Sex, Romance, and the Glory of God (C.J. Mahaney)

Since the dawn of time, the (non-procreative) purpose of and approach to sex has been much distorted.  The two extremes are prudes- those who believe sex is mostly bad- and perverts- those who practice sex outside the bonds of marriage and/or for selfish reasons.  C.J. Mahaney sets the record straight on what sex is and should be in Sex, Romance, and the Glory of God.

Mahaney starts with a conversation on marriage in general.  "Marriage between a man and a woman is meant to reflect the relationship between Christ and the Church."  This concept is straight out of the Bible.  Because of this, for the Christian

. . . your primary role is not to raise your children (or to excel in your career or immerse yourself in hobbies or anything else) but to build a marriage by God's grace that reflects the relationship between Christ and the Church.

Your wife should be the most important person to you, and "the most important thing [you can] do is to be a godly husband to [your] wife."  Contrast this with how most of us approach our relationships, where spouses are put on the back-burner and children, careers, or hobbies take the center stage.

So how does sex play into this?  Sex within marriage is the most intimate, personal, vulnerable, and pleasurable act.  But it's not just a physical act.  Mahaney's main point, oft repeated throughout this 122-page volume, is this:

In order for romance to deepen, you must touch the heart and mind of your wife before you touch her body.

In other words, a good sexual relationship isn't established in the bedroom.  It's built throughout the course of your relationship, in every angle and activity.  To touch your wife's heart and mind, Mahaney recommends several things, summarized in the following paragraph.

You should learn about your wife (by observation and asking questions) and plan/prepare ways to get to know her better.  Do things like have regular date nights, make daily phone calls, leave frequent notes, give occasional gifts (even small things, like a favorite candy), write/sing/play music for her (if you're so inclined), plan getaways, and surprise her.  Learn the 'language of romance' and compliment her in unique and heartfelt ways.  In a nutshell, love your wife by focusing on her, being passionate about her, and put her needs/wants before your own.

----------

This book is a good, fast read.  It's more about the husband/wife relationship than sex per se, so the title can be a bit deceiving.  I'm not sure I learned anything new, having read much of this in other Christian books on relationships, but it's always good to hear a good message again.  I (for one) need the reminder, as my tendency, left unchecked, is to focus on me first.

Rating: B

Batman: Under the Red Hood

A new menace is in Gotham- Red Hood has arrived.  Part altruistic, part criminal overlord, his motive and identity are unknown . . . but Batman begins to suspect a connection with his past.  Who is Red Hood, what does he want, and can Batman stop him in time?

Batman: Under the Red Hood is one of the better Batman animated movies.  I was entertained, anyway.  Intended for kids age 12 and up, parts are dark, and there is some language.  As with most movies in this vein, it's not overly deep- just an action/adventure tale.  Recommended- especially for fans of Batman who are familiar with the Dark Knight's more popular capers (as some past knowledge will enhance enjoyment).

Rating: A-

Friends

I don't watch much TV, but one show I've seen more than I should admit is Friends.  It aired 236 episodes over 10 seasons (1994-2004), and I've seen each at least twice (I just completed my second marathon- which took months- yesterday).  At ~22 minutes per episode, that means I've spent 173 hours of my life . . . good grief . . . following this series.

Friends is a sitcom that follows (shockingly) six friends in their 20's and 30's as they navigate post-college life living in New York City.  You have:
- Ross Gellar (David Schwimmer): paleontologist, dork, and frequent divorcee
- Monica Gellar (Courteney Cox): Ross' sister, chef, and neat freak
- Chandler Bing (Matthew Perry): nobody knows what he does . . . but he's the funny/sarcastic one
- Phoebe Buffet (Lisa Kudrow): masseuse and the weird (but hilarious) one
- Joey Tribbiani (Matt LeBlanc): soap actor, player, and lovable dummy
- Rachel Green (Jennifer Aniston): Monica's friend from high school, fashion designer, and pretty/ditzy one

The themes of the show are common to those in the post-college years: relationships, children, jobs,  hobbies, facing uncertainty in a time when settling is expected . . . and of course, the personality quirks of each character played a large role in the humor surrounding each.  Most shows/scenes were set in Monica's apartment (shared with several during the course of the show), Joey's apartment (across the hall), or "Central Perk"- the coffee store downstairs.  Some consistent storylines (like Ross and Rachel's on-again/off-again relationship) and cameo characters (like Janice, Chandler's lamentable old flame) provided a degree of continuity, but each episode largely stood on its own.

