2014 – Justin Daniel

This is a list of the books I read in 2014. All the reviews were written in 2014 and are archived on this site in (roughly) the order I read them in.

Book Reviews 2014

The Lord of the Rings, The Two Towers, J.R.R Tolkien

September 25, 20192014 / Book ReviewsI actually finished this book last week, but have yet to write a review for it. It seems to be a trend that I procrastinate everything from school work to book reviews, but yet I keep saying: better late than never! This book delves into the fantasy world of Middle Earth where, as most of you know from the polarizing movie trilogy, Frodo is on a quest to destroy the one ring of power in the fires of Mt. Doom. As I said in the last review on the Fellowship of the Ring, the plot synopsis is not necessary because of how intricately tied our culture has become to this story. Much of what I said about the Fellowship applies here: the text is lush and eloquently written. It is almost like enjoying a rich desert that melts in your mouth as you are able to taste the smallest details in the concoction. It really is a pleasant read. But it is not always the most understandable read. Many of the words are archaic in nature and perhaps even a little alienating because of Tolkien’s English heritage. Either way, I was able to fall in love easily with the main characters because of how relatable they are. Frodo has been given this enormous task to deliver the ring to Mt. Doom but the irony here is he is only a halfling. He is not even tall enough to blend in with an orc. But the beauty behind this is no matter how big the task is, not only does he accept it’s challenge but he makes huge strides in finishing his goal; not without the one and only Sam. Sam tries his hardest to protect his master, even if he stumbles a little on the way and does more harm than good. Nevertheless, his courage to put his master’s well-being before his own is admirable, and he does it without compromising the weight of his master’s mission. It would be easy to help Frodo carry the ring, but Frodo has been tasked with this undertaking, not Sam and he cannot interfere no matter how much he might want to when he see’s Frodo’s burden. One more side note: the actor that portrayed Gollum did such a superb job when matching his performance to the standard of the book. It is actually kind of freaky how well he played that out. As I have said before, I understand now how these books have become enshrined in our culture fifty years after they were written. The story is excellent and the detail is impeccable. I look forward to finishing the trilogy this week! [...]

Titan: The Life of John D. Rockefeller, Ron Chernow

September 25, 20192014 / Book ReviewsRon Chernow is one of my most favorite biographers. I read his biography on George Washington that was captivating and interesting. I’ve also gotten about 3/4 the way through his biography on Alexander Hamilton, constructed with equal precision and acclaim. One of Chernow’s first biographies was a look at one of America’s most controversial figures: John D. Rockefeller. Many have heard of Rockefeller (particularly because “Rockefeller Center” in New York City bears his name), but few are inclined to know the details that make this man intriguing and contentious. Succinctly, John was an oil man. At the height of his wealth in the early 1900’s, he had nearly a billion dollars to his name (which would equate to several billion dollars in today’s economy). But how he got here is a matter of debate. John started buying property and soon had a booming business in the oil industry. He made an agreement with the rail companies that boosted his success enormously. Essentially, he would choose a particular train company that would ship his oil in exchange for extensive price cuts to the cost of shipping. It seems like a win-win: Rockefeller’s oil gets delivered for cheap and the train companies get the business of a burgeoning industry on the cusp of a huge breakthrough. This, of course, is illegal now and should have been back then: but that is not the extent of his controversy. We must imagine in this time, there are no large corporations like “Wal-Mart.” It was literally the wild west when it comes to big business, and the laws concerning these businesses were largely unregulated. For example, a company cannot buy up all his competition because that hurts the market: one company is in control of the price and can do with it what he wants. Back in Rockefeller’s time, this was certainly legal but the morality of it was questionable. However, Rockefeller indeed did buy up all his competition. Even when legislation was passed to stop this practice, he developed a system where a third party would represent the company but be passed as an individual company. This was called a “trust.” Rockefeller literally had total control over the oil industry in America. For years, his corporation, “Standard Oil,” reigned king in the oil business, squelching competitors who would try the open market. But in all his controversy, Rockefeller is known for something else: philanthropy. Growing up in wake of the Second Great Awakening, Rockefeller was a spiritual man who generously gave away millions of dollars to schools, foundations, organizations, churches etc. When antitrust laws were passed and Standard Oil was disassembled from the inside out, Rockefeller enjoyed retirement with ease. He was able to live very comfortably for the rest of his life as his son dealt with Standard’s affairs for the remainder of the time it was a corporation. The breakup of Standard brings familiar names that our generation would recognize: ExxonMobile, Chevron, Texaco, and BP. By the end of this book, Rockefeller dies in the last pages and I felt as if I had lost a friend I had grown to know intimately. For all his controversy, there is no doubt that Rockefeller possessed an immense character of giving that is often shrouded in dispute of his immoral practices as an executive. In any case, the legacy of John D. Rockefeller continues on, whether it be in the form of the beautiful Rockefeller Center in New York City, or a bygone era of complete control of the oil industry seen in the aftermath of the collapse of Standard Oil. [...]

