2016 – Justin Daniel

This is a list of the books I read in 2016. All the reviews were written in 2016 and are archived on this site in (roughly) the order I read them in.

Book Reviews 2016

Lincoln: A Very Short Introduction, Allen C. Guelzo

January 14, 20202016Abraham Lincoln is considered one of the greatest, if not the greatest, Presidents in the history of the United States. For my Civil War class, I had to read this book. While some biographies of Lincoln stretch hundreds of pages, the goal of this particular book was not an exhaustive look at Lincoln’s life, but rather a short glimpse at his thoughts and motivations. Dr. Guelzo mentions that there is very little evidence from Lincoln, as he did not keep a diary as most people did in that day. Therefore, the evidence that we do have come in the form of letters and speeches. This complicates things and makes Lincoln a controversial figure in some respects. Nonetheless, this little book is packed with pertinent information. For one, I thought it was interesting to see Lincoln’s motivation behind the slavery issue. Dr. Guelzo says that Lincoln got a job early in his life that took him up the Mississippi River to New Orleans. There, he would have seen all the travesties and ugliness of slavery first hand. I also thought it was interesting that Lincoln never had formal education beyond what little grade school he finished. He was a farmer, and when he wanted to become a lawyer, he read books on law and passed the bar. Which leads to the next point which is very interesting as well: leaders ARE readers. Lincoln was scolded for not doing work and instead, reading. He was a vociferous reader and those who diminish this skill need to take a hard look at those who are successful in history. Also of note was Lincoln’s debates again Stephen Douglas. Douglas, at the time, was one of the greatest politicians of his day. Lincoln debated Douglas and while he lost the nomination, he did put himself out there as a successful orator. When the Presidential race pinned Democrat candidate Douglas against the newly formed Republican party candidate Lincoln, Lincoln won. Lincoln then led the United States through the most bloody war the nation has ever seen: the Civil War. Lincoln was an able Commander in Chief and sought, at first, to hold the Union together. It is unclear whether he thought that emancipation was the most pressing issue at this juncture. My personal thoughts make me want to believe that Lincoln first needed the Union to be unified before addressing the emancipation issue; Lincoln’s lack of action is sometimes taken as a sign that he did not care about emancipation, but I find the evidence for this lacking. Through a terrible eastern campaign, Lincoln weathered equally terrible Generals, including one George McClellan who was a pro-slavery Democrat fighting for the Union. When General Grant took Vicksburg, he was put in charge of the Army of the Potomac and, with the help of General William Sherman, eventually crushed General Lee to end the Civil War. As most know, Lincoln was tragically killed soon after. Lincoln is a complicated President. He was able to hold on to the ultimate goal of keeping the Union together. But his complacency with emancipation somewhat tarnishes his legacy. This may or may not be an adequate analysis. But it’s called a very short introduction for a reason. I definitely recommend this book for someone who wants to cut their teeth on the basics of the Civil War. [...]

The Mathews Men: Seven Brothers and the War Against Hitler’s U-boats, William Geroux

