Shepherds For Sale by Megan Basham

  

Shepherds For Sale, as one would expect, is not an uplifting read, but it's very insightful.  Each chapter gives details about how so many church leaders are turning away from the Bible as their sole authority of faith and practice and instead turning to the 'moral' 'causes of the world.  

I really liked how Basham did this, giving facts in  journalistic way and yet giving Biblically based commentary/critiques throughout.  I wasn't sure how to write this review (or 'tome' as it turned out to be!) as this book is a little more unique from any book I've read before, as it has a lot of 'data' as it were, a lot of documenting of the downfall of church leaders. So I'll write it a bit different and go chapter by chapter:

CLIMATE CHANGE: Pastors have accepted the idea of climate change as one of the things they are obligated to warn their people about. Some of them are doing it under the guise of it's being "Creation Care" or something of the sort. And some are even making it out to be a "part of the Gospel".  That, of course, is absolutely false. But many church leaders have bought into concepts like that. I really liked that Basham went on to explain what the Gospel actually is.  

I also liked how she pointed out that there is another side to all of this supposed 'creation care' and that it isn't necessarily as 'caring' as it appears.  Actually, it could be argued that it is causing harm to people in poorer countries. And she gives examples of this, showing how other developing countries have made deals to implement climate protecting measures in exchange for certain things and they end up halting the progress toward wealth and prosperity and causing the reverse of prosperity in their countries.

This earth is temporal, not eternal. We should not live for it. As Romans 8 says, The earth is not getting better, right now it is in bondage to corruption, decay, and was apparently put into that bondage by God Himself.  It is waiting, not for mankind to care for it correctly, but rather, it is waiting for the "revealing of the sons of God"(vs.19), waiting for the day when Christ will come again along with His people who are already with Him in Heaven, on that day He will also rescue His people who are still on earth, rescuing their fleshly bodies from their bondage to sin and corruption. On that day He will also set the creation itself free from its bondage to corruption. But even after this, even after the thousand year reign of Christ, apparently He is going to torch the earth and make a new Heaven and a new earth (Rev 21:1).

ILLEGAL IMMEGRATION

This topic has been promoted with similar, seemingly Biblical, disguises.  In this case, welcoming illegal immigrants under the banner of "welcoming the stranger". And yet, our country does welcome the stranger, and has welcomed the stranger. But does this mean that Christians should push for our government to welcome any and every stranger into the country we live in? Basham shows that actually, this mindset is actually harming the citizens and legal immigrants who already live here.  A government report given in 2018 "showed that between 2010 and 2015, illegal migrants who were incarcerated were responsible for the deaths of 33,000 people. Simple back-of-the-envelope math suggests that the total over the last thirteen ears could easily top 85,000." And they're not just losing their lives, they're losing jobs too, and human trafficking over our border has also risen.  Sure, we Christians could risk losing our lives, jobs..etc. But where is our love for the lost, natural born citizens of our country? Do we not care what happens to them?

Basham points out that "'Of course, believers are to preach Christ crucified to all, no matter how they arrived here. Of course, we should provide for those in real need, no matter how the needy came to cross our path. But 'welcome the stranger' was Christ's command to his followers to personally emulate the Good Samaritan. To insist that it was meant to be used as a blanket immigration policy is spiritual manipulation that cheapens its meaning…" 

Which leads to some thoughts that came to mind while reading this book.  There seems to be this thought, in the minds of many Christians, that any given country, especially one based on Judeo Christian principles, should act as if it were an individual Christian toward other nations and even toward its own people. If that makes any sense. Let me explain some more:

When you look at what the Bible says about government leaders, even though government leaders are set up by God, both collectively and individually, the leaders of a country apparently do NOT have to act as an individual Christian is supposed to act. A Christian is supposed to love his enemies, turn the other cheek and return good for evil. The leaders of a country are given a sword, to punish evildoers (Romans 13). An individual Christian should not make people who do wrong against him terrified of him, and  they are not allowed to punish, or take vengeance on those who hurt them,  but one could make the case that, apparently, governments rightfully do so (Romans 13:3-4), and not only that, the leaders of governments are God's avengers, agents, as it were, of His wrath "on the one who practices evil".

 So yes, vengeance is God's, not ours as individual Christians, but part of how He carries out His own vengeance is through government leaders. (Can the government misuse their authority, yes, but that's not what we're looking at here). One could also make the case that governments are not to love their enemies, but rather to protect the people over whom God gave them charge, which may involve military conflicts with other countries, and yes, even borders to keep potential enemies from entering their country. As Basham notes, "Scripture does not require us to sacrifice national sovereignty. In fact, Acts 17:26 tells us that God 'marked out [our] appointed times in history and the boundaries of [our] lands.' The Lord is not opposed to borders; He invented them."

HIJACKING THE PRO LIFE MOVEMENT

Oddly enough, Basham shows that even Christian antiabortion movements are being affected by a more liberal stance.  The concept of not taking innocent life is one of the most basic truths, the 6th commandment. And yet she shows that there are some 'Christian' movements who think that one shouldn't be so vigilant in standing against it, and some professing Christians who seem to be questioning whether we should even be against it at all.  

I liked her argument to those professing Christians who (bizarrely)thought that one should vote for Clinton or Biden rather than Trump, (largely because of Trump, "Let's be clear, no one cast a ballot for Trump because he committed adultery….Nor was the legal protection of adultery or lechery a feature of the Trump campaign's platform.  In contrast, Clinton and Biden did promise voters that electing them would allow the butchery to continue. They did make it a part of their platforms, and a significant number of voters cast ballots for them based on those promises. Given this, which vote is more morally uncompromising for the Christian - the one that places power in the hands of those who promise to allow the innocent to be put to death or the open that vests power in those who promise to make a way to rescue the innocent?"

CHRISTIAN MEDIA AND THE MONEY MEN

And then, of course, there Christian publications that are headed down…or solidly on, the liberal path. Basham demonstrates examples of these and the mindsets of the various people promoting them.

GRACIOUS DIALOGUE

Wow. Covid-19. Those were weird years. I remember seeing some of the arguments that Basham cites. "Love Your Neighbor" in particular. As if the only way to love one's neighbor was to avoid your Christian brethren when they were sick or rather, just avoid them all together because both of you might get sick or be carriers of covid. It's frightening to think that this all seems to laud the actions of those who, on the judgment day, Christ condemns  for not caring for other Christians,  "[I was] sick, and in prison, and you did not visit Me.’"(Matt 25:43). 

