Today I drove past an interesting sight...

A cow was grazing in a beautiful, well-watered, pasture... but instead of enjoying the lush green grass in the pasture, the cow was reaching over the barbed wire fence, straining to try to eat some tree leaves on the other side of the fence.

I'm sure there was some reason... but I found it hilarious and illustrative.  God gives us so much and so many good blessings in our lives.  Often though, we hunger for what is outside the bounds of what God has given to us, instead of focusing on and enjoying what He has given to us.

"...Dwell in the land and enjoy safe pasture." -- Psalm 37:3b

Here are some recent book reviews.  For older reviews, see http://tim223.xanga.com/category/book-reviews/

What does the Bible really teach about homosexuality?  by Kevin DeYoung
This is a great book! ... for two reasons.  First, the tone is wonderfully gentle.  Second, it accurately exegetes all the relevant Bible passages about homosexuality (Genesis 1-2, 19, Leviticus 18,20, Romans 1, 1 Corinthians 6, 1 Timothy 1, etc), and shows that the traditional interpretation is the one that most accurately fits the Bible in its textual and cultural context.
Regarding the tone, the author is EXTREMELY respectful, irenic, gentle, and welcoming toward homosexuals, while carefully presenting accurate doctrine.  It briefly answers all the revisionist claims, such as that the prohibitions against homosexual behavior might be directed only against violence (not so, in context), or that the ancients didn't know about 'orientation' and loving monogamous same-sex relationships (on the contrary, they did know about it, even from the time of Plato, hundreds of years before the New Testament.
The book also has a great section answering objections, very gently but thoroughly.  Such as: "The Bible hardly ever mentions homosexuality", "Not that kind of homosexuality", "What about gluttony and divorce?", "The Church is supposed to be a place for broken people", "You're on the wrong side of history", "It's not fair", "The God I worship is a God of love", and "What about same-sex marriage?".
The book also helpfully differentiates between experiencing feelings of same-sex attraction, versus acting on those feelings by engaging in same-sex activity.
This is a good reference book or a good book to give to a homosexual person who is sincerely seeking the truth about what the Bible says.  It is short, and to-the-point.  Excellent.

 
Justification Reconsidered, by Stephen Westerholm
The author critiques the "New Perspective on Paul" (NPP), which over the past 50 years or so has claimed that Paul (author of much of the New Testament of the Bible) when speaking of being "justified by faith" was not concerned with how people could find gr huace and mercy individually for their sins and acquire individual forgiveness, but instead how people (such as Gentiles) could be enter into the "covenant family of God" and acquire the covenant blessings. NPP claims that Paul's Pharisaical and Judaizer colleagues were not teaching 'salvation-by-works' but rather were teaching 'Gentiles-cannot-participate'... and NPP claims that justification is not the immediate announcement that we have been given "righteous"(innocent,holy) legal status before God, but instead NPP claims there is a temporary justification based on our faith which allows participation in the "covenant", then a final "eschatological justification" based on our works which determines whether we enter heaven or hell.  Thus NPP muddies the difference between justification and sanctification, and ends up basically teaching that we are justified by our works.
Westerholm step-by-step and very politely demolishes the NPP claims, going through 1 Thessalonians, 1&2 Corinthians, Galatians, and then Romans, and showing that Paul was indeed concerned about "righteous" as referring to the moral quality opposed to sinfulness (not just the legal status of being "vindicated in court")... Westerholm goes through all the relevant passages, especially Romans, and shows that the NPP claims don't fit the text and context.   Westerholm is gracious to the NPP scholars (N.T.Wright, James Dunn, E.P.Sanders, Krister Stendahl, Douglas Campbell, etc) and points out that many of their applications are still useful and correct (such as the fact that Paul's "salvation by faith" teaching breaks down racial and ethnic barriers to the gospel) despite their doctrine being so wrong. It's a little dense sometimes, but worth reading to the end.

 
The Tyranny of Experts, by Willaim Easterly
In this book the author makes the case that most "development" efforts (aid, relief, etc to poor countries) impose plans made by a small group of 'experts', which end up trampling the actual rights of the poor.  For example, some UN or World Bank group decided that some grand project should be enacted in order to receive aid... the local autocratic dictator of the poor country enforces this by driving out the locals at gunpoint (as actually happened in 2010 in Mubende district in Uganda, for a World Bank-sponsored forestry project - 20000 farmers were evicted).
The author makes the further case that true economic improvement of a nation, or a region, or a city, happens by individuals seeking to improve their own family's situation, by having the freedom to jump into whatever business opportunity they see around them.
This is an excellent, powerful, book... somewhat depressing and somewhat pedantic at times, but with a powerful case.  This would be excellent reading for a discussion group for people who work in development environments in western nations.
The book is generally secular.  Thus it misses out on the fact that the concepts of the rights of the poor only makes sense if they are in fact 'endowed by their creator with' those rights.  The spread of the Gospel would (I think) be the most effective way to help a poor country in a long-term sense.  However, Easterly's points are also well-made.

