and linguistic constraints of humanity.”
“We affirm the value of diverse perspectives— though not the value of the claim that truth is merely relative to each observer.”
**Received an ARC via NetGalley**
Book Review Blog | Facebook | Pinterest
“Ours is a culture of sexual confusion, oppression, and slavery that masks itself as a culture of sexual freedom. In reaction to a hypersexualized world, the Christian purity culture was born. While well-intended in some respects, the purity movement would, not unlike its sexual revolution counterpart, overswing the pendulum and become its own version of a culture of shame.”
“Sex works a lot like fire. When removed from its protective boundaries, it burns us and leaves scars.”
[Scott Sauls, Foreword]
I was very interested in this book.
‘Purity culture’ has been under attack. So many people have been hurt by this Christian subculture of shame regarding sexual purity. I grew up during this movement but I don’t bear the scars so many others do. I wasn’t even aware of what ‘purity culture’ even was until just recently.
So what happened? What did I miss?
I wanted to hear others’ stories and see where the church went wrong. Sexual purity is a good thing, so Scripture must have been mishandled/misapplied/distorted to cause the fallout it did.
I didn’t read this book to feel satisfaction in tearing down the church. And thankfully, it’s not Rachel’s goal in writing it. The church is made up of imperfect people and unfortunately a place that should always feel safe, sometimes doesn’t. That doesn’t mean everything spoken in the church should be trashed.
I think we can all agree that our bodies matter and what we do with them matter. So we are responsible to discern what is truth, not based on our feelings or on who said it, but based on Scripture. The boundaries God gives regarding sex and sexuality are for our good and protection. But even as God gives us commands, he also offers grace and forgiveness. All of these components are important as we approach this topic.
[Siednote: Sam Allberry’s book What God Has to Say about Our Bodies is a wonderful book to read along with this one!]
Rachel recommends to read this with a group of people and I strongly agree.
I read it with a group of 4 other women and I’m glad I did. We all had our own experiences, influences, and interactions to discuss the topics Rachel brings up and look at what Scripture has to say.
We realized that this is a deconstruction book. Deconstructing purity culture rhetoric. It is always good to think critically about our beliefs. Especially because so many are often shaped as cultural responses. The downside of this formatting is that Rachel wants us as readers to do the work of rebuilding according to biblical standards. This may cause frustration for some readers because she doesn’t spoon-feed us the answers.
She wants us to wrestle with our experiences and our preconceived ideas or subconsciously held beliefs and make sure they have been shaped by God’s Word and his commands for us.
My group discussed how reading it only a chapter at a time with a week or two in between was often discouraging. The last few chapters are the hope and the way forward, but when you’re slogging through the rest it’s easy to become cynical and focus on all the bad things. We tried to make sure we came back to Scripture, to the love and hope of Christ and to remember the gospel message.
I was so glad that Rachel begins her book with the disclaimer that she loves the church and does not write this book to tear apart the bride of Christ.
“My desire to reevaluate purity culture teachings is out of love for the church, not a vendetta against her.”
This was important to me.
Having recently read Jesus and John Wayne by Kristin Kobes Du Mez, which is also a deconstruction book of sorts, I was wary of Welcher’s posture toward the church. Jesus and John Wayne is a strong critique of the failings of the evangelical church in many ways. There is much to say about that that I included in my review of it, but what was disheartening was KDM’s lack of love toward the body of Christ. There was no Scripture, grace, hope, or love in her message. Not so in Talking Back to Purity Culture. Rachel loves the Church and God’s Word and her book reflects that.
No matter where we fall in our beliefs about purity, we are all image-bearers of God and we need to treat each other as such.
As Sauls stated in the foreword, purity culture was borne out of a reaction to the sexual promiscuity of the culture. Rachel says:
“Evangelical purity culture was not a wicked movement but rather an earnest response to the age-old problem of immorality and the modern crisis of STDs and teenage pregnancy. As with most earnest, human responses, we didn’t get everything right… I won’t get everything right in this book either.”
I appreciate her honesty here. Just as purity culture was a response, the reevaluation of purity culture is also a response.
We have to be critical thinkers. She quotes from an interview with a man named Jay who said that he didn’t feel manipulated or lied to by the movement but that he “was able to ‘eat the fish and spit out the bones.’”
I think this was my experience. I had a purity ring, but I didn’t read most of the books she critiqued or go to purity conferences or balls. I didn’t feel the pressure or shame that many did.
With everything we read, we need to listen and interpret through a biblical lens. Even if things are said by a Christian, no matter how well-known, we hold it up to Scripture and see if it stands. Eat the fish, spit out the bones.
I won’t go into detail about all the things she said. I encourage you to read it for yourself and grow with others in your community.
What I’ll do instead is share a table I created. It’s not exhaustive by any means, but here are some things that came up as we reflected on what we read. We wanted to compare what purity culture says to what the Bible says.
Purity culture’s emphasis of sexual purity comes from Scripture’s many many commands to be sexually pure and its teachings of sex being between one man and one woman in the bounds of marriage. What got distorted in practice was the message of grace, redemption, and the motivations for our pursuit of purity.
“‘Purity culture unwittingly told me I was already broken, yet simultaneously gave me a crushing weight of maintaining my own righteousness.’”
In this table, the left column demonstrates what people influenced by purity culture heard from their pastors, youth leaders, or parents. While purity culture didn’t necessarily overtly teach them or even agree with these statements, they were some of the general effect of how sexual purity was communicated and handled.
The right column is the ‘clarification’ and shows what the Bible actually says. Purity culture was trying to uphold the biblical teachings but their fear of the culturally acceptable sexual freedom made the communication of these truths presented as a prosperity gospel focused on ‘following the rules’ rather than focusing on loving and following Jesus.
VIEW TABLE HERE ON MY ORIGINAL POST
Welcher tackles many topics like lust, divorce, abuse, porn, masturbation, modesty, virginity, same-sex attracted people, female vs male responsibilities, infertility, and singleness.
Turns out purity is more complicated than just ‘stay abstinent and you’ll have a healthy marriage and kids and never struggle with impurity.’ Purity culture often simplified things that left people struggling, shamed, and motivated by the wrong desires.
Finding sexual fulfillment at any stage in our life can become an idol and a worship of self and self-fulfillment. The most important part of this book is Rachel reminding us that pursuing sexual purity (and all of God’s commands) is an act of worship of a holy God. That makes all the difference!
Not only did this book draw good discussion with my female friends, but it made for interesting conversation with my husband. I got to ask him a lot of questions about how he, as a male, thought about things or the messages he felt like he was taught or what things influenced him.
This was good for us to grow in learning more about each other and how we can help one another pursue purity, even after marriage, and how we should be teaching our kids about purity in our home.
I admit, there were definitely times where I struggled with her presentation of certain ideas or beliefs where it seemed like she was advocating for something I disagreed with. I’m not sure if our picture of how this looks in the church is the same.
I’m sure we differ on some of the details, but Rachel upholds a biblical view of sex, marriage, and purity and grounds everything in the gospel message that our purity is already won in Christ. So I can get behind that!
Conclusion
This spurs on discussion and biblical study of purity.
It is transparent, challenging, and gospel-centered.
It is a valuable read whether you’re dating, married, parents, childless, heterosexual, or same-sex attracted.
Our bodies matter and what we do with our bodies matter. Therefore, what we think about purity matters.
Christian purity culture didn’t get everything right, but the Bible gives us what we need to know. It’s worth studying so we can worship God with our bodies in obedience and love.
“Marriage is not the goal of purity. Family is not the goal. Sex is not the goal. God and his glory are the goal of purity. Practicing purity is a form of worship, another way we get to praise God through obedience with our bodies, hearts, and thoughts… We are called to purity because we are called to be like Jesus.”
A few more quotes:
“You are a precious image bearer of God. Your purity has already been won for you in Christ, and your dedication to pursuing sexual purity is not defined by your virginity but by your surrender to Christ and dependence on the Holy Spirit today. Today is a new day to pursue sexual purity out of love for the God who rescued you and brought you safely to himself in Christ.”
“The desire to be the god of your life— of your sexuality— is still a serpent in the ear, a lie in the heart. We are not above falling for the original sin over and over again. Recognize that self-worship is behind every act of disobedience, even the ones we try to justify or minimize. Every time we sin, we are saying, ‘I choose to be my own god.’”
“The solution is not necessarily to talk about sex more often but more honestly, and in community.”
“Too often, purity rhetoric hyperfocuses on what we should and shouldn’t do instead of what Christ has already done. It neglects the gospel and places personal striving above the finished work of Christ.”
Book Review Blog | Facebook | Pinterest
“Sex works a lot like fire. When removed from its protective boundaries, it burns us and leaves scars.”
[Scott Sauls, Foreword]
I was very interested in this book.
‘Purity culture’ has been under attack. So many people have been hurt by this Christian subculture of shame regarding sexual purity. I grew up during this movement but I don’t bear the scars so many others do. I wasn’t even aware of what ‘purity culture’ even was until just recently.
