Love That Lasts (Gary & Betsy Ricucci)

Love That Lasts is a short (150 page) primer on what a Godly, Biblically-based marriage should look like.  It covers the role of husbands and wives, the goal of communication (relational intimacy), the content of communication (grace and truth), the heart of conflict (and how to restore communication), and concludes with keeping romance and sex alive and fresh.

For its length, the book covers a lot of ground and is solid, insightful, and encouraging.  It oscillates between theological elements of marriage (as presented in Scripture) and tips for improvements (as learned by experience in the authors' 28-year marriage).  It's certainly not a comprehensive relationship book, but it's a good start.  I recommend it to Christians and non who want to learn more about God's view of relationships and His intent/desire/design for them.  Contrary to what some believe Christianity teaches, God's directives are neither outdated nor demeaning to either party.  Read this book and see why.

Rating: A

No Future Without Forgiveness (Desmond Tutu)

For decades (~1950-1994), Apartheid (a system of racial segregation) was practiced in South Africa, whereby the minority White population subjugated the majority Black in every way.  Communities were relocated (to separate Black from White), Blacks were deprived of basic needs (like access to good medicine, food, jobs, and education), and Blacks perceived to be troublemakers were (often unjustly) accused of terrorist acts and tortured or killed without fair trial.  International and domestic outrage eroded the regime's support over time, and in 1994, Nelson Mandela (who had been imprisoned for 27 years by the Apartheid government, and released only four years prior) won the Presidential election- the first democratically held in the country's history (I think).  I'm summarizing of course- leaving out some important details- but I need to set the stage for this book.

What does a group of people do when they suddenly have power and a voice after decades of suppression and injustice?  It's impossible (and unwise) to forget the past- it must be dealt with for true healing to occur.  It could be handled several ways:
1. The Nuremberg Trial approach- prosecute as many perpetrators as possible and 'make them pay'
2. Blanket Amnesty- state that horrors occurred in the past, but move on without specifics or condemnation for the perpetrators
3. A compromise:

Our country's negotiators rejected the two extremes and opted for a "third way," a compromise between the extreme of Nuremberg trials and a blanket amnesty or national amnesia.  And that third way was granting amnesty to individuals in exchange for a full disclosure relating to the crime for which amnesty was being sought.  

South Africa chose this third way and formed the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC)- a panel to systematically handle public disclosures of wrongs committed and experienced throughout the land.  Archbishop Desmond Tutu headed the TRC, and discusses it in his masterful work No Future Without Forgiveness.

In No Future Without Forgiveness, Tutu outlines the TRC's approach, discusses its creation and architecture, answers its critics, provides examples of the horrors suffered and committed, and claims that there truly is no future without reconciliation.  He makes several valid points about problems with other approaches:
- true justice was both impossible (many acts were shrouded in state-sponsored secrecy, and truth beyond reasonable doubt was impossible to determine) and prohibitively expensive (just one trial could cost the government millions of dollars- an approach that could not scale to the levels required).
- blanket amnesty denied the past and hurt the victims a second time by refusal to acknowledge the truth of the situation.  It also provided no mechanism for reparations or contrition of any kind.

Thus, a third way- a call to come forward and speak the truth.  For victims, that meant telling their stories (often for the first time) in a forum of willing listeners.  Often, just telling the story and letting the world know the truth had a therapeutic effect.  For perpetrators, that meant acknowledging their crimes and disclosing as much information as they could in exchange for potential amnesty (their crimes had to meet certain criteria to be eligible for pardon).  Could this work?  Wouldn't that mean the guilty would walk away?

One might go on to say that perhaps justice fails to be done only if the concept we entertain of justice is retributive justice, whose chief goal is to be punitive . . . We contend that there is another kind of justice, restorative justice, which was characteristic of traditional African jurisprudence.  Here the central concern is not retribution or punishment.  In the spirit of ubuntu, the central concern is the healing of breaches, the redressing of imablances, the restoration of broken relationships, a seeking to rehabilitate both the victim and the perpetrator, who should be given the opportunity to be reintegrated into the community he has injured by his offense.