January 14, 20202016Mathews County is located in Virginia, and in order to find it, you have to want to go there. Farmers still leave trucks full of produce out on the side of the road where you can pay for fresh vegetables and fruits on the honor system. There is just a two lane road that runs through the central part of the city, where the courthouse and other administrative buildings lay. It hasn’t changed much since the 1940’s, where the majority of men from Mathew’s County men were mariners who worked on ships run by the Merchant Marines. And in these few details lies a story that is inextricably linked to the greatest conflict the world has ever known and how a family from this backwoods place worked to fight against the evil Nazi regime. One of the most overlooked details of World War II was the Atlantic war where ships carrying supplies to Europe from America were systematically gunned down in the Atlantic Ocean. America was neutral until 1942 when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, but under Roosevelt, they supported the Allies in the East by shipping weapons, supplies, and ammunition to England and France. Obviously, Hitler couldn’t stand for this and while angering the Americans might lead to them declaring war on Germany, Hitler thought this inevitable; therefore, he waged a fierce war for the German U-boats (the precursor to the submarine) to take down ships of the Merchant Marine’s on their trek to Europe. At the beginning of this engagement, German U-boats were tasked with destroying ships around Europe. But soon, their focus spread to the American mainland. As early as 1942 when Hitler declared war on America, U-boats were routinely seen off the coast of North and South Carolina, New York, New Jersey, and Rhode Island. The Merchant Marine ships were not equipped with any sort of defensive capabilities and were pretty much sitting ducks. Hundreds of ships were lost in 1942 to U-boat attacks. This book follows seven brothers (as the title suggests) from Mathew’s County as they risked their lives to continue the supply chain to Europe. What emerges is a story of heroism and courage in the face of imminent danger. Most of the young men joined the Merchant Marines when they came of age. And although they were dodging bullets from downrange, their sacrifice is not to be overlooked. The dangerous waters of the Atlantic produced a ship graveyard that is still being studied today. In 1943, the Navy began assigning groups of ships to protect the assets crossing the sea. While I don’t have the exact statistic, ship casualties went from around 800 in 1942 to around 300 in 1943 as the government began to deal with the growing crisis. After the European war ended, ships were diverted to the Pacific to carry supplies for the war against the Japanese, and while the dangers of U-boats passed, the Merchant Marines never stopped. A quote I recently read is from Alexander the Great, where he is purported to have said, “My logisticians are a humorless lot… they know if my campaign fails, they are the first ones I will slay.” Alexander understood the importance of logistics in the war effort. So too we have to recognize that the Merchant Marines played an integral part of the American military machine in World War II, no matter how un-sexy it is. It’s much more interesting to read about Easy Company in the European theater or the Marines on the island hopping campaign. But without the critical supplies from people like the Mathew’s men, there would be little success on the battlefield. So tip your hats and kiss a logistician the next time you see them and thank them for making things work. [...]

Total Truth: Liberating Christianity from Its Cultural Captivity, Nancy Pearcey (2016)

October 10, 20192016I’m no stranger to Nancy Pearcey. In fact, I’ve been a keen follower of her since my friend and fellow blogger, Ron, introduced me to this book back in 2014. Since then, I’ve read Saving Leonardo, Total Truth (2014 review), and most recently, Finding Truth. This is my second read through of Total Truth, but the refresher is a breath of fresh air. Here are some thoughts: Total Truth is about culture. It’s about worldview. We go to our jobs thinking we can’t make a difference because we’re not in “real” ministry. But of course, this is a lie we tell ourselves. Pearcey, being influenced strongly by the ministry of Francis Schaeffer, understands that worldview is key to unlocking the potential for people to live out their faith in their boring, mundane, non-ministry jobs. In fact, one of the biggest problems Christians face today is not that we are not Christians in our workplaces, but that we do not see the world in our work space through the lens of a Christian worldview. What I mean is that politicians, lawyers, doctors, and others all play a crucial role in impacting those around us. We are not merely a Christian on Sunday mornings, but rather our faith should play an integral part in every facet of our lives. The problem is we tend to know what we believe but we understand less how that should play out in realms outside of Church. The premise to Pearcey’s book lays in a fact/value splits. Facts, of course, are things that are indisputable. For example, the sky is blue is public and logical fact. Values, on the other hand, are private and depend on who you’re talking to. For example, I like chocolate ice cream; notice that this is dependant upon whom this sentence is coming from. Obviously not all people like chocolate ice cream. Further, it would be foolish to assume that everyone around you feels the same way so this value is more privatized than what is factual. This is something that dominates our thinking without realizing it. Take for example this dichotomy when you’re speaking about Christianity: Christianity is relegated to the “lower story” (as Pearcey puts it) because not everyone is a Christian. But the big problem with this is that value based opinions, if you will, make the assumption that it’s not necessarily true for everyone. We go to our workplaces everyday thinking that we don’t want to offend anyone because of our preference for chocolate ice cream (to continue the use of the analogy). The fallacy is that Christianity is not merely a private value, but rather a fact. It’s truth that should permeate in every facet of our lives. I’ve spoken about Francis Schaeffer before, and I like what he said in “How Should We Then Live“: a worldview is predicated on the presuppositions you believe about the world. Pearcey’s main objective in part 1 of this book is how Christians can formulate a cohesive Christian worldview that does not commit the mistake of placing it underneath the value story of the fact/value split. In part 2, Pearcey delves deep into the most dominant worldview of our time and how to combat it; that is, evolution. She provides several great examples of how the evolutionist worldview fails in light of both scientific and worldview perspectives. In part 3, Pearcey examines how we came to be where we are in Evangelical America. I thought, as I mentioned in my previous review, that this is the weakest section for me because I’ve studied a little bit about Church history and I would like to challenge some of the claims. For the most part however, I think Pearcey is spot on. Lastly, Pearcey explains how to live it out in the world in part 4. This is a great book for those looking for an introduction to philosophy and how it applies to us today. I really enjoyed Finding Truth because Pearcey builds on some of these thoughts and develops an actual system for worldview evangelism. The next logical step after Total Truth is Finding Truth I believe. Both are essential books for Christians I think. [...]