Though dramatic and emotional at times, the show never strayed far from its comedic focus.  Most episodes were done well, and it's easy to see why the show was so successful- by the last season, each of the six mains were making $1 million per episode.  It won many awards; deservedly so.  As with any show that runs so long, some episodes were better than others, and some running jokes could grow stale.  Still, by the last episode, I found myself unexpectedly emotional as (spoiler alert) they vacate the apartment that had been the show's centerpiece.   It was fittingly symbolic of the passing of 'innocence'- those post-college years- into 'true' adulthood and middle age.

Rating (for the entire show): A-

The Secret of Kells

From the same studio that brought us Song of the Sea (review here), The Secret of Kells is the story of Brendan, a young monk in the fortified town of Kells.  Brendan has never left (and is forbidden to leave) the town, for his uncle, the abbot, is fearful of what lies beyond.  He's increasing the town wall height based on reports of Norse attacks in nearby regions.  One day, the legendary brother Aidan from Iona arrives (having fled the Norse invasion there), bearing with him a partially-completed illuminated book.  He wishes to finish it in Kells, and enlists Brendan to assist him.  To do so, Brendan must step outside his boundaries, defy his uncle, and brave what lies beyond.  As he enters this new world, it becomes apparent that supernatural assistance will be necessary for him to succeed.

The Secret of Kells is a good movie.  Made before Song of the Sea, the latter features slightly better animation and music, but the stories in both are captivating.  It's a hero's journey tale, combined with wonderful animation, religion, and Celtic lore.  It has a mild historical flavor, with obvious reference to the Book of Kells.  Not recommended for younger children (there are some scary moments), it's worth a look.

Rating: A-

How to Measure Anything (Douglas W. Hubbard)

"Anything can be measured.  If a thing can be observed in any way at all, it lends itself to some type of measurement method.  No matter how "fuzzy" the measurement is, it's still a measurement if it tells you more than you knew before."  So claims author Douglas Hubbard in this book How to Measure Anything.  He proceeds to lay out his method for finding the value of "intangibles" in business settings.

There's a lot of good in this book; it gave me many points to ponder.  It was dry and 'textbookish,' which wasn't always appreciated, and there was a lot of math that I skimmed over.  Still, the concepts presented are valuable.  I attempt to concisely recap the book below.

Rating: A-

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

Why are metrics such a hot topic?  Metrics are simply measurements, and "management cares about measurements because measurements inform uncertain decisions."  Hubbard argues that "for any decision or set of decisions, there are a large combination of things to measure and ways to measure them- but perfect certainty is rarely a realistic option . . . therefore, management needs a method to analyze options for reducing uncertainty about decisions."  A well-defined and executed measurement method is what's necessary, where a measurement is defined as "a quantitatively expressed reduction of uncertainty based on one or more observations."

Hubbard believes

There are just three reasons why people think that something can't be measured.
1. Concept of measurement (the definition is misunderstood)
2. Object of measurement (the thing being measured is not well defined)
3. Methods of measurement (many procedures of empirical observation are not well known)

He also claims

1. If it matters at all, it is detectable/observable.
2. If it is detectable, it can be detected as an amount (or range of possible amounts).
3. If it can be detected as a range of possible amounts, it can be measured.

Hubbard proceeds to lay out a 5-step process to measure anything:

1. Define the decision and the variables that matter to it.

A problem well stated is a problem half solved. - Charles Kettering

It's not uncommon to lose sight of why we want metrics in the first place- what are we trying to accomplish with them?  "What problem are you trying to solve with this measurement?"  A common understanding here is key.  Ambiguity will result in disaster.  "It is . . . imperative to state why we want to measure something in order to understand what is really being measured."  To start, "if a measurement matters at all, it is because it must have some conceivable effect on decisions and behavior."  Therefore, one should answer the following clarification questions:

1. What is the decision this measurement is supposed to support?
2. What is the definition of the thing being measured in terms of observable consequences?
3. How, exactly, does this thing matter to the decision being asked?

