Search
Search results
Goddess in the Stacks (553 KP) rated Georgia Peaches and Other Forbidden Fruit in Books
Jun 11, 2019
This is a sweet, southern f/f romance. Set in Georgia, it deals with a lot of things young lesbians might have to deal with in the south - religion, bigotry, the stress of coming out or not coming out (or being forced back in the closet by a move to a small town)! It doesn't deal with any outright violence against our lesbian protagonists, and it just barely touches on drug use, eating disorders, and abusive relationships. Joanna has a mostly supportive family, even if they do ask her to hide her sexuality for her senior year in the new town. Jo reluctantly agrees to do so, but doesn't count on falling in love with a girl at her new school.
The book deals a LOT with religion and sexuality; Jo's father is a radio preacher, and she attends a baptist church in town with her stepmother and new grandparents. At one point - one of my favorite scenes in the book - she snaps, and calls out her classmates for thinking homosexuality is a sin, while they eat shellfish and have premarital sex.
I liked the book, but I'm not sure I'd recommend it. I grew up Christian; I'm familiar with all the concepts in the book, but rather than progress to a kinder, more loving version of Christianity, I left it behind altogether. I'm glad that some people can reconcile religion with progressive values, but I can't. So it might be a good book for some, but not for me.You can find all my reviews and more at http://goddessinthestacks.com
The book deals a LOT with religion and sexuality; Jo's father is a radio preacher, and she attends a baptist church in town with her stepmother and new grandparents. At one point - one of my favorite scenes in the book - she snaps, and calls out her classmates for thinking homosexuality is a sin, while they eat shellfish and have premarital sex.
I liked the book, but I'm not sure I'd recommend it. I grew up Christian; I'm familiar with all the concepts in the book, but rather than progress to a kinder, more loving version of Christianity, I left it behind altogether. I'm glad that some people can reconcile religion with progressive values, but I can't. So it might be a good book for some, but not for me.You can find all my reviews and more at http://goddessinthestacks.com
ClareR (5577 KP) rated Sistersong in Books
Aug 9, 2021
Sistersong is a stunning story, steeped in the mythology of Ancient Britain. It’s set in Dumnonia (a real place - I googled it. It was in SW England where Cornwall, Devon and some of West Somerset are now), at a time of great change and fear. Christianity is making itself known, and the Saxons are a very real threat. King Cador has lost his magical connection to his Land, due to the threats and sermons of a priest called Gildas. With this loss comes the danger of the Dumnonians being unable to protect themselves effectively, and the land not providing food for them.
Cadors three daughters do still have that magical connection. The story is told from their perspective. The eldest, Riva, has been badly burnt in the past, and whilst she can heal others, she can’t heal herself.
Keyne, although born female, has never felt female and longs to be recognised as a man.
Sinne, the youngest, lives for love and flirtation.
When an emissary from another kingdom arrives, he drives a wedge between Riva and Sinne. They see their chance at escape from the Hold. Whilst this is happening, Keyne trains with Myrdin, in the hope that he’ll be recognised as next in line to the throne.
I loved this book - it has all of my favourite elements in a story: mythology, history, magic, lies, deceit, the love of family and siblings, along with the themes of duty and identity. It really packs a punch. The world building is fantastic, and thoroughly immersive. Highly recommended!
Cadors three daughters do still have that magical connection. The story is told from their perspective. The eldest, Riva, has been badly burnt in the past, and whilst she can heal others, she can’t heal herself.
Keyne, although born female, has never felt female and longs to be recognised as a man.
Sinne, the youngest, lives for love and flirtation.
When an emissary from another kingdom arrives, he drives a wedge between Riva and Sinne. They see their chance at escape from the Hold. Whilst this is happening, Keyne trains with Myrdin, in the hope that he’ll be recognised as next in line to the throne.
I loved this book - it has all of my favourite elements in a story: mythology, history, magic, lies, deceit, the love of family and siblings, along with the themes of duty and identity. It really packs a punch. The world building is fantastic, and thoroughly immersive. Highly recommended!
Cody Cook (8 KP) rated Writings Of Thomas Paine Volume 4 (1794 1796); The Age Of Reason in Books
Jun 29, 2018
Thomas Paine was a political theorist who was perhaps best known for his support for the American Revolution in his pamphlet Common Sense. In what might be his second best known work, The Age of Reason, Paine argued in favor of deism and against the Christian religion and its conception of God. By deism it is meant the belief in a creator God who does not violate the laws of nature by communicating through revelation or miracles The book was very successful and widely read partly due to the fact that it was written in a style which appealed to a popular audience and often implemented a sarcastic, derisive tone to make its points.
The book seems to have had three major objectives: the support of deism, the ridicule of what Paine found loathsome in Christian theology, and the demonstration of how poor an example the Bible is as a reflection of God.
In a sense, Paine's arguments against Christian theology and scripture were meant to prop up his deistic philosophy. Paine hoped that in demonizing Christianity while giving evidences for God, he would somehow have made the case for deism. But this is not so. If Christianity is false, but God exists nonetheless, we are not left only with deism. There are an infinite number of possibilities for us to examine regarding the nature of God, and far too many left over once we have eliminated the obviously false ones. In favor of deism Paine has only one argument—his dislike of supernatural revelation, which is to say that deism appeals to his culturally derived preferences. In any case, Paine's thinking on the matter seemed to be thus: if supernatural revelation could be shown to be inadequate and the development of complex theology shown to be an error, one could still salvage a belief in God as Creator, but not as an interloper in human affairs who required mediators.
That being said, in his support of deism, Paine makes some arguments to demonstrate the reasonableness in belief in, if not the logical necessity of the existence of, God which could be equally used by Christians.
For instance, just as the apostle Paul argued in his epistle to the Romans that, "what can be known about God is plain to [even pagans], because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made" (Romans 1:19-20, ESV), so also Paine can say that, "the Creation speaketh an universal language [which points to the existence of God], independently of human speech or human language, multiplied and various as they be."