 
Competent to Counsel, by Jay Adams
The thesis of this book is that you don't need specialized academic training in counseling (i.e. studying Freudian and Rogerian counseling techniques) to be a good counselor.  (Indeed, these approaches typically don't help people,dingfrom what he said.)  Instead, anyone (especially a pastor) who knows the Bible well and is willing to speak the (sometimes hard) truth in love to people can be 'competent to counsel'.  He tells of his own and other pastors' experiences, and shares a lot of techniques.  The main point is getting people to admit their problems, take responsibility, and really want to change (instead of merely considering that they are 'mentally ill', as in, under the influence of something they have no control over).  Then, they can take steps to change the bad habits in their lives.  He speaks of "nouthetic" counseling, which comes from the Greek word "to warn, to admonish".
Nouthetic counselors can counsel both Christian and nonChristian people,... but if I remember correctly, the author correctly implies that counseling of Christians has a special extra success factor. It is important for people to realize how God sees them, and agree with God's perspective (sinners in need of a Savior)... once they see this and come to believe in Jesus Christ they can seek to overcome sinful habits with the power of God's spirit.
This book is filled with practical advice, and is highly recommended to read and consider.  However, it is EXTREMELY politically-incorrect, in many ways, both in the discussion of certain maladies (gender dysphoria and homosexuality are no longer considered undesirable deviations by secular mainstream psychologists/counselors), and in the method of counseling (he advocates a little bit of listening and asking probing questions, then advancing practical steps to solve the relationship or other problems, beginning even as soon as the first session, in sending home "homework" / practice steps for the client to do before the next session).  If a client cannot be helped in 8 sessions or so (often even less), there is likely something that they are hiding or unwilling to let go of, which means that they cannot overcome their symptomatic problems.
This book is 30 or 40 years old.  One thing I would wish for is a modern edition, updated with knowledge as of 2016, especially for today's hot issues (including research and anecdotes from Mark Yarhouse, Sam Allberry, Wesley Hill, Rosaria Butterfield, etc).

Here are four recent book reviews.  (Visit this link for all my book reviews http://tim223.xanga.com/category/book-reviews/ )

The Art of Neighboring, by Jay Pathak and Dave Runyon
This is a great book, about reaching out to build friendships with neighbors, and ultimately show not only the love of Christ to them, but possibly also eventually share the specific message (gospel) of Christ with them too.  The book points out that we often don't know our neighbors.  It shares the importance of knowing them, and provides practical ideas for getting to know them.  It talks a lot about our attitude... loving, respectful, not arrogant (willing to ask/receive help from neighbors)...  How to overcome fear... etc.  It has a lot of stories from their own experiences in Denver. It also has good advice for relationships in general, such as their chapters on establishing boundaries, and forgiveness, and focusing on specific 'people of peace', etc.  Interesting ideas for group neighborhood fellowship: outdoor movie nights, picnics, block parties.  Recommended book!

True Love Dates, by Debra Fileta
This is a fairly typical Christian dating advice book.  It gives all the standard and common-sense (if sometimes cliche) Christian dating & relationships advice.  She organizes her points as follows: 1. Date inward (get to know yourself), 2. Date outward (get to know other people), and 3. Date upward (cultivate your relationship with Jesus Christ).  Point #1 was the most unusual... she recommends spending plenty of time, money, energy, effort, etc in getting to know oneself.  She has a section in chapter 12 called "Jesus can't be your boyfriend" in which she inveighs against the commonly-given Christian advice that Jesus ought to satisfy all romantic longings.  However, she tends to get very close to doling out that same advice herself, in many places.  It is a hard line to walk correctly, because she's right - God did design most people for marriage relationships, but marriage will never ultimately satisfy.  Overall I partially recommend this book... it is fairly good and might be helpful to some people, especially those who have not read other Christian relationship books.

Rid of My Disgrace, by Justin and Lindsey Holcomb
This book is about sexual assault, and in particular a Christian counseling response to it.  It starts by giving stats/etc about sexual assault (and helping victims to name/recognize it for what it was), then spends several chapters talking about the shame, guilt, disgrace, etc that victims usually feel, including real life stories.  Then there are some chapters at the end about God's grace as shown in the Old Testament and New Testament.  Overall this is a good, balanced, book (including both the psychological/counseling perspective and the Biblical perspective).  I think this might be worth using as a discussion starter in counseling someone who has been hurt.  Here's an excerpt from the chapter called "Mandy's Story."  " [7 years afterward]....I began to see the fullness of the evil done against me.  Progressively, as the magnitude of the evil grew in my awareness, it was amazing for me to realize that God is even bigger. .... Following Him through that dark valley and resting in His real promises rather than my own ideas became the true healing that I needed.  I came to know the true God, sovereign over all, who is ultimately good.  And I was his daughter, cherished and loved by him even in the midst of being raped.  When I reached that point, my heart was soft toward God, and I asked him what else he had for me.  I remember driving to work saying, "Is there more, here?" And that's when it hit me.  I saw their faces.  I saw the men who raped me and felt a surprising compassion towards them.  I began to cry out for them, "God save them." Just as I was an enemy of God in need of reconciliation, so they need to be reconciled by the blood of Christ.  I wept for them for quite a while and still often find myself tearing up on their behalf, wishing that I could see them face-to-face and tell them of a great God who is bigger than their harmful acts of violence, who loves them to the point of crushing his own Son to deliver them from death.  This forgiveness was a miracle.  I have found freedom in loving them with the love of Christ.  My anger, bitterness, resentment, escape, numbness, denial, self-pity, or any other response is not capable of removing their sin.  Nothing but the blood of Christ will pay their debt.  And so I can look back on that night, recognizing the fullness of the pain God counted me worthy to suffer, and also to look on it with the joy of knowing my God in a more intimate and magnificent way.  It has become a mark of God's help in my life, a place where he ordained healing for me ......."