The Oxford History of the French Revolution, William Doyle

January 14, 20202016July 14th is not just the day this post was written. It marks a momentous event in the history of France: the storming of the Bastille. Known as “Bastille Day” in France, this event was in conjunction with perhaps the most important event (to some historians at least) in Western history: the French Revolution. I took a class on the French Revolution that just finished and I had to read this book for the class. While most are familiar with the basic storyline of the French Revolution, it was actually a much more convoluted event then people realize. Here are some thoughts: The introduction to the book must begin in the ancien regime (the monarchy and estate system of feudalism) and its construction. In France prior to 1789, the class system consisted of three different groups of people, or “estates.” The First Estate was the nobility. To be in this estate meant that you had a pedigree that allowed you to be there; meaning that you couldn’t become a nobel unless you had nobel blood flowing through your veins. The Second Estate was the clergy. Obviously, the clergy were a part of the Roman Catholic Church who played a dominant role in French society. The Third Estate was the peasantry. The thought behind social classes at this time was that God placed you in your class and the king on the throne. To break out of your lot in life was to defy God Himself. The way things turned into calamity is complex. Essentially, the first two estates were the most wealthy, but were exempt from taxes. The peasantry bore the brunt of the taxation for the entire country (which really defies logic if you ask me). Further, the peasantry found itself in an awkward position when the middle class, or the “bourgeoisie”, arose from the lawyers and doctors. They were wealthy, paid very high taxes, but were excluded from the nobility. Enter King Louis XVI. The King found himself embarrassed by his father’s failure in the Seven Years War. On top of that, the treasury was greatly diminished at the same time. To make up for the losses during the war, King Louis sent French troops to aid the American Revolution, also draining the treasury. King Louis also married the extremely unpopular Marie Antoinette. The palace at Versailles was an ornate system of pretension. When an unlucky (or providential depending on how you look at it) famine occurred, the people were up in arms against the fat king. There was a call for the Estates General which was a meeting of all three estates. In the meeting, the three estates would vote on various issues (this particular one was about taxation due to the dwindling treasury) but mostly the first two estates would team up to garner more votes than the peasantry. Since the peasantry consisted of about 93% of France at the time, they called for representation by numbers. Of course they were excluded for further negotiations. Relegated to a tennis court, the Third Estate and some from the Second gathered to proclaim the “Tennis Court Oath” where they ultimately would revolt against the nobility and the king. Things got out of hand quickly and it culminated in the storming of the Bastille. The Bastille was a prison and housed weapons and powder. By taking it, the people demonstrated they would not bow to a tyrannical government. By establishing a temporary government, work soon began on a constitution. The product of these talks was a constitution with a preamble called “The Declaration of the Rights of Man.” In later years, the government never could establish itself firmly. Problem after problem arose, with the whole continent of Europe threatening war at one point. The revolutionists actually won against their European brothers in the brief war with France. The revolution sought to undermine every monarchy in Europe and was seen as a grave threat that needed to be dealt with. There were a small number of pro-royalist peoples who wanted a parliamentary system with a King as the monarch as in England. A faction called the Jacobins who were anti-royalists called for the king to be put on trial