The key point on which Paine differs from Paul on this issue is in his optimism about man's ability to reason to God without His assisting from the outside. Whereas Paul sees the plainness of God from natural revelation as an argument against the inherent goodness of a species which can read the record of nature and nevertheless rejects its Source's obvious existence, Paine thinks that nature and reason can and do lead us directly to the knowledge of God's existence apart from any gracious overtures or direct revelation.
On the witness of nature, Paine claims, and is quite correct, that, "THE WORD OF GOD IS THE CREATION WE BEHOLD: And it is in this word, which no human invention can counterfeit or alter, that God speaketh universally to man." What is not plainly clear, however, is that man is free enough from the noetic effects of sin to reach such an obvious conclusion on his own. Indeed, the attempts of mankind to create a religion which represents the truth have invariably landed them at paganism. By paganism I mean a system of belief based, as Yehezkel Kaufmann and John N. Oswalt have shown, on continuity.iv In polytheism, even the supernatural is not really supernatural, but is perhaps in some way above humans while not being altogether distinct from us. What happens to the gods is merely what happens to human beings and the natural world writ large, which is why the gods are, like us, victims of fate, and why pagan fertility rituals have attempted to influence nature by influencing the gods which represent it in accordance with the deeper magic of the eternal universe we all inhabit.
When mankind has looked at nature without the benefit of supernatural revelation, he has not been consciously aware of a Being outside of nature which is necessarily responsible for it. His reasoning to metaphysics is based entirely on his own naturalistic categories derived from his own experience. According to Moses, it took God revealing Himself to the Hebrews for anyone to understand what Paine thinks anyone can plainly see.
The goal of deism is to hold onto what the western mind, which values extreme independence of thought, views as attractive in theism while casting aside what it finds distasteful. But as C.S. Lewis remarked, Aslan is not a tame lion. If a sovereign God exists, He cannot be limited by your desires of what you'd like Him to be. For this reason, the deism of men like Paine served as a cultural stepping stone toward the atheism of later intellectuals.
For Paine, as for other deists and atheists like him, it is not that Christianity has been subjected to reason and found wanting, but that it has been subjected to his own private and culturally-determined tastes and preferences and has failed to satisfy. This is the flipside of the anti-religious claim that those who believe in a given religion only do so because of their cultural conditioning: the anti-religionist is also conditioned in a similar way. Of course, how one comes to believe a certain thing has no bearing on whether that thing is true in itself, and this is true whether Christianity, atheism, or any other view is correct. But it must be stated that the deist or atheist is not immune from the epistemic difficulties which he so condescendingly heaps on theists.
One of the befuddling ironies of Paine's work is that around the time he was writing about the revealed religions as, “no other than human inventions set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit," the French were turning churches into “temples of reason” and murdering thousands at the guillotine (an instrument of execution now most strongly identified with France's godless reign of terror). Paine, who nearly lost his own life during the French Revolution, saw the danger of this atheism and hoped to stay its progress, despite the risk to his own life in attempting to do so.
What is odd is that Paine managed to blame this violent atheism upon the Christian faith! Obfuscated Paine:
"The Idea, always dangerous to Society as it is derogatory to the Almighty, — that priests could forgive sins, — though it seemed to exist no longer, had blunted the feelings of humanity, and callously prepared men for the commission of all crimes. The intolerant spirit of church persecution had transferred itself into politics; the tribunals, stiled Revolutionary, supplied the place of an Inquisition; and the Guillotine of the Stake. I saw many of my most intimate friends destroyed; others daily carried to prison; and I had reason to believe, and had also intimations given me, that the same danger was approaching myself."
That Robespierre's deism finally managed to supplant the revolutionary state's atheism and that peace, love, and understanding did not then spread throughout the land undermines Paine's claims. Paine felt that the revolution in politics, especially as represented in America, would necessarily lead to a revolution in religion, and that this religious revolution would result in wide acceptance of deism. The common link between these two revolutions was the idea that the individual man was sovereign and could determine for himself what was right and wrong based on his autonomous reason. What Paine was too myopic to see was that in France's violence and atheism was found the logical consequence of his individualistic philosophy. In summary, it is not Christianity which is dangerous, but the spirit of autonomy which leads inevitably into authoritarianism by way of human desire.
As should be clear by now, Paine failed to understand that human beings have a strong tendency to set impartial reason aside and to simply evaluate reality based on their desires and psychological states. This is no more obvious than in his own ideas as expressed in The Age of Reason. Like Paine's tendency to designate every book in the Old Testament which he likes as having been written originally by a gentile and translated into Hebrew, so many of his criticisms of Christian theology are far more a reflection upon himself than of revealed Christianity. One has only to look at Paine's description of Jesus Christ as a “virtuous reformer and revolutionist” to marvel that Paine was so poor at introspection so as to not understand that he was describing himself.
There is much more that could be said about this work, but in the interest of being somewhat concise, I'll end my comments here. If you found this analysis to be useful, be sure to check out my profile and look for my work discussing Paine and other anti-Christian writers coming soon.
The book seems to have had three major objectives: the support of deism, the ridicule of what Paine found loathsome in Christian theology, and the demonstration of how poor an example the Bible is as a reflection of God.
In a sense, Paine's arguments against Christian theology and scripture were meant to prop up his deistic philosophy. Paine hoped that in demonizing Christianity while giving evidences for God, he would somehow have made the case for deism. But this is not so. If Christianity is false, but God exists nonetheless, we are not left only with deism. There are an infinite number of possibilities for us to examine regarding the nature of God, and far too many left over once we have eliminated the obviously false ones. In favor of deism Paine has only one argument—his dislike of supernatural revelation, which is to say that deism appeals to his culturally derived preferences. In any case, Paine's thinking on the matter seemed to be thus: if supernatural revelation could be shown to be inadequate and the development of complex theology shown to be an error, one could still salvage a belief in God as Creator, but not as an interloper in human affairs who required mediators.
That being said, in his support of deism, Paine makes some arguments to demonstrate the reasonableness in belief in, if not the logical necessity of the existence of, God which could be equally used by Christians.
For instance, just as the apostle Paul argued in his epistle to the Romans that, "what can be known about God is plain to [even pagans], because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made" (Romans 1:19-20, ESV), so also Paine can say that, "the Creation speaketh an universal language [which points to the existence of God], independently of human speech or human language, multiplied and various as they be."