As Basham shows, many presented the Covid restrictions as a matter of obedience to Jesus. But she argues that there were practical and Biblical arguments against them, including Hebrews 10:25.  It is a very fascinating and sobering chapter to see detailed many of the various manipulation of the facts and the Scripture that went on during those days.

 To add more of my own argument, even if it WERE an extremely, very deadly serious sickness, don't Christians believe in the sovereignty of God? He is ultimately in control of who gets sick and who doesn't. And He's not just over sickness, He controls our life and death, whether sick or not.  And if early Christians (and many present day ones)were willing to risk their lives (and the lives of their unbelieving family members and acquaintances because of association) by meeting together to hear the Word of God (in spite of government command), to fellowship and care for one another, shouldn't we do the same in the face of deadly disease? Risking our own potential death and even the potential death of our unbelieving relatives and acquaintances? Wouldn't we want to be one of those to whom Christ says, "I was sick and you visited me?"(Matt 25:36) And when you think about it, the covid restrictions also hindered other loving acts toward "the least of these, my brethren", like giving a cup of water to them, or food, or clothes…etc.  This truly was a case of "We must obey God rather than men"(Acts 5:29). 

CRITICAL RACE PROPHETS

Critical race theory is also infiltrating churches, and Basham sums it up well when she says, "Where Christianity teaches that mankind's greatest need is salvation from his sin, CRT teaches that it is power over his oppressors. The two groups in CRT are not, as in the Bible, sinners and saints, but victims and oppressors. CRT encourages collective grievance in the first group and collective guilt in the second, without ever dealing with the individual heart. Rather than embracing unity through Christ, it encourages division through ethnicity".

We expect the world to hold grudges and be racist and put up dividing lines, but not the church!

Christ tore down the dividing wall between ethnicities (Ephesians 2:11-18). But Churches are putting a new dividing wall up.  They are teaching a different Gospel, namely, that, we are not "One new man", but rather, in Christ, THERE ARE Jews, Greeks, People of Color, White People…etc. And so we should treat each other, not as brothers and sisters, but as divided peoples, some of whom did not have ALL their sins atoned for by Christ. They act as though there are certain sins that Christ did not wipe off of the slate and therefore we need to make each other atone for them on their own (as if they could do that). They are basically teaching a doctrine of unforgiveness. That is not the Gospel and it is not Christlike. 

Even IF people do treat me badly because of my ethnicity or the color of my skin, I'm supposed to love my enemy (Matt 5:44) and do good to those who hate me(Luke 6:27). I don't want to spend my life focused on the sins of others when my own sins have been eternally forgiven by such a gracious God.  I want my enemies to have this forgiveness too.

And then when churches try to force a DEI type of qualification for their ministers, that is unbiblical as well. In one instance Basham brings up how a potential DEI hire for a church leader position was disqualified because he didn't meet the criteria for having pastored a huge congregation or had experience with a large budget.  My dad(a pastor), who has been listening to this book in audiobook form, lamented that that wasn't right either. He pointed out that the main thing people should be looking for in a pastor is whether his goal will be to prepare the people in a congregation to stand before the judgement seat of Christ. Should he be a good studier and know the Word of God? Absolutely. Should he be chosen because of his ethnicity? No. But neither should be chosen or rejected because of his administration skills and his knowledge of how to handle a large budget. The job of a pastor is to feed the sheep. 

#ME TOO, #CHURCHTOO, AND AN APOCALYSPE

I actually skipped chunks of this as I didn't want to read the details of the accusations of sexual assault n' stuff like that. I do like how Basham brings it back to, not necessarily just being the man's fault but that the woman being equally culpable in many instances. And the fact that any woman consented to sex outside of marriage, and then was  abused physically or emotionally doesn't then acquit her of any sin or culpability. If she wasn't married to him but still  initially consented, then it was sin too.  

Basham points out Christ's dealing with women who had sinned, He doesn't let them off the hook or say it was the man's fault but rather, "He acknowledges these women's transgressions and forgives them, because though the men with whom they transgress have sinned as well, those are not the hearts Jesus is concerned with at the moment. He is concerned with freeing the women from their burden of guilt for THEIR sinful acts, which could only happen if He and the women acknowledge that sin."  And she ultimately emphasizes the need for one to focus on their own sins, turning "Metoo" into a whole different connotation.

NONE DARE CALL IT SIN

And finally, the LGBTQ+ mindset is entering the church, as, not sin, but just a part of one's core identity that one cannot change, even as a Christian.  Basham does a very good job here, basically pointing out that churches who think that God saves LGBTQ people without changing them are denying the command for Christians to put off the old man and put on the new (Eph 4:22-24) That they are essentially denying the "rebirth" that happens at salvation. They don't believe that people need to be born again, to be new creations. 

It's not loving to say the opposite, that God doesn't think you need to change but saves you WITH your sin not FROM it. It is not Christlike love to tell someone a lie. As my dad says, the people who claim that God saves you WITH your sin are "hugging people straight to Hell ". And that is about as cruel as you can get.

I appreciated this account that Basham gives: "Becket Cook is no pastor, no celebrated theologian, but he is a former Hollywood production designer who became a Christian and repented of his former homosexuality….He explained in an interview with The Gospel Coalition that he would never call himself a 'gay Christian' because his former gay identity has been crucified with Christ: 'Why in the world would I use a sinful adjective-gay-to describe my new identity in Christ? I wouldn't and I don't.'"

I also really liked how she pointed out that, unlike the liberal churches who are sending out 'activists', true churches are simply following the Biblical command, even if it goes against reason. "While theologically conservative churches might conversely say they would like to see every affirming church embrace biblical standards on sexuality, gender, and marriage, they're not training activists to infiltrate affirming denominations in order to transform them from within. Instead, again and again, they have done what the Bible commands us to do when we find heresy and immorality in our midst: they have warned and , when those warnings were not heeded, they have separated (Matthew 18:15-17, 2 Thessalonians 3:14, 1 Corinthians 5:9-10)"

And so to conclude my (rather strange) review. This book was very enlightening, showing that things are all messed up in many churches nowadays. Biblical truths, like the 6th commandment, and the destiny of thieves,  homosexuals, idolators…etc. that the Bible warns about  are denied, all while at the same time, concepts that are not necessarily sin, but are grey areas, like HOW one should take care of the creation, Or 'Love your neighbor, get the vaccine'! are being promoted as essential truths despite not being rooted in the Bible. They are in the category of Romans 14 where Paul tells the Romans how to deal with scruples, a.k.a. grey areas, to let each individual be convinced in his own mind but don't judge each other in these matters.

