Steve Bagdanov
What a sad story. The “accomplishment” is astounding, but the story is flat. There is no redemption, no character qualities to emulate, ultimately it feels like a story that shouldn't be told.
Unrelated but something that I wish it had were pictures of the characters. There is a center section with pictures of some of the art work stolen but there are no photos of the characters. There are drawing of the attic rooms where he stashed his loot, but no photos. I want to leave this story with the last page of the book but feel weirdly compelled to finish the story by googling the characters. I think I will abstain.
Should you read it, meh.
I enjoyed this book mostly. I liked the main character, the story was interesting, different. I looked forward to picking it back up each day, the ending was...interesting - still trying to figure it out.
Best quote: “Maria understood that part of aging, at least for many of us, was to see how misshapen and imperfect our stories had to be. The passage of time bends us, it folds us up, and eventually, it tucks us right into the ground.” p. 323
Ken Follet will tell you a fairly good story, so there is that.
This book though...how long are we going to gamble with the fate of the world? We are like the proverbial frog in the pan, unaware that the water is going to eventually kill us. Our propensity to violence, accident, and power are an uncontrollable/inevitable? path to self destruction. If the last administration wasn't enough evidence that the US is vulnerable to incredible stupidity and blind nationalism then just think about how as a people we are defined by vengeance and violence. And we have already justified the dropping of two Nuclear weapons.
Can't we just all agree that killing, war, violence is something that we should have rid ourselves of long ago and that it is way past time for us to “give peace a chance”?
For all of us who try to cleanse our collective conscience by minimizing our past actions and relegating them to selected actions of bigots who exist on the fringe of our culture, this book is for you. Rothstein gives ample evidence that the racism of our country is explicit, ubiquitous, and codified at every level of our country.
Part of our problem is that we have never used the right terms to describe our racism. Rothstein differentiates between de facto racism (that which simply describes the facts as they were) and de jure racism (that which is undergirded by law). His evidence is overwhelming and makes this a hard book to read. If right, I think he is, then the right word to describe our racist history is apartheid. But in our “exceptionalism” we restrict that term to other countries. The reality is that it describes the USA.
We continue apartheid when we see that the racism in our country is de jure, but offer no remedy.
This book is a tale with two halves. The first half is worth reading, the second is not.
It also has a companion book: The Lost World of Adam and Eve.
in the first half of the book Walton lays out an alternative view to the Genesis 1 creation account where he makes the case for a “functional” creation description versus the traditional “material” creation account. Here is his description:
“In conclusion, analysts of the ancient Near Eastern creation literature often observe that nothing material is actually made in these accounts. This is an intriguing observation. Scholars who have assumed that true acts of creation must by definition involve production of material objects are apparently baffled that all of these so-called creation texts have nothing of what these scholars would consider to be creation activities. I propose that the solution is to modify what we consider creation activities based on what we find in the literature. If we follow the sense of the literature and its ideas of creation, we find that people in the ancient Near East did not think of creation in terms of making material things—instead, everything is function oriented. The gods are beginning their own operations and are making all of the elements of the cosmos operational. Creation thus constituted bringing order to the cosmos from an originally nonfunctional condition. It is from this reading of the literature that we may deduce a functional ontology in the ancient world—that is, that they offer accounts of functional origins rather than accounts of material origins. Consequently, to create something (cause it to exist) in the ancient world means to give it a function, not material properties.”
I thought this part of the book was well argued and compelling. The connection to temple and sabbath were especially interesting.
But like all conservatives they have trouble staying in their lane. So the last part of the book is a laborious conversation about how this view helps/hinders the origins debate - which only exists in their world, a lost world of its own. It includes an odd section on Public Education. If you, like me, consider the “origins” debate fundamentalist detritus that is both bad science and bad Bible reading, read the first half, skip the second.
3 stars = 1st half of the book 5 stars, second half 1 star.
A major premise of the book is that the idea that Christianity was a well formed, unified community with a clear corpus of beliefs that were universally accepted is unfounded. They talk instead about a multiplicity of kinds of groups/gatherings. These groups reflect a diverse set of ideas, practices, and beliefs. A provocative challenge in the approach of this book is that they ask the question: “what if Christianity died in the fourth or fifth centuries after it began? How would that change how historians see and understand its first two hundred years?” Implicit in these questions is the obvious burden for any modern adherent of religion: Is what I experience today as Christianity the same as what the first followers experienced and understood?
