BOOK REVIEW - FACE TO FACE VOLUMES ONE AND TWO BY KENNETH BOA

 I was at a prayer-for-missions training back in '13 (called "School of Prayer for All Nations), and we were given a copy of Face to Face Volume 1. While I haven't come up with an island list of books, definitely Volume 1 and possibly Volume 2 would be on the list.

"Face to Face Volume One: Praying the Scriptures for Intimate Worship" is my favorite devotional book. It is desired for a 90 day reading. Each of the three months have 31 readings. The goal of that is that you have something to read each day.

Each of those days are divided into 8 parts of prayer: 

1. Adoration (praise to God).
2. Confession of sin
3. Renewal
4. Petition (includes a paragraph for deeper prayer, with seven variations).
5. Intercession (includes a paragraph for deeper prayer, with seven variations).
6. Affirmation.
7. Thanksgiving. 
8. Closing Prayer.

 Each of these sections include usually two passages (sometimes three). I love it because it is focused on praying Scripture, which Boa uses his own translation for, worded for it to be a prayer from us to God.

Of course, this gave me interest in "Face to Face Volume Two: Praying The Scriptures for Spiritual Growth." It has several similarities - being designed for 3 months, and being solely Scripture. However, this volume is more focused on Spiritual character. The readings are divided into 5 areas:

1. The Attributes of God.
2. The Works of God.
3. My Relationship to God.
4. The Character I Want to Cultivate.
5. My Relationship to Others.

The readings for Volume 1 are longer than Volume 2: 3-4 pages and 2-3 pages respectively (probably because of the number of sections). There are a lot of verses (probably the majority) that are in both Volumes. 

These can be read separately (Volume 1 for the first three months, Volume two for the next quarter). Recently I read Volume 1 in the morning and Volume 2 in the evening. 

I usually end a review on whether I recommend the book or not. If it isn't obvious, I highly recommend both Volumes, and especially the first.

ARE THE NO KINGS RALLIES JUST A WARM-UP? PLUS, AN UPCOMING SERIES THAT IS NOT COMPLETELY UNRELATED.

King David Playing the Harp by Gerard van Honthorst

You may have heard of the "No Kings" protests. They seem to think that President Trump is acting like King Trump. I personally believe its because he's doing what he said he'd do (politicians aren't supposed to do that, are they?) 

The biggest issues that are driving that are the views on illegal immigration and transsexuallism. Sorry, but mind translates these respectively as condoning law-breaking and as telling God He goofed in creating us. 

Before I go further, I don't consider myself a MAGA fan; I might even identify more with the label "Deplorable." I have questions on how Iran is being handled or some of his other policies. Like every other President between Washington and whoever we elect in 2228 (no, not a typo) he has both good and bad points. 

In reality, both major parties act like they're monarchs. We currently have a country divided, with both sides wanting their rights protected to the point it removes protection of the rights of their opponents. My opinion, but are any No-Kings crowd ready to stand up for me not using the right pronouns or not wanting my taxes to pay for Planned Parenthood or make sure that we keep the bad guys from crossing our border?

It hit me, though. The reality is President Trump is just a President, not a King, and answerable to the true King of all the earth, Jesus of Nazareth. Former VP candidate Sen. Tim Kaine argued that he felt better with rights coming from the Government preferable to being given by a creator. Could it be that a lot of our leaders as well as a good portion of U.S. citizens want to be accountable only to themselves and not the King of Kings and Lord of Lords?

Yes, I ended on a question. I'm not sure I've got the answer. Do you have it? Please let me know.

But now, I'll look at my plans for the blog. Yes, it's mostly reviews and a few opinion pieces like this one, and I'm not finding time to do interviews. But I do have in my mind a series. It's inspired by a comment the Southern Baptist University's Presiden Al Mohler said on The Briefing, that many believe creating art requires transgression, both in their work and in their lifestyle. It crosses over into my interest in the arts, which is a major reason for me starting this blog, and thoughts on heroes (super and otherwise). So I'm going to hopefully have that possibly in May, or maybe in June or July (no later than that). 

Let me know what you think. I'm looking forward to writing the series, and hope you are to reading it as well.

MOVIE REVIEW - DIXNEY PIXAR "THE INCREDIBLES" AND "INCREDIBLES 2"

I'll confess - I haven't been interested in most Pixar films. So far, I've only watched three, two of which I thoroughly enjoyed, the third not so much ("Finding Nemo"). In case you can't guess, the two I liked were "The Incredibles" and "Incredibles 2."

"The Incredibles" came out in 2005, the same year as "The Fantastic Four," which was interesting because three of the Incredibles had power matches with the FF (super strength, elasticity, and invisibility). However, the two movies had nothing in common. The Incredibles not only has the action you'd expect from a superhero movie, but it also deals with family issues, plus some good philosophy: ... I was going to give a quote, but that would have spoiled it.