Overall, it's a sobering read. It really seem that we may already be extremely close to the great "apostasy" that must happen before the Day of the Lord (2 Thess 2:3).

Many thanks to the folks at Harper Collins Publishers for sending me a free review copy of this book! My review did not have to be favorable.

One of the places where you may purchase this book:  Amazon.com

The Baker Compact Dictionary of Biblical Studies - Tremper Lognman III & Mark L. Strauss

The Baker Compact Dictionary of Biblical Studies is a dictionary that seeks to provide definitions and explanations for words that you will find in many books and articles that delve into the study of the text of the Bible.  It gives definitions and brief overviews of places, scholarly terminology, prominent people whose works are mentioned in theological books.

It was pretty interesting to just sit and read through a lot of the information in the book, to learn a lot of new things and even to glean some extra helpful information about events, people and places that I already knew a few things about.  If I came across something that I've already become acquainted with I felt sort of reluctant to read those parts, thinking something along the lines of, "this is just a dictionary, what more could it tell me about that?" But I was surprised at some of the extra information I gleaned.  For example,  I have done a bit of reading on the "Counsel of Jamnia" but I did not particularly notice before that the book of Ezekiel was one of the books whose canonicity was debated by the Jews.  Or if I had noticed, I don't remember understanding why it's validity was up for debate.  The dictionary explains that it was because in the vision given to Ezekiel of the alter it is depicted as having steps which was something contrary to Mosaic law. Interesting!

 At least  one bit of information I came across was quite shocking.  I was extremely surprised, when I came to the summary of who Gerhard Kittel was (editor of The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament), to find that he had had strong Anti-Semitic viewpoints and supported the Nazis during World War II!

 There is some, in my opinion, pretty useless information in this dictionary, mainly the detailed information about various pagan 'gods' , their 'story' and the attributes attributed to them.  They don't actually have any attributes, so why mention them in detail? And I also didn't like how they mentioned how so many scholars think that The Biblical writers drew inspiration from myths and attributes of other gods, without countering that  viewpoint.  I guess I can sort of see how that could come in handy for someone who wanted to know which authors not to read, but I wish they would have countered them in the notes, instead of letting them stand.

  All I need to know that it is a pagan god and therefore not a god at all.  The Bible doesn’t focus its attack on the mythological attributes of the false gods, rather it deals with the facts.  It points out their ACTUAL attributes of deafness, blindness, dumbness, irresponsiveness and utter lack of existence at all.

Another thing I didn't like , and   was surprised at, was the dogmatism in certain places, like where they state that "The Sumerians invented writing for the first time in human history sometime in the thirty-first century BC."  Oh, really? How do we know that Noah didn't know how to write already and taught it to his descendants? How do we know for sure that people didn't know how to write before the flood?

I was also surprised that they don't list Martin Luther, John Calvin, Jonathan Edwards, John Wesley and the like in this dictionary.  That just seemed a little weird, as their works are still pretty popular.

Don't get me wrong, things like the above don't take away from the usefulness of this book.  They do have a lot of information, and,  when dealing with 'grey areas', for the most part the editors of this dictionary seem to use phrases along the lines of "it is believed"  or "some scholars think" when the facts are not certain. And they do give some quick criticisms to a few of the obviously erroneous viewpoints. 

Overall I think that this still  a pretty handy dictionary, for just about anyone.  If you read any linguistic commentaries on the Scripture, or even just a regular commentary, it would be handy to have. 

Many thanks to the folks at Baker Books Blogger for sending me a free review copy of this book!  -  My review did not have to be favorable.

This book may be purchased at Christianbook.com and at Amazon.com

Tillie PIerce: Teen Eyewitness to the Battle of Gettysburg - by Tanya Anderson

Tillie Pierce:  Teen Eyewitness to the Battle of Gettysburg by Tanya Anderson gives a very interesting perspective of the battle of Gettysburg.  As the title indicates, Tillie was a teenager at the time the Confederates invaded her state (Pennsylvania) and thence ended up at her hometown of Gettysburg.  As the danger grows Tillie's parents allow her to go with a neighbor who desires to flee, with her two children to a safer spot at her own parents farm.  Ironically, their refuge ends up being a not-so-safe place with war taking place around them and nearby on the Round Tops. Tillie and her friends accept the situation in which they are placed and end up helping with the wounded and helping give water to active soldiers and in so doing she meets various soldiers participating in the battle (including General Meade) all the while worrying about her own family back in the main town.  

The book is filled with interesting facts about the Civil War and many photographs, some of which may be disturbing as they are of dead soldiers.  One of the facts that they bring out is how an account that Tillie's father gave has been confirmed by forensic evidence, about his neighbor's house being used by a Confederate soldier to fire at the Union and subsequently being killed in that room.

All in all  I thought that the book is well written and that Tillie's story was well edited and explained throughout and will probably be interesting enough to induce readers to look up her full account of her experiences. 

I received a free copy of this book as a part of the Library Thing Early Reviewers Program:  Many thanks! (My review did not have to be favorable)

One of the websites at which this book may be purchased is Amazon.com

Daily Readings from: The Christian in Complete Armour - by William Gurnall

I have read a good chunk of the unabridged Christian in Complete Armour by William Gurnall, it is very good but HUGE, you kind of need to plough through it. This book, Daily Readings from The Christian in Complete Armour, was an excellent idea!  Breaking it up into small chunks for daily reading makes it a much easier read, and gives you a good taste of Gurnall's great skill of teaching and illustrating various spiritual warfare concepts.

The best summary that I can come up with is that this book is like having a spiritual commanding officer giving you a rousing speech each day to be ready to fight the battles to come.  Gurnall talks about the armor our General has provided for us and each individual piece's purpose,  he instructs us to keep in  mind that we should 'wrestle' with the enemy in the way our General has instructed us to do so, not merely in the way that we think we can defeat him,  he also examines the strategy of our spiritual enemy, and gives many warnings about his tactics

Every day Gurnall will warn you about the enemy's deceptive tactics, alerting you with statements like, "When Satan cannot hide the truth, he works to hinder the practical application of it."  and  "If you wish to stand firm in the midst of suffering, forewarn yourself of this fact:  Temptation is never stronger than when relief seems to dress itself in the very sin that Satan is suggesting."  He'll remind you to be ready to follow the Commander's orders at any moment, "Sometimes soldiers do not have as much as an hour's warning before they  must take the field.  And so you, too, might be called out to suffer for God …. Abraham, for example, had very little time to deal with his heart and persuade it to obey God by offering his child.  'Take now thy son, thine only son, Isaac, whom thou lovest' - not in a year, not a month or week, but now (Genesis 22:2).  This command came during the night and 'early in the morning' he was on his way to the mountain (v.3). .....Sometimes God makes very sudden changes in our personal lives."  He will remind you to keep your focus during suffering, "Let those who will, mock and scorn your faith.  What is Heaven worth if you cannot bear a little shame?  If they spit in your face, Christ will wipe it off.  They may laugh at you now, but not later.  The final outcome has already been declared, and you have sided with the victor."  And reminds us that our Commander is invincible, "Let Lucifer choose his way; God is a match for him at every weapon.  If he assaults the saint by persecution, God will oppose him.  If he works by a subtlety, God is ready there also.  The devil and his whole council are mere fools to God.  The more wit and craft in sin, the worse, because it is employed against an all-wise God who cannot be outwitted."