2. Model the current state of uncertainty about those variables.

Remember, measurements are about reducing uncertainty.  To reduce the uncertainty, you need some idea of the current level of uncertainty.  How much do we know now?  A fourth clarification question (continued from the previous section):

4. How much do you know about it now (what is your current level of uncertainty)?

Here, we need to establish a range for our measurement that is likely to contain the right answer.  It's a starting range, necessary for subsequent analysis.  We often know more than we think- we have an idea of range.  For example: we want to determine how many people actively use our software.  We don't know the exact amount (obviously), but based on downloads we know there are between 10,000 and 20,000 users.  That's a large spread, but it's much better than nothing.  "Initially, measuring uncertainty is just a matter of putting our calibrated ranges or probabilities on unknown variables."  By 'calibrated range,' we mean a 90% "Confidence Interval" (90% CI)- the range that has a 90% chance of containing the correct answer.  Hubbard discusses various ways to train or 'calibrate' employees to produce reasonable probability calibrations, which I won't elaborate upon here.  The idea is that "when you allow yourself to use ranges and probabilities, you don't really have to assume anything you don't know for a fact."

3. Compute the value of additional measurements.

We often focus on what's easy to measure vs. what's important to measure.  Remember, "if some information being requested has no bearing on decisions, it has no value."  A final clarification question (continued from previous sections) needs to be asked:

5. What is the value of additional information?

We want to obtain more information to reduce uncertainty (shrinking our 90% range and producing a clearer picture of the way to proceed).  But what information do we collect?  Where do we focus our efforts?  "If you don't compute the value of measurements, you are probably measuring the wrong things, the wrong way . . . understanding the value of information tells us what to measure and about how much effort we should put into measuring it."

There are really only three basic reasons why information ever has value to a business:
1. Information reduces uncertainty about decisions that have economic consequences.
2. Information affects the behavior of others, which has economic consequences.
3. Information sometimes has its own market value.

Hubbard presents his "Expected Value of Information" formula:

Expected Value of Information (EVI) = Reduction in expected opportunity loss (EOL)

In other words,

where

4. Measure the high-value uncertainties in a way that is economically justified.

Once we know the EVI (see last step), we have to measure the high-value uncertainties.

In business cases, most of the variables have an "information value" at or near zero.  But usually at least some variables have an information value that is so high that some deliberate measurement effort is easily justified.

To begin, we must recognize that "many measurements start by decomposing an uncertain variable into constituent parts to identify directly observable things that are easier to measure."  The has several advantages, and in some cases, we can stop after decomposition due to the

Decomposition effect: The phenomenon that the decomposition itself often turns out to provide such a sufficient reduction in uncertainty that further observations are not required.

After a problem has been decomposed into its simplest, observable parts, there are several techniques to actually perform a measurement.  Hubbard talks about various sampling methods, Bayesian analysis, the Monte Carlo method, and using secondary research (what others have done before) to get ideas for other techniques.  I talk more about some shortly.

It's important to remember that measurements, at their core, are observations.  There are several basic methods of observation that will result in meaningful measurements:
- follow its trail (the information has left footprints- you see them, and just have to follow them)
- use direct observation to start looking (the information has left footprints, but you don't see them- you have to find them, then follow them)
- add a tracer so it starts leaving a trail (the information has not left footprints, but could if you put sensors in certain places)
- create conditions to observe (an experiment) (the information has not left footprints, and won't 'in the wild'- so you have to create a controlled environment for observation)

Sampling

As mentioned above, Hubbard discusses several measurement methods.  I'll discuss only sampling in more detail, as that's of most interest to me.  What is sampling?  "In effect, sampling is observing just some of the things in a population to learn something about all of the things in a population."

"We may need only a very small number of samples to draw useful conclusions about the rest of the unsampled population."  For example, the Rule of Five states that "there is a 93.75% chance that the median of a population is between the smallest and largest values in any random sample of five from that population."  That's pretty cool!

Sampling plays a large part in our lives, whether or not we realize it.  ". . . Everything we know from "experience" is just a sample.  We didn't actually experience everything; we experienced some things and we extrapolated from there.  That is all we get- fleeting glimpses of a mostly unobserved world from which we draw conclusions about all the stuff we didn't see."

Done well, sampling can tell us a lot and significantly reduce our uncertainty.

Measuring Soft Concepts

How do you measure those intangibles that can be so difficult to quantify?  Things like "quality" and the like?  Here's an interesting concept: "Valuation, by its nature, is a subjective assessment."  Yes- many things we treat as objective (like monetary value, the gold standard, etc.) are based largely on human preference.  "All quality assessment problems . . . are about human preferences.  In that sense, human preferences are the only source of measurement."  So, how do we observe preferences?

Broadly, there are two ways to observe preferences: what people say [stated preferences] and what people do [revealed preferences].

Revealed preferences are often more valuable, and "two good indicators of revealed preferences are things people tend to value a lot: time and money."