In the end, South Africa decided that what it needed more than revenge was healing, and that it couldn't get that healing without acknowledgement of evil and forgiveness of the same.

Thus to forgive is indeed the best form of self-interest since anger, resentment, and revenge are corrosive of that summum bonum, that greatest good, communal harmony that enhances the humanity and personhood of all in the community.

This book should be required reading.  Truth, forgiveness, and reconciliation are truly needed by all if we are to have a future.  I'm leaving a lot of good things out for the sake of brevity- read the book and see what I mean.

Rating: A

The Life and Words of GK Chesterton (Wyatt North)

GK Chesterton was a great writer, full of wit and wisdom.  The author of such works at Orthodoxy, Heretics, The Father Brown Mysteries, and The Man Who Was Thursday, he's regarded as the primary persuasive force behind CS Lewis' conversion to Christianity, and his genius was acknowledged even by his staunch opponents (George Bernard Shaw being the most famous).   The Life and Words of GK Chesterton is a concise attempt to capture a quality portrait of the man.  It fails.

This biography- only 66 pages- doesn't do him justice.  Brevity isn't inherently bad (in fact, it's often preferred), but it's impossible to cover Chesterton's (or anyone's?) life in so short a story.  The bare facts are provided, but not in a compelling or interesting way.  The last quarter of the book contains selected quotations (mostly poems) from his works.  That was of mild interest but little relevance.  I'm sure there are better works on this topic out there.

Rating: C

The Great Gatsby (F. Scott Fitzgerald)

The classic American novel about the 'roaring' 1920s, The Great Gatsby is about the pursuit of that which does not satisfy.  Wealth, status, materialism, illicit love- the characters set up and pursue idols in their lives that do not (and cannot) quench the true thirst we all have as humans.  They say the twenties was that time when America drifted from the original dream and became a nation obsessed with material gain and unshackled pleasure.  This novel embodies that perfectly.

What I liked most about The Great Gatsby wasn't the plot, main themes, or the characters (though these all had their good points).  I liked the words- the expressions, phrases, and vocabulary Fitzgerald uses to tell the story.  It's beautifully done- not complex or elegant, but wonderfully told.  This is a classic for a reason.

Rating: A

Feeding your Appetites (Stephen Arterburn)

In Feeding Your Appetites, Stephen Arterburn looks at how we so frequently satisfy our healthy, God-given urges with unhealthy things (or in unhealthy ways) that can lead to addiction, depression, and worse.  Money, food, power, sex, work, pleasure, possessions- due to our fallen nature, we can allow these areas to take over our lives (and destroy them) if we're not careful.  He then puts forwards tips for true satisfaction- feeding our appetites in ways that are healthy and in keeping with God's commandments.

The book is okay.  I agree with many of the claims put forward by the author- that our appetites aren't inherently bad, but must be bounded as decreed in Scripture.  I disagreed with two primary things:
- some recommendations seemed like they could trade one problem for another.  For example, he recommends getting a new hobby or pampering yourself instead of falling into bad habits.  While that may help cure a given problem, it could create new ones (like addictions to new hobbies or self-love).  It doesn't deal with the root of the matter- just fruit.
- he hints at a 'prosperity gospel' viewpoint that is prevalent among some today (like Joel Osteen)- this idea that "obey and God showers you with good things."  It can very easily be twisted, and take away the sacrifice of Christ to become a works-based faith.  In addition, it's not always true- in Scripture, plenty of holy, God-fearing people endured terrible situations that were not due to specific elements of disobedience on their part.  Some Christians don't get that- God uses all things for our benefit, whether or not we like it (or know it) at the time.  So, "obey and all will be well" can be deceptive- and even wrong.

Overall, there was some truth here, but I suspect better works on this topic exist.