But remember, this book shouldn't be used to replace the Word of God, if you are going to ready any book every day that book should be the Bible.  Like any book, besides the Bible, this book has its flaws, to  name a few, the author may give a bit too much credit to Satan in our spiritual warfare and even in this world in general (he seemed to think that Satan can control the weather), and I don't agree necessarily with all of his advice or application of certain texts, but overall I thought the book was very good, It's now one of my favorite books.  It is VERY motivating and thought-provoking, it is a very good sort of 'push' to have in the mornings to get out and do the work, and fight the battles, that God has ordained for us to face. 

I'll end with one of my favorite, motivating, go out and fight the good fight type of quotes from the book:

 "You should find great strength and encouragement in the knowledge that your commission is divine.  God Himself underwrites your battle and has appointed His own Son "the captain of [your] salvation" (Hebrews 2:10).  He will lead you on to the field with courage, and bring you off with honor.......For bravery none compares with our Lord.  He never turned  His head from danger, not even when hell's hatred and heaven's justice appeared against Him.  Knowing all that was about to happen, Jesus went forth and said, "Whom seek ye?" (John 18:4).  Satan could not overcome Him - our Savior never lost a battle, not even when he lost His life.  He won the victory, carrying His spoils to heaven in the triumphant chariot of His ascension.  There He makes an open show of them, to the unspeakable joy of saints and angels.    As part of Christ's army, you march in the ranks of gallant spirits.  Every one of your fellow soldiers is a child of a King.  Some, like you, are in the midst of battle, besieged on every side by affliction and temptation.  Others, after many assaults, repulses and rallyings of their faith, are already standing upon the wall as conquerors.  From there they look down and urge you, their comrades on earth, to march up the hill after them.  This is their cry: "Fight to the death , and the City is your own, as now it is ours! For the waging of a few days' conflict, you will be rewarded with Heaven's glory.  One moment of this celestial joy will dry up all your tears, heal all your wounds, and erase the sharpness of the fight with all the joy of your permanent victory"

Many thanks to Moody Publishers for sending me a complimentary copy of this book to review (My review did not have to be favorable).

One of the websites where you may purchase this book is Amazon.com

Consider Your Calling - Gordon T. Smith

Usually, at least for me, when I think of God 'calling' someone to some type of work it is always in the context of some type of 'official' evangelistic type of work, such as one being a missionary overseas, starting a 'prison' ministry, working at a rescue mission, teaching a class at Church on Sundays…etc.    Normally it is always outside of 'everyday life', outside of one's secular profession and outside of one's life at home, it is something recognizably 'spiritual'.  The author of this book has a different perspective(one that I basically agree with).  The premise of this book, Consider Your Calling by Gordon T. Smith,  is  that the work that God  calls Christians to do is not just missionary work, or heading church ministries, but it is also the seemingly 'secular' callings.

 I LOVE the premise of the book, I just have some problems with how Mr. Smith tries to teach it.  First,  he talks about discovering ourselves, discovering what matters to us (after first asking what matters to God which is good), and I sort of get what he means but something seemed 'off' to me.  He says things like,"…It can be so difficult to peel back the layers of pretense and get to the heart of our identity, to the deep sense of who we are.  But we must, because wisdom is found here.  The wise are always those who know God and know the ways of God.  But the wise are also those who come to the gracious and liberating truth of their own self-identity. "  and "Saying yes to our lives will mean saying no to that which is not us. …we stop living with living with illusions about who we are or wish we were - and accept the life that has been given to us.  We embrace it, we choose it, and we walk with it." Yes, God will often work with our desires and interests, but what if He chooses to put us in a vocation which we have no interest?  Mr. Smith does say that, "…God's calling on our lives will consistently be in light of our actual circumstances."  And I completely agree with that and appreciate his bringing that up, I just wish he would have dealt more with submission to God when we end up in a vocation that we would not have chosen for ourselves, that we should try to develop an interest in it and do our work to the best of our ability to God's glory.  One really may end up in a profession in which one has no interest but doesn't have a plausible way of getting out of it.  For instance, in Biblical times I am sure that many (if not all) servants would not have an innate interest in their vocation if they had an unjust master, and perhaps they would rather have  done something else, but Paul tells them, "Servants, be in subjection to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward. For this is acceptable, if for conscience toward God a man endureth griefs, suffering wrongfully."(1Pe 2:18-19 ASV)  Perhaps they were slaves or bondservants and didn't have a choice as to their profession, but if they were a Christian they already had their true identity given to them by Christ (they didn't have to analyze their own interests, their interests were given to them by God in His Word) and thus they knew how they were to act in their profession. 

The above brings me to another point that I think Mr. Smith should have dealt with, our identity in Christ - that type of 'self-discovery' is more important to discover first than the self-discovery Mr. Smith was talking about.  That is something that I do not remember him dealing with, the new people we are in Christ (defined by God's Word),though he does talk about us aspiring to deeper fellowship and  identification with Christ, I just don't remember him focusing on the fact that as Christians we are new creations/people in Christ (2 Cor. 5:17), that that is something that we need to come to grips with first of all by reading God's Word which tells us who we are and what attributes we are to be pursuing, humility (and counting others as more important than ourselves (Philippians 2)) ,self-control, patience, love, joy, submitting to authorities/bosses that God has placed over us (Romans 13, Titus 2:5..etc.), giving thanks in every circumstance, renewing our minds, dying to self…and on so on. The Bible is the best place to start for discovering our identity, if we realize who we are in Christ and how we are best pleasing to our true Master, then we are ready for any profession God assigns to us. 