Shame Interrupted, by Edward Welch
This is a fascinating book.  It is a thorough, 300-page, study of shame (and honor & healing).  What is shame?  (there are several types... due to our sin or due to our weakness/inadequacy... foisted upon us by others or imposed upon ourselves... etc)  Why do we feel it?  What are the sources?  And especially, how did/does God address and 'interrupt' and heal our shame, in various different ways, throughout the Bible?  Very unusual book in terms of writing style, but worth reading, perhaps even studying in a group together.  It is not just for counselors or counselees... I think everyone could benefit.
Quote: (p. 151-2)
"You have known fractures and enmity in relationships, and sometimes you feel helpless to do anything about them.  At other times you don't want to do anything about them.  But if you have known God's power in such a way that you, an outcast, have been accepted, you will want to invite others to peace with God and peace with other people.
"Peacemakers renounce violence and vigilante strategies. They renounce them even at the level of their imaginations. They don't wish evil on others in private but play nice in public.  It sounds impossible, especially if you have had an enemy.  But it makes complete sense when you remember that you were an outsider and an enemy when Jesus brought you in and said, "Peace to you."
"How you actually function as a peacemaker is not always easy to determine.  But we know this: shamed people feel powerless, and what could be more powerful than being an agent of peace in the midst of war?  What could be more powerful than disarming someone with love?  Peacemaking is, indeed, an honorable profession.
"If anyone knows shame, it is the wife of a cocaine addict. Her husband chose a drug over her. A drug - not even another human being. Now add the accessories of betrayal- the lies, empty promises, lost jobs, mysterious disappearances of her jewelry, all done in full view of family and friends. Peace seemed impossible, but she knew God's peace and she always looked for opportunities to express it.
"After a few months of his sobriety, she had a sense that he had gotten high, so she asked him about it.  Apparently, he had made some changes because this time he told her the truth, even though he knew it might cost him what was left of his marriage. 
"He could never have predicted her response: 'What will we do about this?'
"'We!' Peacemakers pursue unity in relationships. They think in terms of 'we', not only 'you.'
"It was the last time he got high, and that was ten years ago.
"Peacemaking is a powerful and honorable profession, indeed.
"Yet peacemakers are not always successful. Neither peacemaking in general nor a kingdom lifestyle in general will always win you points with others. In other words, the way of honor is not by expert peacemaking but by being connected to the King.  ......."

This section of Scripture provides a fascinating answer.  My comments are below.

Matthew 20:1-16
"For the kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out early in the morning to hire laborers for his vineyard.
When he had agreed with the laborers for a denarius for the day, he sent them into his vineyard.
And he went out about the third hour and saw others standing idle in the market place; and to those he said, 'You also go into the vineyard, and whatever is right I will give you.' And so they went.
Again he went out about the sixth and the ninth hour, and did the same thing.
And about the eleventh hour he went out and found others standing around; and he said to them, 'Why have you been standing here idle all day long?'
They said to him, 'Because no one hired us.' He said to them, 'You go into the vineyard too.'
When evening came, the owner of the vineyard said to his foreman, 'Call the laborers and pay them their wages, beginning with the last group to the first.'
When those hired about the eleventh hour came, each one received a denarius.
When those hired first came, they thought that they would receive more; but each of them also received a denarius.
When they received it, they grumbled at the landowner, saying, 'These last men have worked only one hour, and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden and the scorching heat of the day.'
But he answered and said to one of them, 'Friend, I am doing you no wrong; did you not agree with me for a denarius?
'Take what is yours and go, but I wish to give to this last man the same as to you.
'Is it not lawful for me to do what I wish with what is my own? Or is your eye envious because I am generous?'
So the last shall be first, and the first last."

 
According to Jesus, God is not "fair"... He is far more generous than that.

On Judgment Day, no one will be able to accuse God of treating them worse than they deserve.  But millions of us will attest that God has treated us far better than we deserve!

I recently saw a claim: "Allahu Akbar = How Great Thou Art".