Why We’re Not Emergent (By Two Guys Who Should Be), Kevin DeYoung and Ted Kluck

September 25, 20192014 / Book ReviewsKevin DeYoung is an interesting character in evangelical Christianity. Coming from a strong reformed tradition, he is turning heads by becoming involved in big projects with the Gospel Coalition. He considers himself “Young, Restless, and Reformed,” a movement that stems from millennial’s coming into the Church holding onto important tenants such as expository preaching and election. Interestingly enough, the early 2000’s produced a movement of evangelical Christians that tried to appeal to millennials by producing hip pastors with soul patches, fancy coffee drinks, and contemporary music. Most importantly, they embraced existentialism and shy away from strict doctrinal stances that seem to them an anachronism. This movement was called the “Emergent Church,” and for awhile they posed a great threat to Christian Orthodoxy. DeYoung partners with Ted Kluck to investigate this movement, what they believe (or don’t believe) and how it is effecting Evangelical Christianity. They admit it is a hard task to undertake. Perhaps this is because emergents are unequivocally mysterious about what they claim to believe in particularly on doctrinal issues. For example, no where can you read Brian McLaren’s stance on homosexuality. Is it right or is it wrong? Emergents thrive on ambiguity and embrace spirituality, not religion. They are big proponents of the social gospel: the thought that making a change in the world by doing is better than sitting in coffee shops debating theology. Theology and doctrine are the enemies to the emergent. What does it matter if you deny the trinity? What does it matter you deny the virgin birth? Shouldn’t Christians be getting out and showing the love of Jesus instead of sitting on their knowledge, their fat, obese intellect, and doing nothing for the world? DeYoung provides an interesting look at the Church at the very end of the book. He comments on the Churches from Revelation. These Churches were real at one time and had these problems he lists, but the metaphorical nature of the Church can help diagnose problems in our Churches today. He essentially breaks down a swing which is too extreme in both cases: in the first, churches are too intellectual and have little emotion, like the church at Ephesus who “lost first love.” On the other side, there are churches that are seemingly alive with emotion, but are dead in the way of knowledge, to which Christ responds, “I know all the things you do, and you have a reputation for being alive – but you are dead!” Both of these examples contribute to the widening divide between the stuffy churches of yesterday who are content with taking but not giving and the charismatic upheaval seen in recent years, particularly influenced by churches attempting to please millennials in a convoluted way to lull them back to the church, from the opposite spectrum. Fortunately, the most attended churches today are those who have: 1) a strong position on what truth is, and 2) doctrine and not emotionalism in the sermons. This is encouraging because remember, DeYoung wrote this book in the hay-day of the emergent church. What we have seen since then is a rapid disintegration of the threat of emergents. This is good news, but not all is good: complacency kills, as the Marine Corps preaches, and we need to be on guard and on the lookout for dangers that threaten the truthfulness of Christianity and seek to displace the authority of the Bible in exchange for popular belief. [...]

1984, George Orwell

September 25, 20192014 / Book Reviews1984 is a book about a near-future dystopian world where nothing is secret from the government. The theme of book is an illustration of what can happen in a totalitarian system of government, much like North Korea today. My impressions from this book are numerous so I will shed some insight onto a few areas that impacted me most. A large part of the book is dedicated to the travails of censorship. Winston Smith, the main protagonist, works in the “Ministry of Truth” which edits newspaper articles whenever the government changes it’s mind. For example, the nation Oceania has been at war with Eurasia for years, until the government decided that it was at war with Eastasia. Winston’s job is to go through all the previous articles written about the war with Eurasia and change it to Eastasia. I particularly enjoyed the ending (so if you haven’t read the book and would not like a spoiler.. stop reading!). Winston gets captured by the thought police and gets taken in for “retraining.” Here, the antagonist of the story tells Winston that in previous generations, the way to deal with people who did not conform to the government were just imprisoned. Ideologically, this did not correct the thinking of those people, but rather made it fester for years. Under the government in 1984, those who think counter to the government are subjected to torture until they relinquish to thinking that is aligned with the reigning powers. So Winston under goes a torture experience that is an allegory for the Soviet methods. One popular one was the phrase “2+2=5.” Apparently, the Soviets used this tactic to convince people that if the government said that 2+2=5, then that is how it is. Orwell also discusses the importance of the “war” efforts that were inherently fictitious. This is interesting because nationalism is a large theme in 1984. The purpose of the war efforts were to convince subjects to rally around an opposing force and thus propagate the reputation of the government. Lastly, the turning point at the end of the book was the denunciation of his love for Julia, an intimate mate whom he met. He was faced with a torture of facing his worst fear (rats) and betrayed her. This was the final straw in his re-education, showing that the one thing that he believed in was no longer important. Overall, Orwell’s book brings about several topics that are applicable in our society today: that of censorship, nationalism, etc. These reappear throughout history and will continue to impact our thoughts into the future. [...]