Another thing that I didn't like was that Smith seems to think that the 'religious orders' of various monks (Benedictines, Franciscans…and so on) were legitimate works for God, but from what I understand, most monks were imposing sacrificial works upon themselves to earn some type of favor with God (for salvation or grace) rather than working from salvation/grace that God had already given, they worked for it, and that type of work is heretical as the salvation/grace of God is not of human works, it is not earned by us at all.

And lastly, he is a bit too open to liturgy for my taste, he encourages signing oneself with the sign of the cross before going about our work, and there is also a prayer at the end of the book that one can use in corporate worship.  He defines worship as "the liturgy of the gathered people of God" - But isn't true worship obedience?  Serving God and submitting to His will in everything?  I think he missed another great starting point there, instead of talking about how we are to participate in God's work by being like Him in being creative and working along with God's plan to redeem people, he could have, instead, defined worship and obedience/our work for the Lord/submission to Him and thus have come from the standpoint of "we don't only worship on Sundays, or at official church gatherings, we can worship every single day, every hour by our submission to His will and by our obedience to His Word".  And thus we can work at secular occupations and be worshiping God.  Yes we want to participate in the work of God (though I might have some trouble with how Smith described I in the book), but our participation is not just a privilege, it is 'worship'.  I must say though that I heartily agree with this statement the author makes:  "We are participants in the grand narrative, the work of the Creator and Redeemer.  It is not, in the end, all about what we are up to, but rather what God is up to."

All in all, though I loved the point of the book, I think that Mr. Smith missed some key starting points for the basis Christian service.  I'll end with my favorite quote from the book where the author is encouraging people to recognize God's sovereignty in their lives/in their occupations:

Our vocations are always for 'such a time as this ' (Esther 4:14). Our vocations are always for this time and this place.  Always.  We always embrace the good work to which we are called in response to actual circumstances, challenges and opportunities.  No one is ahead of their time, no one missed their time.  Further, this means that vocation is not generic, by which I mean that we do not fill out a form about ourselves and our interests and strengths and then turn to the back of the book to see if we are to be an engineer, artist or preachers.  Rather, our vocations are always received and responded to in light of the actual situations in which we find ourselves.  And typically these are circumstances over which we may have very little control.  We have been placed here, in this time and place, and now we need to navigate our way through what lies before us.   What must be stressed is that wise women and men refuse to think of themselves as victims of their circumstances, but rather as those who have been providentially situated - before God and in the grace of God - and will respond with courage, creativity and patience to what is at hand."

Many thanks to the folks at InterVarsity Press for sending me a complimentary review copy of this book (My review did not have to be favorable).

You may purchase this book at Amazon.com and at other websites/bookstores

The Illustrated Life of Paul by Charles Quarles is, as the title demonstrates, an account of the life of Paul with illustrations (mainly photographs) of the places he is associated with, maps to give one a picture of where he went, and photographs of archaeological finds from Paul's era.  For the most part, Quarles does a good job of sticking to the Biblical account, and I do not remember him questioning, or even hinting at doubting or questioning the Bible's accuracy in the least.

But I have a few issues with this book.  First, Quarles takes some liberties in imagining Paul's thoughts and feelings.  Here is an example of his imaginative pictures:  "Paul was happy to be back in Jerusalem.  He had lived in Jerusalem longer than any other place.  It still felt more like home to him than anywhere else.  His sister's family lived there (Acts 23:15).  He was thrilled to see her, her husband, and her children.  His nephew was practically a grown man now.  Where did the years go?  Paul wondered.  Paul had no regrets over the years he had invested in sharing the gospel around the world, but he did sometimes miss the joys of hearth and home, of watching his nieces and nephews grow, and of reminiscing with his sister about their childhood….when Paul looked into his sister's face, he still saw his father's eyes, and her smile was just like his mother's.  Looking into her face always brought back a flood of memories." He doesn't give these imaginative scenes a lot, normally he just gives a straightforward account along with historical details, he includes a bit of speculation, but doesn't paint imaginative scenes like the one above, but that just makes his ventures into imaginative 'pictures' of Paul even more out of place and embarrassing.

Second, and related to the above, the author makes statements in various places throughout the book that bothered me, speculating on why the Apostle's may have gone to such and such a city, or why they did such and such.  When he was speaking of Paul in Athens he was commenting on the strategic advantage of getting people in that city to see the credibility of the Gospel,  "If the gospel won acceptance in this intellectual center, it could no longer be dismissed as the fantasy of madmen.  Instead, Christianity would be recognized as a reasonable faith accepted by some of the world's most brilliant thinkers."  I really don't think that Paul's goal was to have the Gospel recognized as 'intellectually credible' by the brilliant thinkers of the day, rather I would assume, based on his writings that he would have expected the opposite,  "For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, And the discernment of the discerning will I bring to nought. Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For seeing that in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom knew not God, it was God's good pleasure through the foolishness of the preaching to save them that believe. Seeing that Jews ask for signs, and Greeks seek after wisdom: but we preach Christ crucified, unto Jews a stumblingblock, and unto Gentiles foolishness; but unto them that are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men."  (1Co 1:19-25)

And third, among the illustrations of the book is at least one nude statue of a man (the 'god' Hermes).  I don't need to know what the 'gods' of the day looked like, nor do I think that such illustrations are appropriate in a Christian book.  

Overall, I simply didn't 'love' the book, and I'm not exactly sure why.  Perhaps because one could simply pick up the Bible and read Acts and Paul's epistles to learn about his life?  I mean, technically speaking, it was Luke's biographical account of Paul that made it into the Bible, so who could really write a  better biographical account? I have absolutely no problem with people writing biographical accounts of Biblical characters as long as they make sure to have the Bible as the primary and most authoritative source of their information, and Quarles does a pretty good job.  it was okay and others may like it better. It does give interesting historical background information of the time.

 I really liked how Quarles ended the book, by encouraging a proper perspective of Paul as God's slave/servant, and that people should not admire the Apostle too much:, "Although those who study the life of the apostle cannot help but be moved by his faithfulness, inspired by his passion, and awed by his commitment they must not forget that Paul would blush, not with embarrassment but anger at such accolades.  To those who would deify him, he would retort, 'Men! Why are you doing these things?  We are men also, with the same nature as you' (Acts 14:15).  To those who would sing his praises, he would quickly reply, 'Was it Paul who was crucified for you?  Or were you baptized in Paul's name?" (1 Cor 1:13)….Although this book has attempted to help readers better know the mind and heart of the apostle Paul, Paul himself would insist that this was not the point….'For I didn't think it was a good idea to know anything among you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified. (1 Cor 2:1-2)  Know him, Paul would say.  Know him….If knowing Paul stirs a yearning ot know the One for whom he suffered, the One whose name he proclaimed, the One for whom he died, then Paul lived and died well. (then he quotes Phil 1:20)."