5. Make a risk/return decision after the economically justified amount of uncertainty is reduced.

Hopefully, this should be the easy part.  If your measurement reduced uncertainty significantly, the way forward is a risk/return decision based on better information than you had initially.  "Keep the purpose of measurement in mind: uncertainty reduction, not necessarily uncertainty elimination."  The cool thing is that if you started with very little information (and thus had a lot of uncertainty), "you don't need much new data to tell you something you didn't know before [and thus to reduce uncertainty significantly]."

Measurements will not and cannot guarantee the way forward . . . but they can make the way reasonably plain.

Designing Metrics (Dr. Bob Frost)

Designing Metrics is a short (77 page) introduction to performance metrics- those measures that companies use "to define and guide performance."  In it, Dr. Bob Frost discusses measuring frameworks, using them, and staying on track.

There's a lot of good information in this small volume.  Here are is an overview (any quotes are from the book):

Introduction

Measuring performance is important and has been for some time.  Private and non-profit organizations alike have a need to quantify their operations and measure progress towards their goals.  Still, when we talk about metrics, it's easy to be led astray.  Some general principles to stay on a good path are the need for multiple perspectives and balance.

The need for multiple perspectives.
When we focus on one element of operations (like, say, cost) and ignore others, problems ensue.
Today there is "wide acceptance of the idea that financial metrics alone do not provide enough help in understanding and managing performance" . . . "balanced, multi-perspective metrics provide a richer, truer understanding of group performance."

The need for balance.
Hand in hand with multiple perspectives is the idea of balance.  "Inside every organization, there are certain forces, goals, or value systems that tend to oppose one another . . . if any of these worthy goals becomes the sole guiding light of the organization, many other legitimate goals will be sacrificed- resulting in imbalanced efforts and, often, an early demise for the organization."

"The goal of management, and the reason excellence in management is so difficult, is balanced achievement of multiple goals, not the optimization of one thing at the expense of all else."

"Anything not measured is subject to being sacrificed for things that are measured."

Measurement Frameworks

"Your chief tool in designing [balanced] metrics is a measurement framework."  "They serve as guides in thinking about what performance actually means in your situation."  This will help you determine what to measure, what to balance, and the path to high performance.    A number of frameworks are in use today, and are introduced below.  Note that it's wise to use several frameworks to encourage multiple perspectives and balance:

Balanced Scorecard
Popular in industry today, the balanced scorecard framework looks at four measurement perspectives:
- Financial ("how do we look to our owners?")
     - Government/non-profits may redefine this perspective as "Mission Success"
- Customers ("how do we look to customers?")
- Internal ("Are we improving how we operate?")
- Learning/Growth ("Can we sustain growth & position?")

The balanced scorecard approach is considered long-term/strategic.

Stakeholder Framework
This framework focuses on the customers (or stakeholders).  It asks three main questions:
- Who are our stakeholders?
- What do they care about? [don't assume here]
- How can we measure it?

The stakeholder framework approach focuses on the here-and-now, and can be a useful complement to the long-term strategic focus of the balanced scorecard.

Program Logic Model
This approach "captures and succinctly illustrates the big picture view of an entire organization, program or effort."  It captures the following:
- Inputs
- Activities
- Outputs
- Outcomes

This approach works best when applied to things with very targeted missions.

Enterprise Performance Framework
This perspective "pays particular attention to the competitive and economic pressures behind performance in today's economy."  It looks at three fundamental ideas:
- Effectiveness ("How well are we fulfilling our mission?")
- Efficiency ("How efficiently are we operating?")
- Strategic Improvement ("How well are we preparing for success tomorrow?")

Cascading Framework
"This framework recognizes and uses the inherent structure of your organization."  It helps "ensure alignment of effort within an organization."
For this framework, each small unit in an organization "must look to the goals and Critical Success Factors of the next higher level" . . . and looks for its role in achieving those larger objectives.  The primary advantage of this approach is alignment of effort.

Translating to Measures

The author advocates a 3-step method for translating your measurement framework(s) into measures and indicators.

Step 1: "list a set of perspectives or performance topics" based on the results of your measurement framework(s), which you used to conceptualize performance.  A performance topic could be something like financial performance, customer service, product development, or the like.

Step 2: For each performance topic, "craft a list of Critical Success Factors."  CSFs are "the 'must do' factors that determine whether you are successful today and whether you will succeed in the future."

Step 3: For each CSF, define specific performance measures to track success.