So what happened? What did I miss?
I wanted to hear others’ stories and see where the church went wrong. Sexual purity is a good thing, so Scripture must have been mishandled/misapplied/distorted to cause the fallout it did.
I didn’t read this book to feel satisfaction in tearing down the church. And thankfully, it’s not Rachel’s goal in writing it. The church is made up of imperfect people and unfortunately a place that should always feel safe, sometimes doesn’t. That doesn’t mean everything spoken in the church should be trashed.
I think we can all agree that our bodies matter and what we do with them matter. So we are responsible to discern what is truth, not based on our feelings or on who said it, but based on Scripture. The boundaries God gives regarding sex and sexuality are for our good and protection. But even as God gives us commands, he also offers grace and forgiveness. All of these components are important as we approach this topic.
[Siednote: Sam Allberry’s book What God Has to Say about Our Bodies is a wonderful book to read along with this one!]
Rachel recommends to read this with a group of people and I strongly agree.
I read it with a group of 4 other women and I’m glad I did. We all had our own experiences, influences, and interactions to discuss the topics Rachel brings up and look at what Scripture has to say.
We realized that this is a deconstruction book. Deconstructing purity culture rhetoric. It is always good to think critically about our beliefs. Especially because so many are often shaped as cultural responses. The downside of this formatting is that Rachel wants us as readers to do the work of rebuilding according to biblical standards. This may cause frustration for some readers because she doesn’t spoon-feed us the answers.
She wants us to wrestle with our experiences and our preconceived ideas or subconsciously held beliefs and make sure they have been shaped by God’s Word and his commands for us.
My group discussed how reading it only a chapter at a time with a week or two in between was often discouraging. The last few chapters are the hope and the way forward, but when you’re slogging through the rest it’s easy to become cynical and focus on all the bad things. We tried to make sure we came back to Scripture, to the love and hope of Christ and to remember the gospel message.
I was so glad that Rachel begins her book with the disclaimer that she loves the church and does not write this book to tear apart the bride of Christ.
“My desire to reevaluate purity culture teachings is out of love for the church, not a vendetta against her.”
This was important to me.
Having recently read Jesus and John Wayne by Kristin Kobes Du Mez, which is also a deconstruction book of sorts, I was wary of Welcher’s posture toward the church. Jesus and John Wayne is a strong critique of the failings of the evangelical church in many ways. There is much to say about that that I included in my review of it, but what was disheartening was KDM’s lack of love toward the body of Christ. There was no Scripture, grace, hope, or love in her message. Not so in Talking Back to Purity Culture. Rachel loves the Church and God’s Word and her book reflects that.
No matter where we fall in our beliefs about purity, we are all image-bearers of God and we need to treat each other as such.
As Sauls stated in the foreword, purity culture was borne out of a reaction to the sexual promiscuity of the culture. Rachel says:
“Evangelical purity culture was not a wicked movement but rather an earnest response to the age-old problem of immorality and the modern crisis of STDs and teenage pregnancy. As with most earnest, human responses, we didn’t get everything right… I won’t get everything right in this book either.”
I appreciate her honesty here. Just as purity culture was a response, the reevaluation of purity culture is also a response.
We have to be critical thinkers. She quotes from an interview with a man named Jay who said that he didn’t feel manipulated or lied to by the movement but that he “was able to ‘eat the fish and spit out the bones.’”
I think this was my experience. I had a purity ring, but I didn’t read most of the books she critiqued or go to purity conferences or balls. I didn’t feel the pressure or shame that many did.
With everything we read, we need to listen and interpret through a biblical lens. Even if things are said by a Christian, no matter how well-known, we hold it up to Scripture and see if it stands. Eat the fish, spit out the bones.
I won’t go into detail about all the things she said. I encourage you to read it for yourself and grow with others in your community.
What I’ll do instead is share a table I created. It’s not exhaustive by any means, but here are some things that came up as we reflected on what we read. We wanted to compare what purity culture says to what the Bible says.
Purity culture’s emphasis of sexual purity comes from Scripture’s many many commands to be sexually pure and its teachings of sex being between one man and one woman in the bounds of marriage. What got distorted in practice was the message of grace, redemption, and the motivations for our pursuit of purity.
“‘Purity culture unwittingly told me I was already broken, yet simultaneously gave me a crushing weight of maintaining my own righteousness.’”
In this table, the left column demonstrates what people influenced by purity culture heard from their pastors, youth leaders, or parents. While purity culture didn’t necessarily overtly teach them or even agree with these statements, they were some of the general effect of how sexual purity was communicated and handled.
The right column is the ‘clarification’ and shows what the Bible actually says. Purity culture was trying to uphold the biblical teachings but their fear of the culturally acceptable sexual freedom made the communication of these truths presented as a prosperity gospel focused on ‘following the rules’ rather than focusing on loving and following Jesus.
VIEW TABLE HERE ON MY ORIGINAL POST
Welcher tackles many topics like lust, divorce, abuse, porn, masturbation, modesty, virginity, same-sex attracted people, female vs male responsibilities, infertility, and singleness.
Turns out purity is more complicated than just ‘stay abstinent and you’ll have a healthy marriage and kids and never struggle with impurity.’ Purity culture often simplified things that left people struggling, shamed, and motivated by the wrong desires.
Finding sexual fulfillment at any stage in our life can become an idol and a worship of self and self-fulfillment. The most important part of this book is Rachel reminding us that pursuing sexual purity (and all of God’s commands) is an act of worship of a holy God. That makes all the difference!
Not only did this book draw good discussion with my female friends, but it made for interesting conversation with my husband. I got to ask him a lot of questions about how he, as a male, thought about things or the messages he felt like he was taught or what things influenced him.
This was good for us to grow in learning more about each other and how we can help one another pursue purity, even after marriage, and how we should be teaching our kids about purity in our home.
I admit, there were definitely times where I struggled with her presentation of certain ideas or beliefs where it seemed like she was advocating for something I disagreed with. I’m not sure if our picture of how this looks in the church is the same.
I’m sure we differ on some of the details, but Rachel upholds a biblical view of sex, marriage, and purity and grounds everything in the gospel message that our purity is already won in Christ. So I can get behind that!
Conclusion
This spurs on discussion and biblical study of purity.
It is transparent, challenging, and gospel-centered.
It is a valuable read whether you’re dating, married, parents, childless, heterosexual, or same-sex attracted.
Our bodies matter and what we do with our bodies matter. Therefore, what we think about purity matters.
Christian purity culture didn’t get everything right, but the Bible gives us what we need to know. It’s worth studying so we can worship God with our bodies in obedience and love.
“Marriage is not the goal of purity. Family is not the goal. Sex is not the goal. God and his glory are the goal of purity. Practicing purity is a form of worship, another way we get to praise God through obedience with our bodies, hearts, and thoughts… We are called to purity because we are called to be like Jesus.”
A few more quotes:
“You are a precious image bearer of God. Your purity has already been won for you in Christ, and your dedication to pursuing sexual purity is not defined by your virginity but by your surrender to Christ and dependence on the Holy Spirit today. Today is a new day to pursue sexual purity out of love for the God who rescued you and brought you safely to himself in Christ.”
“The desire to be the god of your life— of your sexuality— is still a serpent in the ear, a lie in the heart. We are not above falling for the original sin over and over again. Recognize that self-worship is behind every act of disobedience, even the ones we try to justify or minimize. Every time we sin, we are saying, ‘I choose to be my own god.’”
“The solution is not necessarily to talk about sex more often but more honestly, and in community.”
“Too often, purity rhetoric hyperfocuses on what we should and shouldn’t do instead of what Christ has already done. It neglects the gospel and places personal striving above the finished work of Christ.”
Book Review Blog | Facebook | Pinterest
“Everything is a calculated move in this house. Nothing is as it seems. Ever.”
“I’m so sorry… I always do this. Every time I care about someone, I find some way to destroy them.”
I loved Jessica’s first book, Sing Me Forgotten. That book was themed around music and was a great fantasy/love story.
A Forgery of Roses is themed around a different art— painting. And while it does have a love story, it’s secondary to the mystery of the book.
The Plot
In this world there are people known as prodigies who have been gifted with part of the Artist’s power. (The Artist being God/Creator who created the world by making his paintings come to life)
Myra is a prodigy.
“Prodigy magic, which flows through my body just as it did through Mother’s, gives a painter the ability to alter human and animal bodies with their paintings, and it is considered by the Church to be even more of an abomination than normal portrait work… sinful imitation of the Artist.”
There are dangers to being a prodigy. Not only is your practice considered an abomination, but others have blackmailed and forced prodigies to do their bidding.
Myra must keep her powers a secret.
But the governor’s wife approaches Myra with a dangerous proposition. One she can’t refuse. The governor’s son, Will, has fallen from a balcony and died and the governor’s wife wants Myra to paint him back to life.
As Myra spends more time in the governor’s house, the more she questions whether Will’s death was actually an accident or something far more sinister.