The speaker was claiming that it was hypocritical for Christians to critize Muslims for saying the former, when they themselves say the latter, since the meaning is basically identical.

However, upon deeper examination, this claim falls apart, and in the process reveals a powerful difference between Islam and Christianity.

"Allahu Akbar" literally means, "God is greater" or "God is the greatest".
(A closer Christian equivalent would be "Our God Reigns", but the philosophical nuances are not identical to that song either.)

Basically, when a Muslim shouts "Allahu Akbar," he is saying that Allah (the Arabic word for God) is not, cannot, and never will be 'sullied' by limitations or weaknesses, especially human limitations and weaknesses.  If he hears a suggestion that Allah might be forgetful, or weak, or tired, or needing to use the bathroom, etc, he reacts with "Allahu Akbar", that is, "Allah is above those embarassing human limitations... Allah is greater than all."

In fact, going even farther, Muslim theologians teach that Allah is not only 'above' human limitations, but 'above' human description... He is inherently un-knowable.  He is so completely transcendent that it is impossible for we humans to know Him... his true nature, essence, character.  Allah has many names in the Quran, which describe his attributes (mercy, justice, etc).... but according to Muslim theologians, we cannot say that the word means the same thing when applied to Allah that it normally means when applied to another human.  Thus Islam cannot say what Allah is, it can only say what He is not.  His attributes are "not He nor are they other than He" (Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Karim al-Shahrastani, commenting on al-Ash'ari).  It is "impossible for them to know Him" (Al-Ghazali).

In particular, Allah (as the Quran describes Him) would never limit himself by binding himself to keep His own promises... Allah would never stoop down to rescue a human being if it meant He Himself would get hurt or pained in the process...  The Quran talks about Allah's "love", but Allah only loves those who are righteous... Allah does not love sinners.  Allah's "love" in the Quran is NOT self-sacrificial in any way.  It is broadly "beneficent", but it is not the love which would sacrifice oneself to help the beloved.

In contrast, the God of the Bible is a God who willingly "emptied Himself of"/"laid aside" His privileges, stooped down, and was willing to be born as a dirty human, subject to tiredness, sickness, thirst, hunger, and the need to use the bathroom.

The Muslim is rightly shocked by this... it is a tremendously shocking action for God to take.

Quoting from the link below, "The Bible on the other hand presents us with a God who suffers because of his disobedient people. He is grieved, he is angered. The prophets of Israel reveal him as a wounded lover, a husband who feels the pain of betrayal because of his unfaithful wife, a father whose heart is broken because of his rebellious children."

As the song "How Great Thou Art" puts it:

And when I think that God, his Son not sparing,
Sent him to die, I scarce can take it in,
That on the cross, my burden gladly bearing,
He bled and died to take away my sin.

What kind of God is this?  A God who loves sinners?  Who "loves" them not merely in the sense of extending vague beneficence to them, but in the sense of "seeking them out", willing to "die in their place"??

This is the God of the Bible.  A God of shocking, embarrassingly-strong, outrageous, self-sacrificial love.

"Allahu Akbar" does NOT equal "How Great Thou Art".  The Allah of the Quran is weaker, not greater, than the God of the Bible... the former stands aloof and is unable to stoop down to get involved in the lives of us sinners.  The latter proved His willingness to rescue us at huge personal cost and heartbreak, to demonstrate His real love for us.

"How Great Thou Art."

For more about this, please see:
http://www.answering-islam.org/God/character.html
http://www.answering-islam.org/Hahn/god_his_word_and_the_quran.htm
http://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/Schlorff/schlorff1_t.html

(Visit this link for all my book reviews http://tim223.xanga.com/category/book-reviews/ )

Why God Calls Us To Dangerous Places, by Kate McCord
This is a beautiful, thought-provoking book, interwoven with stories from her experiences of 9 years in Afghanistan.  Why do we go (or support those who go)?  Primarily, because God loves those people, and His love begins to transform us so that we begin to love them too.  She has great insights about loss, PTSD, ministry burnout, etc... great insights on how to rest in God and be at peace when all around you comes crashing down, when your friends die (or are murdered), when you are threatened, etc.  When terrorists plot to attack us and do attack us, may our heart be that described in this book.  So far opposite from "let's nuke them all", let our heart instead be, "Who will go to tell them about the love of Jesus?"  See also my previous review of her (excellent) book "In the Land of Blue Burqas".

The 5 Love Languages, by Gary Chapman
You've probably heard of this book, even if you haven't read it.  I finally got around to reading it.  I was afraid that it was going to be oversimplistic... but it was not.  His main point is that people experience 'feeling loved' in very different ways (words of affirmation, acts of service, receiving gifts, quality time, and physical touch), and that husbands and wives need to learn how to speak the other's love language.  He explains how he 'discovered' each one by various conversations with his clients (he is a professional counselor).  He includes lots of stories, including about those whose marriages were falling apart.  He is a Christian, but keeps most of the book 'generic' and secular... until the last chapter or so, when he explains about Christ's love.  Excellent, worth reading, overall.