Final Steps/Thoughts

Like anything, coming up with a system of metrics is not a 'one and done' affair.  Follow a "continual improvement model" (design, use, audit, improve, and repeat) to evaluate effectiveness and ensure the measures "encourage the right kinds of behaviors and right kinds of decisions in your group or organization."  "We have to ask whether we are creating what was intended."


Rating: A-

Song of the Sea

Song of the Sea, an Irish production, is a tale about Saoirse (pronounced "Sear-sha"), a Selkie, and her brother Ben.  They live on an island off the Irish coast with their father, who works the local lighthouse.  Their mother passed when Saoirse came, and their father mourns her still.  Saoirse is mute and her abilities unknown until a day when the sea calls her.  She's an impressive little girl.  Not only can she turn into a seal, but she can set fairies (turned to stone) free if she can sing "the song of the sea."  She can do this, though, only while wearing a special coat which gives her voice, and the owls (led by a witch) are determined to stop her and keep the fairy world in stone.  Can Saoirse set the fairies free . . . and what will it mean if she can?

Beautifully animated (and by hand, to boot), haunting in places, this is a good film.  Some plot elements (especially symbolic components) lost me . . . but it was a captivating story nonetheless (with some hauntingly enchanting music).  It has distinctive roots in both Irish mythology and (to a lesser degree) religion.  I look forward to The Secret of Kells, an earlier work in the same vein by this studio.

Rating: A-

X2: X-men United

The 2003 sequel to X-men (reviewed here), X2: X-men United focuses on the same topic: mutant-human relations.  Things seem to be going better after Magneto was arrested for his crimes at the end of X-men . . . but some humans still want the mutants gone.  Colonel Stryker is one such, and he has a plan to kill every mutant on the planet.  To do so, however, he needs the powers of Professor X . . . which he might just be able to obtain through devious methods.  X-men and the Brotherhood (the bad guys from the first film) must unite to combat this new menace . . . or face extinction.

Most say this film is better than the original.  I'm one of them- the plot felt 'tighter,' though the movie still had the "rushed-yet-slow" feeling of the first (perhaps due in part to the somewhat uncompelling musical score).  Most characters return, with a few additions- Nightcrawler being my favorite.*  The graphics and effects are decent- though they don't hold a candle to today.  The dialogue is better; the message and outcome are the same- you're either in the 'fight' or 'unite' camp when it comes to mutant-human relations, and so far, the 'unite' crowd seems to be winning.**   In the end, this is a good film with a 'first-generation superhero flick' feel to it.

Rating: B+

*A German, Christian, and former circus entertainer . . . what's not to like?
**Will that hold true for X-men 3??  

World War II (DK Publishing)

World War II (1939-1945) was the costliest conflict in history; in human life alone, over 60 million died (3% of the world's population at the time).  It was effectively a continuation of World War I (1914-1918), whose peace settlement was poorly constructed, eventually leading to economic depression and (as a result) the rise of totalitarian regimes like Hitler's Nazi Germany.  Increasingly defiant of several Versailles mandates, Hitler occupied parts of Czechoslovakia and annexed Austria.  When others did nothing, he invaded Poland in 1939, which finally triggered a response from the British and started World War II.  Japan and Italy entered with Germany to form the Axis powers, and (eventually) America joined the UK, Russia, and others to form the Allies.  The lines were drawn; the conflict raged across the globe, and much was lost in the ensuing carnage.  The story of it all is told in World War II by DK Publishing.

Like its WWI counterpart (reviewed here), DK's World War II is a visual history.  This volume is heavily illustrated with pictures, maps, and other visuals that help convey the details, magnitude, and horror of the conflict.  While informative, comprehensive, and less choppy/fragmented than its predecessor, World War II suffers from uncompelling delivery, unexpectedly frequent spelling errors, and more focus on military maneuvers than what's needed (or wanted) in an overview. The resulting read is rather dry at times, and parts can be skimmed without losing the overall point.  Perhaps I'm too harsh; there is a lot of good here, but it could be better.

Rating: B+

Into the Woods

Into the Woods, a Stephen Sondheim musical recently made into a Disney movie, is a mish-mash of several fairy tales: Cinderella, Rapunzel, Little Red Riding Hood, and Jack and the Beanstalk.  Tying these all together is a baker and his wife, who are unable to have children due to a witch's curse.  She visits them one day and promises a child if they can collect four items: a golden slipper, blonde hair, a white cow, and a red cape.  In the course of their collecting, they run into characters from the aforementioned tales in the woods.