Of particular interest to me were the parts of the book that challenged word usage and formation. For instance, the suggestion that transliterated words are unhelpful in many instances. “Christ” is a transliteration of Christos (Χριστός) and is more appropriately translated “anointed one” as opposed to Christ. This feels self evident, even the most conservative of scholars would not object to this translating this word instead of transliterating it. But for some reason, many of our English translations transliterate this word, surely as a result of some developed tradition. But does this give us the right feel of the word? To broaden the conversation, the word “Christian” would generally be understood to describe religious followers of Jesus. But if we compare it to other words from the time, like “Herodian” (belonging to the party of Herod), the best understanding of the word “Christian” would be, “belonging to the party of Christ.” This translation opens the possibility that the nature of following Jesus in the early part of the development of Christianity may have had more political overtones than we have entertained previously.
Other words that are discussed are the terms “baptism” (which they assign the primary meaning of “bath'), “kingdom” which contextually may be better translated “empire,” and “Judean” which often is translated “Jew” or “Jewish.”
Other subjects I found intriguing:
- Early expressions of “Christianity” are many times reactions to the violence of the Roman empire
- The death of Jesus should be seen in light of the noble deaths of antiquity and that the death of Socrates is a template for these kinds of deaths
- Gnosticism has been misrepresented in our common descriptions and definitions
- Many of our texts fit into the category of Hidden or Secret Texts that use code to speak out against the powers that be. Demon possession was a common vehicle for these hidden messages.
I took Sue Monk Kidd's advice in the preface to this book, and I found it rewarding:
“Whether your relationship to the Christian religion is deep, shallow, past, present, or nil, the way you read this book matters. If you do so while loving the questions, the book will plunge you into the freedom of unknowing.” I “tried to love the questions” that it raised. I was not disappointed, I have a lot more questions.
Read my full review
As usual with Wright, he has provocative things to say and I noted many of them with appreciation. He certainly enlarges perspective.
As to this book, a couple of comments. It is a compilation/result of a lecture series (The Gifford Lectures) so the book is highly contextualized as a result. It is about “Natural Theology” and I felt like I was entering into a conversation mid-stream that was dealing with ideas to which I was not privy, and I was looking up a lot of things midstream - disrupting the flow of the book. Wright is also verbose, it feels like he likes the sound of his pen too much. It also felt like he got caught up name dropping, quoting from theologians and expecting you to know the quote/context/argument without looking it up or being reminded of it. I know this is part of the process, in order to critique something, you have to engage in the ongoing conversation, I found I wasn't up for it and wanted him to make his point.
David Ferguson comments on the back cover: “An impressive and timely publication...Bold, lively and accessible, it will generate widespread discussion.” I didn't find it accessible. I am a pretty savvy reader of theology with an MDiv., and I found it cumbersome at times. I think it is worth reading, but make sure you are sitting at a desk and taking notes. The book could have been laid out better as well to help the reader, with headings and a bit of outlining.
I want to say that what he says in this book is available in more accessible formats in some of his other writing - but am not aware of which would be appropriate. He deals with the resurrection quite a bit, so maybe “Surprised by Hope” (but it has been at least a decade since I read that) or his more recent work on the crucifixion “The Day the Revolution Began” but I haven't read that.
I want to like this book. (I wish the rating system allowed half-stars, I would have given it 3.5) Even though I don't highly rate it, I do recommend it.
I agree with so much of the premise and admire the journey and story of the author. The book itself is best described by the word “scattered.” I struggled to follow the train of thought and was surprised often by the insertion of the main point three pages after the chapter start or 1-2 pages after a heading. The definition of terms was often murky. In the midst of all of the scattered-ness were incisive and well articulated paragraphs.
I feel obligated to finish the books I start. Kelly just shakes her head. If a book doesn't strike a cord with her, she just puts it down and moves on. It feels like a betrayal to me. To be honest, the combination of interspersed gems in the text and my own dysfunctional loyalty is what made me finish the book- and I am glad I did. Ultimately, the message makes the additional work worth the read.
