i have always been one of those people who will only read one book at a time. it bothers me to read more than one. my mind is invested in whatever i'm reading, so it's hard to invest in more than one.
somehow, i have found myself reading four books at once.
four.
here is how this slippery slope unfolded:
i started reading frankenstein. cool. my one book.
then my neighborhood group started reading a book together, so that's two. but i felt ok about it because i only read a chapter a week, and i'm doing it with other people. it's called "how people change" and it is interesting.
then...
i don't know how or why...
but i started reading a book called "lincoln and douglas: the debates that changed america." i read from every genre, but this is my first history book. i feel like i'm cheating on frankenstein. frankenstein is good, but like all classic literature...i kind of hate it, but i'm sure i will love it when i read the last few pages. i got bored with it, and started reading about lincoln. i have a pile of unread books and it was in the pile. just sitting there.
book four...
i went over to a house. these people have my dream book collection. so many different genres. quality books in each of them. i picked one up and said "were you telling me about this book? someone was." and next thing i know, it was being lent to me.
the irresistible revolution by shane clairborne.
i want to immediately rebel against anything rob bell validates, but it's good. i'm not that far into it, but i understand the thought process so far.
anyway.
i'm a literature whore. i don't know how this happened.
and if you need more material with which to mock my nerd qualities:
today i am attending a reformation day party. there will be a powerpoint presentation about church history, and then a viewing of the movie "luther." and at some point today i'm going to read the 95 theses. for fun. and because it's the anniversary of when he posted them.
happy reformation day!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I have several comments on this post...
1. I hated Frankenstein. It's good to read it for it's "classic" status, but...yeah.
2. I am curious to know what the neighborhood group book turn out. I might need to read that one.
3. What's wrong with Rob Bell??? Your review of the revolution will be much anticipated, however.
4. I enjoy church history. We should make a club called "the nerdy saint's society" or something. I nominate you for president. :)
frankenstein was by far the best (long) book out of my brit lit class. that doesnt mean i ever want to read it again, but it was by far the best one.
emily your sister
rob bell. i associate him with the emergent church, which may not be entirely fair. but i feel like "they" equate preaching the Gospel with saying outrageous things to prove that Christians are not cheesy or stiff. but the Bible is outrageous enough by itself. there's a lot of big statements and ideas, but not a lot of depth.
Hmm. I find that interesting. I like Rob Bell. I think he has a lot of good insight. Have you ever read "The Velvet Elvis" by him? I would recommend it. After all your other books, of course. Haha.
As far as the emergent church, not entirely sure what you mean by that term. I know that in the New Testament times, the "emergent" church was when Christianity exploded around the world, but I've never heard the term in conjunction with modern times.
If, by chance, you mean the "new movement" church with the trendy, coffee shop, type church, I can see how some could be construed as shallow. I've attended some that were less than perfect, but, hey, what church is perfect? I am of the opinion that such churches are trying to show unbelievers/unchurched people that Christ is relevant to them and their lives, not just some old-fashioned idea that doesn't matter anymore. Sometimes that takes being a little outrageous. Or something. Haha. But I understand that any "method" of "doing church" can be taken to an extreme.
Post a Comment