Rating: C

The Star Wars (Various)

Most movies go through multiple script drafts and edits before making it to the big screen.  Star Wars is no different, save that its popularity is (apparently) so phenomenal that someone thought it necessary to bring us a comic version of the original draft.  Enter The Star Wars- George Lucas' original vision for what would ultimately become the timeless classic Episode IV- A New Hope.  In it, we see many familiar locales, plot elements, armies, and characters- but with a different twist.  There's  Luke Skywalker, Annikin Starkiller, Han Solo (a giant green alien), Princess (then Queen) Leia, Darth Vader (sans familiar mask), droids, Jedi, Sith . . . you get the picture.  Some things remained unchanged to the movie version; some thing were altered quite a bit.  Can the forces under General Skywalker lead the Rebels to victory?

This was enjoyable only in that it showed just how many changes stories undergo as they mature.  That aside, it was confusing (as many familiar elements represented characters and technologies in different roles than the finished version), rushed, and relatively ho-hum.  For Star Wars fans, it's good to read it once, then put it aside and be thankful this version didn't make it into theaters.

Rating: C

Jurassic World

In 1993, Jurassic Park wowed audiences with its tale about dinosaurs re-created from DNA and put on display in an island park.  In 2015, Jurassic World (the fourth film in the series, though it's considered the sequel to the original) attempts to recreate the magic . . . by using basically the exact same story: an island of dinosaurs, excited tourists, shady corporate interests, unsuspecting/naive employees, and wary handlers.  To increase the 'wow' factor, they've created a new dinosaur- a mutant T-rex- and (shockingly), it gets out.  Commence lots of running, screaming, suspense, and dinosaur on dinosaur action.

This movie was about what I expected- light on plot/character development (save for Owen (Chris Pratt)- he's cool), heavy on action/suspense.  It pays homage to the original in fun ways, has good humor sprinkled throughout, and is enjoyable overall- if you can overlook the unoriginal plot, rushed development, unresolved plot elements, and Bryce Dallas Howard spending the entire film running around in heels.  But hey, we're talking dinosaurs here, so all is well.

Rating: B-

Angels (Billy Graham)

Angels, by famous evangelist Billy Graham, provides a background on those celestial beings discussed so frequently in the Bible.  Graham discusses their characteristics, roles, and organization, as well as some talk on their dark counterparts- Satan and his demons.

I admit, this book disappointed me.  The only good point was seeing many different passages in Scripture where the Bible talks about angels.  I hadn't realized they came up quite so frequently in the background (or foreground) of God's and man's affairs, though I've read the accounts more than once.  That aside, Graham's book was repetitious, at times speculative (it should have been based solely on Scripture), and contained a good deal of evangelistic messages over and above the topic.  Yes, he's an evangelist, so that's not surprising, but I was hoping for a more scholarly, focused treatment of the subject.

Rating: C

The Ocean at the End of the Lane (Neil Gaiman)

A fantasy novel by renowned author Neil Gaiman, The Ocean at the End of the Lane is the tale of a boy, his special friend Lettie Hempstock, and the monster they both encounter in their childhood.  Unleashed into this world by a suicide, the foe takes hold of the boy's family and threatens to destroy all.  The boy finds refuge with Lettie and her family, who live in the house at the end of the lane, besides which there is a pond (which Lettie calls the ocean).  They will overcome the fiend- but at what cost?

This is my third Neil Gaiman novel, and like the first two, I enjoyed it.  His works are different in a good way- well-written, unconventional, engaging, and thought-provoking.  I acknowledge that I don't always follow the point(s) presented in the book, or the symbolism (if there is any), but I appreciate the fact that Gaiman doesn't spoon-feed the reader.  I think the book was about childhood, becoming an adult, the horrors we all face in life, and the sacrifice of others required to make it through.  I could be wrong though- I should think on it more (another quality I enjoy in books- making you think).  My uncertainty tarnishes an otherwise enjoyable experience, and the fault could be entirely my own.  This is recommended.

Rating: A-

Food, Inc.