The key point on which Paine differs from Paul on this issue is in his optimism about man's ability to reason to God without His assisting from the outside. Whereas Paul sees the plainness of God from natural revelation as an argument against the inherent goodness of a species which can read the record of nature and nevertheless rejects its Source's obvious existence, Paine thinks that nature and reason can and do lead us directly to the knowledge of God's existence apart from any gracious overtures or direct revelation.
On the witness of nature, Paine claims, and is quite correct, that, "THE WORD OF GOD IS THE CREATION WE BEHOLD: And it is in this word, which no human invention can counterfeit or alter, that God speaketh universally to man." What is not plainly clear, however, is that man is free enough from the noetic effects of sin to reach such an obvious conclusion on his own. Indeed, the attempts of mankind to create a religion which represents the truth have invariably landed them at paganism. By paganism I mean a system of belief based, as Yehezkel Kaufmann and John N. Oswalt have shown, on continuity.iv In polytheism, even the supernatural is not really supernatural, but is perhaps in some way above humans while not being altogether distinct from us. What happens to the gods is merely what happens to human beings and the natural world writ large, which is why the gods are, like us, victims of fate, and why pagan fertility rituals have attempted to influence nature by influencing the gods which represent it in accordance with the deeper magic of the eternal universe we all inhabit.
When mankind has looked at nature without the benefit of supernatural revelation, he has not been consciously aware of a Being outside of nature which is necessarily responsible for it. His reasoning to metaphysics is based entirely on his own naturalistic categories derived from his own experience. According to Moses, it took God revealing Himself to the Hebrews for anyone to understand what Paine thinks anyone can plainly see.
The goal of deism is to hold onto what the western mind, which values extreme independence of thought, views as attractive in theism while casting aside what it finds distasteful. But as C.S. Lewis remarked, Aslan is not a tame lion. If a sovereign God exists, He cannot be limited by your desires of what you'd like Him to be. For this reason, the deism of men like Paine served as a cultural stepping stone toward the atheism of later intellectuals.
For Paine, as for other deists and atheists like him, it is not that Christianity has been subjected to reason and found wanting, but that it has been subjected to his own private and culturally-determined tastes and preferences and has failed to satisfy. This is the flipside of the anti-religious claim that those who believe in a given religion only do so because of their cultural conditioning: the anti-religionist is also conditioned in a similar way. Of course, how one comes to believe a certain thing has no bearing on whether that thing is true in itself, and this is true whether Christianity, atheism, or any other view is correct. But it must be stated that the deist or atheist is not immune from the epistemic difficulties which he so condescendingly heaps on theists.
One of the befuddling ironies of Paine's work is that around the time he was writing about the revealed religions as, “no other than human inventions set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit," the French were turning churches into “temples of reason” and murdering thousands at the guillotine (an instrument of execution now most strongly identified with France's godless reign of terror). Paine, who nearly lost his own life during the French Revolution, saw the danger of this atheism and hoped to stay its progress, despite the risk to his own life in attempting to do so.
What is odd is that Paine managed to blame this violent atheism upon the Christian faith! Obfuscated Paine:
"The Idea, always dangerous to Society as it is derogatory to the Almighty, — that priests could forgive sins, — though it seemed to exist no longer, had blunted the feelings of humanity, and callously prepared men for the commission of all crimes. The intolerant spirit of church persecution had transferred itself into politics; the tribunals, stiled Revolutionary, supplied the place of an Inquisition; and the Guillotine of the Stake. I saw many of my most intimate friends destroyed; others daily carried to prison; and I had reason to believe, and had also intimations given me, that the same danger was approaching myself."
That Robespierre's deism finally managed to supplant the revolutionary state's atheism and that peace, love, and understanding did not then spread throughout the land undermines Paine's claims. Paine felt that the revolution in politics, especially as represented in America, would necessarily lead to a revolution in religion, and that this religious revolution would result in wide acceptance of deism. The common link between these two revolutions was the idea that the individual man was sovereign and could determine for himself what was right and wrong based on his autonomous reason. What Paine was too myopic to see was that in France's violence and atheism was found the logical consequence of his individualistic philosophy. In summary, it is not Christianity which is dangerous, but the spirit of autonomy which leads inevitably into authoritarianism by way of human desire.
As should be clear by now, Paine failed to understand that human beings have a strong tendency to set impartial reason aside and to simply evaluate reality based on their desires and psychological states. This is no more obvious than in his own ideas as expressed in The Age of Reason. Like Paine's tendency to designate every book in the Old Testament which he likes as having been written originally by a gentile and translated into Hebrew, so many of his criticisms of Christian theology are far more a reflection upon himself than of revealed Christianity. One has only to look at Paine's description of Jesus Christ as a “virtuous reformer and revolutionist” to marvel that Paine was so poor at introspection so as to not understand that he was describing himself.
There is much more that could be said about this work, but in the interest of being somewhat concise, I'll end my comments here. If you found this analysis to be useful, be sure to check out my profile and look for my work discussing Paine and other anti-Christian writers coming soon.
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated The Girl Behind the Red Rope in Books
Oct 15, 2019
I'm a fan of dystopian novels, so when I heard about The Girl Behind the Red Rope by Ted Dekker and Rachelle Dekker, I knew it was a book that I just had to read sooner rather than later. Everything about the synopsis was calling out my name. Luckily, this book lived up to the hype.
As I stated previously, the synopsis of The Girl Behind the Red Rope definitely left me intrigued. Grace has seen what not following her religious community's strict rules can bring. However, when a young boy makes his way into their tight community, Grace begins to question everything she's been taught which puts her in extreme danger.
Everything flowed so smoothly including the pacing which never let me down. I was constantly finding excuses to finish reading The Girl Behind the Red Rope since I had to know what would happen next. While I felt the plot was predictable more often than not, I still really enjoyed this book. I felt like their were no cliff hangers, and all of my questions were answered by the ending.
As for the Christian aspect of this book, it didn't read like a Christian novel most of the way through. I'd say it was probably around the last quarter of the book where Christianity came into play. I didn't think it was overly preachy although I think that those who aren't very spiritual or who are agnostic or are atheist may feel it's a tad on the preachy side. I would say The Girl Behind the Red Rope is more anti-religion and pro-Christianity overall. That's what I took from it anyway. It does have a really good message regarding love though which I found really nice to read about.