With the help of Will’s younger brother, August, whom Myra has grown attracted to, and information from the infamous Forger, can Myra unravel the mystery and bring Will back to life before she is discovered and faces certain harm? Even death?
It will be tough because everyone in that haunted house looks like a suspect.
“Trust is a luxury for the wealthy, the secure, the loved.”
My Thoughts
I loved this book!
It was interesting, clever, mysterious, and suspenseful.
As an art major, I was intrigued by the concept of painting powers. I never painted with oils so I can’t relate to that experience, but I definitely knew which colors she was talking about with titanium white, phthalo blue, etc.
I liked Myra and her sister Lucy so it was easy to become invested in her predicament. The other characters were too suspicious to like. But just as I enjoyed the banter between the characters on Sing Me Forgotten, I did in this book as well. Olson is very skilled at writing dialogue.
It was a little bit like an Agatha Christie novel in that there were a lot of suspects and the crime happened in a ‘bubble’ so the ‘detective’ (aka Myra) had to figure out what was going on with each family member and servant.
I kept thinking I knew where the story’s arc was going to go but Olson kept offering up surprises and unexpected details! While there were parts of it I suspected, I don’t think I was really confident about any of my theories the entire book.
I think this book would make for a really good movie!
There is a theme that runs in the book about appearances and authenticity. While authenticity has some connotations that I don’t really agree with, I like how Olson handled it in her book. You can’t help but want to high five this character for speaking this truth:
“I’m done believing the lie… that says I deserve less respect because I struggle. I’m far stronger than you’ll ever be because I’ve fought for every victory. Because those fights have taught me compassion and kindness. They’ve taught me to see the world for what it is, not for what I think it should be. So step aside… I’m done minimizing my greatness so you can feel superior.”
My last thought is in regards to the title. I always like a profound title and one with multiple layers. I won’t reveal too much because of the nature of the story but this quote speaks to part of the title’s depth:
“I think of Ladyroses catching flame… ‘A symbol of life. Beautiful, like birth.’”
It’s the perfect title!
The One Thing
My only qualm with this book is the setting. We are not given a concrete date that this story takes place. The clues we have are that there are carriages instead of cars and gas lights instead of electricity. But the vernacular of the characters and the banter doesn’t really seem to fit that time period to me. Also the hospital scene feels too modern for gas lights, but I don’t mind suspending that reality.
Perhaps because it’s a fiction/fantasy it is not based on a historical era. Which is fine. I just felt a little disconnected from the story. We actually don’t even find out about the carriages for several chapters so at the beginning I wasn’t quite sure where I was for awhile. A little setting at the beginning would have been helpful.
Conclusion
I would definitely recommend this book!
It’s an intense (and clean!) read with a compelling plot, likable protagonist, and great writing.
And then you should also read her first book because that one’s really good too.
A Forgery of Roses finishes a little open-ended and I’m crossing my fingers for a sequel that brings Lucy’s character more into the spotlight, but I think Olson just likes to give her readers something to think about.
I was surprised by some other reviewers’ negative comments. I think if I had read their reviews BEFORE I read the book I might have been similarly influenced, but I read the book on my own and my first impressions and uninfluenced feelings about it were very positive.
I guess, as with any book, there’s a chance we have differing tastes, but I think most people will like it!
**Received an ARC via NetGalley**
Book Review Blog | Facebook | Pinterest
“I’m so sorry… I always do this. Every time I care about someone, I find some way to destroy them.”
I loved Jessica’s first book, Sing Me Forgotten. That book was themed around music and was a great fantasy/love story.
A Forgery of Roses is themed around a different art— painting. And while it does have a love story, it’s secondary to the mystery of the book.
The Plot
In this world there are people known as prodigies who have been gifted with part of the Artist’s power. (The Artist being God/Creator who created the world by making his paintings come to life)
Myra is a prodigy.
“Prodigy magic, which flows through my body just as it did through Mother’s, gives a painter the ability to alter human and animal bodies with their paintings, and it is considered by the Church to be even more of an abomination than normal portrait work… sinful imitation of the Artist.”
There are dangers to being a prodigy. Not only is your practice considered an abomination, but others have blackmailed and forced prodigies to do their bidding.
Myra must keep her powers a secret.
But the governor’s wife approaches Myra with a dangerous proposition. One she can’t refuse. The governor’s son, Will, has fallen from a balcony and died and the governor’s wife wants Myra to paint him back to life.
As Myra spends more time in the governor’s house, the more she questions whether Will’s death was actually an accident or something far more sinister.
With the help of Will’s younger brother, August, whom Myra has grown attracted to, and information from the infamous Forger, can Myra unravel the mystery and bring Will back to life before she is discovered and faces certain harm? Even death?
It will be tough because everyone in that haunted house looks like a suspect.
“Trust is a luxury for the wealthy, the secure, the loved.”
My Thoughts
I loved this book!
It was interesting, clever, mysterious, and suspenseful.
As an art major, I was intrigued by the concept of painting powers. I never painted with oils so I can’t relate to that experience, but I definitely knew which colors she was talking about with titanium white, phthalo blue, etc.
I liked Myra and her sister Lucy so it was easy to become invested in her predicament. The other characters were too suspicious to like. But just as I enjoyed the banter between the characters on Sing Me Forgotten, I did in this book as well. Olson is very skilled at writing dialogue.
It was a little bit like an Agatha Christie novel in that there were a lot of suspects and the crime happened in a ‘bubble’ so the ‘detective’ (aka Myra) had to figure out what was going on with each family member and servant.
I kept thinking I knew where the story’s arc was going to go but Olson kept offering up surprises and unexpected details! While there were parts of it I suspected, I don’t think I was really confident about any of my theories the entire book.
I think this book would make for a really good movie!
There is a theme that runs in the book about appearances and authenticity. While authenticity has some connotations that I don’t really agree with, I like how Olson handled it in her book. You can’t help but want to high five this character for speaking this truth:
“I’m done believing the lie… that says I deserve less respect because I struggle. I’m far stronger than you’ll ever be because I’ve fought for every victory. Because those fights have taught me compassion and kindness. They’ve taught me to see the world for what it is, not for what I think it should be. So step aside… I’m done minimizing my greatness so you can feel superior.”
My last thought is in regards to the title. I always like a profound title and one with multiple layers. I won’t reveal too much because of the nature of the story but this quote speaks to part of the title’s depth:
“I think of Ladyroses catching flame… ‘A symbol of life. Beautiful, like birth.’”
It’s the perfect title!
The One Thing
My only qualm with this book is the setting. We are not given a concrete date that this story takes place. The clues we have are that there are carriages instead of cars and gas lights instead of electricity. But the vernacular of the characters and the banter doesn’t really seem to fit that time period to me. Also the hospital scene feels too modern for gas lights, but I don’t mind suspending that reality.
Perhaps because it’s a fiction/fantasy it is not based on a historical era. Which is fine. I just felt a little disconnected from the story. We actually don’t even find out about the carriages for several chapters so at the beginning I wasn’t quite sure where I was for awhile. A little setting at the beginning would have been helpful.
Conclusion
I would definitely recommend this book!
It’s an intense (and clean!) read with a compelling plot, likable protagonist, and great writing.
And then you should also read her first book because that one’s really good too.
A Forgery of Roses finishes a little open-ended and I’m crossing my fingers for a sequel that brings Lucy’s character more into the spotlight, but I think Olson just likes to give her readers something to think about.
I was surprised by some other reviewers’ negative comments. I think if I had read their reviews BEFORE I read the book I might have been similarly influenced, but I read the book on my own and my first impressions and uninfluenced feelings about it were very positive.
I guess, as with any book, there’s a chance we have differing tastes, but I think most people will like it!
**Received an ARC via NetGalley**
Book Review Blog | Facebook | Pinterest
I should probably start by saying that I had no idea who Gary Janetti was before I read this book. I entered a Goodreads giveaway for the book because it was marketed as a funny book and I like funny things.
Janetti is writer and producer for Family Guy and Will & Grace, which are both popular shows, so I’m assuming a lot of people would find this book funny. There’re lots of positive reviews to that affect.
Unfortunately, for me, this book didn’t do it.
First and foremost, there were a ton of f- and s-words. And sentences do not need those to be funny.
It felt to me that so many of his ’comedic moments’ required profanity or sexual innuendo or relied on the fact that he’s a gay man. That’s not my kind of comedy.
The back of the book says- “Gary Janetti is bothered. By a lot of things. And thank God he’s here to tell us.”
Each chapter was something else he was complaining about and he generally tried to wrap each one up with something light-hearted or positive. A lot of comedians make jokes about things they hate or ‘don’t understand.’ I get that. But I don’t think Janetti nailed it. It seemed too actual complain-y to me instead of tongue in cheek. Maybe he’s just too believable.
The Funny
To be fair, there were a few things that were funny or that I related to.