The heart of the book may be his chapter entitled “Having Church.” For me, the book could have used the structure taken from the Spiritual he quotes called “I Will Trust in the Lord”:
Read the full review here: https://thetempleblog.com/book-review-reconstructing-the-gospel/
This is a fantastic book.
The premise of the book is that within the tradition of art surrounding the resurrection of Christ there are two distinct types of resurrection images. One he calls the individual resurrection tradition, the other the universal resurrection tradition. The individual resurrection tradition most characterizes the Western Church and the universal resurrection tradition is represented in the East.
Early in the history of the church (the first millennium) we have both of these traditions are represented, but as we move into the second millennium, the West adopts the individual tradition and the East the universal. The Crossans examine this history and trace the development in a marvelous visual way. They take us to little known locations and display wonderful pictures to help us see this development. Occasionally, the photos are too small to show the detail needed, but often I could find the work online and enlarge and follow. Occasionally not.
But Resurrecting Easter is more than a visual history. Crossan makes a case for the tradition he feels best represents the Easter tradition expressed in the Gospels. His conclusion is that the true Easter vision is represented by the universal resurrection tradition that is dominant in the East.
I won't try to reproduce his argument in this review but I will leave you with some of his observations...
Read the whole review: https://thetempleblog.com/book-review-resurrecting-easter/
Meh.
The Enneagram is interesting, this book takes it way too seriously in ways that I found somewhere between an astrological horoscope in the LA Times and the old 4 humors approach to medicine and personality. The Enneagram has gained popularity recently especially in some religious contexts and has been said by some to be ancient.
Many people who take the Enneagram “seriously” understand that it is a tool not a serious diagnostic methodology. It can help with conversation, introspection, growth, self-analysis but it has no foundation in any sort of data or study. Myers-Briggs, Taylor-Johnson Temperamental Analysis, The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), DISC profile are all tests that attempt to determine personality type and tendencies or characteristics associated with those types and all of them have their limitations. I had an work colleague who took the DISC test way too seriously. I think I have taken all of the above tests, and am not sure they helped me in any way.
I don't mind these kinds of tests and they do in fact give some fodder for good conversation given the context of those conversations. I find people who take them tend to give them more credence than they deserve and lock themselves into a narrative about who they are that may or may not be helpful.
We meet with friends on Sunday afternoons and this was our book of choice for the last few months. The test and descriptions gave us opportunity to get to know one another better and to talk about things we may not have talked about without it. As far as that goes, the Enneagram was helpful for discussion, most of the time we had quizzical reactions to the descriptions in the book.
Personally, I had a hard time with the style of the author, and the certainty with which he described the different roles. It felt very conclusive. Also, my copy of the book had an odd smell to it - unlike that new book smell, maybe that influenced me.
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Thomas Kuhn is not an easy read. It is a mixture of fascinating summary paragraphs hidden in semi-insider language surrounding science. This is not so much a critique, this is a book on the philosophy and history of science, but a warning that it will take some work to read, especially if you aren't a scientist.
This book was nominated as one of the All-Time 100 Best Nonfiction Books and here is what they said about it:
“Thomas S. Kuhn didn't invent the phrase paradigm shift, but he popularized it and gave it the meaning it has today. He also triggered one when he published The Structure Of Scientific Revolutions in 1962...After Kuhn, we can no longer ignore the fact that however powerful science is, it's as flawed as the scientists who do it.”
From the back cover of the book
I first read it as a freshman in college and decided to read it again...
Full Review: https://thetempleblog.com/2022/03/26/book-review-the-structure-of-scientific-revolutions/
A lifelong student of the Bible, I am always looking to read the Bible better.
Reading the Bible better. That is an interesting...odd thing to say about a book. Because of my background, training, and career, how I read the Bible was an issue of faith, integrity, intelligence, and success.
If you want to read the Bible better this is one of the books you should read to help you do that.
I wanted to give it four stars because Enns is snarky and it only works some of the time, but that didn't feel right -
Full review:https://thetempleblog.com/2022/03/21/book-review-how-the-bible-actually-works/
This book was written in 1949.
I start with that for context. My last review was of James Cone's Black Theology of Liberation, which is a harsh and startling read for most white Christians. In fact many reject Cone because of his rhetoric and language. It doesn't feel “christian” enough. It offends sensible white theologians. He should be more like Jesus and less like Malcolm X.