I very much enjoyed how every character in The Girl Behind the Red Rope was written. I felt like I was actually part of their world, stuck in the same community with them. Grace is a very likable character. I loved how the characters made her feel like a real person by giving her the conflicting thoughts as to who was to be believed throughout the novel. I enjoyed Grace's thought process about everything throughout the book. While I knew who and what she should choose, it was easy to see why she was so torn. Bobbie and Sylous were both very intriguing characters. I never trusted Sylous from the start, but Bobbie was one character that I wasn't sure if she actually had Grace's best interest at heart or if she had ulterior motives. There were times I despised Rose, not because she wasn't written poorly, in fact, she was written perfectly, but because of how much trust she put into Sylous and how overly judgmental she could be sometimes. I know that Rose was only going on what she thought to be true, but there were just so many times I wanted Rose to disappear! My favorite character was Eli. I loved his innocence and how happy go lucky he was.
Trigger warnings for The Girl Behind the Red Rope include cult mentality, violence, and murder.
All in all, The Girl Behind the Red Rope is such a fantastic read with such a powerful message. The characters are written beautifully, and the plot is done superbly. I would definitely recommend The Girl Behind the Red Rope by Ted Dekker and Rachelle Dekker to those aged 15+. Christians will definitely enjoy this book, but I think even non-Christians will probably love it as well.
As I stated previously, the synopsis of The Girl Behind the Red Rope definitely left me intrigued. Grace has seen what not following her religious community's strict rules can bring. However, when a young boy makes his way into their tight community, Grace begins to question everything she's been taught which puts her in extreme danger.
Everything flowed so smoothly including the pacing which never let me down. I was constantly finding excuses to finish reading The Girl Behind the Red Rope since I had to know what would happen next. While I felt the plot was predictable more often than not, I still really enjoyed this book. I felt like their were no cliff hangers, and all of my questions were answered by the ending.
As for the Christian aspect of this book, it didn't read like a Christian novel most of the way through. I'd say it was probably around the last quarter of the book where Christianity came into play. I didn't think it was overly preachy although I think that those who aren't very spiritual or who are agnostic or are atheist may feel it's a tad on the preachy side. I would say The Girl Behind the Red Rope is more anti-religion and pro-Christianity overall. That's what I took from it anyway. It does have a really good message regarding love though which I found really nice to read about.
I very much enjoyed how every character in The Girl Behind the Red Rope was written. I felt like I was actually part of their world, stuck in the same community with them. Grace is a very likable character. I loved how the characters made her feel like a real person by giving her the conflicting thoughts as to who was to be believed throughout the novel. I enjoyed Grace's thought process about everything throughout the book. While I knew who and what she should choose, it was easy to see why she was so torn. Bobbie and Sylous were both very intriguing characters. I never trusted Sylous from the start, but Bobbie was one character that I wasn't sure if she actually had Grace's best interest at heart or if she had ulterior motives. There were times I despised Rose, not because she wasn't written poorly, in fact, she was written perfectly, but because of how much trust she put into Sylous and how overly judgmental she could be sometimes. I know that Rose was only going on what she thought to be true, but there were just so many times I wanted Rose to disappear! My favorite character was Eli. I loved his innocence and how happy go lucky he was.
Trigger warnings for The Girl Behind the Red Rope include cult mentality, violence, and murder.
All in all, The Girl Behind the Red Rope is such a fantastic read with such a powerful message. The characters are written beautifully, and the plot is done superbly. I would definitely recommend The Girl Behind the Red Rope by Ted Dekker and Rachelle Dekker to those aged 15+. Christians will definitely enjoy this book, but I think even non-Christians will probably love it as well.
graveyardgremlin (7194 KP) rated The Reapers are the Angels (Reapers, #1) in Books
Feb 15, 2019
If you're going into this book thinking you'll find an action-packed, zombie-mauling good-time, you're in for a surprise. THE REAPERS ARE THE ANGELS is literary zombie fiction (yes, you read that right), although it's not too literary it feels pretentious and stuffy, but it's not a totally light read either. There's violence chock full of blood and gore, a semi-solitary road trip, and God. Does it work? Yeah, in a way. The book was serious but there wasn't much depth and it didn't impact me as much as it probably should have. The plot is basically an odyssey, in which many diverse characters appear and we see how the main character, Temple, relates with them. One of these struck me as odd and took me out of the story. Before, the book showed realism and grit, then it came to giant mutants and turned into a sci-fi horror show. Frankly, it was just weird and didn't correlate with the rest of the story. Temple was an interesting character who told the tale well but was a contradiction; she's illiterate but knows words that few people do. Since she's always lived with "meatskins" and has never known the world before, her background doesn't support this and I found it didn't fit with her character at all. I got her but didn't care about her.
Honestly, I don't have much feeling for this book, I liked it but that's all, and while it's a good read, it's not great. If you like a thinking zombie story with philosophy and a stream of Christianity running through it, although it's not too deep, than you just might enjoy this book.
Honestly, I don't have much feeling for this book, I liked it but that's all, and while it's a good read, it's not great. If you like a thinking zombie story with philosophy and a stream of Christianity running through it, although it's not too deep, than you just might enjoy this book.
Hazel (1853 KP) rated In the Shadow of David in Books
Dec 17, 2018
<i>This eBook was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review
In the Shadow of David</i> is Martin Baggen’s attempt at reimagining “the greatest story ever told,” i.e. the life of Jesus Christ. Beginning on the banks of the river Jordan where John the Baptist is washing away the sins of his followers, the story continues before concluding with the resurrection. Told through the eyes of supporting characters, the details of Jesus’ life, or in this instance Yeshua’s, are reinvented in fairly accurate historical settings.