The Secret Thoughts of an Unlikely Convert, by Rosaria Champagne Butterfield
This is the true story of how a very liberal and atheistic woman found Christ.  She explains her journey into identifying as a lesbian, and her journey to become an English professor at Syracuse University, teaching Gay and Lesbian Studies.  She happened to become connected with a caring Christian, who took the time to invite her to dialog regularly about matters of faith over dinner with himself and his wife.  Through this friendship, she reevaluated Christ and the Bible, and eventually came to believe in Christ.  This began to massively change her lifestyle, as she chronicles.  Later in her life, she became married, became an adoptive/foster mom, and homeschooled her children.  This is a beautiful, well-written, testimony... well worth reading.

The Verbally Abusive Relationship, by Patricia Evans
This book discusses relationships (primarily husband-wife) where one person (typically, but not always, the husband) verbally abuses the other person.  Most of the book is focused on description (and true stories).  She categories all people as holding to either a "Power-over" mindset or a "Personal power" mindset, which is rather simplistic, but there is some value in the distinction.  (The "Power-over" mindset perfectly describe the consequences of the Fall that the Bible discusses in Genesis 3:16.)  Chapter 11 and 12 have some great, helpful, advice on how to respond to abuse in a way that will hopefully cause the abuser to notice the problem and begin to change.  Basically, 'set limits'/'boundaries' in your own mind before the abuse happens (for example, 'I will not allow him to yell at me', or 'I will not allow him to demean me'), and then if it happens, respond forcefully 'Cut it out', or 'I will not accept that sort of speech', or, walk away.  In cases of physical abuse, of course, flee.  Chapter 13 on recovery is also good.  Convicting for all to read, and helpful if (/when) we have friends going through this type of marital stress, to be able to provide support and counsel.  Worth reading (or at least skimming, chapters 1, 11, 12, 13).  However, sadly, it is completely secular... so unable to discuss the powerful wisdom from Ephesians, etc.  Eggerichs' "Love and Respect" is more helpful in this area, and also even "For Men Only"/"For Women Only" by the Feldhahns (even though the latter mostly restrains itself to secular points).

And the Word Came With Power, by Joanne Shetler and Patricia Purvis
Powerful true story(ies) of how the Bible was translated for the Balangao people in the Philippines.  She shares many stories from her life there.  Especially powerful were all the times when God brought about events that she thought were catastrophic, but actually turned out for the best.  She prayed for the salvation of her host family for a LONG time, and nothing happened.  But eventually, they became believers in Jesus, and became powerful proponents of the gospel.  Also fascinating to hear about the confrontations between the evil spirits and the Spirit of God in the Christians.  Highly recommended book.

The Post-Church Christian: dealing with the generational baggage of our faith, by J. Paul Nyquist and Carson Nyquist
This book very well exposes and airs the reactionary complaints that millenials have against the 'institutionalized', 'tradition-bound', 'organized-religion', 'overprotective', 'cultural-christianity', 'anti-homosexual', 'judgmental', 'overly-political', 'hypocritical', Church (as they consider it).
Unfortunately, the response that J.Paul Nyquist tries to give to his son is rather weak.  He basically says 'try to be understanding to us (the older Christians), give us the benefit of the doubt, cut us some slack, understand our historical context'.  But our response should be to go back to Jesus, that iconoclastic, 'have you never read the scriptures' Man.
Typical paragraph from the book: "Thirty years ago, the American evangelical church member would never dream of being caught in a bar. Today, churches are being planted there. Amid the social environment found in pubs, we see opportunities to express the hope of Christ to those who enjoy a pint as they talk about life."
Their main takeaway points: don't give up on the church.  Increase authenticity, yes, sure, fine.  Remove excessive linkages between "God and country", sure.  Remove unbiblical legalism, yes by all means.  But don't throw out the Church - it has an important God-given function.   With this point, I agree.

You and Me Forever, by Francis and Lisa Chan
The Chans discuss marriage in this book, but first, they discuss putting Jesus at the center and top priority of one's life.  That is their main point... to stop focusing so much on marriage or singleness, and focus more on the kingdom of God in whatever station of life.  Since they are themselves married, it comes across as slightly tone-deaf to the struggles singles have, however, their bracing 'focus on Jesus'/'put His kingdom first' message is important and needed and overall Biblical.  They make much of Paul's instructions in 1 Cor. 7, and other passages.  They also generally live out what they preach, enhancing their message's impact.  Good book, a little strident at times, but worth reading and pondering.

Seven Marks of a New Testament Church, by David Alan Black
Excellent short book (only 50 pages).  He talks about these "7 marks"- Evangelistic preaching, Christian baptism, apostolic teaching, genuine relationships, Christ-centered gatherings, fervent prayer, sacrificial living, based on Acts 2.