Many thanks to B&H/Lifeway blog review program for sending me a complimentary review copyof this book (My review did not have to be favorable)!

Short Answers to Big Questions about God, the Bible and Christianity - by Clinton E. Arnold and Jeff Arnold

Short Answers to Big Questions about God, the Bible and Christianity by Clinton E. Arnold and Jeff Arnold is just what its title declares it to be, it is an endeavor to answer, in only a few pages, many questions new Christians, or unbelievers, have about God, the Bible or Christianity.  The book is not as good as I had hoped it would be.  My main problem with it is its presentation of the relationship/interaction between God and mankind. 

 First, its discussions of the love of God toward people are presented too much like the modern concept of "falling in love", an uncontrolled, "couldn't help it" type of thing.  Here are a few quotes to demonstrate what I mean:  "God isn't just loving, he is love……And he isn't just a loving person 'in theory'; he literally, at this very moment, is aware of his deep love for you. "and, "he loves you because he created  you…If  you have a child,  you have felt this love before; you don't love your child because of what they've accomplished; you love them because they are your child.  This is how God sees you. …"  I don't remember anywhere in the Bible where God's love is declared to have been bestowed on us simply because we are His creations.  God created Satan too but He doesn't love him even though he is His creation. "The problem of sin created a serious dilemma for God…It is his nature to hate sin….yet he earnestly wants a relationship with his people…..", "In his perfect purity, holiness, and righteousness, God is deeply offended by our sin.  Yet he longs to have a close relationship with us.  Since he cannot simply overlook our offenses, he devised a merciful and loving plan to deal with this problem…"  To me, this makes God's love come across as a human loving a pitiable sickly little child, but God's love isn't generally presented that way (unless you count the picture of God's love towards Israel, but even then, it was His choice), it's more like God choosing to love a corpse, or a zombie…those dead in their sins and yet using their decaying faculties to rage against God and His attributes and desires. God CHOSE to have pity on us, God CHOSE to love us detestable creatures, creatures who naturally choose to despise Him and His laws in favor of their own selves and desires.  He chose to make us New Creations, breathing spiritual life into us. 

Second, in answering the question "Why Bad things happen to good people", part of the explanation is given like this, "God gave us the free will to make our own decisions.  Without this freedom, we would be unable to truly love God - or each other, for that matter; we would simply be robots following commands.  So when we ask how an all-powerful God could allow someone else to wrong us, the problem with what we're asking is that God's power has nothing to do with it;….God could, if he wished, end all pain on this earth right now.  He could step in and directly control everyone's actions, thoughts, and feelings in order to keep anyone from doing anything that causes harm.  But imagine the cost:  an entire world full of people who move around like puppets, never saying or doing anything that wasn't controlled for them.  No one wants that." So will we be robots in Heaven, not able to choose evil?  When God makes us into New Creations, Christians, does that make us puppets?  Is it really more loving for God to let a person choose to make choices that will lead to condemnation for eternity than it is for Him to change their dispositions to desire the right and accept Him so that they will live in the New Heaven and the New earth for eternity?  That logic doesn't come from the Bible.  That logic doesn't even make sense when it comes to parents with their children, it would not be loving for a parent to let their child slap their brothers and sisters around and then also give them the option to choose to stick their finger into a light-socket.  The loving thing to do would be to stop them from doing both of those things, not giving them a choice in the matter, even if they aren't happy in the process of being stopped.  "…without this freedom, we would be unable to truly love God.." really? Where does the Bible say that?  True love comes from God (see 1 John), it doesn't originate with human beings.  God defines love, and we learn in the Bible that true love is selfless.  So to rephrase the above statement, "Without the freedom to be selfish, we wouldn't be able to truly be selfless?"  As you can see, I don't believe that question about why bad things happen to good people was answered biblically in this book. 

Things like the above really bothered me.  This is not to say that there weren't good things in the book, there were.  I just don't think that this book would necessarily be the best to give an unbeliever or an immature Christian because some of the answers given do not match up with what the Bible says.  I really liked their section on why we don't always sense the presence of God. That chapter contains many statements that I really like, actually, I think they're excellent! So I'll end on a positive note with my favorite excerpt from the book:

 
Soon after I stopped feeling this intense love and presence of God, I started grasping for things that normally brought that passion back.  I would drive almost an hour away to find churches with great worship bands and speakers……I knew on some level that there was something off about the way I was approaching this, but I felt like I needed to do whatever it took to get that feeling back.  And then one day it struck me:  my faith had stopped being about God and had become about how I felt.  That was really selfish of me.  It shouldn't have mattered how I felt if I trusted that God was real.  At that point the best thing for someone like me was to remove those feelings so that my faith would once again become about God, not myself. ….the end result was that I began learning how  to center my life around God with or without the feelings that I once had…….To make Christianity purely about feelings is to make it about ourselves rather than God.  God doesn't promise to constantly flood us with intense emotion…From the earliest days of the church, Christians have based their closeness to God on theology - on what they knew about God from Scripture - rather than feelings.  Many of the first Christians shed blood for believing in God.  If anyone had the right to feel distant from God, wouldn’t it be the people suffering for his sake? Instead, the early disciples rejoiced at the chance to suffer for Christ (Acts 5:41)."


I received a free review copy of this book from the Baker Books Blogger Program and my review did not have to be favorable.

 

The Carols of Christmas - Andrew Gant

The Carols of Christmas by Andrew Gant goes through various popular carols of Christmas and tells some of their intricate, and often confusing, history.  You may not come out of the book wiser than when you started it about who wrote such and such a carol but Gant himself warns of this in the intro:  "…if you occasionally get to the end of a chapter in this book slightly unsure about who wrote words or tunes or bits of either, me too…." Apparently we don't know exactly who wrote some of the songs, and many of them were revised from their original written form. 

One of the histories I found particularly interesting was that of Hark the Herald Angels Sing, originally Hark How all the Welkin Rings' by Charles Wesley.  Apparently George Whitefield was one of the people who revised the song, one of the verses he changed was "universal nature say 'Christ the Lord is born today!'" to "With th'Angelic hosts proclaim, Christ is born in Bethlehem!'"  I found it interesting that Mendelssohn, the man who composed the music that was eventually used for the words, didn't think that the tune was fit for religious songs and that it would "never do for sacred words.  There must be a national and merry subject found out…" Nowadays it would be hard for me to picture it put to secular words!