For example, he took piano lessons and he gave his logic for why he failed to practice the week between. Thursday is too close to Wednesday (piano day), Friday and Saturday are the fun days and you of course don’t practice then and ruin your weekend. Sunday is too depressing because a new week is starting. Then Monday and Tuesday you avoid because you know you haven’t been practicing and everything is too hard. That was pretty much the same logic I had when I took piano lessons!
He also recounts a really awkward and bad situation he had back when people didn’t have cell phones. He says:
“Today you would pull out your phone and text ‘You can’t believe what a nightmare this is’ to every single person you know. But back then you had to just sit with it. There was no way to get it out. Nobody to help you gauge your sanity.”
Cell phones truly are a necessity.
And then I enjoyed these two quotes as well:
“Nuns can be unpredictable.”
[From his Commencement Address chapter] “I’m guessing most of you will be working in the service industry within a few weeks and will be wondering how that happened. Well, it happened because there aren’t that many jobs and your major was likely stupid.”
But then we can talk about how he has a whole chapter dedicated to why he thinks The Wizard of Oz is the gayest movie ever created.
And we can talk about his views on weddings and marriages, his preoccupation with appearances, how he always thought how glamorous it would be if his parents would divorce, and how much he hates people and tries to avoid them (hence the title). I mean reading this I would not want to have a conversation with him. I would be imagining all the negative things he would be thinking about me and the situation while we talked.
Random Ponderings
I know that a lot of why I didn’t think this book was funny is because Gary and I live life from very different worldviews. His humor is not my humor. I’m not the target audience, I get it.
I’m probably going to regret voicing these questions on the internet, but when I read a book like this where Janetti makes statements about ‘gay men’ frequently throughout the book as if the collective group of gay men are the same, I have to wonder… is it true?
What does it mean to be gay?
According to Janetti gay men: hate throwing sports balls, have a low threshold for physical pain, love Broadway musicals, love being dramatic and b****y, love fashion, love gossip, and love going to the gym. (And a few other things that I feel like probably apply to the general public)
But the point is… these things feel superficial and yet when I think back to gay men I’ve seen on reality TV or portrayed in movies, they fit (what I would call) this stereotype. I guess I’m curious what other gay men who read this book think. Do they say ‘All these things! Same!’ or do they say, ‘That’s not me’?
I’m not trying to start a discussion on my beliefs on sexuality and gender, this doesn’t seem like the right book for that nor the book’s intent, but reading this book does make me feel like gay men have kind of created this ‘caricature’ of what it means to be a gay man. And it doesn’t seem like they picked a very good one.
I don’t know if gay men would claim the qualities they have (that don’t fit into the traditional definition of masculine) to be feminine, but if they were to say that, as a woman I would feel offended by that. When I think of a woman I don’t feel like I would fit any of the qualities he talks about. So IF gay men view themselves as more ‘woman’ than ‘man’ (??) I would feel like they’ve reduced what it means to be a woman to something quite simple and inaccurate.
This book seems to highlight the fact that today’s culture is ironically creating smaller boxes of what it means to be a man or a woman. What does it mean to be a man or a woman? By blurring these boundaries it feels like we’re creating more caricatures and categories for people instead of diversity.
Using broad strokes, Janetti depicted what it is to be a gay man. And I wonder if that is a helpful or a hurtful strategy or way of communicating. Does it allow for diversity? Should it?
ANYWAY! That’s a rabbit trail of thoughts I had. Obviously there are no simple answers, but I’m bravely sharing my musings because it’s what reading this book evoked for me.
Conclusion
My negative review of this book and the reason for why I would not recommend it are based on two things: the coarse language and that I didn’t think it was funny.
If you already know who Gary Janetti is and you’re already a fan, then you’ll probably like this book.
If you don’t like the shows Family Guy or Will & Grace, you probably won’t really enjoy this book either.
And if he writes another book… you guys can start that one without me.
[FYI: For an example of a book that I found funny, even though I don’t agree with all of her beliefs, is Jenny Lawson’s book ‘Broken (in the best possible way)'. There is language in that one but at least I found a lot of her book almost laugh out loud funny.]
**Received an ARC via a Goodreads Giveaway**
Book Review Blog | Facebook | Pinterest
Janetti is writer and producer for Family Guy and Will & Grace, which are both popular shows, so I’m assuming a lot of people would find this book funny. There’re lots of positive reviews to that affect.
Unfortunately, for me, this book didn’t do it.
First and foremost, there were a ton of f- and s-words. And sentences do not need those to be funny.
It felt to me that so many of his ’comedic moments’ required profanity or sexual innuendo or relied on the fact that he’s a gay man. That’s not my kind of comedy.
The back of the book says- “Gary Janetti is bothered. By a lot of things. And thank God he’s here to tell us.”
Each chapter was something else he was complaining about and he generally tried to wrap each one up with something light-hearted or positive. A lot of comedians make jokes about things they hate or ‘don’t understand.’ I get that. But I don’t think Janetti nailed it. It seemed too actual complain-y to me instead of tongue in cheek. Maybe he’s just too believable.
The Funny
To be fair, there were a few things that were funny or that I related to.
For example, he took piano lessons and he gave his logic for why he failed to practice the week between. Thursday is too close to Wednesday (piano day), Friday and Saturday are the fun days and you of course don’t practice then and ruin your weekend. Sunday is too depressing because a new week is starting. Then Monday and Tuesday you avoid because you know you haven’t been practicing and everything is too hard. That was pretty much the same logic I had when I took piano lessons!
He also recounts a really awkward and bad situation he had back when people didn’t have cell phones. He says:
“Today you would pull out your phone and text ‘You can’t believe what a nightmare this is’ to every single person you know. But back then you had to just sit with it. There was no way to get it out. Nobody to help you gauge your sanity.”
Cell phones truly are a necessity.
And then I enjoyed these two quotes as well:
“Nuns can be unpredictable.”
[From his Commencement Address chapter] “I’m guessing most of you will be working in the service industry within a few weeks and will be wondering how that happened. Well, it happened because there aren’t that many jobs and your major was likely stupid.”
But then we can talk about how he has a whole chapter dedicated to why he thinks The Wizard of Oz is the gayest movie ever created.
And we can talk about his views on weddings and marriages, his preoccupation with appearances, how he always thought how glamorous it would be if his parents would divorce, and how much he hates people and tries to avoid them (hence the title). I mean reading this I would not want to have a conversation with him. I would be imagining all the negative things he would be thinking about me and the situation while we talked.
Random Ponderings
I know that a lot of why I didn’t think this book was funny is because Gary and I live life from very different worldviews. His humor is not my humor. I’m not the target audience, I get it.
I’m probably going to regret voicing these questions on the internet, but when I read a book like this where Janetti makes statements about ‘gay men’ frequently throughout the book as if the collective group of gay men are the same, I have to wonder… is it true?
What does it mean to be gay?
According to Janetti gay men: hate throwing sports balls, have a low threshold for physical pain, love Broadway musicals, love being dramatic and b****y, love fashion, love gossip, and love going to the gym. (And a few other things that I feel like probably apply to the general public)
But the point is… these things feel superficial and yet when I think back to gay men I’ve seen on reality TV or portrayed in movies, they fit (what I would call) this stereotype. I guess I’m curious what other gay men who read this book think. Do they say ‘All these things! Same!’ or do they say, ‘That’s not me’?
I’m not trying to start a discussion on my beliefs on sexuality and gender, this doesn’t seem like the right book for that nor the book’s intent, but reading this book does make me feel like gay men have kind of created this ‘caricature’ of what it means to be a gay man. And it doesn’t seem like they picked a very good one.
I don’t know if gay men would claim the qualities they have (that don’t fit into the traditional definition of masculine) to be feminine, but if they were to say that, as a woman I would feel offended by that. When I think of a woman I don’t feel like I would fit any of the qualities he talks about. So IF gay men view themselves as more ‘woman’ than ‘man’ (??) I would feel like they’ve reduced what it means to be a woman to something quite simple and inaccurate.
This book seems to highlight the fact that today’s culture is ironically creating smaller boxes of what it means to be a man or a woman. What does it mean to be a man or a woman? By blurring these boundaries it feels like we’re creating more caricatures and categories for people instead of diversity.
Using broad strokes, Janetti depicted what it is to be a gay man. And I wonder if that is a helpful or a hurtful strategy or way of communicating. Does it allow for diversity? Should it?
ANYWAY! That’s a rabbit trail of thoughts I had. Obviously there are no simple answers, but I’m bravely sharing my musings because it’s what reading this book evoked for me.
Conclusion
My negative review of this book and the reason for why I would not recommend it are based on two things: the coarse language and that I didn’t think it was funny.
If you already know who Gary Janetti is and you’re already a fan, then you’ll probably like this book.
If you don’t like the shows Family Guy or Will & Grace, you probably won’t really enjoy this book either.
And if he writes another book… you guys can start that one without me.
[FYI: For an example of a book that I found funny, even though I don’t agree with all of her beliefs, is Jenny Lawson’s book ‘Broken (in the best possible way)'. There is language in that one but at least I found a lot of her book almost laugh out loud funny.]