An all-star cast isn't enough to save this movie.  I love musicals (don't know if I should admit that), but this film, for whatever reason, was utterly uninteresting and failed to draw me in.  The songs were okay but not great.  The plot dragged on interminably.  Some small parts were inexplicably morbid, leading me to question the PG rating (and intended audience).  Halfway through, I thought/hoped it would be over, and ended up fast-forwarding to the end in hopes that it might redeem itself.  It didn't.

Rating: C

A Distant Mirror (Barbara Tuchman)

"What was life like in Medieval times?"  This, in a sense, is the question A Distant Mirror seeks to answer.  It does so by looking at one important Frenchmen- Enguerrand VII, Sire de Coucy and Count of Soissons- and discussing him and events in his lifetime (and slightly beyond).  The focus is the 14th century- a time that featured:
- the Black Plague
- much of the Hundred Years' War
- the Papal Schism
- brigands and the decay of chivalry
- a Crusade (against the Turks, who ultimately beat the Westerners at Nicopolis)

As the above list suggests, there's a wealth of material here.  The book focuses on France, though Italy, England, Hungary, and the Holy Roman Empire are touched upon insofar as events there intersected the life of Coucy.  We learn about not just political history, but culture, religion, and lifestyle as well.  Though each chapter has a theme, Tuchman fluidly moves through topics in each.  Her style works, but pay attention, as topics can change quickly enough (with little warning).

This work is excellent.  I don't always agree with her worldview or conclusions, but the prose is all at once elegant, succinct, and profound.  As with her other work (The Guns of August- review), I really enjoyed her words- each sentence is crafted with care.  The nature of this work can be problematic- it's both history and biography, oscillating in scope between nations and an individual.  To that end, the digressions in each chapter can be frustrating, but are ultimately well done and arguably necessary to convey a more complete portrait of the time.  All in all, a good read about a tumultuous and fascinating era.

Rating: A

Cool Hand Luke

Paul Newman stars at the title character in Cool Hand Luke, a tale about a man who simply refuses to conform.  Imprisoned for beheading parking meters while intoxicated, Luke spends his days on a southern chain gang without complaint or much emotion.  He 'wins' even when events are against him through an implacably calm disposition- he comes out on top despite having nothing.  The authorities, though, don't take kindly to Luke, and look to break him and 'get his mind right' through overly cruel punishment.  Can they break Cool Hand?

This 1967 film is widely liked (on Rotten Tomatoes, at least) and may have been top-notch in its time.  Now, however, it feels slow and (mostly) dull.  Newman's character is fun, to be sure- the character has a "content in all situations" feel that's really appealing- and the overall premise is interesting when one looks at the prison as allegorical.  That aside, modern films, to which I've apparently become accustomed, appear to deliver messages in much more compelling fashions.  Perhaps, in the end "what we have here is a failure to communicate,"* with older films being more subtle and featuring less spoon feeding than their current counterparts.

Rating: B-

*the famous line from this movie

The Canon of Scripture (F.F. Bruce)

There are millions of Christians in the world today, and they base their beliefs on this book called the Bible.  The Bible today consists of 66 books divided in two testaments (39 in the Old Testament, or OT, and 27 in the New Testament, or NT).  Who decided which books made up the Bible?  What was their criteria?  F.F. Bruce, noted scholar in the field, looks at just these questions in The Canon of Scripture.  This isn't a normal book review, in a sense- it's as synopsis of Bruce's work, and any quotes presented here are his.

Background

Why does the Bible matter to Christians?

Many religions have sacred books associated with their traditions or their worship . . . the 'book' has a regulative function: conformity to what the book prescribes is a major test of loyalty to their religious faith and practice.

Why does Christianity have two testaments?

It comes down to covenants.  In the OT, God made a pact- or covenant- with Abraham and his descendants (the Jews).  The Lord would be their God, and they would be His people.  There was a problem, though- the Jews were unable to be faithful to God due to fallen human nature, and the covenant was constantly broken.  In the NT, Jesus Christ claimed to be Son of God , and permanently restored a right relationship between God and His people through a sacrifice- Himself.

Each of these covenants- the ancient covenant of Sinai and the new covenant inaugurated by Jesus- launched a great spiritual movement.  Each of these movements gave rise to a special body of literature, and these bodies of literature came to be known in the Christian church as 'the books of the ancient covenant' and 'the books of the new covenant' . . . It was not until the end of the second century AD that the two collections began to be described, briefly, as the Old Covenant (or Testament) and the New Covenant (or Testament).