Thurman is everything the critic of Cone desires. He is measured. His language is eloquent, lucid, and cogent. He is articulate.1 And herein lies the rub of the context. Thurman details the elements of the racial divide in our country (and universally) in a way that is not offensive or that is harsh in its descriptions of the “oppressor.” And this message goes unheard. It preempts the criticism of Cone that says, “say it nicer.” Thurman says it nicer. The issue with racism isn't how the oppressed express their pain, it is in the unwillingness of the oppressor to listen at all.
This book is short, a mere 5 chapters and just over 100 pages. It proves that substance is not a quality of length. His 5 chapters covers:
Jesus
Fear
Deception
Hate
Love
In this sense and with these broad categories Thurman manages to not only be specific by addressing racism in America directed towards blacks, but can apply to all contexts of oppression.
The real genius of the book is how Thurman is able to capture for us the experiences and psyche of those who live under oppression. It is also a cutting criticism of the church and its failure to effectively express its core values in light of widespread and ongoing injustice. From the preface:
https://thetempleblog.com/2022/03/07/book-review-jesus-and-the-disinherited/
About two years ago, our pastor said in a sermon that he had started to read theological/spiritual/religious books by black, women and queer authors exclusively. Part of his rationale was that he had only been exposed to authors who were white and male. As he raised up several examples of books he was reading, I began a mental inventory of my meager library collected over 40 years of education and professional ministry. I could only visualize 1 book in my theological library that was written by a person of color: A Theology of Liberation, by Gustavo Gutiérrez. It was assigned to me in my undergraduate studies at Westmont College.
I am not going to “review” this book. I am going to make some comments as to why I was never asked to read this book by the institutions and colleagues and environments within which I surrounded myself. From this cloister of opinion and viewpoint and entitlement I never read/nor was challenged to read a perspective that called me across the divide to listen, see, and feel what others experience and live. It is hard to make a case against my latent and unchallenged racism when I can't even list a book I have read from a person with a different background that myself. My experience is not unique to me, but part of our system. I am not going to review this book because I really am not qualified to speak about Cone's experience or perspective. AT this stage I should be in a learner's posture.
I have three responses to my narrow education:
My first reaction was anger.
Full Review: https://thetempleblog.com/2022/02/28/book-review-a-black-theology-of-liberation/
Where is God?
I used to sit next to Diana in class at college. If I remember right, we were in Greek 3 together, writing exegetical papers for Dr. Silva on the book of Galatians. I bet she got a better grade than I did; I should of copied off of her papers.
I thoroughly enjoyed this book, and recommend it to you, not because I knew Diana briefly in college, but because this is a marvelous book.
Answering the question, Where is God? is a noble yet difficult task – at least for those of us who struggle with the question and strongly desire a non-trite answer. Diana delivers. And right up front, her last chapter is a masterpiece. The chapters can be summarized by the common heading/thread based on the attempt to answer this question:
“Where is God?” and the Dirt
“Where is God?” and Water
“Where is God?” and the Sky
“Where is God?” and Roots
“Where is God?” and Home
“Where is God?” and the Neighborhood
“Where is God?” and the Commons
As I said above, the last chapter was my favorite...
Read the full review: https://thetempleblog.com/book-review-grounded/
One of my frustrations in 31 years of professional ministry is the impact the youth movement in our culture had on the preparation and installation of leaders in ministry. Not only is pastoral ministry male dominated, it is also (in a weird way) youth oriented.
One of my frustrations with our culture is its emphasis on retirement.
As I am now in my early 60's, one of the struggles has to do with contribution, purpose, place as an older person. But more than complaining about things I probably cannot change, I felt I needed to figure out what my life was going to look like between 60 & 90. Often our life is preparation for the ages 25-65, and after that we are put out to pasture. I feel like I am just starting to figure things out. This is where Rohr's book Falling Upward really came in handy.
Rohr is a great source for the journey of the last half of your life. He is whimsical, straightforward in a gentle way, wise, wide, and gracious. I found his presentation in this book to hit the mark as I ponder the direction and impact I want to make in the final trimester of my life.