**Received an ARC via a Goodreads Giveaway**
Book Review Blog | Facebook | Pinterest
"There are scars on my heart, just as thick, as disfiguring as those on my face. I know they’re there. I hope some undamaged tissue remains, a patch through which love can come in and flow out. I hope.”
Eleanor Oliphant is fine. She has her job and her routine and she needs no one else.
Except she’s not.
“For me, dying of loneliness is not hyperbole. If someone asks you how you are, you are meant to say FINE. You are not meant to say that you cried yourself to sleep last night because you hadn’t spoken to another person for two consecutive days. FINE is what you say.”
For so long she has convinced herself that she is content with her life. That she is fine.
And then she has an unexpected encounter with Raymond, an IT guy from her office who comes to fix her computer. It’s a turning point. Little by little she starts to break her routine. She makes changes and concessions.
It’s a little chip in the dam that’s going to break and change Eleanor’s life for the better.
I really like the concept of this story. As the author intended to expose, loneliness is so much more prevalent than we realize. And then, after this book was written, Covid happened and loneliness ratcheted up a few notches. People were literally dying of loneliness.
We are humans created to be in community. To share each other’s joys and burdens. Face-to-face. We need physical touch.
Eleanor Oliphant is Completely Fine is a story that reminds us that we don’t have to be fine. And it’s okay to tell people that. We aren’t meant to do life alone. We need each other.
I really liked Eleanor’s character. She reminded me a little bit of Fern in The Good Sister— literal thinker, witty, and struggling to interpret social situations— mixed with animal-loving Kya from Where the Crawdads Sing who also must navigate relationships from an isolated place of feeling unlovable and damaged.
Here are a few of her gems:
“Animals, birds and insects can provide such useful insights. If I’m ever unsure as to the correct course of action, I’ll think, ‘What would a ferret do?’ or ‘How would a salamander respond to this situation?’”
“YMCA! Arms in the air, mimicking the letters— what a marvelous idea! Who knew the dancing could be so logical?”
“He wasn’t using a knife, but held a fork in his right hand like a child or an American.”
“There was no window, and a framed print on the wall ( a vase of roses, made using a computer by someone who was dead inside) was more offensive to the eye than a bare wall.”
[HELP ME with this one:] “People did seem to sing about umbrellas and fire starting and Emily Bronte novels…”[I get what the first two songs she’s referring to, but what is the Bronte novel song??? Someone please comment!]
Gail Honeyman did an excellent job writing Eleanor’s voice. Whether or not her character is a person we can picture in the real world is a different conversation, but within the story the voice was consistent and entertaining. Oh, and Gail, I very much appreciated your Oliphant in the room joke.
I’m glad I read this book. It’s been sitting on my shelf for awhile. But, as a rule, I tend to not read trendy books or ones with boring-looking covers.
But, other than the frequent f-words, I enjoyed this story.
There was a little mystery in it as to what happened in Eleanor’s childhood and what the deal is with her mother. There was humor. There was heartache. There is not *really* romance but a wider variety of social relationships that develop.
Eleanor is such an odd character that is somewhat of a puzzle we, as readers, are trying to figure out. We get to see her come out of her shell and experience what life is all about. We see her open herself up to others, which means she is opening herself up to pain and grief. But it means she’s also opening herself up to experience joy, adventure, and unconditional love.
“There must be some people for who difficult behavior wasn’t a reason to end their relationship with you. If they liked you, then, it seemed, they were prepared to maintain contact, even if you were sad, or upset, or behaving in a very challenging ways. This was something of a revelation.”
Apparently this book has been picked up by Reese Witherspoon to do a movie. I’m trying to picture how this would work and I’m intrigued but not convinced it can be pulled off.
For one, it was really hard for me to picture Eleanor as a young woman in her thirties. Not sure if it was the name, the vocabulary, the sentence structure or what. (Who do you think should be cast for her part?!) Speaking of vocabulary— there are a lot of big words in here. It fit her character. If you want to read another book that has a lot of big words done pretentiously instead of tastefully read Nick Offerman’s book Where the Deer and the Antelope Play.
Second, so much of the book happens in Eleanor’s head. It’s her thoughts and internal dialogue that often fills the chapters so I don’t know how that can be effectively done on screen.
If they do create a movie, I will most likely watch it and I will update my review with a short comparison!
This isn’t typically my go-to genre but I did enjoy the book. I would recommend it! I think a wide variety of people can appreciate this book and hopefully be inspired to make sure the people around them are actually fine.
My Obligatory Section of New UK Vocabulary:
- jerkin: a short, closefitting jacket, often sleeveless, or a vest, of a kind worn by men in the 16th and 17th cent (This was Eleanor’s main coat and I’m still at a loss of what it looks like. I googled it and there is quite a selection. I guess we need that movie after all. Show us the jerkin!!)
- brogues: decorative Oxford shoes
- leaving do: party held in honor of someone leaving their job
- Christmas cake: similar to a fruit cake
- shopper: (Eleanor’s purse of choice) this is a shopping bag on wheels that looks a little like luggage.
- duffle coat: kind of like a pea coat but different material.
- comestibles: food
- Biro: ballpoint pen
- offy shuts: I COULDN’T FIND THE DEFINITION OF THIS! Someone please inform me. Unless it's a bad word. Then let's leave it a mystery.
- bibelots: small objects of beauty or rarity
- Seneca: I also couldn’t figure this one out. Eleanor says ‘Thank you, Seneca.’ kind of to herself and I was trying to figure out if Siri is called Seneca in the UK. Anyone have any insights? Or is it the UK equivalent of ‘Karen’ or ‘Felicia’?
- treasury tags: items of stationary used to fasten papers together
Book Review Blog | Facebook | Pinterest
Eleanor Oliphant is fine. She has her job and her routine and she needs no one else.
Except she’s not.
“For me, dying of loneliness is not hyperbole. If someone asks you how you are, you are meant to say FINE. You are not meant to say that you cried yourself to sleep last night because you hadn’t spoken to another person for two consecutive days. FINE is what you say.”
For so long she has convinced herself that she is content with her life. That she is fine.
And then she has an unexpected encounter with Raymond, an IT guy from her office who comes to fix her computer. It’s a turning point. Little by little she starts to break her routine. She makes changes and concessions.
It’s a little chip in the dam that’s going to break and change Eleanor’s life for the better.
I really like the concept of this story. As the author intended to expose, loneliness is so much more prevalent than we realize. And then, after this book was written, Covid happened and loneliness ratcheted up a few notches. People were literally dying of loneliness.
We are humans created to be in community. To share each other’s joys and burdens. Face-to-face. We need physical touch.
Eleanor Oliphant is Completely Fine is a story that reminds us that we don’t have to be fine. And it’s okay to tell people that. We aren’t meant to do life alone. We need each other.
I really liked Eleanor’s character. She reminded me a little bit of Fern in The Good Sister— literal thinker, witty, and struggling to interpret social situations— mixed with animal-loving Kya from Where the Crawdads Sing who also must navigate relationships from an isolated place of feeling unlovable and damaged.
Here are a few of her gems:
“Animals, birds and insects can provide such useful insights. If I’m ever unsure as to the correct course of action, I’ll think, ‘What would a ferret do?’ or ‘How would a salamander respond to this situation?’”
“YMCA! Arms in the air, mimicking the letters— what a marvelous idea! Who knew the dancing could be so logical?”
“He wasn’t using a knife, but held a fork in his right hand like a child or an American.”
“There was no window, and a framed print on the wall ( a vase of roses, made using a computer by someone who was dead inside) was more offensive to the eye than a bare wall.”
[HELP ME with this one:] “People did seem to sing about umbrellas and fire starting and Emily Bronte novels…”[I get what the first two songs she’s referring to, but what is the Bronte novel song??? Someone please comment!]
Gail Honeyman did an excellent job writing Eleanor’s voice. Whether or not her character is a person we can picture in the real world is a different conversation, but within the story the voice was consistent and entertaining. Oh, and Gail, I very much appreciated your Oliphant in the room joke.
I’m glad I read this book. It’s been sitting on my shelf for awhile. But, as a rule, I tend to not read trendy books or ones with boring-looking covers.
But, other than the frequent f-words, I enjoyed this story.
There was a little mystery in it as to what happened in Eleanor’s childhood and what the deal is with her mother. There was humor. There was heartache. There is not *really* romance but a wider variety of social relationships that develop.
Eleanor is such an odd character that is somewhat of a puzzle we, as readers, are trying to figure out. We get to see her come out of her shell and experience what life is all about. We see her open herself up to others, which means she is opening herself up to pain and grief. But it means she’s also opening herself up to experience joy, adventure, and unconditional love.
“There must be some people for who difficult behavior wasn’t a reason to end their relationship with you. If they liked you, then, it seemed, they were prepared to maintain contact, even if you were sad, or upset, or behaving in a very challenging ways. This was something of a revelation.”
Apparently this book has been picked up by Reese Witherspoon to do a movie. I’m trying to picture how this would work and I’m intrigued but not convinced it can be pulled off.