Why do both the OT and NT matter to Christians?

The OT matters because its events and prophecies all point to Jesus.  He was no Savior that came out of the blue- His appearance and actions were foretold centuries before, by more than one prophet in the OT.  And,

Jesus . . . regularly appealed to the Hebrew scriptures [the OT] to validate his mission, his words and his actions.

Therefore,

The church's use of those writings was based on Jesus' use of them.

Again,

The earliest Christians . . . accepted the Old Testament scriptures as they had received them: the authority of those scriptures was sufficiently ratified by the teaching and example of the Lord and his apostles.

The NT matters because it's about Jesus.  His words, works, and sacrifice are all displayed therein, as recorded by his followers-

. . . what he [Jesus] said was treasured and repeated by those who heard him, and by their hearers in turn.

Since Jesus himself left nothing in writing, the most authoritative writings available to the church were those which came from his apostles.

What qualified one as an apostle?

Those whose apostleship was recognized by fellow-Christians were acknowledged to be Christ's agents, speaking by his authority.

With this backstory, we can now look briefly at the canon of Scripture, and how the OT and NT came to be.

The Canon of Scripture

What is a canon?

In a Christian context, we might define the word as 'the list of the writings acknowledged by the Church as documents of the divine revelation.'

 Those writings are

understood to be the list of books which are acknowledged to be, in a unique sense, the rule of belief and practice.

How did the OT canon come to be?

Basically, it was passed down from ancient times.  The Masoretic Hebrew and Aramaic texts have been in use for centuries.

The books of the Hebrew Bible are traditionally twenty-four in number, arranged in three divisions.  The law (5 books of Moses), the prophets (8 books), and writings (11 books).

These twenty-four books are identical with the thirty-nine of the Protestant [current] Old Testament; the difference in reckoning arises from counting the twelve ('minor') prophets separately and dividing Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, and Ezra-Nehemiah into two each.

Bruce mentions three OT books that at various times were disputed: Esther, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Songs.  The order of books, too, at times changed, as the originals were on separate scrolls and not bound together in books like we have today.  Still, this OT canon was well understood in Jesus' day.

When we think of Jesus and his Palestinian apostles, then, we may be confident that they agreed with contemporary leaders in Israel about the contents of the canon . . . when in debate with Jewish theologians Jesus and the apostles appealed to 'the scripture', they appealed to an authority which was equally acknowledged by their opponents.

The OT in most Bibles today is translated from the Hebrew/Aramaic Masoretic texts; some Churches (likes Eastern Orthodox) base their OT on a Greek translation of the same text (called the Septuagint).

How did the NT canon come to be?

Basically, the NT today consists of the gospels (4 books), the acts of the apostles (1 book), and the apostolic letters (22 books, most of which are by Paul).  Most of these has been accepted from the start as having apostolic authorship (and thus authority).  Athanasius (in 367 AD) was the first to list exactly 27 NT books [our current NT] with distinction of status.

The Gospels and Acts never appeared to be in serious dispute, and

From the early second century onward Paul's letters [13 books] circulated not singly, but as a collection.

A handful of books have been disputed by various people in various times- predominantly Hebrews, 2 Peter, 2 & 3 John, James, Jude, and Revelation.  For example, Origen (185-254) agreed with 21 of the current 27 but disputed Hebrews, 2 Peter, 2 & 3 John, James, and Jude (but was fine with Revelation).  In another example, the authorship of Hebrews was questioned- some said it was Pauline, others that it was canon but not of Paul.  Bruce looks at statements like these from many historical heavyweights through ancient times, to include the above as well as Josephus, Jerome, Eusebius, Tertullian, Augustine, Marcion, Valentinus, and Ptolemy.  Most of these agreed (either through overt lists or implications) with the bulk of the books; they squabbled over the aforementioned ones.

Through the Ages

Throughout the ages, the NT (and OT) have been re-evaluated.  Biblical scholars, literary critics, and other experts use various criteria to include:

Antiquity

If a writing was the work of an apostle or of someone closely associated with an apostle, it must belong to the apostolic age.  Writings of later date, whatever their merit, could not be included among the apostolic or canonical books.

Orthodoxy

By 'orthodoxy' they meant the apostolic faith- the faith set forth in the undoubted apostolic writings and maintained in the churches which had been founded by apostles.

