Books I've read in 2011

I have to confess that I have not read the majority of books that sit on my shelves. I realized that when I tried to recall exactly what I read this year.  Several books were from either the Orange County Public Library or from Reformed Theological Seminary.  This calls for a New Year's resolution, one that I will likely break, so may be I won't make one.

I don't have a Top 10 or Top 5 of books I've read in 2011, but I will list a handful that I did read and what I liked or disliked about them.

1984 by George Orwell

It's one thing to read a book once, it's another to read it twice. Often I have to read the same book or article twice before it's locked in my brain. I was happy to re-read this classic and I reference it in an earlier blog. There's not much to dislike about the book. I credit it with sharpening my reasoning when it comes to the use of language and keeping an eye out for propoganda, from the Right or the Left. It is not a book that should make a person cynical. Cynicism often leads to apathetic anger where people throw up their hands and no longer care. Often times politics (of all kinds) has to put on a certain face in order for peace to be kept. That's fine. Not everything should be out in the open. This book is a call to be informed, be cautious, and to question things. But in questioning, don't do it just to question, for the the questioning must itself be informed and cautious.

A Land Remembered by D. Patrick Smith

This is another book I re-read. Strange enough, I got this book for 75% off at the RTS bookstore a number of years ago. I'm not sure why it was even there in the first place, but I am forever grateful I bought it after eyeing it for months. I laughed out loud the first time through and I did it again the next time. When people ask, "What books should I read about Florida history?" it is this book that is named, even though it's under the classification of historical fiction. Though it follows a fictional family with fictional events, the events are based on actual history in Florida from the mid-19th to mid-20th century. There's really nothing grand or outlandish about the characters. It's the often-times humorous, often-times sad story of daily life for farmers, cattle drivers and orange growers before the development of Florida. For a modern-day look at what A Land Remembered speaks of check out the YouTube clip below.

History Through the Eyes of Faith by Ron Wells

Two of my blog posts feature quotes from this book. I've told several friends that I was a dunce up until about 10 years ago. That's not quite accurate, but it's only been in the past 10-13 years that I've put some pieces together in my mind that have made the jigsaw puzzle of life into a recognizable picture.  The best feature is Wells' presenation on the Enlightenment that informed my pronounced ignorance on the subject. Particuarly informing is how Enlightenment thinking has affected our concept of democratic and economic theory that are not necessarily in line with Christianity.  The United States and Western values offer great ideas, but the lines of distinction between them and the Christian Faith must not be blurred.

Jesus and the Logic of History by Paul Barnett

Rather than write full paragraph on the book as I have done so far, I will link to a book review I wrote in March of this year.

Review of Jesus and the Logic of History

I believe Michael Shepherd's words in his article on Daniel 7:13 and the "son of man" (Westminster Theological Journal Vol. 68, No. 1 Spring 2006) aptly apply to Barnett's book: "It is one thing to distinguish between (Jesus') actual words and his authentic voice. It is quite another to attribute his words entirely to the early church."

"Right Reason and the Princeton Mind by Paul Helseth

I had to get this book. Anything written concerning Princeton Seminary concerning the time of 1812-1929 (known as "Old Princeton") interests me. The subject takes up a shelf-and-a-half on one of my bookcases. Much more than a historical survey of how Old Princeton did Apologetics and Systematic Theology (examining the thought of Archibald Alexander, Charles Hodge, B.B. Warfield, and John Gresham Machen), Helseth writes to set the record straight on its methodology.  The small creek of criticism began decades ago has turned into a flowing river from parts of the evangelical world, particularly the group labeled "post-conservative." The assertions made about the Princetonians is that they were so affected by Scottish Commen Sense Realism and Enlightenment thinking that it turned their theology and apologetic method into rationalistic rigidness that threatened the "integrity of evangelicalism's contemporary witness" (p. 221). Rather, Helseth shows that "right reason" presupposed the work of the Spirit on the whole person, a view most accurately described by Warfield in his statement, "Authority, intellect, and the heart are the three sides of the triangle of truth."

Involvement: Being a Responsible Christian in a Non-Christian Society by John Stott

This is only the second book by Stott that I have read. The other is a commentary on 1 John. Shame on me. He was a giant of the Christian faith as it is expressed in Anglicanism. He died earlier this year at the age of 90. Though the book is a bit dated (1984) the treatment of the subjects are still relevant. Though Stott would be what we would call a good "churchman" he was not opposed to Christians being involved in the political process, naming William Wilberforce as a prime example of a Christian who influenced England to ban the slave trade.  He cites many biblical examples for social concern. Stott is careful to not identify the church with one political association and that God has chosen the lowly and unassuming to change the world.

Since he was in a British context, some of his social and political views may rub the wrong way to contemporary Americans. He's not afraid to address economics, ecology, and nuclear arms in ways that seem strange to American ears. Stott's concern for the global south, particularly the growth of the church, foreshadowed the work of scholars such as Philip Jenkins (The Next Christendom) and addresses the economic inequality that exists (and still exists) between the North and South. So if any evangelical starts talking big stuff about addressing the needs of the poor, that's fine, but know that people like Stott were doing it long before.

Star Trek & Sacred Ground: Explorations of Star Trek, Religion and American Culture edited by Jennifer Porter and Darcee McLaren

The Geek book for 2011. With this book my reading truly went where no one has gone before. Well, that's not entirely true because the authors did it before me. Even if you haven't see one episode of any Star Trek series, you cannot doubt the profound impact Gene Roddenberry's creation has had on American culture (and beyond our borders). Star Trek is more than a bunch of people flying around space running into aliens, friendly or hostile. The show, like any drama, explores the human condition. It is not simply space that is explored, but the area between the ears, the human mind.

Not only does humanity ask "Who are we, where did we come from, and where are we going?" but "Are we alone in the universe?" The worldview of Star Trek states that we are not alone and that humanity can be united behind one goal of exploring the final frontier and through interaction with other species, learn about ourselves. The worldview of Star Trek is not necessarily atheistic, but religion being able to make statements about reality is dismissed because of the advancement of scientific thought. Religion performs more of a functional role of keeping order as long as it submits to the frame work of science and "reason." Though Christians and other world religions say we are not alone in the universe--we believe in angels, arch angels, cherubim, seraphim, and God himself--the world of Star Trek would say any being with god-like powers is simply something that has evolved over time. See my blog from September 8 on the Star Trek Philosophy.

The best essay was by Jeffery Lamp's "Biblical Interpretation in the Star Trek Universe." Lamp mentions the views of the controversial "Jesus Seminar" and how, for the most part, biblical interpretation takes on a shape that resembles how religion is viewed by the Star Trek worldview. They are not dependent on each other, but Lamp states that "there are similarities that may prove suggestive in understanding biblical interpretation in the Star Trek universe" (p. 203). The two episodes that address this are "Birthright" and "Rightful Heir." As far as I'm concerned this displays the sketchiness of the scholarship of the Jesus Seminar and the likes of John Crossan and Marcus Borg ("Resistence if futile!). Any worldview that resembles Star Trek's view on the afterlife and the course of human history, seeing humanity as evolving into something beyond what we are, minus the resurrection, I personally reject. I am a Star Trek fan, but I cannot accept it's worldview.