For one, it was really hard for me to picture Eleanor as a young woman in her thirties. Not sure if it was the name, the vocabulary, the sentence structure or what. (Who do you think should be cast for her part?!) Speaking of vocabulary— there are a lot of big words in here. It fit her character. If you want to read another book that has a lot of big words done pretentiously instead of tastefully read Nick Offerman’s book Where the Deer and the Antelope Play.
Second, so much of the book happens in Eleanor’s head. It’s her thoughts and internal dialogue that often fills the chapters so I don’t know how that can be effectively done on screen.
If they do create a movie, I will most likely watch it and I will update my review with a short comparison!
This isn’t typically my go-to genre but I did enjoy the book. I would recommend it! I think a wide variety of people can appreciate this book and hopefully be inspired to make sure the people around them are actually fine.
My Obligatory Section of New UK Vocabulary:
- jerkin: a short, closefitting jacket, often sleeveless, or a vest, of a kind worn by men in the 16th and 17th cent (This was Eleanor’s main coat and I’m still at a loss of what it looks like. I googled it and there is quite a selection. I guess we need that movie after all. Show us the jerkin!!)
- brogues: decorative Oxford shoes
- leaving do: party held in honor of someone leaving their job
- Christmas cake: similar to a fruit cake
- shopper: (Eleanor’s purse of choice) this is a shopping bag on wheels that looks a little like luggage.
- duffle coat: kind of like a pea coat but different material.
- comestibles: food
- Biro: ballpoint pen
- offy shuts: I COULDN’T FIND THE DEFINITION OF THIS! Someone please inform me. Unless it's a bad word. Then let's leave it a mystery.
- bibelots: small objects of beauty or rarity
- Seneca: I also couldn’t figure this one out. Eleanor says ‘Thank you, Seneca.’ kind of to herself and I was trying to figure out if Siri is called Seneca in the UK. Anyone have any insights? Or is it the UK equivalent of ‘Karen’ or ‘Felicia’?
- treasury tags: items of stationary used to fasten papers together
Book Review Blog | Facebook | Pinterest
“The fact that we desire something to be true does not make it true. At the same time, desire is not irrelevant to truth either… For example, hunger might not prove you have food, but it might suggest to you that there is such a thing as food out there, somewhere.”
This is, perhaps, a more academic version of Tim Keller’s The Reason for God book. However, this book has its own twist.
Instead of merely trying to convince readers that Christianity is true, Gavin Ortlund has written this book to look at the beauty and goodness of Christian Theism.
He is not looking at all religions but focusing on Christianity versus Naturalism:
“Which is telling us a better story— a story that better accounts for the strangeness, the incompleteness, the brokenness, and the beauty of our world?”
I was intrigued when I saw this book but also a little hesitant. I’m a truth seeker so my first reaction is just- focus on the truth! Show the evidence! Share the good news!
But I admire what Ortlund has accomplished in this book and I think it is a very valuable endeavor. Because as he states,
“The greatest impediment to the hearing of the gospel is usually not opposition but indifference… Beauty is a powerful tool for cutting through disenchantment and apathy because it has a kind of persuasive power that reaches down to the heart.”
People today aren’t really asking if Christianity is true. They’re more commonly asking- is it good?
Ortlund is applying Blaise Pascal’s threefold strategy for commending God by showing religion to be “respectable, desirable, and true.”
Knowing that people make sense of the world through narratives— stories— he formats his book accordingly.
A good story has four essential pieces: a beginning, a meaning, a conflict, and a hope.
These are the four chapters/arguments in his book.
He does not begin with Christian Theism but rather comes to the story by looking at the pieces and gradually showing how supernaturalism, rather than naturalism, makes sense, then theism and eventually how Christian Theism is the best story to explain the world as we see it.
Disclaimer
I feel it necessary to let you know that this book is not an easy read. The Reason for God is a pretty approachable and non-intimidating read. Ortlund’s book will appear intimidating to broad readership.
However, I would encourage you to still try it. Even if you don’t grasp every sentence, you will understand his main points and will be able to follow his logic.
I had to look up several words. There were parts that he talked about that required more brain power than I was ready to give, but to his credit, he usually follows up those segments with a ‘In short…’ or ‘This means that…’ to help us follow along.
I think if you know what to expect coming in to the book and decide that it’s okay if you can’t re-explain the entire book to a friend, then you will be ready to hear what Ortlund presents and find its value.
Plus, I am reading this book with several friends and we plan to get together to discuss it. Allow a variety of minds help you parse out the truths of the book. I’m sure the conversations will be lively!
A Taste of Each Chapter
The Cause of the World: Why Something is More Plausible (and much more interesting) than Nothing
The Big Bang Theory right? God spoke and bang the earth was created?
You can’t create something out of nothing. Matter cannot be created or destroyed. Unless you’re God.
One of the first things Ortlund says is this:
“You start off wanting to say, innocently enough, that the universe didn’t go “Poof!” from nothing, but to defend the point you find yourself talking about oscillating universes, quantum mechanics, eternal inflation theories, various definitions of the word “nothing,” “no-boundary” conceptions of time, and so forth.”
And I was like… I do?! The only word I understand from that sentence is ‘and so forth.’
Ortlund has done such a comprehensive job researching all of the theories and analyzing not only opposing explanations but the Christian ones as well. What are the weak points and what questions do each theory beg?
I don’t share that quote to scare you away from this book but to show you that he’s not just flippantly giving ‘answers’ to the hard questions. He is digging deep to consider all the options and figure out which one is the best explanation!
Some of the main points in this chapter:
- Who created the Creator? (and why this is not a helpful question)
- God as the ‘Uncaused Cause’
- The world expanding from a singularity, collapses, and repeats the process
- Is God necessary?
- Is there supernature?
- Can the world explain itself?
The Meaning of the World: Why Things Like Math, Music, and Love Make More Sense if There is a God
“A book has transcendent meaning because there is an author. The book has a meaning because the author has intentions for writing it; and that meaning is transcendent because the author is outside the book (rather than a character within it).”
He talks about the realism, durability, and usefulness of math that undermines the arbitrary context of naturalism:
“Mathematical realism turns out to be a rather strange bedfellow to the broader metaphysical assumptions of nature. Specifically, it is difficult to explain why a finite space-time universe that is in constant flux should produce a mental realm characterized by apparently eternal, necessary truths. Where did this distinct realm come from? How did the temporal produce the permanent?”
A Christian theism viewpoint looks at numbers as eternal truths because they came from an eternal mind/Truth— they are something to be discovered, not invented.
Another question that naturalism cannot really explain is how music affects people. Music feels meaningful and important.
“Neuroscientists note that music affects the same part of our brains as sex and food. But unlike sex and food, it has no obvious survival function— so, from the standpoint of evolutionary psychology, why does it affect us so emotionally?”
What if music is not just a dream, an accident of biology that worked out this way, but a window— a glimpse of something beyond?
Without transcendent meaning in our lives, we lose a significant part of our humanity.
Some of the main points in this chapter:
- Can the multiverse theory explain the fine-tuning of our universe?
- Is love permanent? Is love accidental, biological, and functional or essential, spiritual, and purposeful?
- The meaning we find in math, music, and love speak to something transcendent and personal
The Conflict of the World: Why Good and Evil Shape the Plot of Every Story You’ve Ever Heard
“I propose that a worldview that allows for the supernatural provides both a more plausible and a more meaningful explanatory framework for [conscience and a ‘Happy Ending’]. Specifically, such a worldview can 1) ground objective moral reality and 2) offer hope. By contrast, the story that naturalism tells is a dreadful tale in which moral drama is fundamentally illusory, for conscience is deceiving us and no Happy Ending is coming.”
Virtually every movie and book we read has some sort of conflict between good and evil. Where did this idea of ‘good’ and ‘evil’ come from?
Ortlund asks us to consider a crocodile killing and eating a gazelle. This is not an immoral act to us. However, a human murdering another human is. If we are believers in a worldview of naturalism, at what point in the evolutionary process did the moral objection to human murder take place?
Where do we get our idea of human rights and equality? [this is a driving point in Rebecca McLaughlin’s book The Secular Creed]
“We intuitively recognize that it matters whether we exploit or help the poor, whether we love our families or abuse them; to consider that such intuitions are illusory feels not like a minor loss but like something unspeakably horrible. The theistic story, by contrast, infuses nobility into human life and struggle; it has the potential implication that how you live will matter forever.”
Some of the main points in this chapter:
- Why do we all have a sense of moral justice and the ‘rightness’ of what the world should be?
- What outcomes do we see in terms of moral justice when God is removed from the equation?
- Are morality and justice arbitrary illusions?
The Hope of the World: Why Easter Means Happiness Beyond Your Wildest Dreams
“Christ’s incarnation and resurrection are the true Story every other story is searching for.”
If we’ve determined that the Earth and humans were created on purpose, with a purpose, to experience glimpses of a different and better reality, a place where all the injustices in the world will be made right, then this chapter is where we see the object of our hope.