Most Christians believe the Bible is self-authenticating, and that's where orthodoxy comes in.  If a 'new' apostolic-age book were discovered, for example, deciding to include it in the Bible would be based in part on its claims about Christ.  Does what it says mesh with the undoubted apostolic writings?

Catholicity
By this they meant 'universal'.  Was the text held as canon in all Churches?  If not, why not?

Conclusion & Review

The Bible is an immensely important book, and understanding how it came to be in its present form is important.  It's been so for ages:

An issue of high importance for theologians in the church was the distinguishing of those books which might be used for settling doctrinal questions from those which were generally edifying.

Bruce, a professor in England for decades, does an excellent job stepping through the centuries and discussing, at a high level, "who said what when" about the canon of Scripture.  His book is an overview, considering things at a high level.  It is not a book-by-book analysis of exactly which book was written at which date by which authors.  That part disappointed me, but I can get that information elsewhere (in the Reformation Study Bible, for example, available here).  That Bruce is well-informed and a scholar of highest magnitude is without doubt; numerous in-page annotations make for easy reference lookup, and he brings a critical eye to everything, which is necessary and welcome.  In addition to learning about how we got the present Bible, he impressed upon me

the importance of the historical dimension in biblical interpretation

and that

It is not enough to say 'the Bible says . . .' without at the same time considering to whom the Bible says it, and in what circumstances.

The historical dimension has often been overlooked by Christians and non alike, with potentially disastrous consequences over the years.

As a final comment, the Bible is all about Christ, and that comes through when you look at the formation of the OT and NT.  It's not, as some Churchgoers say, "an instruction manual," or "guide to life," or history book, or science book.  Yes, we can learn from it- both instructions for life and historic situations- but the Bible is about Christ.  Old Testament and New alike point to Christ.  Remember that when reading.

Overall, I really liked The Canon of Scripture.  It was academic, but easy enough for a layman like me to follow.  I want to learn more.  I believe the Bible, and it's important to know what you believe.

Rating: A

X-men

Today, superhero movies are a dime a dozen; it wasn't always so.  Released in 2000, X-men has been credited (along with 2002's Spider-man) as starting the onslaught of comic book film adaptions.  In it, some humans ('mutants') have evolved and possess special powers.  Some people are calling for mutant registration, enabling the government to keep a closer eye on these advanced creatures.  Others point to history as precedent for avoiding such segregation.  Tensions heighten on both sides as the world deals with this new reality, and mutual distrust is increasingly prevalent.  Eventually, mutants take sides- some (led by Professor X) believe humans and mutants can peacefully coexist, while others (led by Magneto) believe war is coming, and the earth can hold only one advanced species at a time.  As they battle each other, the future of mutant-human relations- and billions of lives- may hang in the balance.  Who will prevail?

Suspenseful, thought-provoking, and featuring an all-star cast, there's a lot of good in X-men.  Joining the aforementioned mutant leaders are comic mainstays like Wolverine, Cyclops, Storm, Rogue, Jean Grey, Mystique, and Sabertooth- some of whom would feature strongly the next 6 X-men flicks.  It wasn't all golden, though- the movie felt both too rushed (at 90 minutes) and too long (due to slow periods), the effects weren't top notch (CG has come a long way in 15 years), and some dialogue was cheesy.  All told, it wasn't a bad first effort, but I'm glad subsequent entries improved upon the first.

Rating: B-

The Courtship of Princess Leia (Dave Wolverton)

I've been reading some mentally heavy, academic works recently . . . and I needed a break.  Something mindless.  The Courtship of Princess Leia fit the bill.  It's the story of how Leia married Han Solo, in essence.  But before she said "I do," Prince Isolder of the Hapes Consortium offered the riches of his worlds for her hand, and Han kidnapped Leia to prevent her from taking a look at the handsome man's offerings.  He took her to Dathomir, a planet he won in a sabacc game, which turns out to be populated by the Nightsisters- a band of force-wielding witches who enslave men and ride rancors.  Hilarity ensues . . . unintentionally.

As with other works since Disney purchased the brand, this book is no longer 'canon' in the Star Wars universe.  I thought I'd read it anyway to recapture the magic I felt 20 years ago, when I first perused its pages.  Turns out, my memory has dimmed and/or my tastes changed much since that time.  Parts were entertaining, but inexplicable plot points, horrible dialogue, and an overly ridiculous story ultimately led me to put this down halfway through.  I could see a young boy enjoying this . . . but maybe I should leave the past in the past, and not re-read the treasures of my teenage years.

Rating: C-