Food, Inc., is a 2008 film that looks at how our food is produced and controlled by corporations who- shockingly- may not have our best interests in mind.  Various topics are covered, including poultry, beef, corn, and seed production.  In each case, the movie looks at how the desire for efficiency and profit can drive companies to change how things are produced in ways that may have significant (negative) consequences for us all.

The film makes a lot of good points- I was aware of most of the concepts discussed, and agree that things need to change.  The movie, however, was also quite slanted/biased, and that got annoying.  You can convince people of the need to change without resorting to deception.  It was poorly researched, and some half-truths were conveniently presented.  The argument that bothered me most was the low-income family they showed, 'forced' to eat fast food because healthy food is more expensive.  Here's my opinion: nobody is forced to eat anything.  You can eat better in smart ways.  The film goes on to talk about how junk food ingredients are subsidized, driving down the cost.  If that's true, it's wrong, so they should stop that.  That would drive prices of such food up, though, right?  Wouldn't that make it harder for lower-income families to eat, if they're 'forced' to consume garbage today?  I'm ranting . . . I apologize.  Anyway, bias aside, there are good points here.  The most powerful one is true of all things in a capitalistic society: people vote with their money.  If you want things to change- if you want companies to raise healthier animals and produce better products- buy the healthy stuff today.  Corporations care about profit- so choose wisely, and they will out of self-interest.

Rating: B-

When Christ and His Saints Slept (Sharon Kay Penman)

When Christ and His Saints Slept tells the story of England's 'troubles'- when King Henry I died in 1135, leaving only a female heir (Matilda).  Many at the time didn't want a female to reign, and Maud spent the better part of two decades fighting Stephen, her cousin, for the English throne.  They eventually struck an agreement- Stephen would reign until he died (1154), and then Matilda's son, Henry II, would reign.  It thus transpired, with Henry II becoming the first in a long line of Plantagenet kings.

This book was okay, not great, so I put it down after 100 pages.  The history seems correct, but my personal problem with historical fiction is the degree of liberty the author must take with the famous figures.  We know so little about Stephen and Maud from history, but Penman has to flesh out each character, so she does the best she can by creating plausible personalities and dialogue based on sparse historical evidence.  Her efforts aren't poor, but I always worry in such situations that the inventions miss the mark, and create wrong impressions.  I'm beginning to realize that I like my history in one of two ways:
- scholarly historical works, where no attempt is made to take liberties with the unknown
- historical fiction where the characters are fictional but live in a historical setting (like in Ken Follett's Pillars of the Earth), so you get the idea while having to take fewer liberties with known historical figures.

Rating: B-

Iron Man 2

Another "old" superhero movie review for you today.  Released in 2010, Iron Man 2 takes place months after Iron Man.  Tony Stark is being pressured to turn over the iron man suit to the US military and their main weapons contractor, Justin Hammer.  Meanwhile, Ivan Vanko (whose father and Tony's were first partners, then rivals) develops similar energy tech and becomes Whiplash, intent on revenge.  As Tony deals with these external threats, he faces one from within- the palladium he's using for his reactor is slowly poisoning him.  Can he beat the odds, or are they too overwhelming?

Critics didn't like this movie nearly as much as its predecessor; neither did I.  Hammer's character is over-the-top cheesy, and Pepper Potts is too much the helpless damsel in distress (though she does show signs of strengthening as the movie progresses).  The plot is okay but poorly developed.  Iron Man's new allies, War Machine and Black Widow, are cool, but my main beef with this flick is the failure to adequately explore the intriguing topic it raises: does the government have the right to take technology from a private citizen to maintain a national technological (and military) edge?  The question is never resolved; the government does confiscate a suit (creating War Machine), but neither compensates Tony nor creates more (in this film or subsequent).  It's an unresolved question, and one that would have made this movie more interesting and memorable.