Unfortunately, Braggen’s attempt at originality is going to upset 2.2 billion people. Instead of telling the story of Jesus in the manner he is portrayed in the Bible, the author pens the character Yeshua and claims that there was no “Son of God.” The names, settings and historical facts all remain the same or similar in this version of events, however the miracles: Lazarus’ death, water into wine, the resurrection of Christ/Yeshua, were all shown to be a charade. According to<i> In the Shadow of David</i>, the “Son of God” was a charlatan attempting to reunite the Jews and overthrow the ruling Romans.
By mocking Christianity, Martin Braggen has wasted his writing talent with this blasphemous novel. Granted there are many people who try to prove the inexistence of a god, however in these instances there are always counter arguments. By containing this controversial opinion in a story, it prevents any other theories or beliefs from contributing.
Many may purchase this book with the mistaken idea that it will convey an in-depth narrative of the life of Jesus. What they will find instead is a disappointing atheist version instead. It is doubtful that readers will get to the end of the book, despite it not being overly long, after slamming it shut in anger and frustration.
In the Shadow of David</i> is Martin Baggen’s attempt at reimagining “the greatest story ever told,” i.e. the life of Jesus Christ. Beginning on the banks of the river Jordan where John the Baptist is washing away the sins of his followers, the story continues before concluding with the resurrection. Told through the eyes of supporting characters, the details of Jesus’ life, or in this instance Yeshua’s, are reinvented in fairly accurate historical settings.
Unfortunately, Braggen’s attempt at originality is going to upset 2.2 billion people. Instead of telling the story of Jesus in the manner he is portrayed in the Bible, the author pens the character Yeshua and claims that there was no “Son of God.” The names, settings and historical facts all remain the same or similar in this version of events, however the miracles: Lazarus’ death, water into wine, the resurrection of Christ/Yeshua, were all shown to be a charade. According to<i> In the Shadow of David</i>, the “Son of God” was a charlatan attempting to reunite the Jews and overthrow the ruling Romans.
By mocking Christianity, Martin Braggen has wasted his writing talent with this blasphemous novel. Granted there are many people who try to prove the inexistence of a god, however in these instances there are always counter arguments. By containing this controversial opinion in a story, it prevents any other theories or beliefs from contributing.
Many may purchase this book with the mistaken idea that it will convey an in-depth narrative of the life of Jesus. What they will find instead is a disappointing atheist version instead. It is doubtful that readers will get to the end of the book, despite it not being overly long, after slamming it shut in anger and frustration.
Ivana A. | Diary of Difference (1171 KP) rated The Swords of Silence in Books
Feb 3, 2020
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
#1 <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/2886479579">The Swords of Silence</a> - ★★★
<img src="https://diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Book-Review-Banner-20.png"/>;
I was born and raised in a country where religion is sacred. I was surrounded with Christianity all my life. However, while I have learned lessons of love, respect and hope, I am not a believer. I do believe that we need to be kind to each other, respect each other and hope for a better tomorrow, but I don't believe there is a God out there who decides our faith. My review is based on how I felt while reading and I believe everyone is entitled to their own opinion and should be respected for that.
The Swords of Silence features father Joaquim, who moves to Japan in the 1620's, to share the religion of Christ. However, the brutal regime in Japan forbids any other religion than Buddhism. The Shogun is determined there is no more Christianity in his country. Throughout the book, we follow Joaquim's journey, where he manages to get captured and escapes several times, with the help of God.
<b><i>This book perfectly captures the regime in Japan during this time.</i></b>
The true terror and the brutal punishments if you ever dare make a mistake. The world of no mercy. But this book is also a product of divine inspiration and has great elements some of us consider fantasy.
<b>Many of the scenes in The Swords of Silence that featured escaping were unrealistic and resembled the Bible stories.</b> We had walking on water, moving of mountains and a big storm in the sea that only affects the enemy ship, even though they are only metres away from father Joaquim's ship.
There is one scene though, that I was absolutely in awe with, and that was the scene with the duels. As a person who trained karate all my life and is very familiar with the rules of a duel, honour, respect and combat in martial arts - this scene was perfectly set and accurate. It brought all the emotions and it was brutally realistic. And it is because of this scene that I will give this book three stars.
The Swords of Silence is a great book, and I love the fact that the author captured moments in history that were true and brutal, and not many people in the world know about. A story that will make people aware of what was happening in the past. Even though I am not a believer in God, I stand by that people shouldn't be mistreated, bullied, or in this case - brutally murdered for what they believe in. Everyone has the right to believe in anything they believe in.
If this book was more realistic with the events and scenes, I would have given it five stars for the message it shares with the world.
<b><i>True fact: Around 1% of the population in Japan claims Christian belief or affiliation. Most large Christian denominations are repressed in Japan today.</i></b>
Thank you to LoveReading UK, the publisher Harper Collins UK and the author, Shaun Curry, for sending me a copy of this book in exchange for an honest review.
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
#1 <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/2886479579">The Swords of Silence</a> - ★★★
<img src="https://diaryofdifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Book-Review-Banner-20.png"/>;
I was born and raised in a country where religion is sacred. I was surrounded with Christianity all my life. However, while I have learned lessons of love, respect and hope, I am not a believer. I do believe that we need to be kind to each other, respect each other and hope for a better tomorrow, but I don't believe there is a God out there who decides our faith. My review is based on how I felt while reading and I believe everyone is entitled to their own opinion and should be respected for that.
The Swords of Silence features father Joaquim, who moves to Japan in the 1620's, to share the religion of Christ. However, the brutal regime in Japan forbids any other religion than Buddhism. The Shogun is determined there is no more Christianity in his country. Throughout the book, we follow Joaquim's journey, where he manages to get captured and escapes several times, with the help of God.
<b><i>This book perfectly captures the regime in Japan during this time.</i></b>
The true terror and the brutal punishments if you ever dare make a mistake. The world of no mercy. But this book is also a product of divine inspiration and has great elements some of us consider fantasy.
<b>Many of the scenes in The Swords of Silence that featured escaping were unrealistic and resembled the Bible stories.</b> We had walking on water, moving of mountains and a big storm in the sea that only affects the enemy ship, even though they are only metres away from father Joaquim's ship.
There is one scene though, that I was absolutely in awe with, and that was the scene with the duels. As a person who trained karate all my life and is very familiar with the rules of a duel, honour, respect and combat in martial arts - this scene was perfectly set and accurate. It brought all the emotions and it was brutally realistic. And it is because of this scene that I will give this book three stars.