One of my favorite quotes from the book is: “We are the clumsy stewards of our own souls.” Falling Upward helps us to see how our lives can have impact and purpose.
Rohr divides life into two halves: “The first half of life is discovering the script, and the second half is actually writing it and owning it.” He describes the first half as a sort of container and the second half is the filling:
“The task of the first half of life is to create a proper container for one's life and answer the first essential questions: “What makes me significant?” “How can I support myself?” and “Who will go with me?” The task of the second half of life is, quite simply, to find the actual contents that this container was meant to hold and deliver.”
If you are looking for a challenging and comprehensive guide to helping you steward your soul, I recommend this book. It is not the easiest read, and you will be challenged. What that means is that you should read the book more than once. The first time for an introduction to foreign idea, the second time for comprehension, the third for apprehension – with a pen and journal for mapping out your journey.
Full review: https://thetempleblog.com/2022/02/14/book-review-falling-upward/
One of the regular conversations I had with my Greek Orthodox friend was about how Protestants seemed to be confused about how to understand the connections and distinctions between the human person of Jesus and the eternal second person of the Trinity. He was a sort of “trouble-maker” so he would generally pose these question to his Protestant friends (mostly lay-persons):
Where is Jesus now?
Did Jesus exist before he died?
Is Jesus the Second Person of the Trinity?
Needless to say, this was generally an issue not given much thought by Christians, not just Protestants. Most laypersons, and unfortunately, most pastors rarely give much thought to this and may not recognize its importance. I don't raise those questions to try and answer them in this review, nor does Richard Rohr specifically list them or answer them in his book. I simply want to provide some context.
Richard Rohr addresses the idea of the “Christ” and why we should distinguish between the Christ and the person of Jesus. The question of why it makes any difference and why we should have conversations about it is central to the premise of the book. This idea is both a necessary conversation moving forward but it also is a historical conversation that isn't new. Hence Rohr's subtitle: How a Forgotten Reality Can Change Everything We See, Hope for, and Believe.
Rohr is what is called a “panentheist.” Not a pantheist, but a panentheist.
To keep it simple, it is best explained by breaking down the etymology of the word. Panentheism is made up of three Greek words: pan, en, theos. “Pan” means “all.” “En” means “in.” “Theos” means “god.” So, Panentheism means “God in all,” or “in all God.” Panentheism is the idea that God is in all things and all things are in God. This is distinct from Pantheism which gets rid of the “in” and is the idea that God is all things and all things are God. Panentheism essentially is a bridge between Pantheism and Theism.
If you are a conservative Theist, you are already bristling which makes this the very book you need to read. The idea has roots in verses like Colossians 1:15-20, Ephesians 1:10 and the multiplicity of Pauline “in Christ/ἐν Χριστῷ statements.
If you are open to a way to look at Christ in a way that is unifying, both of theology and people, then this is a provocative read. Being “in Christ” is the key to living life to the fullest and both fulfilling and experiencing the life of God. Being human and experiencing what it means to be the image of God is Rohr's hope and life's work. This work expresses the very foundation for him. For Rohr a verse like Colossians 3:10-11 is key:
10 and have clothed yourselves with the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge according to the image of its creator.11 In that renewal there is no longer Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave and free; but Christ is all and in all!
(Col. 3:10-11 NRS)
My challenge with this review is that I listened to the audio book while driving on my way to record an audio book for a friend, which I will review in a few weeks. Finding quotes and relaying specifics is much more difficult. So I will not stress about those omissions from this review, although I do list important quotes below.
As far as the audio version is concerned, it is top notch. The book is read by Arthur Morey who reads very deliberately and slowly, which means you should definitely speed up the audio on your device. I don't like it too fast, so 1.10 gave it a near perfect cadence. If you are used to higher speeds then you can increase this, it cut down the listening time and I didn't even notice at 1.10.
Full review on my blog: https://thetempleblog.com/2022/02/07/book-review-the-universal-christ/
Maybe this quote from Pedro Albizu Campos typifies this book most eloquently: “The Yankees are interested in the cage but not the birds” (p.346).