When We Were on Fire: A Memoir of Consuming Faith, Tangled Love, and Starting Over, Addie Zierman

September 24, 20192014 / Book ReviewsI think we’ve all been there: you spent too much time reading a book that you had so much hope for but didn’t really care for in the end. Well, while I was browsing Facebook one afternoon, I stumbled upon a blog written by Mrs. Zierman called, “How to Talk to an Evangelical” (http://addiezierman.com). This led me to her book, “When We Were on Fire” with that crazy long subtitle. It was only 7 dollars on Amazon, so I thought why not? The book is just as it says: a memoir of this lady’s life. It starts out as a person reminiscing about a typical 1990’s evangelical childhood, one that I can fully sympathize with: See You at the Pole Rally, Awana, Psalty that big blue Bible that sang songs, etc. She makes a few good points early on: how commercial Evangelicalism has become (or was), how you could order everything out of a Bible book store catalog among other things. But there was always a sense of cynicism towards Christianity in her thoughts: for example, at the beginning of each chapter there is a definition of an Evangelical term that is brutally misrepresented, like “born again” which traces itself back to John 3, and is not typically Evangelical but Biblical. As her life moves on, she talks about a love affair with a “missionary” boy, a boy (notice: not man) who wants her to be spiritual as “spiritual” as he is. She deals with again, some good points: the fact that sometimes people want to be seen as hyper-spiritual, even legalistic, when they are not authentic. After getting married to a man in college, she begins a downward slide into alcoholism and depression but returns to a “normal” life after months of therapy and begins to attend Church again after a long departure. Somethings I disagree with: 1) The consistent erroneous ecclesiology. Throughout the book, the Church is displayed in a negative light, most often from the hypocritical people inside the Church. She displays modern Evangelicals as consuming, hyper-spiritual, cliche Bible-thumpers who don’t care about people (in certain circles at least). Her view of the Church seems to have an emphasis on receiving. In one section, she says, “When the pastor begins his sermon, I page through the church bulletin, trying to get a sense of the church’s ministries. The flow of its resources and attention. I am looking, specifically, for what they have to offer us: Married, in our early twenties, without kids. I am looking for a kind of instant community. A kind of magic. I am looking for Our People- the ones who will become our dearest friends. The ones who will get us immediately the second we meet.” Obviously, this is the wrong motive of pursuing Church. Yes, community is essential to the Christian life. Yes, the Church does offer people all those things and more. But don’t for a second think that the primary purpose of the Church is to serve you. Equally as important is that you serve the Church. Notice there was no emphasis on the teaching, just what programs and ministries can serve you. Does that seem inconsistent? 2) The Church is two-fold. Firstly, it is the universal body of believers, those who are in Christ, who are brought into the kingdom of God and who live like brothers and sisters in that body. Secondly, the Church is the local body of believers that engage in community and fellowship. True, the Church doesn’t always have to be in a “building” per say, but the idea that the body of Christ is more important than the Church is not accurate: they are both important. The idea one gets when reading through some of the things Mr. Zierman thinks about the Church displays, again, a false eccelisiology: “‘But we are the Church,’ Andrew said. This is one of his favorite biblical truths, this idea of church as a moveable feast, an ever-present community-church not as a place you go to, with walls and crosses and long rows of pews, but as something that happens spontaneously when two or three Christians are gathered together in one location.” If that was true, then why go to Church at all when you can just meet with believers outside of the institution? Jesus said “Love your wife as I have loved the Church,” therefore it is important and we should note the distinction of the two. 3) At the end, she finds a Church to her liking. She describes it: “At Grace Community Church, they are raising money to start a counseling center, so they can help those who cannot afford therapy get to the bottom of their bottomless darkness… They are building wells so that clean water flows from the dry, cracked earth. They are providing oil changes to single mothers, free of charge. They are looking at the world that is shifting, these people in this church. They are clunking along the best they can, trying their damnedest to shift alongside it.” This description is void of things that should be more primary: how is the teaching? What small groups are available? What doctrinal positions do they hold to? This brings me to my next point: While I think books like Amos detail the horrors of when Israel failed to be socially minded, on the flip-side, when the Church is only socially minded, it will never represent the true Gospel. The social Gospel is noble: feeding the homeless, being active in the community, all things that I am 100% for. But when we bypass doctrine and theology for love, we miss an essential part of the Gospel. Dr. John MacArthur said, “We all know how young people are interested in social justice, and how Christianity…even evangelical Christianity non-Charismatic has turned away from the gospel. Why has it turned away from the gospel? If you go to a place that’s been through a difficult time, you go to New Orleans after a hurricane, or whatever, and you start reaching out to people, if you go and sit them down and say, “Let me tell you why you need to come to Jesus Christ because you’re a sinner,” and you go through the gospel. What kind of reception are you going to get? You’ll probably going to run out of the house, it’s going to be very difficult, people aren’t going to buy in. But show up with food, show up with clothes, they will love you. They will embrace you and say you’re doing this in the name of Jesus. That kind of stuff is easy.” I could say more but I think that is enough. Most disappointing for me, was the book went through this long process to describe how heartbreaking the Church was for this woman and in the end, it didn’t seem like anything was better. It seemed like there was still bitterness for past hurts and not enough emphasis on what is truly important in the Church. [...]