instead. When he did go to trial, he was convicted and executed by the guillotine. Maximilien Robespierre ascended to a position of power and was paranoid of the various factions that sought to squash the revolution. In order to stop them, he organized the “Committee on Public Safety” and systematically began executing political enemies in the “Great Terror.” The bloodshed ended when Robespierre himself wanted to become dictator, and was sent to the guillotine himself; an ironic end to the man who instituted the Great Terror. The Revolution ended only when Napoleon ascended to the throne in the early 19th century. Here are some thoughts on the take-aways from the revolution: 1. France was highly influenced by the Enlightenment. Voltaire, Rousseau, and other Enlightenment thinkers really created the groundwork for revolution in France. The Enlightenment begins with the idea that man is essentially good, good enough to bestow upon him the ideals of liberty and equality. This blossomed into the ideals that closely aligned themselves with the revolution: that is, the natural order bestowed by God is actually not a natural order at all, if all men are equal and possess within themselves liberty. 2. The French Revolution began on the basis of the Enlightenment which was vastly different than other revolutions happening in Europe. In England, the English underwent what was called the “Bloodless Revolution.” But England’s revolution began on a basis that was influenced by the Reformation. One can understand the difference plainly when taking into consideration the “Great Terror” and political turmoil that surrounded France during the time of the revolution. Thousands lost their lives before the chaos ceased, and it only did when a dictator bent on subjugating all of Europe to the will of France ascended to the throne (Napoleon). 3. The revolution in France would go on to create a lasting legacy throughout the world. Indeed, every revolution since the French Revolution has been influenced by it. The upheaval of tyrannical governments where people are not content on letting themselves be ruled by that tyranny is somewhat of a mainstay in history post 1789. Thinking of all the revolutions that happened in the early 19th century in both Europe and Latin America and extending into the present with the Islamic coups (such as in Egypt some years ago), one can see what impact the French Revolution presented to many cultures since. The French Revolution was a defining moment in history and deserves to be studied. Unfortunately, it’s really complicated. This book has all these names and political parties that are very hard to understand if you’re not French or speak the language. The Girodans, the Jacobins, the Sans Culottes.. Try keeping them all separate from each other. Nonetheless, a good textbook for a worthy subject. [...]

Crazy Love: Overwhelmed by a Relentless God, Francis Chan

January 14, 20202016Chan begins the book as getting your mind right; it’s a review for those who may not know and a reminder for those who do of who God is and what the Gospel means. With this introduction, Chan dives into our response as Christians. Here is this God who loves us more than we comprehend and He asks certain things of us. He asks us to go unto all the nations and make disciples, preach the Gospel, and baptize. And yet, we have trouble reading our Bibles in our $300,000 homes with our two cars, iphones, and computers; we find it difficult to love on those less fortunate than ourselves and we would never even consider going somewhere where God has not blessed the people financially as He has in America. This is the critique of the American Church Chan is trying to point out. It’s not all about you, it’s all about God! His love for us demands a response in obedience to Him, which often times means going outside your comfort zone to love on others. This book is truly life changing. For me and I know for others. I appreciate Chan’s loving attitude toward his readers but also his gentle but firm rebuke of the kind of lives that we live. This is an excellent book I highly recommend! [...]