Gant's style of writing is a bit confusing at times, he strikes me as trying too hard to be casual, which doesn't always flow very well in my opinion. Also some of his statements were a bit weird, for instance, his comment, "the most potent force in the shaping of human destinies: luck", and then again, when speaking of the original lines of Wesley's hymn, cited above, "universal nature say…" he declares that , "…there is something gloriously inclusive, almost pantheistic…in Wesley's lines…much better than Whitefield's replacement." Statements like that seem a bit odd for a Christian to say.  There were several songs where I had wished that he would have dealt more with the history of the wording and meaning of the words  but he focused on the development/ evolution of the commonly used tune (or tunes) for the carol instead.

All in all it was a bit confusing, and I think it could have been written a lot better than it is, but it did have interesting tidbits of carol history in it, and the cover is pretty and feels neat!

I received a complimentary copy of this book from the BookLook blogging program in exchange for my review, which did not have to be favorable.

I rate this book at 3 out of 5 stars.

Happiness - By Randy Alcorn

God commands His people to be happy and therefore being 'happy' is a matter of obedience for Christians. Such is the argument of Randy Alcorn's newest book "Happiness".  It seems that he has encountered a lot of Christians who seem to think, or imply, that happiness is sin and that God's purpose is for us to be holy, not happy.  He declares that the oft cited difference between happiness and joy is in reality a nonexistent difference, that the terms are so alike in meaning they are synonymous.  "The distinction between joy and happiness is not biblical".   

He critiques the view that 'joy' is more 'contentment' without reference to the emotions, while 'happiness' is primarily circumstantial and emotional.  He makes a case that the word "joy" is also emotional in meaning.  He also believes that "happy" is the better term to use in the case of many of the Greek and Hebrew words translated in many Bibles as "blessed".  Perhaps the term "blessed" isn't the best term to express the actual meaning behind the original words, but is "happy" truly the best?    I don't deny that the words do, perhaps even often, denote 'joy' or 'happiness', but do those terms always express their primary meaning?  Alcorn quotes from dictionaries and lexicons to show that the definition of "happy" corresponds with aspects of the lexical definitions of the Greek and Hebrew terms. One of the elders at my church (also a biology teacher at a Christian school)  pointed out that the lexical meaning of a word is not necessarily the common usage/evolution of the word.  He used the word 'gay' for example: the dictionary still includes 'happy' as one of the definitions, but nowadays, to use the term in reference to happiness would be unwise as its primary usage in our society refers to homosexuals.

 So, when Mr. Alcorn makes statements like, "God threatens terrible things if we will not be happy" and "A Gospel that promotes holiness over happiness isn't good news. " and, "our happiness is a measure of our obedience"  what picture does that convey? When I think of "happy" I picture an emotion ,a beaming face, a person in a state where they are prone to laugh merrily.  I suspect that others may have the same idea of 'happiness'.  Am I sinning if I am not in a jolly state?  Am I disobeying God when I am simply content with His will and am in a serious, not a merry, condition of mind? What if I changed the quotes above using a synonym for happy, "Our merriness is a measure of our obedience",  "A Gospel that promotes holiness over jolliness isn't good news."  This is along the lines of what Mr. Alcorn's statements imply to me.   

Again, maybe he is right and "blessed" isn't the best English word to use to translate words like 'makarios', but are the words 'happy' and 'joyful' the best ones to use?  For instance in the beatitudes, is the best translation truly, "happy are the poor in spirit…" or would expressions like  "content", 'favored by God' or 'fortunate', fit better?   

Alcorn says that, "Maybe by defining joy as unemotional, positional, or transcendental, we can justify our unhappiness in spite of God's command to rejoice always in him" But is having the 'happiness' emotion to be our primary goal?  Or can we admire and be in awe of God without having a feeling of merriment or jocularity? Can't one serve God without being jolly and yet not be sad? "…feelings are not the entirety of joy, but since God's joy involves his emotions, shouldn't our joy involve ours?"  Alcorn asks. Maybe this is the case, but does the emotion have to be "happiness" or can it be emotions of "awe", "contentment", "peace", or can it be an action of the mind/thought processes like focusing on God's will and submitting to it, loving others, praying to God, or even weeping with those who weep? But  does delighting and rejoicing in the Lord always take the form of great emotional happiness?  I'm sincerely asking these questions, not just using them as counters to Alcorn's arguments.

Alcorn seems to think that a major problem among Christians today is that they are against happiness.  Maybe the ones he knows of are, but the ones that I know of aren't.  Actually, I've thought that a major problem amongst Churches has been the focus upon drumming up emotions and feelings, like happiness, over and above seriously trying to be intent upon learning and doing what God says.   The statement is made in the book that the word happiness has been, "a bridge between the church and the world - one we can't afford to burn".  Alcorn makes a great case that Christians should be happy in the Lord, and that true happiness can only be found in Him and doing His will. But Happiness, even happiness in the Lord, isn't the beginning of wisdom, rather, "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom".  Our witnessing to bring others to Christ will not, and should not (I think) always be presented as an offer of happiness, but rather out of our reverence for the Lord, we may witness by warning of His judgement:  "having known, therefore, the fear(not the happiness) of the Lord, we persuade men…"(2Co 5:11 ASV). " And our motivation in serving the Lord will not always be our emotional happiness in Him: Having therefore these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all defilement of flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God. "(2Co 7:1 ASV) Not, "perfecting holiness in the happiness you have in God". 

 I am NOT against Christians being happy, I just don't see the biblical proof that we're necessarily sinning if we are not in that particular state.  If he had presented it from the standpoint of the many reasons Christians have to be happy in the Lord and used material that he has presented in sections of this book like, "Ways to Cultivate Happiness", "Happiness Comes From Meditating on God's Word," and "Happiness Through Confession, Repentance and Forgiveness." I would have liked it much better.   A lot, and I truly mean a LOT, of good points were made in this book, I just didn't like how Alcorn presented the concept of happiness as an obligatory state for Christians to be in, and I wasn't convinced of the exegetical necessity for all of the Greek and Hebrew words dealt with in the book as needing to be translated as 'happy'. 

 

Many thanks to Tyndale House Publishers for sending me a complimentary review copy of this book (My review did not have to be favorable)

Dead Wake - by Erik Larson

Dead Wake: The Last Crossing of the Lusitania by Erik Larson is one of the most interesting history books I've read in a long while.  Lots of history  books have interesting facts and can keep your interest simply because of the elements of history they present, but this one is among the 'time machine' history books that pull you into the time period and make you seem as if you are a present but invisible observer of the events of the past.   

