07 August 2006

Book Meme

I've been tagged by Michael, and I'm just making cups of tea at the moment, so what better thing to do than the book meme?

1. One book that changed your life: Love’s Endeavour, Love’s Expense by W. H. Vanstone.

It was a book that I read when God was calling me back into faith and into the church. My own faith challenge was never “Is there a God?” but “Is God good or is God both good and evil?” This book helped me to affirm in my heart that God is good.


2. One book that you’ve read more than once:
I don’t normally read books more than once. I probably have done but I can’t think of one off-hand.


3. One book you’d want on a desert island: probably Margaret Silf’s Wayfaring which takes one through St. Ignatius’ Spiritual Exercises.

I can’t imagine having only one book on a desert island, but I think this book is probably not only as good as any, but better than most.


4. One book that made you laugh: Notes from a Small Island by Bill Bryson.

This book didn’t only make me laugh, it made me explosively guffaw at inappropriate times on public transport. If you have some knowledge about life in Britain and you want everyone to think you are a stark-raving lunatic so they won’t sit next to you, this is the book for you!


5. One book that made you cry: Anyone who knows me in person knows that I could probably cry reading a book on particle physics.

Probably I Dared to Call Him Father by Bilquis Sheikh. Although I’m somewhat nervous about Christian exclusivity, this is one of those amazing stories about God bringing someone to faith in a miraculous way with very little prior knowledge of Christianity or the bible. I have known two un-churched people of “Christian” background who God brought to faith in miraculous ways.


6. One book that you wish had been written: The History of the Kingdom of God: The last 500 years.


7. One book that you wish had never been written: Das Kapital by Karl Marx.

The reason I wish it had never been written is not so much because of the book itself but because of a story I heard about Marx’s childhood – if the story is true. The story is that Marx wrote a paper for his Lutheran confirmation class where he asserted that Acts 2:44-45 were verses to be enacted in this world. He was failed on the grounds that this was not part of Christian discipleship today. How would world history have been different if Marx had become an activist Christian?

8. One book you’re currently reading: The Nonviolent Atonement by J. Denny Weaver.


9. One book you’ve been meaning to read: Reaching out without Dumbing Down: a theology of worship for the turn-of-the century culture by Marva Dawn.

This is on my bookshelf and I keep meaning to read it.


10. Now tag five people:
Sally Dave Will Sandlestraps Dave

14 comments:

Michael Westmoreland-White said...

Interesting choices. That's one of Marva Dawn's best works, but it responds especially to "dumbing down" processes on the U.S. scene. Your mileage in the U.K. may vary.
That's Denny Weaver's best work to date and one of the most important works on the atonement ever. Some of your others are unfamiliar--but that's part of the fun of the game for bibliophiles looking for new books to browse! :-)

PamBG said...

Quite a number of people have recommended Denny Weaver's book and I'm finding that the narrative Christus Victor thing isn't particulary exciting me. Not saying anything about Weaver, it's just not grabbing me.

I've had a glance through Marva Dawn's book and I realise its quite American, but I'd like to read it anyway.

I'm trying to work out my views on "styles of worship" - for want of a better term. I've been a lay preacher for about four years, but that's quite different from having pastoral charge for particular congregations. I suspect that different approaches to worship reach different people at different stages in their faith walk.

As an American who has lived in the UK for about 18 years, I *am* intrigued by all the talk of "feel good" worship in the US. It's hard to sort out what's hyperbole and what's true. (I have to say that I do opt for the Episcopalian service when I visit my folks because the Methodist church's service seems more like a variety-show to me and it doesn't seem too God-centred. But that's only one experience, so I don't know whether to genralise or not.)

Sandalstraps said...

I just noticed that you tagged me! I've been away for the past ten days, intentionally doing nothing with the computer. But now that I know I've been tageed, I'll get right on it. Thanks for the tag.

Sandalstraps said...

You can find mine here.

Willie said...

Thanks for tagging me, Pam!

Christian Socialist said...

Christians to-day haven't got the conviction to live by the Apostles Doctrine of ACTS 2:44-45

PamBG said...

christian socialist,

Undoubtedly that statement is true in an "objective" sense. I simply don't feel in a position to be throwing the first stone. I can only think that it is right to strive to do so.

Anonymous said...

The Apostles threw the first stone. From which the Church. Act 2:47 And the Lord added to their number day by day those who were being saved.

PamBG said...

I'm sorry, I do not understand that comment nor do I understand the reason for making the comment.

Anonymous said...

"I simply don't feel in a position to be throwing the first stone".

I do not understand that comment nor do I understand the reason for making the comment.

PamBG said...

Anon, I see no place in the book of Acts where the Apostles engaged in any sort of actual or metaphorical stoning.

I really do not understand your point.

You hide behind anonymity and you are being cryptic.

I think that the commandment to first reprove your brother or sister in private (Matthew 18:15) requires the honesty of identifying oneself and the honesty of speaking plainly.

Anonymous said...

"I simply don't feel in a position to be throwing the first stone".

YOUR WORDS IN RESPONSE TO THE CHRISTIAN SOCIALIST.

PamBG said...

The reference to not casting stones is "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone". And no-one cast stones because they were not without sin.

So what is your point?

Are you claiming that in the book of Acts, the Apostles claimed to be without sin with respect to giving away all their worldly goods and that they went out and criticised fellow Christians for not doing so and thus the fellowship grew?

As you saying that I ought to be sinless and that I ought to criticise fellow Christians?

I'm afraid that your anonymous posting and your refusal to say what you mean feels like you are trolling this site. If your next post is not plain about your meaning, I will not respond further.

Anonymous said...

PamBG said...
christian socialist,

Undoubtedly that statement is true in an "objective" sense. I simply don't feel in a position to be throwing the first stone. I can only think that it is right to strive to do so.


What is it that you don't understand I feel sorry for any one that sits under your peaching