The Swords of Silence is a great book, and I love the fact that the author captured moments in history that were true and brutal, and not many people in the world know about. A story that will make people aware of what was happening in the past. Even though I am not a believer in God, I stand by that people shouldn't be mistreated, bullied, or in this case - brutally murdered for what they believe in. Everyone has the right to believe in anything they believe in.
If this book was more realistic with the events and scenes, I would have given it five stars for the message it shares with the world.
<b><i>True fact: Around 1% of the population in Japan claims Christian belief or affiliation. Most large Christian denominations are repressed in Japan today.</i></b>
Thank you to LoveReading UK, the publisher Harper Collins UK and the author, Shaun Curry, for sending me a copy of this book in exchange for an honest review.
<a href="https://diaryofdifference.com/">Blog</a>; | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/diaryofdifference/">Facebook</a>; | <a href="https://twitter.com/DiaryDifference">Twitter</a>; | <a href="https://www.instagram.com/diaryofdifference/">Instagram</a>; | <a href="https://www.pinterest.co.uk/diaryofdifference/pins/">Pinterest</a>;
ClareR (5577 KP) rated The Country of Others in Books
Sep 19, 2021
This is a fascinating look at Leïla Slimani’s own family history.
Mathilde falls in love with, and marries, Amine Belhaj, a Moroccan stationed in Alsace. After the war, she sails to Morocco to live with Amine on his family farm. Life is so different to that in France, and Mathilde struggles to adapt. The French there shun her because of her husband, and Moroccans are suspicious of her because she’s French.
It’s a time of great upheaval in the 1950’s, as the Moroccans fight for independence from France, and life becomes increasingly dangerous for the Belhaj’s.
It’s a challenging life for Mathilde: she has to work hard, and Amine has a very fixed idea of a wife’s role. When she doesn’t stick to his rules, voices her opinions or disagrees, Amine beats her - he’s a violent man, scarred by the things that he saw and experienced in the war.
Mathilde does manage to insist that their daughter, Aicha, goes to a good French speaking school, and Aicha proves to be a good, diligent student - but the other girls at school are poisoned by their parents views: they’re very unkind and bully her.
There is a real feel for the heat and dust of Morocco. The contrasting cultures and religions of Christianity and Islam are shown, as well as the roles of women and how they are restricted in the light of their religions and it’s traditions. It looks at what it is to be a foreigner in a strange land; belonging, both in a country and a family; and the Moroccan struggle for independence from France.
This is going to be a trilogy, and I’m already fully invested in it - I can’t wait for the next book. Sam Taylor’s translation is perfect, and I hope that they’ll be translating the subsequent books as well.
Many thanks to The Pigeonhole for helping me (yet again!) with my NetGalley reading, and to Faber for my ebook copy through NetGalley.
Mathilde falls in love with, and marries, Amine Belhaj, a Moroccan stationed in Alsace. After the war, she sails to Morocco to live with Amine on his family farm. Life is so different to that in France, and Mathilde struggles to adapt. The French there shun her because of her husband, and Moroccans are suspicious of her because she’s French.
It’s a time of great upheaval in the 1950’s, as the Moroccans fight for independence from France, and life becomes increasingly dangerous for the Belhaj’s.
It’s a challenging life for Mathilde: she has to work hard, and Amine has a very fixed idea of a wife’s role. When she doesn’t stick to his rules, voices her opinions or disagrees, Amine beats her - he’s a violent man, scarred by the things that he saw and experienced in the war.
Mathilde does manage to insist that their daughter, Aicha, goes to a good French speaking school, and Aicha proves to be a good, diligent student - but the other girls at school are poisoned by their parents views: they’re very unkind and bully her.
There is a real feel for the heat and dust of Morocco. The contrasting cultures and religions of Christianity and Islam are shown, as well as the roles of women and how they are restricted in the light of their religions and it’s traditions. It looks at what it is to be a foreigner in a strange land; belonging, both in a country and a family; and the Moroccan struggle for independence from France.
This is going to be a trilogy, and I’m already fully invested in it - I can’t wait for the next book. Sam Taylor’s translation is perfect, and I hope that they’ll be translating the subsequent books as well.
Many thanks to The Pigeonhole for helping me (yet again!) with my NetGalley reading, and to Faber for my ebook copy through NetGalley.
Cody Cook (8 KP) rated A Black Theology of Liberation in Books
Jun 29, 2018
James Cone is considered to be the founder of Black Liberation Theology, a variant of the Liberation Theology movement most widely connected with South American theologian Gustavo Gutierrez. Liberation Theology emphasizes those biblical concerns that white European flavored Christianity has often looked over– concerns like justice and liberation for the oppressed and downtrodden (Luke 4:16-21, Matthew 25:31-45, etc.). Though these emphases are quite important, in Liberation movements, they can often drown out other, extremely vital, elements of the Christian faith, as they clearly do in Cone’s Black Liberation Theology.
One major issue for Cone is one of authority. The experience of one group of people (the oppressed) becomes equivalent with universal truth, and not simply an important concern in Christian theology. In other words, Cone makes his own experience the judge of who God is and what God is for. While “white” (a term used by Cone not so much to reflect skin color but an oppressor mentality) Christianity commits this grave error without realizing it, Cone does so with full knowledge. So, for instance, while a conservative “white” theologian would say that his own views and actions *should* be directed by the scripture (whether or not he does in fact direct them by this standard), Cone makes the judgement of the oppressed black community the ultimate truth for them– and if mass violence against whites is decided by the group as the best means to effect their liberation, so be it. Cone explicitly distances himself from the approach of King, identifying more with the violence-prone philosophy of the Nation of Islam as propounded by Malcolm X. If someone criticizes his approach, he seems to assume that they’re doing so as a “white” oppressor and should be ignored– an oppressor has no moral right to question the rightness or wrongness of the actions of the people he is oppressing. This of course ignores the criticisms of violence, even from the oppressed, of black Christians like Martin Luther King Jr., Desmond Tutu, etc. Cone is also unfortunately either unfamiliar with or unconvinced by pacifist Christian claims to be committed to peaceful action, since he equates non-violence with inaction and acquiescence. While he is absolutely correct in seeing liberation as an important theme in the Christian faith, he, like “white” religionists, allows his own experience and emotions to determine what is right and wrong to the point of supporting evil in the interest of what he feels is best for his community. However, what can’t be said of Cone’s position on violence is that it is radical, because it is emphatically not. The political heroes of most white Americans are men who used violence to gain political autonomy. Thus, it is not radical for black men and women to look up to figures like Malcolm X and James Cone who advocate doing the same thing if it seems necessary for freedom and self-determination; it is merely status quo. The problem is that Jesus calls all men and women, regardless of color, to rise above the status quo and the myth of redemptive violence.