I really didn't know much about the Lusitania before I read this book, I think that I remember hearing it(or reading it) mentioned in connection with World War I but I didn't really have much of a concept of what happened.  The Lusitania was a British passenger ship headed for England, torpedoed by Germany in the "Great War" before America had joined the fight. Larson tells the story from the point of view of many of the passengers, Winston Churchill and the secret "Room 40" in Britain, and also from the German perspective of the German government and the U-boat commander Schwieger and his crew who sank the ship.  President Wilson's thoughts and perspective are also brought into the book, though in his case I didn't quite see the point as it is mainly about his personal struggles over having lost his wife and then his courtship and marriage to his second wife, Edith.  

Normally when I've read books, fiction or non-fiction, that switch between various characters there are certain one's I am interested and other one's I'm bored with, wanting to get back to the intriguing characters.  But this book is so well written that all of the characters were interesting, I didn't really mind when the perspective was moved from the war officials and Admiralty in England to the Captain, crew and passengers of the Lusitania, though it did get a bit tense when the torpedoes hit as one wants to keep reading about the passengers and their situation and not about what the war office in England was hearing.

 I did think, but this is generally the case with all good books, that it could have been longer.  I wish that Larson had included more of the passengers' perspectives than he did.  I've found, in looking up more on the event, there were a lot more 'stories' he could have included.  And on a more negative note, I wish that he hadn't quoted the swearing, even though it was from actual quotations.  The language is generally more the 'condemning someone' type, and exclamations of where they're condemned to.  Also , some of the accounts of the examinations of the dead were a bit too descriptive. There are some things I don't want, or need to know. 

The events of the sinking are fascinating in a unique way, an almost seeming reversal of 'Providence', only it wasn't really a reversal of course, it was just several people's God-ordained time to meet their Maker.  The events of the sinking were set up perfectly: if they had left a little sooner or even if they had been delayed a little longer they may not have met up with the U-20.   If the British Admiralty had sent word to the Lusitania to take a recently opened alternate route, which was definitely safer, then they may never have crossed paths at all.  If the fog hadn't cleared during the time the two marine vehicles were going through the same area then the U2-20 would almost certainly have passed by the ship under water.  And if the Lusitania had not slowed and turned directly towards the U-boat, the Germans may never have had a shot(being slower than the ship), and it is also remarkable that the torpedo caused as much damage as it did. 

There were people who lived of course, and their stories are very fascinating.  Some of the ways the various characters survived were amazing, and particularly note-worthy when one realizes that it was not their time to die, and that God was the One ultimately saved them.  One particular account was funny and very moving, in the aftermath of the sinking when two brothers both think the other may have died and are searching for each other, they meet up in a morgue while searching for each other among the dead.

All in all it is a very fascinating account, and very well written.  It makes me want to read more of Larson's books.

Many thanks to the people at Blogging for Books for sending me a review copy of this book!  My review did not have to be favorable)

This book may be purchased at Amazon

NIV Proclamation Bible

This is going to sound wrong, but for a study Bible, this is a lame one.  Not the Scriptures themselves of course, but the study notes, or rather, lack of notes in this edition.  It has several essays at the beginning of the book, on topics such as "the historical reliability of the Bible', "From text to doctrine:  the Bible and theology", "Biblical interpretation: a short history.  But I didn't like them much as they had several concepts and statements that were more biased towards Covenant Theology, promoting concepts like Christian Jews and Gentiles all being a part of the 'Israel of God', and the Promised land not being limited to a small geographical location like Israel, but now includes the whole earth…or something along those lines.

 Also promoted is a 'Christocentric' hermeneutic…which I still don't quite get.  Why not use a Theocentric hermeneutic, or what about a literal grammatical historical one?  Some of the sections in the Bible, like some of the historical narratives, or some of the genealogies, just point to concepts of God's sovereignty rather than God's plan of salvation. Some just show human depravity like Judges 19.  I just don't see a Biblical case for a Christocentric Hermeneutic. 

Okay, moving on from the beginning essays, all this Bible has are rather short introductions to each book of the Bible, and a cross reference column down the center of each page of the Scriptures.  The introductory notes didn't strike me as very profound but they did include short lists of commentaries for further reading on whichever book of the Bible you're studying. At the back of the Bible is a Concordance.

This Study Bible doesn't strike me as even remotely as great as several of the promotion reviews on the cover make it out to be. 

 

I received a free copy of this book from the Booklook Blogger Program(My review did not have to be favorable)

No Greater Valor - By Jerome Corsi

No Greater Valor:  The Siege of Bastogne And the Miracle That Sealed Allied Victory by Jerome Corsi deals with the surprise attack by Nazi forces against the Americans in Belgium that hinged upon the capturing/holding the town of Bastogne.  It is a very detailed account, almost too detailed for my taste, for instance, there are intricate accounts of the weapons used, what kinds they were, how many…etc.  Which just didn't capture my interest, but it makes absolute sense to have that type of info in a book about war.  And many probably prefer such attention to detail.  There are many maps in the book as well, illustrating what was happening, and many photographs from that time too. 

The thing I really didn’t like about this book was that, though trying to have a Christian aspect to it, it didn't really succeed in anything but showing that many of the allied forces were theists.  One of the main persons focused upon is a Catholic Priest rather than a protestant pastor.  I found the parts that dealt with him and his actions during the war, though obviously meant to be inspiring, were actually quite disheartening because the man was not teaching or promoting the Gospel of Christ but rather a works based salvation which will not save.  Corsi also tries to demonstrate that Patton was a devout Christian, but I didn't get that impression from all of Corsi's arguments, rather it seemed that Patton viewed God as more of a tool to be utilized rather than a God to be worshiped because He is what life is all about.  I just didn't get the idea that Patton was a very godly man.  Also, as this book was published by Thomas Nelson and supposed to be from a more Christian perspective(and is in Christian bookstores), I was quite shocked that there is a quotation with Christ's name being taken in vain while swear words are cut out and replaced with: [expletive].  Why didn't they take out the vain reference to Christ's name and put: [blasphemy] instead?  I mean, I find Christ's name being taken in vain more offensive than references to Hell, especially as it goes against the third commandment.  

Anyway, the book seemed to be written with more of a theistic perspective than a Christian one.  But again, if you like detailed books about war/battles, you'd probably like this one. There are a lot of references to other books about the siege of Bastogne and personal accounts of various people who were involved, so if you just want more of the history, overview/summary, this would probably be a good one to get.  I just wasn't thrilled personally.

I received a free review copy of this book from the Booklook blogger program in exchange for my review which did not have to be favorable.