Tactics, by Gregory Koukl
Excellent book.  When people hear of 'tactics' in the context of apologetics, most millenials are turned off because they assume it's about manipulation and argumentation, which they want to avoid.  Instead, Koukl presents ways of using questions to turn around conversations that start out with someone asking you a hostile question related to your faith, so that you can expose the deeper beliefs underlying the question, and move into a respectful, healthy, dialog.  This book is worth reading over and over, and practicing its contents, not for the purpose of manipulation, but for the sake of truly loving our neighbors, and helping them find out the awesome truth about Jesus.

From Heaven He Came and Sought Her
This book is a collection of essays about Particular Atonement ("Limited Atonement").  It thoroughly covers the historical views of the Church in the past centuries, and then gets into the Scriptural/theological discussion.  It's a tough, slow, closely-reasoned read, but worth slogging through.

The Genesis Account, by Jonathan Safarti
This is a scientific and theological commentary on Genesis 1-11.  It is a very thorough, even, solid, well-documented, well-reasoned, and objective commentary.  As a reference book, it's not for light reading (some of Sarfati's other books like "Refuting Evolution" or "Refuting Compromise" are easier to read), but it's well worth slowly reading.  It covers all the major scientific evidences for/against various age theories of the earth and evolution, and all the current and past hermeneutical interpretations of Genesis 1-11.  Excellent.

Cold Case Christianity, A Homicide Detective Investigates The Claims of the Gospels, by J. Warner Wallace
This is an awesome book.  It focuses on whether the gospel accounts (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) about Jesus are accurate or not.  The author was an atheist until his thirties, and a homicide detective who specialized in solving cold cases (unsolved crimes from decades past).  When he began to investigate the gospel accounts, he realized that they have all the marks of true eyewitness accounts.  This book covers the same historical facts as many other apologetics books (Josh McDowell, etc), but is extremely well-written, and with a fresh perspective.

Debating Darwin's Doubt, edited by David Klinghoffer
This book is basically a collection of online articles written as back-and-forth debate followup to Steven Meyer's "Darwin's Doubt".  It discusses the major objections of all the critics, and offers rebuttal.  It is a little hard to read, and a little repetitive, but overall a good, very solid and thorough, rebuttal of the critics' arguments and confirmation that Meyer's basic point was correct: the sudden appearance of Cambrian animals in the fossil layer cannot be explained through Darwinian/neoDarwinian evolution, nor through any other non-intelligent materialistic causes.  An Intelligent Designer is the proper inference to the Cambrian fossil record.

Most secular scientists believe in the (naturalistic) Big Bang theory (BBT) of the origin of the universe. However, this theory has huge scientific problems.

Producer Spike Psarris explains the BBT, and also the reasons why scientists keep trying to desperately patch it up, with unobserved/unobservable entities like "inflation", "dark matter", "dark energy", and "multiverses". He shows how the BBT is very unscientific, in that it contradicts known science such as the conservation of matter/energy, it postulates unobservable entities and 'miracles', and sweeps away the philosophical foundation of science: the assumption of an orderly, cause-and-effect universe. He includes a hilarious (and well-documented) discussion of "Boltzmann Brains", another aspect of the self-refuting nature of the BBT. He concludes with a brief explanation and celebration of the main alternative theory - the Genesis 1 story, that God created the heavens. He did not get into the starlight-time-travel problem in this DVD but said it would come in his next DVD. (There are good articles explaining this at creation.com and elsewhere, via time-dilation or space-stretching hypotheses.)

He nicely distinguishes the scientific, measureable facts observed in the skies (redshifts, blueshifts, spectral signatures, gravity waves, etc) from the interpretations people make about those facts. Last week's announcement about LIGO's discovery of gravitational waves is an example of real science (measureable, testable, repeatable), in contrast to the practically-unfalsifiable continually-patched-up LCDM BBT.

It's worth buying a copy of the DVD and watching it... Let me know if you'd like to borrow a copy from me...

This is fascinating - this university president wanted to eliminate struggling freshmen students out of his university after one month of classes, before the deadline to report them as 'enrolled' - in this way, he planned to increase the "retention" rate of his university.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2016/02/09/the-controversy-at-mount-st-marys-goes-national-after-professors-are-fired/

It was a 'clever' plan, though perhaps not very compassionate. Perhaps this approach stems from a Darwinist 'survival-of-the-fittest' view?  Wouldn't a better way be to provide help for the struggling students?  That's what we seek to do at the university where I teach...

The students were planned to be "helped out the door" based on their survey responses to questions like this: "How often were each of the following things true in the last week?:  I felt depressed.  I felt that I could not shake the blues, even with the help of family and friends.  I thought my life had been a failure.  I felt that people disliked me."

It seems to me that students like this need a friend... someone to come alongside them and tell them about Jesus... about the fact that God loves them... that they are valuable in His sight... that they are precious, and worthwhile, and that God cares so much about them that "every hair on [their] head is numbered".

This fun new 20-minute video from the Discovery Institute illustrates the question of "where did the information inside living cells come from?"   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aA-FcnLsF1g

If even ONE single stable protein of practical biological length could not have formed by chance processes during the history of life on earth, much less a biologically functional protein, much less the hundreds of proteins necessary for new functional types of cells and new body plans, why do evolutionists keep insisting that all biological information was formed this way?