He talks in length about C.S. Lewis’ famous ‘Liar, Lunatic, Lord’ argument. It is not a question of whether Jesus existed, but who he really was. Lewis’ argument goes: Jesus claimed to be God so either he was lying, he was crazy, or he was who he said he was.
Ortlund provides another option: legend. Did Jesus actually claim to be God? This then becomes a discussion on the truthfulness and reliability of Scripture.
He uses Bart Ehrman as his main counter-source for this section. As such, I will insert a plug for you to check out the book ‘Surviving Religion 101’ by Michael Kruger. Kruger had Ehrman as a professor in college and is now a scholarly voice on the canonization and historicity of the Bible.
Ortlund lays out the arguments for believing the Bible is true and that Jesus is who he says he is. And if Jesus is who he said he is, his death on the cross was for us and provided a way for us to have eternal life in Heaven where all is right in the world. That is good news!
Some of the main points in this chapter:
- Does ‘religion’ cause violence? If religion is the problem, why have (atheistic) “Marxist regimes murdered nearly 110 million people from 1917 to 1987. For perspective on this incredible toll, note that all domestic and foreign wars during the 20th century killed around 35 million.” ?
- Is the validity of a belief determined by how it came to be?
- Can we trust the Bible?
- Did Jesus really rise from the dead?
Conclusion
This is a long review and it is by no means exhaustive of the content found in this book.
I hope if you find yourself despairing the broken world, wondering what your purpose is in life, or fearful of what comes next, that you would consider hearing what Ortlund puts forth.
It is a thoughtful and explorative book that is meant to draw you in to think and imagine, not sit you down to sign off on his beliefs.
Naturalism explains things in terms of random illusions as evolution works itself out, but what if our deepest feelings and convictions of meaning and morality are not deceptions but clues to reality?
Ortlund truly does reveal the beauty and the goodness of a Creator God who made us, loves us, and will make all things right.
I like to think that I’m a pretty logical person. Though I already believe in God and the truths of the Bible, this book reiterated to me that what I have is not a blind faith. In a world that doesn’t make sense, God really does. His truth really does.
It gives me confidence, hope, joy, and endurance. To know there is intention, design, purpose, and future really changes how I view the world and the people in it, and how I live each day.
What a relevant and important book today.
“In the Christian story, our physical universe is just one tiny contribution to reality, like an island in an immense ocean; therefore the beauty we observe around us does not enclose us but merely whispers of this vast beyond. In the Christian story, music and poetry tug at our hearts for a reason: they are the ancient language by which the world was written. In the Christian story, ideas and math and logic have a kind of stable energy to them; learning them is like discovering an encoded message from someone highly intelligent. In the Christian story, love is at the core of reality; it is what spawned the world, and it will have the final word. In the Christian story, you have every right to be furious with injustice; goodness is real, and your life can be nobly spent in its service. In the Christian story, evil will one day be defeated; happiness will reign forever; every movie you ever watch is whispering to you about this.”
Some Other Quotes
“What is the difference between arguing in favor of an eternally existing creator versus an eternally existing universe without one?”
“Thinking that scientific advance will remove the need for a meta-cause is likely getting two-thirds of the way through Hamlet and thinking that the final third will somehow replace the need for Shakespeare.”
“Einstein could be very critical of organized religion, and he certainly did not profess belief in a personal God. But he was equally (if not more) critical of aggressive atheism, and he often spoke in almost religious terms of the sense of humility and wonder that the world impresses upon us. For Einstein, the more one penetrates into an understanding of the physical universe, the more one is left with this lingering sense of Something else, Something beyond.”
“[Richard] Dawkins maintains that the multiverse is much simpler than God, because although it posits a vast number of universes, they all share the same basic laws. God, by contrast… is the most complex answer… But this depends upon the criteria by which we determine simplicity. Which is simpler: an infinite number of worlds or an infinite person behind the world?”
“If we think evolution has displaced the need for God, whatever else we have done, we have not transitioned from the mysterious to the non mysterious, from the wild to the prosaic. No, we are in a deeply mysterious world any way we look at it.”
“I think it was Chesterton who said the worst moment for the skeptic is when he feels truly grateful but has no one to thank.”
“Think about it: on a naturalistic account of reality, the feeling of love has a similar status to the enjoyment of music. Love came about in the evolutionary process as a by-product of natural selection. It affects us the way it does because it helped our ancestors survive and pas not their genes. Love is therefore an accidental feature of reality, and the feeling of significance that accompanies it is your brain tricking you.”
“In the modern West, our moral framework is primarily grounded in considerations of harm, whereas virtually all other cultures have developed their moral vision from a variety of other criteria, such as care, fairness, loyalty, authority, and sanctity.”
“Johnathan Haidt (The Righteous Mind) argues that conservatives and liberals often talk past one another because they don’t take into account their differing intuitions about the nature of morality. We therefore need to be slower to dismiss others simply because we can refute their arguments and more discerning of the role our moral convictions are playing in us. ‘Morality binds and blinds. It binds us into ideological teams that fight each other as though the fate of the world depended on our side winning each battle. It blinds us to the fact that each team is composed of good people who have something important to say.’”
“… the evolutionary process is interested in survival, not truth.”
“What is needed to explain the existence of a book is not a first sentence but an author.”
“The idea of God as the source of morality is not a claim that believers in God are more moral (which is a sociological question), or that religions have produced moral guidelines for society (a historical question), or that religious people know morality more accurately (which is an epistemological question). The issue is where morality itself comes from (an ontological question).”
“To put it simply: if you are looking for God, you will likely succeed; if you are avoiding him, you will also likely succeed.”
Book Review Blog | Facebook | Pinterest
This is, perhaps, a more academic version of Tim Keller’s The Reason for God book. However, this book has its own twist.
Instead of merely trying to convince readers that Christianity is true, Gavin Ortlund has written this book to look at the beauty and goodness of Christian Theism.
He is not looking at all religions but focusing on Christianity versus Naturalism:
“Which is telling us a better story— a story that better accounts for the strangeness, the incompleteness, the brokenness, and the beauty of our world?”
I was intrigued when I saw this book but also a little hesitant. I’m a truth seeker so my first reaction is just- focus on the truth! Show the evidence! Share the good news!
But I admire what Ortlund has accomplished in this book and I think it is a very valuable endeavor. Because as he states,
“The greatest impediment to the hearing of the gospel is usually not opposition but indifference… Beauty is a powerful tool for cutting through disenchantment and apathy because it has a kind of persuasive power that reaches down to the heart.”
People today aren’t really asking if Christianity is true. They’re more commonly asking- is it good?
Ortlund is applying Blaise Pascal’s threefold strategy for commending God by showing religion to be “respectable, desirable, and true.”
Knowing that people make sense of the world through narratives— stories— he formats his book accordingly.
A good story has four essential pieces: a beginning, a meaning, a conflict, and a hope.
These are the four chapters/arguments in his book.
He does not begin with Christian Theism but rather comes to the story by looking at the pieces and gradually showing how supernaturalism, rather than naturalism, makes sense, then theism and eventually how Christian Theism is the best story to explain the world as we see it.
Disclaimer
I feel it necessary to let you know that this book is not an easy read. The Reason for God is a pretty approachable and non-intimidating read. Ortlund’s book will appear intimidating to broad readership.
However, I would encourage you to still try it. Even if you don’t grasp every sentence, you will understand his main points and will be able to follow his logic.
I had to look up several words. There were parts that he talked about that required more brain power than I was ready to give, but to his credit, he usually follows up those segments with a ‘In short…’ or ‘This means that…’ to help us follow along.
I think if you know what to expect coming in to the book and decide that it’s okay if you can’t re-explain the entire book to a friend, then you will be ready to hear what Ortlund presents and find its value.
Plus, I am reading this book with several friends and we plan to get together to discuss it. Allow a variety of minds help you parse out the truths of the book. I’m sure the conversations will be lively!
A Taste of Each Chapter
The Cause of the World: Why Something is More Plausible (and much more interesting) than Nothing
The Big Bang Theory right? God spoke and bang the earth was created?
You can’t create something out of nothing. Matter cannot be created or destroyed. Unless you’re God.
One of the first things Ortlund says is this:
“You start off wanting to say, innocently enough, that the universe didn’t go “Poof!” from nothing, but to defend the point you find yourself talking about oscillating universes, quantum mechanics, eternal inflation theories, various definitions of the word “nothing,” “no-boundary” conceptions of time, and so forth.”
And I was like… I do?! The only word I understand from that sentence is ‘and so forth.’
Ortlund has done such a comprehensive job researching all of the theories and analyzing not only opposing explanations but the Christian ones as well. What are the weak points and what questions do each theory beg?
I don’t share that quote to scare you away from this book but to show you that he’s not just flippantly giving ‘answers’ to the hard questions. He is digging deep to consider all the options and figure out which one is the best explanation!
Some of the main points in this chapter:
- Who created the Creator? (and why this is not a helpful question)
- God as the ‘Uncaused Cause’
- The world expanding from a singularity, collapses, and repeats the process
- Is God necessary?