Seizing on that point, one major problem with Cone’s view of violent revolution is that when oppressed people rise up through violence, they become the oppressor– co-opting the tools of oppression and dehumanization. “Blacks” become “white” through the use of violence. Cone seems unaware of (doubtful) or unaffected by the history of the Bolshevik, Cuban, or French revolutions, wherein the oppressed quickly became the oppressors and became twofold more a child of hell than their oppressors. His view also reshapes Nat Turner, the slave who claimed to have been directed by God to murder white women and children, into an unqualified hero. Cone’s system re-establishes and re-affirms oppression– it does not end it.
For Cone, God is black and the devil is white, because God supports the oppressed and the devil supports the oppressor. But in so closely identifying God with blackness, the actions of those in the black community are now above being questioned, just like the actions of white enslavers were, according to them, above being questioned because they aligned themselves with God and those whom they oppressed with the devil.
What Cone is really trying to get at is that since Jesus supports the cause of the oppressed, the oppressor must so distance himself from his oppressor identity that he becomes indistinguishable from the oppressed– willing to suffer along with them– if he is to be Christ-like. In other words, the “white” must become “black.” Cone says that God can’t be colorless where people suffer for their color. So, where blacks suffer God is black. Taking this logic, which is indeed rooted in Scripture, where the poor suffer, God is poor. Where babies are killed in the womb, God is an aborted baby. Where gay people are bullied, God is gay. It is our obligation to identify with the downtrodden, because that’s what Jesus did. Paul, quoting a hymn of the church about Jesus, puts it this way:
“In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:
‘Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!'”
–Philippians 2:5-8
Jesus not only gives up his power to express love to the powerless by identifying with them, He also takes on their sin and suffers with and for them. This is the essence of the gospel, and it often gets lost when we translate it into our daily lives. For Cone, this important truth gets lost in the banner of black militantism and the cycle of violence. For so many American Christians, it gets lost when they reduce the political nature of Christianity to scolding those whose private expression of morality doesn’t line up with theirs. We refuse to identify with sinners (which is a category we all fit into) in love.
One major issue for Cone is one of authority. The experience of one group of people (the oppressed) becomes equivalent with universal truth, and not simply an important concern in Christian theology. In other words, Cone makes his own experience the judge of who God is and what God is for. While “white” (a term used by Cone not so much to reflect skin color but an oppressor mentality) Christianity commits this grave error without realizing it, Cone does so with full knowledge. So, for instance, while a conservative “white” theologian would say that his own views and actions *should* be directed by the scripture (whether or not he does in fact direct them by this standard), Cone makes the judgement of the oppressed black community the ultimate truth for them– and if mass violence against whites is decided by the group as the best means to effect their liberation, so be it. Cone explicitly distances himself from the approach of King, identifying more with the violence-prone philosophy of the Nation of Islam as propounded by Malcolm X. If someone criticizes his approach, he seems to assume that they’re doing so as a “white” oppressor and should be ignored– an oppressor has no moral right to question the rightness or wrongness of the actions of the people he is oppressing. This of course ignores the criticisms of violence, even from the oppressed, of black Christians like Martin Luther King Jr., Desmond Tutu, etc. Cone is also unfortunately either unfamiliar with or unconvinced by pacifist Christian claims to be committed to peaceful action, since he equates non-violence with inaction and acquiescence. While he is absolutely correct in seeing liberation as an important theme in the Christian faith, he, like “white” religionists, allows his own experience and emotions to determine what is right and wrong to the point of supporting evil in the interest of what he feels is best for his community. However, what can’t be said of Cone’s position on violence is that it is radical, because it is emphatically not. The political heroes of most white Americans are men who used violence to gain political autonomy. Thus, it is not radical for black men and women to look up to figures like Malcolm X and James Cone who advocate doing the same thing if it seems necessary for freedom and self-determination; it is merely status quo. The problem is that Jesus calls all men and women, regardless of color, to rise above the status quo and the myth of redemptive violence.
Seizing on that point, one major problem with Cone’s view of violent revolution is that when oppressed people rise up through violence, they become the oppressor– co-opting the tools of oppression and dehumanization. “Blacks” become “white” through the use of violence. Cone seems unaware of (doubtful) or unaffected by the history of the Bolshevik, Cuban, or French revolutions, wherein the oppressed quickly became the oppressors and became twofold more a child of hell than their oppressors. His view also reshapes Nat Turner, the slave who claimed to have been directed by God to murder white women and children, into an unqualified hero. Cone’s system re-establishes and re-affirms oppression– it does not end it.
For Cone, God is black and the devil is white, because God supports the oppressed and the devil supports the oppressor. But in so closely identifying God with blackness, the actions of those in the black community are now above being questioned, just like the actions of white enslavers were, according to them, above being questioned because they aligned themselves with God and those whom they oppressed with the devil.
What Cone is really trying to get at is that since Jesus supports the cause of the oppressed, the oppressor must so distance himself from his oppressor identity that he becomes indistinguishable from the oppressed– willing to suffer along with them– if he is to be Christ-like. In other words, the “white” must become “black.” Cone says that God can’t be colorless where people suffer for their color. So, where blacks suffer God is black. Taking this logic, which is indeed rooted in Scripture, where the poor suffer, God is poor. Where babies are killed in the womb, God is an aborted baby. Where gay people are bullied, God is gay. It is our obligation to identify with the downtrodden, because that’s what Jesus did. Paul, quoting a hymn of the church about Jesus, puts it this way:
“In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:
‘Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!'”