(Not even to mention the improbability of getting the first living cell from nonliving chemicals, and problems like Haldane’s dilemma of how to spread genes throughout the population within the short time of the Cambrian Explosion and Sanford’s dilemma of how to prevent genetic entropy from overwhelming beneficial mutations with harmful ones)...

(Not to mention, in a naturalistic scenario, why would one hold to the unscientific view that matter/energy appeared out of nothing, thus breaking all the laws of thermodynamics and scientific method causality?)

The failure of naturalistic theories like neodarwinian evolution to explain the origin of the  information built into living cells has long pointed instead to a Designer (and in my understanding, the best candidate is the God of the Bible, because there is actual evidence for His existence... such as the resurrection of Jesus from the dead...).

http://pleaseconvinceme.com/2013/the-minimal-facts-of-the-resurrection/

http://www.reasonsforgod.org/the-best-reasons/the-resurrection/

http://worldviewofjesus.com/2013/02/03/minimal-facts-argument-for-the-resurrection-of-jesus-Christ/

(warning - spoilers below - you might want to watch the movie first before reading)

I really liked Star Wars episode VII "The Force Awakens"... I thought it was the best of the series so far.  However, some of the worldview implications were sad (though definitely thought-provoking).  Here are 3 things I noticed: one good, two bad.  (One additional point that I might write about some time are the extreme feminist characterization of Rey...)

 
1. Stormtroopers can be saved too
I liked the plot twist of having stormtrooper "Finn" end up deciding that he's going to leave the First Order, despite growing up loyal to it.  Basically, before this point in the Star Wars saga, stormtroopers were always bad, all the time.  They were 'one-dimensional'.  The idea of a stormtrooper with a conscience, and a choice to decide whether he's going to follow a commander he thinks is gratuitously evil, is an idea that is powerful (think modern bogeymen, like ISIS terrorists...? There is good in all of us, and evil in all of us) and realistic (all of us DO in fact have a conscience and moral choice, implanted in us by God, our Creator.  I see this plot twist as saying, no one is too evil to be redeemed... those who repent can be forgiven and have a new life, regardless of their past...  (cf. my note about Orcs in the Tolkien world... http://tim223.xanga.com/2015/01/05/the-orc-that-nobody-wanted/  )

 
2. "The Force" tries to imply that You (human) are ultimately the most powerful being (in the Star-Wars world, and beyond) (unfortunately this common and comfortable narrative is false...)

The Force obviously plays an important role in the Star Wars story.  This concept of an impersonal mysterious force created-by and permeating all of life pulls ideas from a range of eastern and pagan religions (but is not identical to any of them, to my knowledge).

One reason the Force is so interesting is that it taps into something we are already familiar with in daily life - the "religious" or "sacred".  For example, Han Solo (in the original films) or Rey asked skeptical questions of their elders about whether the Force is real or just a hocus-pocus fable - this dialog is a common theme in our polarized religious/secular world.  Phrases from the movies like "May the Force be with you" and "The Force will be with you, always" are obvious allusions to the Bible (with the Force as a replacement for God), and Rey's "religious experience moment" near the end of SW7 seeks to glorify the Force (it saves her, as she remembers it, rests in it and then utilizes it...)  George Lucas has explained that one of his deliberate aims in adding the Force to the movies is to stimulate a sense of spirituality in young viewers.

(Side tangent #1 - I've often wondered why the characters in the story who sometimes use the Force to do amazing (paranormal/supernatural) feats can't utilize those powers more often... why can they only pull it out once in a while?  There are probably two explanations: in the story world, they simply forget about the Force (and remember in the nick of time), whereas in the movie-making world, it would make the story too simplistic if the heros simply used the Force all the time.)

But interestingly, the Star Wars "Force" is actually instead directly analogous to spiritism and the occult, not the God of the Bible.  How so?  In the story, the key aspect of the Force is that you can control it, or channel it, to do your bidding.  Granted, there are certain individuals in the story which are more "sensitive" to the Force than others (e.g. the Skywalkers, Rey, Palpatine, etc), but in principle it's just a matter of mastering certain techniques to make the Force do what you want it to do.  The Force never disobeys, it only obeys you to a greater or lesser extent.

Similarly, the occult (evil spirits) in our real world provides real supernatural powers to those who surrender their lives to it.  This is connected with what might be called the "universal religion" - all spiritistic or theistic religions (other than Christianity) provide a way to 'gain control over' the spirits and get what you want... or 'put the deity in your debt' so that you can get what you want. Hindus offer gifts to a particular goddess for prosperity, Catholics offer prayers to patron saints, animistic folk offer chickens to their idols, Shintoists offer gifts to their dead ancestors, and even materialistic cultures like the Chinese spend money on all kinds of good luck charms.  Americans holding to "moralistic therapeutic deism" (the dominant 'religion' in America) likewise tend to believe in a false prosperity gospel... 'give to the church, and God will bless me financially'... 'do good works, and God will let me into heaven'.