Rating: B-

Extravagant Grace (Barbara Duguid)

In Extravagant Grace, Barbara Duguid recalls relevant teachings of John Newton (16-century Christian preacher and author of Amazing Grace) and, from them, creates a narrative that calls us to better understand our weakness- and God's grace.  Setting aside popular (but inaccurate) views about victory in this life over sin, she outlines the problem with the Church today:

Few people, and perhaps especially few pastors, are willing or able to open up their lives and hearts for public exposure and scrutiny. Most of us prefer to hide our sin and weakness instead of revealing ourselves and experiencing shame and humiliation. As a result, our churches have become places where we perform well for others and speak far more about our victories than our struggles. In consequence, many Christians wrestle with the agony of sinful failure in isolation and desperation. The silent message is deafening: Christians are people who quickly grow and change, and if you are weak and struggling you must not be a believer, or perhaps worse, you are a particularly bad Christian in whom God is very, very disappointed.

This reality runs counter to everything we see in the Gospel.  There, we see that Jesus' sacrifice finished the requirements of the law, and this double imputation (God gives us Jesus' righteousness, and gives Jesus our sinfulness) satisfies the Lord's demands.  Therefore,

Because Jesus was strong for me, I am free to be weak. Because Jesus won for me, I am free to lose. Because Jesus was Someone, I am free to be no one. Because Jesus was extraordinary, I am free to be ordinary. Because Jesus succeeded for me, I am free to fail.

Christianity is different than every other religion for just this reason.  Most (if not all) other religions preach certain beliefs and actions to earn standing or salvation.  The essence of Christianity is the opposite- we cannot act on our own, we cannot earn anything good, we deserve condemnation, and nothing we do can change that.  Thankfully, God changed the game for us.  He acted without our consent or desire to draw us out of the abyss- and He did so without any action of any kind on our part.  We are utterly dependent upon Him at all times.  Even our faith in Him is a gift from Him.

Sadly, our human weakness means that we often turn even the good news of Christianity into the same old works-based religion- follow the ten commandments and God will be happy, live a good life and earn heaven, etc.  This sort of message appeals to us as humans, as it's works-based and something we can do, thus making us feel in control.  But we're not.  Scripture clearly says that our hearts are deceitful, all humans are wicked, and sin will be with us (in varying degrees and forms) during our remaining time on Earth.  We will fail.  A lot.  Why?

God could have saved us and made us instantly perfect. Instead, he chose to save us and leave indwelling sin in our hearts and bodies to wage war against the new and blossoming desires to please God that accompany salvation. This is a raging battle that we often lose, and that often leaves us feeling defeated and joyless in our walk with God. . . . [yet] since we know God does all things for his own glory and the good of his people, his decision to leave Christians with many struggles with sin must also somehow serve to glorify him and benefit his people. 

Really?  Yes:

Whatever a sovereign God allows, he has in fact ordained.

Which means:

God thinks that you will actually come to know and love him better as a desperate and weak sinner in continual need of grace than you would as a triumphant Christian warrior who wins each and every battle against sin. This makes sense out of our experience as Christians. If the job of the Holy Spirit is to make you more humble and dependent on Christ, more grateful for his sacrifice and more adoring of him as a wonderful Savior, then he might be doing a very, very good job even though you still sin every day.

This line of thinking- completely Biblical- shatters the (regrettable) direction many Churches have taken today- one of trumpeting human faith, effort and victory, and judging those who are weak and wandering.  We look to our own performance for comfort and assurance.  God did not deem it to be so:

What if growing in grace is more about humility, dependence, and exalting Christ than it is about defeating sin? 

In the Bible, the strongest people are those who know their own weakness while the weakest people are those who are most impressed by their own strength.

Joy in Christ is perhaps God’s greatest desire for his children. He does not want us to admire ourselves; he wants us to cherish and long for his beloved Son. His goal is to humble us and show us our great need for the ravishing gift he has provided. Sinful weakness is one of the precious tools he uses to help us get there.

-----------------------------------

This book was great reminder of the aforementioned truths.  It wasn't perfect- points were repeated a lot, the reliance on just one preacher could be annoying, and some of the theology explored is deep and may require some background in the reformed faith to fully understand and not distort- but the importance and power of the message overruled its shortcomings.  Highly recommended.

Rating: A+