Fourteen years later, Disney/Pixar released "Incredibles 2." It had big shoes to fill, and succeeded, keeping the charm that was in the original. There are hints of being a formula movie comparing the plots, but they both have their unique emphasis. And most of the time, the original is better and more enjoyable than the sequel, but this is an exception.

One difference between these movies are that they're rated PG, no "13" added to it. The Marvel and DC movies are always rated PG-13, with a couple pushing the envelope for an R rating. One possible reason "the Incredibles" movies earned the straight PG is because it is aimed to be a movie that parents can feel comfortable bringing the whole family to. Now, as you'd expect, there are things that are aimed more at adults in both films, but if I had kids I would gladly watch the film with them. 

I thoroughly recommend both movies.

THE SPIRITUAL STATE OF EGGS AND RABBITS AND WHETHER CHRISTIANS SHOULD CELEBRATE THE PASSOVER

The rabbit gets enough criticism at Easter time, but I thought I'd add the Christmas controversy to the table. Photo by yours truly at Cincinnati Zoo and Botanical Park, Oct. 22.

It's that time of the year... well, one of the times. Let me share three concepts I saw on one FB thread, from different authors:

• Rabbits and Eggs are pagan.
• Rabbits and Eggs are Biblical.
• Christians should observe the Passover, since Jesus did.

If you're a regular reader of the blog, I have at least one installment each year dealing whether Christmas and Easter are holidays Christians should observe. Well, when I saw this, I thought it was time for another.

Anybody besides me crack up (pun unintentional) about the two statements about rabbits and eggs? Both hit the edge of credibility. 

Given, pagans use rabbits and eggs as fertility symbols. But does that mean they're pagan? Uh, no. Who created the rabbits and the eggs? Sorry, but I think it's ridiculous to call rabbits pagans. Same with eggs.

So are they Biblical? Well, if you look above, I gave all the Biblical references that the authors gave on the rabbits and eggs quotes. What? There aren't any Scripture references? No, they didn't give any. A commenter noted that the one who said rabbits and eggs were Biblical gave NO references to prove his point. My hunch is he's one of the troublemakers who make a ridiculous statement to start heated debate and disappears. (By the time I got to it, the comment option had been turned off for that thread.) 

I'm one who prefer using the term "Resurrection Sunday" instead of Easter. There is an instance in the KJV where "Easter" appears in Acts 12:4, but the Greek Word is pascha, the word elsewhere and in all other versions is translated passover. I also don't think Easter eggs and bunnies have a place in the church. However, Paul states that he who observes the day does so to the Lord, and the one who does not observe the day, to the Lord he does not observe it. (Romans 14:6). Why can't we aceept those who disagree? Maybe because we like disputing doubtful things (Jubilee Bible says "doubtful discernment) (Rom. 14:1).

Let's move from Resurrection Sunday to Passover. I read that in the Nicene Council one other item decided on was to separate the dating for Easter from the Passover, in spite of the fact that they're connected together. But should a Christian celebrate the Passover? Or should he abstain? Or is it another of those things that we shouldn't divide over?

I'll definitely go with it not being something to divide over. But let me deal with some arguments.

First, dealing with those who say Christians should observe the Passover. I heard a conversation where someone used 1 Corinthians 5:7-8 to say it commands Christians to observe the feast. Here's the passage: "Therefore purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, since you truly are unleavened. For indeed Christ, our Passover, has been sacrificed for us. Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with unleavened bread of sincerity and truth."

To me, it's obvious it's not talking about the official celebration of Passover and the Feast of Unleavened bread. Thus, it's not a command for Gentile Christians to act like Jews. 

Now, Christians often say that Passover has been replaced with the Eucharist/Communion/The Lord's Supper. Sorry, I don't see that in the text. They are two different events observed differently. Passover is an annual event, starting a week of celebration. Communion is offered with differing frequency. Becky and I both grew up in churches that observed communion weekly. When we got into Baptistic Churches, it was observed on the first Sunday of the month. I attended a church that at first had communion irregularly, but realized it was so rare they celebrated it on the first Sunday. Another decided to go from monthly to quarterly. None of those options are commanded or condemned in Scripture.

A couple of years, though, I was reading through Exodus, and there was something that hit me when God was giving instructions for the Passover (Exodus 12:43-49). Participation was limited to households where all the men have been circumcised. Is that a law we should observe? It does make me question whether Gentile Christians are to observe the Passover. On the other hand, one can try to argue that in the Age of Grace it refers to the circumcision of the heart, though it sounds like the argument of someone who wants to keep the Passover because he has the freedom to.

But I will again put in a plug for Easter caroling. One book suggested it, and I thought it sounds great and uplifiting.