How to Hide an Empire is a book about a USA that is details a history mostly hidden from the average US citizen, at least the ones who live on the mainland. It points to the quiet hypocrisy of our history: a nation dependent on “new” territory for its existence and at the same time denying the occupants of said territory of the freedom instantiated as the highest values of our society. In escaping the abuses of monarchy, we embraced the methodology of imperialism. Campos' quote finds its most revealing expression in this statement from Henry Kissinger responding to concerns regarding Micronesia and nuclear testing fallout:
“There are only 90,000 people out there, who gives a damn?”
p. 350
Beginning with our own colonial beginnings and tracing its effects to our most recent presidential politicians, Immerwahr traces this hypocrisy. In a time when our current conversation politically and nationally surrounds the way we have characterized ourselves historically, this book convinces me of our need to talk frankly about our history especially as it relates to our identity narrative. The need for country wide responsibility for our nation's actions is an act of necessary self-reflection.
Read the Full review: https://thetempleblog.com/2022/01/24/book-review-how-to-hide-an-empire/
Read this book.
I am tempted to end this review there. What Barbara Brown Taylor has done in “Learning to Walk in the Dark” is to take a familiar concept and expose it in multiple ways previously unconsidered. The dark is usually a backdrop, like a good sports referee, doing its job unnoticed. Two passages sum up this background player:
“Jesus was born in a cave and rose from the dead in a cave... “The cave in which he rose from the dead is long gone covered over by the huge Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem. Today visitors stand in line to enter a mausoleum that looks nothing like a hole in the ground. This may be just as well, since no one knows for sure what happened there. By all accounts, a stone blocked the entrance to the cave so that there were no witnesses to the resurrection. Everyone who saw the risen Jesus saw him after. Whatever happened in the cave happened in the dark.
“As many years as I have been listening to Easter sermons, I have never heard anyone talk about that part. Resurrection is always announced with Easter lilies, the sound of trumpets, bright streaming light. But it did not happen that way. If it happened in a cave, it happened in complete silence, in absolute darkness...new life starts in the dark.”
p. 128
And,
“In the book of Genesis, darkness was first; light came second. Darkness was upon the face of the deep before God said anything. Then God said “light” and there was light, but the second word God said was not “darkness,” because the darkness was already there. How did it get there? What was it made of? I do not know. All I know is that darkness was not created; it was already there, so God's act on the first day of creation was not to make light and darkness but to make light and separate it from the darkness, calling the light “day” and the darkness “night.”
“If this primordial story of separation plays a role in our problems with darkness, that is because we turn it into a story of opposition by loading it with values that are not in the story itself. Nowhere does it say that light is good and darkness is bad. Nowhere does it say that God separated light and darkness as a test, to see which one human beings would choose. That is the fruit story, not the darkness story.”
p. 168
These passages reflect a regularity in the book that makes it a must read. Taylor recognizes the place and importance of the dark in the background and consistently draws meaning from the darkness. Darkness has been ignored and vilified as something to be avoided and ignored, and she draws us right into the middle of it, “endarkening” us as she goes. I was consistently brought to a place where I said, “I never thought of it that way.”
Read the full review: https://thetempleblog.com/2022/01/17/book-review-learning-to-walk-in-the-dark/
Convictions was the last book published by Marcus Borg before he died in 2015. Although I was familiar with Borg referentially, this is the first of his books that I have read.
I was attracted to reading this book by Borg as a result of a long and deep felt need that I had and have to frame and re-frame my faith. What is now described as “de-construction” is simply a 21st century way to describe what Borg discusses in his book: learning what matters most.
Curt Whiteman was one of my professors in college and as a naïve freshman I grappled with a statement he made in class one day, it has stuck with me with no need for notation: “Every generation of Christians must examine their theological statements and restate them so that they make sense to the generation they live in.”
WE aren't very good at that. We are much more comfortable learning the statements of our faith and sticking with them. Our language and our values become dated and irrelevant to all but the informed, and our convictions remain cloistered. But maybe more importantly, we don't feel the freedom to engage, think, re-frame, and challenge the ideas passed on to us. When we do, we endure ridicule from those who taught us.
Borg gives a framework for working through this challenge. He wrote this book at age 70 noting “if we aren't going to talk about our convictions – what we have learned about life that matters most – at seventy, then when?”
Full review at: https://thetempleblog.com/book-review-conviction-by-marcus-borg/