–Philippians 2:5-8
Jesus not only gives up his power to express love to the powerless by identifying with them, He also takes on their sin and suffers with and for them. This is the essence of the gospel, and it often gets lost when we translate it into our daily lives. For Cone, this important truth gets lost in the banner of black militantism and the cycle of violence. For so many American Christians, it gets lost when they reduce the political nature of Christianity to scolding those whose private expression of morality doesn’t line up with theirs. We refuse to identify with sinners (which is a category we all fit into) in love.
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) rated Prodigal in Books
Jun 7, 2018
(This review can be found on my blog <a href="http://themisadventuresofatwentysomething.blogspot.com/">The (Mis)Adventures of a Twenty-Something Year Old Girl</a>).
Wow...just wow! The feels in this book were just wow! Prodigal by Rektok Ross has definitely become my favorite book this year. In fact, it may've become my favorite book ever, seriously. I had my reservations about this book being as it is Christian fiction. Although I am Christian, I don't like books that are too preachy because it's like they are preachy to the choir. However, this book was not preachy but helped get the message across. It is just amazing!
The title didn't really give me much to go on. In fact, if I'm being honest, when I first heard of the book, the title didn't catch my attention at all.
The cover is definitely original; I'll give it that that. However, like the title it's a bit plain. However, the sheep can be a symbolism in Christianity. Prodigal also touches on the story of the Prodigal Son which is another reason I believe the sheep is on the cover.
The world building was fantastically done! Ross does a great job of portraying a non-believing teen. Ross also portrays the high school relationship drama very well. I actually felt like I was back in high school while reading this book.
The pacing was set superbly! This was one of those books that I didn't want to put down because I had to know what would happen next. Unfortunately, life got in the way sometimes, and I did have to put the book down, but I would pick it up as soon as I got a chance.
The plot was so sweet! Lexy moves to a new state which means a new school her senior year, meets the uber hot quarterback, and they fall in love. However, there's some problems which means their relationship does suffer. Along the way, Lexy finds God. As I've said before, this book isn't over the top preachy. It's not subtle when it comes to God, but it's not in your face either. Oh, there weren't any plot twists that I noticed, but that didn't affect the book.
The characters all felt very realistic to me. I started out not liking Lexy because I didn't like the way she treated and spoke to her mother. However, Lexy began to grow on me, and I soon felt what Lexy felt when it came to what all was going on around her. I also liked Ash. I like how Ross portrayed him as a typical Christian teen and not one who was overly religious. Ash also had his demons so to speak. I even liked Blythe even though she was the resident mean girl. There's no excuse as to why Blythe behaved the way she did, but towards the ending of the book, it's easier to understand why she's the way she is.
I enjoyed the dialogue and the writing in this book. Again, I want to stress that this book doesn't just focus on God and Christianity. If anything, that's more of a minor subplot. There's no real violence in this book and only one swear word (the word ass).
If there's only one book you'll ever pick up, I'd highly suggest Prodigal by Rektok Ross. This book was so much more than I was expecting and left me with so many feels! If I had enough money, I'd buy this book for friends, family, strangers, readers of my blog, and well, everyone really! This book has it all - a great cast of characters, a world that pulls the reader right in, a fantastic story line, and a great message!
I'd recommend this book to those aged 14+ who are believers of God, non-believers, those struggling with their faith, those that are new believers, and just everyone in general.
(I received a free paperback copy from the author in exchange for a fair and honest review).
Wow...just wow! The feels in this book were just wow! Prodigal by Rektok Ross has definitely become my favorite book this year. In fact, it may've become my favorite book ever, seriously. I had my reservations about this book being as it is Christian fiction. Although I am Christian, I don't like books that are too preachy because it's like they are preachy to the choir. However, this book was not preachy but helped get the message across. It is just amazing!
The title didn't really give me much to go on. In fact, if I'm being honest, when I first heard of the book, the title didn't catch my attention at all.
The cover is definitely original; I'll give it that that. However, like the title it's a bit plain. However, the sheep can be a symbolism in Christianity. Prodigal also touches on the story of the Prodigal Son which is another reason I believe the sheep is on the cover.
The world building was fantastically done! Ross does a great job of portraying a non-believing teen. Ross also portrays the high school relationship drama very well. I actually felt like I was back in high school while reading this book.
The pacing was set superbly! This was one of those books that I didn't want to put down because I had to know what would happen next. Unfortunately, life got in the way sometimes, and I did have to put the book down, but I would pick it up as soon as I got a chance.
The plot was so sweet! Lexy moves to a new state which means a new school her senior year, meets the uber hot quarterback, and they fall in love. However, there's some problems which means their relationship does suffer. Along the way, Lexy finds God. As I've said before, this book isn't over the top preachy. It's not subtle when it comes to God, but it's not in your face either. Oh, there weren't any plot twists that I noticed, but that didn't affect the book.
The characters all felt very realistic to me. I started out not liking Lexy because I didn't like the way she treated and spoke to her mother. However, Lexy began to grow on me, and I soon felt what Lexy felt when it came to what all was going on around her. I also liked Ash. I like how Ross portrayed him as a typical Christian teen and not one who was overly religious. Ash also had his demons so to speak. I even liked Blythe even though she was the resident mean girl. There's no excuse as to why Blythe behaved the way she did, but towards the ending of the book, it's easier to understand why she's the way she is.
I enjoyed the dialogue and the writing in this book. Again, I want to stress that this book doesn't just focus on God and Christianity. If anything, that's more of a minor subplot. There's no real violence in this book and only one swear word (the word ass).
If there's only one book you'll ever pick up, I'd highly suggest Prodigal by Rektok Ross. This book was so much more than I was expecting and left me with so many feels! If I had enough money, I'd buy this book for friends, family, strangers, readers of my blog, and well, everyone really! This book has it all - a great cast of characters, a world that pulls the reader right in, a fantastic story line, and a great message!
I'd recommend this book to those aged 14+ who are believers of God, non-believers, those struggling with their faith, those that are new believers, and just everyone in general.
(I received a free paperback copy from the author in exchange for a fair and honest review).