BOOK REVIEW - "CHRISTMAS K-9 PATROL" (DAKOTA K-9 UNIT BOOK 9) BY LYNETTE EASON AND LENORA WORTH

Who has placed a bounty on Dakota K-9 Unit's Tech Specialist Cheyenne Chen? Can her co-worker and friend Jack Donadio and his K-9 keep her safe? Meanwhile, back on the ranch, how will U.S. Marshal Lorelai Danvers and her Austrailian Shephard K-9 partner survive the triple threat of a blizzard, a murderous fugitive, and a crochety widower who isn't sure he wants a pretty law enforcement official interfering as he faces a familiar foe?

As usual, December sees a two-novella edition to give a denouement to Love Inspired Suspense's 8-novel, multi-author K-9 Unit series. "Christmas K-9 Patrol" fills this role for the Dakota K-9 Unit series with "Deadly Christmas Trap" by Lynette Eason and Lenora Worth's "Dangerous Holiday Manhunt." By the way, is it my imagination, or does the first of the two novellas feature the tech analyst? (Well, one of the four I've read technically deals with the rookie sister of the tech, but still...) 

Both stories have their twists and thrills, as well as compelling main characters and adorable K-9s. If you're a mystery lover, neither are who-dun-its, but the first is one where you see the chess game between good girl and bad guy, and the latter has you guessing the motivation until the climax.

The Dakota K-9 Unit was the best series I've read. These stories - especially "Dangerous Holiday Manhunt - seem to be tied only by common characters but not by plot. Still, they are enjoyable, and I recommend both the series and this pair of novellas.
 

BOOK REVIEW AND CRITIQUE - "THE THIRD CONVERSION" (A NOVELETTE) BY R. SCOTT RODIN

 

Were Fundraiser Walter  Rodgers' apprehensions about the new employee he was training relevant? Was the completely different approach Rodgers and the ministry Hands Of Love International promoted something Carl Burns could comprehend, let alone accept?

R. Scott Rodin poured out his heart and convictions in the  novella "The Third Conversion. He clearly had the aim to win the reader over to his conclusions, and he made a good case. Rodin wrote two other novelettes "The Million-Dollar Dime" and "The Seventh Key." He also has written and co-written non-fiction books dealing with the same subject.

The scenario is a worker nearing retirement is training a young man in the fund-rasing part of a Christian ministry, and is more concerned with the development of the lives of the donors to the ministry than on getting sizeable contributions.

This is a thought provoking book. It does have some preachy parts in this book: this novelette is clearly written for a Christian audience. The title "The Three Conversions" is from a quote by Martin Luther: "There are three conversions necessary for every man: the head, the heart, and the purse."

I recommend this book for those looking into fundraising and an overall one-kingdom theology (as opposed to a two kingdom view where an individual has one set of standards for Sunday and another for the rest of the week).

Allow me to also offer up a critique. When reviewing fiction, I usually award the author a five star review, because they have put in a lot of work developing characters, plot, and maybe going a little deeper. However, I struggled reading this book, and partly because there are certain practices usually done that Rodin didn't do. None of this takes away from his theme in this book, but it could be difficult for readers.

The first thing is point of view. I've learned through my studying in writing that the preferred approach is to have a single point of view character. It could be a first person or third person narration, but in the latter, the author would keep everything from the perspective of a character until either the end of a chapter or a line dividing up the chapter. Sometimes, we would see the perspective change from Walt's to Carl's without a dividing line.

A second thing are tagline when people are speaking. You may see tags like "said," "thought," "declared," "questioned," etc. Rodin used these and others. In writing classes, however, I've seen two basic views: 

1. The only acceptable tags are "said" or "asked." Anything else is an unnecessary elaboration.
2. The only acceptable tag is "said." If the sentence ends with a question mark, "asked" is redundant. 

With such a limited choice, writers often use non-verbal tags to help identify the speaker. So you have characters drinking coffee, rolling eyes, scratching their heads, and things like that to make things more interesting. 

One problem I see in Rodin's writing -  a common problem among authors - is telling instead of showing. For example, once Carl says something that suprised himself. What does that look like?

Again, none of these complaints take away from the value of the book. I highly recommend it.

MOVIE REVIEW - "LINCOLN"

 

This is the 13th Steven Spielberg movie I've seen. True, most of the ones I saw were the typical summer blockbusters with this and "Schindler's List" being the only Oscar season historical films I've seen. But I find it one of the most unique and unforgetable. 

First, I left feeling like I just had a history lesson. In High School history, the 13th through 15th amendments were covered basically in a paragraph, leaving me to think these passed post-Civil War. In watching this movie, I realized that it passed Congress as the Civil War was ending, before the Southern states were able to block it. The movie made it clear that Lincoln was trying to end two things (slavery and the War) at the same time without sabotaging the other. 

Second, while there were plenty of characters that could be labeled antagonists, there wasn't anyone who would be designated as a villain, in my opinion. 

Daniel Day-Lewis deservedly won an Oscar, but he had a cast of peers to work with including Sally Fields and Tommy Lee Jones, both of which earned at the least the Oscar nominations they received.

Again, not a typical Spielberg movie. But one I feel better off having watched.