By contrast, when we pray to God (the Creator, the One True God, described in the Bible), there are no techniques for manipulating Him.  Unbelievers have no connection with Him... and as for us, His children (Christians), we can submit our requests to Him, but He will answer or not answer depending on what He knows is best for us, because of His love for us.  He cannot be tamed or manipulated.

(Side tangent #2 - I suspect that we are being "set-up" for some upcoming supernatural demonstrations, when the Great Imposter (the Antichrist) arrives... As Jesus predicted: Matthew 24:24 "For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect...."  (not that the movie creators are doing this consciously, but the spiritual forces influencing the world may be doing this... imagine what you would think if you saw supernatural powers (like in the movies) being displayed in broad daylight in our world?  Like this, except real? https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=999277153464049  )

(Side tangent #3 - I've been realizing what a large percentage of our modern cinematographic heros are in the same exact story position as ancient gods (Greek, Roman, Egyptian, Babylonian, etc).  Basically, they have superpowers of some kind (supernatural powers), but other than that they are human... they have all the same foibles, lusts, arguments, indulgences, etc.  They are mere "larger-than-life" men/women.  They are on a 'continuum', so to speak... as in the Mormon doctrine "...as God is now, man may be."
This includes Star-Wars Jedi & Sith, X-men, all the Marvel/DC comics - Batman, Superman, Captain America, Thor (perfect fit), IronMan, etc.
(It also includes Tolkien's characters, like Gandalf, Sauron, Elrond, Galadriel, etc... Each of these in Tolkien's saga have "personal power" of greater or lesser degrees.  In Tolkien's saga, there is at least a "God", Illuvatar, who started the universe, but then he never again gets directly and personally involved... so there is a dim step toward accuracy, but not clear.  In the other superhero movies, "God" is eliminated - he is viewed as irrelevant, and mankind's only hope is the various "demigods" such as Superman, Luke Skywalker, etc.)
I think this trend is deliberate... perhaps not on the part of the moviemakers, but on the part of the evil spiritual forces that are constantly trying to pull and push the world and all its humans away from God the Creator.  The same pagan metanarrative keeps popping up, generation after generation: "You don't need God, instead, you yourself can be the supreme power.")

The Star Wars concept of the Force fits perfectly into this narrative which is so comfortable to us as fallen sinful humans... it reassures us that WE are in control... "I am master of my own fate".

However, this is a lie.  God is in control, and we are not Him.  My point is not merely that the Biblical worldview is different than the Star Wars worldview, or that the Force doesn't exist in the real world.  Instead, I am making the case that all religions other than Christianity seek to put man at the center (in the position of control), and that not only does the actual world we live in correspond to a different order (God, not man, is in control), but that it is BETTER this way... that God OUGHT to be in control... that if there was no God and we were really in control, we would royally mess things up.

 
3. "History is cyclic", says Star Wars (and many other epics)

My final point is that in the Star Wars world (as in eastern religions), there is no end to the historical cycle of good and evil.  After each movie's (or set of 3 movies') finale, it seems that "good has triumphed"... but we know it is not permanent.  Evil will always arise again, in some other form.

(Side tangent #4 - Tolkien's LOTR shows the same - the world keeps groaning on, and the happy moments of triumph (Sauron/Morgoth finally defeated, Aragorn finally crowned king) are followed by more pain and sorrow (Arwen loses immortality, then Aragorn dies, then Arwen dies... and even those who go to the Gray Havens, while they get a little peace, end up living with the escapist and callous Valar.... evil is never permanently removed, only put into remission for a while, only to break out again.)

In Star Wars, even the Force, whose 'imbalance' is supposedly connected with the pain and suffering inflicted by those (Sith, Empire, First Order, etc) utilizing the 'dark side of the Force', does not draw toward a conclusion of perfect, permanent, goodness and happiness... but instead toward "balance".  Balance between good and evil?  Unfortunately, yes.

Consider how much more beautiful (not to mention the fact that it's also true!) is the Biblical view - that history is linear... it had a (beautiful) beginning, it was marred in Genesis 3 (the Fall) by sin and the subsequent legacy of pain and death, and it is headed toward an awesomely beautiful ending.

In heaven, there will be no more rebellion.  No more cancer.  No more death.  That is to say, in this world, our world, the real world, the final "End" (which is the beginning of many good and better things) puts a complete end to sin, death, evil, corruption, pain, etc.  To those who might complain that this is boring, please read this: http://tim223.xanga.com/2015/08/13/do-you-really-want-to-live-with-him-forever/

Conclusion

Hooray!  We really do live in the best of all possible worlds.  When I see films like Star Wars, on the surface level (entertainment) I enjoy them.  Great storytelling, great acting, great cinematography.  On the deeper level I loathe the dismal alternate hypothesis they suggest... and I find renewed delight that the actual state of affairs (described in the Bible) is so much better.