- Is there supernature?
- Can the world explain itself?
The Meaning of the World: Why Things Like Math, Music, and Love Make More Sense if There is a God
“A book has transcendent meaning because there is an author. The book has a meaning because the author has intentions for writing it; and that meaning is transcendent because the author is outside the book (rather than a character within it).”
He talks about the realism, durability, and usefulness of math that undermines the arbitrary context of naturalism:
“Mathematical realism turns out to be a rather strange bedfellow to the broader metaphysical assumptions of nature. Specifically, it is difficult to explain why a finite space-time universe that is in constant flux should produce a mental realm characterized by apparently eternal, necessary truths. Where did this distinct realm come from? How did the temporal produce the permanent?”
A Christian theism viewpoint looks at numbers as eternal truths because they came from an eternal mind/Truth— they are something to be discovered, not invented.
Another question that naturalism cannot really explain is how music affects people. Music feels meaningful and important.
“Neuroscientists note that music affects the same part of our brains as sex and food. But unlike sex and food, it has no obvious survival function— so, from the standpoint of evolutionary psychology, why does it affect us so emotionally?”
What if music is not just a dream, an accident of biology that worked out this way, but a window— a glimpse of something beyond?
Without transcendent meaning in our lives, we lose a significant part of our humanity.
Some of the main points in this chapter:
- Can the multiverse theory explain the fine-tuning of our universe?
- Is love permanent? Is love accidental, biological, and functional or essential, spiritual, and purposeful?
- The meaning we find in math, music, and love speak to something transcendent and personal
The Conflict of the World: Why Good and Evil Shape the Plot of Every Story You’ve Ever Heard
“I propose that a worldview that allows for the supernatural provides both a more plausible and a more meaningful explanatory framework for [conscience and a ‘Happy Ending’]. Specifically, such a worldview can 1) ground objective moral reality and 2) offer hope. By contrast, the story that naturalism tells is a dreadful tale in which moral drama is fundamentally illusory, for conscience is deceiving us and no Happy Ending is coming.”
Virtually every movie and book we read has some sort of conflict between good and evil. Where did this idea of ‘good’ and ‘evil’ come from?
Ortlund asks us to consider a crocodile killing and eating a gazelle. This is not an immoral act to us. However, a human murdering another human is. If we are believers in a worldview of naturalism, at what point in the evolutionary process did the moral objection to human murder take place?
Where do we get our idea of human rights and equality? [this is a driving point in Rebecca McLaughlin’s book The Secular Creed]
“We intuitively recognize that it matters whether we exploit or help the poor, whether we love our families or abuse them; to consider that such intuitions are illusory feels not like a minor loss but like something unspeakably horrible. The theistic story, by contrast, infuses nobility into human life and struggle; it has the potential implication that how you live will matter forever.”
Some of the main points in this chapter:
- Why do we all have a sense of moral justice and the ‘rightness’ of what the world should be?
- What outcomes do we see in terms of moral justice when God is removed from the equation?
- Are morality and justice arbitrary illusions?
The Hope of the World: Why Easter Means Happiness Beyond Your Wildest Dreams
“Christ’s incarnation and resurrection are the true Story every other story is searching for.”
If we’ve determined that the Earth and humans were created on purpose, with a purpose, to experience glimpses of a different and better reality, a place where all the injustices in the world will be made right, then this chapter is where we see the object of our hope.
He talks in length about C.S. Lewis’ famous ‘Liar, Lunatic, Lord’ argument. It is not a question of whether Jesus existed, but who he really was. Lewis’ argument goes: Jesus claimed to be God so either he was lying, he was crazy, or he was who he said he was.
Ortlund provides another option: legend. Did Jesus actually claim to be God? This then becomes a discussion on the truthfulness and reliability of Scripture.
He uses Bart Ehrman as his main counter-source for this section. As such, I will insert a plug for you to check out the book ‘Surviving Religion 101’ by Michael Kruger. Kruger had Ehrman as a professor in college and is now a scholarly voice on the canonization and historicity of the Bible.
Ortlund lays out the arguments for believing the Bible is true and that Jesus is who he says he is. And if Jesus is who he said he is, his death on the cross was for us and provided a way for us to have eternal life in Heaven where all is right in the world. That is good news!
Some of the main points in this chapter:
- Does ‘religion’ cause violence? If religion is the problem, why have (atheistic) “Marxist regimes murdered nearly 110 million people from 1917 to 1987. For perspective on this incredible toll, note that all domestic and foreign wars during the 20th century killed around 35 million.” ?
- Is the validity of a belief determined by how it came to be?
- Can we trust the Bible?
- Did Jesus really rise from the dead?
Conclusion
This is a long review and it is by no means exhaustive of the content found in this book.
I hope if you find yourself despairing the broken world, wondering what your purpose is in life, or fearful of what comes next, that you would consider hearing what Ortlund puts forth.
It is a thoughtful and explorative book that is meant to draw you in to think and imagine, not sit you down to sign off on his beliefs.
Naturalism explains things in terms of random illusions as evolution works itself out, but what if our deepest feelings and convictions of meaning and morality are not deceptions but clues to reality?
Ortlund truly does reveal the beauty and the goodness of a Creator God who made us, loves us, and will make all things right.
I like to think that I’m a pretty logical person. Though I already believe in God and the truths of the Bible, this book reiterated to me that what I have is not a blind faith. In a world that doesn’t make sense, God really does. His truth really does.
It gives me confidence, hope, joy, and endurance. To know there is intention, design, purpose, and future really changes how I view the world and the people in it, and how I live each day.
What a relevant and important book today.
“In the Christian story, our physical universe is just one tiny contribution to reality, like an island in an immense ocean; therefore the beauty we observe around us does not enclose us but merely whispers of this vast beyond. In the Christian story, music and poetry tug at our hearts for a reason: they are the ancient language by which the world was written. In the Christian story, ideas and math and logic have a kind of stable energy to them; learning them is like discovering an encoded message from someone highly intelligent. In the Christian story, love is at the core of reality; it is what spawned the world, and it will have the final word. In the Christian story, you have every right to be furious with injustice; goodness is real, and your life can be nobly spent in its service. In the Christian story, evil will one day be defeated; happiness will reign forever; every movie you ever watch is whispering to you about this.”
Some Other Quotes
“What is the difference between arguing in favor of an eternally existing creator versus an eternally existing universe without one?”
“Thinking that scientific advance will remove the need for a meta-cause is likely getting two-thirds of the way through Hamlet and thinking that the final third will somehow replace the need for Shakespeare.”
“Einstein could be very critical of organized religion, and he certainly did not profess belief in a personal God. But he was equally (if not more) critical of aggressive atheism, and he often spoke in almost religious terms of the sense of humility and wonder that the world impresses upon us. For Einstein, the more one penetrates into an understanding of the physical universe, the more one is left with this lingering sense of Something else, Something beyond.”
“[Richard] Dawkins maintains that the multiverse is much simpler than God, because although it posits a vast number of universes, they all share the same basic laws. God, by contrast… is the most complex answer… But this depends upon the criteria by which we determine simplicity. Which is simpler: an infinite number of worlds or an infinite person behind the world?”
“If we think evolution has displaced the need for God, whatever else we have done, we have not transitioned from the mysterious to the non mysterious, from the wild to the prosaic. No, we are in a deeply mysterious world any way we look at it.”
“I think it was Chesterton who said the worst moment for the skeptic is when he feels truly grateful but has no one to thank.”
“Think about it: on a naturalistic account of reality, the feeling of love has a similar status to the enjoyment of music. Love came about in the evolutionary process as a by-product of natural selection. It affects us the way it does because it helped our ancestors survive and pas not their genes. Love is therefore an accidental feature of reality, and the feeling of significance that accompanies it is your brain tricking you.”
“In the modern West, our moral framework is primarily grounded in considerations of harm, whereas virtually all other cultures have developed their moral vision from a variety of other criteria, such as care, fairness, loyalty, authority, and sanctity.”
“Johnathan Haidt (The Righteous Mind) argues that conservatives and liberals often talk past one another because they don’t take into account their differing intuitions about the nature of morality. We therefore need to be slower to dismiss others simply because we can refute their arguments and more discerning of the role our moral convictions are playing in us. ‘Morality binds and blinds. It binds us into ideological teams that fight each other as though the fate of the world depended on our side winning each battle. It blinds us to the fact that each team is composed of good people who have something important to say.’”
“… the evolutionary process is interested in survival, not truth.”
“What is needed to explain the existence of a book is not a first sentence but an author.”
“The idea of God as the source of morality is not a claim that believers in God are more moral (which is a sociological question), or that religions have produced moral guidelines for society (a historical question), or that religious people know morality more accurately (which is an epistemological question). The issue is where morality itself comes from (an ontological question).”
“To put it simply: if you are looking for God, you will likely succeed; if you are avoiding him, you will also likely succeed.”
Book Review Blog | Facebook | Pinterest