Skip to main content

Books of the Year: 2012

I've been extraordinarily busy at work lately so I'm barely getting this out before Christmas.. Oh well. I still want to keep up the tradition and briefly mention the best five books that I read for the first time in 2012. This year was the year of the long books so my volume, again, was a little lower, but I believe I made up for it with quality. Anyways, here's the list!

5. History of Sexuality Vol. 2: The Use of Pleasure by Michel Foucault


All three volumes are worth reading, but this one stuck out to me the most by showing that the way(s) we have thought about sex and sexuality over the past few hundred years is far from the only way. The heavy citation of primary source material also makes this book invaluable. Anyone studying sexual ethics needs to wrestle with this book.

4. Lord of the Rings by J.R.R Tolkien


I read this on my flight to China and back. Even though I knew the whole story it was a very rich and enjoyable read. I love the way Tolkien creates a world full of meaning and wonder. I enjoyed that as much if not more than the story.

3. Song of Songs  by J. Cheryl Exum


There are several good commentaries on the Song of Songs, but I found Exum's to both be the best and the most fun to read. You can tell that she's spent a lifetime in the Song and has many creative solutions to difficult passages. Not only is there a lot of good information and sound reasoning, but also a lot of great prose. It may be the best written commentary I've ever read.

2. Church Dogmatics Vol I.2 by Karl Barth


What can one say except, it's Barth, so of course it's brilliant. I learned a lot pouring through these pages. Yes, Barth is dense and hard to grasp at times but the payoff is big. If nothing else, it's worth reading for this very very lengthy discussion on authority. It's a very rich section with profound practical implications. He articulates, for me, a strong reason why I could never become Catholic (or, for different reasons, Episcopalian under their current leadership).

1. Deliverance of God: An Apocalyptic Rereading of Justification in Paul by Douglas Campbell


I believe Campbell's work is the most significant on Paul since Sanders. He provides a fresh rereading of Romans from the foundations up. One that I find, at many points, persuasive. It's an extremely long and difficult read - I think I spent about four months in it - but it is rewarding. I would rate it as one of the five best books I've ever read.


And as usual, here's my list of books that came out in 2012 that I didn't get to read and am most excited about.


5. Bible Made Impossible, The: Why Biblicism Is Not a Truly Evangelical Reading of Scripture by Christian Smith


Perhaps the most controversial book of the year in Evangelical circles. I'd like, at some point to see what the hubbub was about for myself and I expect to find myself at least somewhat in agreement with him. My only question will be if he is too polemical to be constructive as these types of works sometimes are.

4. The Jewish Teachers of Jesus, James, and Jude: What Earliest Christianity Learned from the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha by David deSilva


I've been trying to read a lot more of the apocrypha and pseudepigrapha over the past couple of years. The insights it has opened up for me into the New Testament have been significant. This book has gotten a lot of positive press and should be a sure guide.

3. Acts: Introduction and 1:1-2:47 by Craig Keener


Keener is one of my two or three favorite Evangelical commentators. I love his little commentary on Romans. This should  be his magnum opus. No other text of Scripture is as well suited for his skill set.

2. Four Views on the Apostle Paul ed. Michael Bird


I love Pauline studies and the contributors to this volume are very good. I'm particularly interested to see the reaction to Campbell's presentation. I love Luke Timothy Johnson as well and Mark Nanos' Jewish treatment of Paul intrigues me too,

1. Simon Peter in Scripture and Memory: The New Testament Apostle in the Early Church by Markus Bockmuehl


Bockmuehl is becoming my favorite New Testament scholar. His emphasis on the importance of reception history for understanding meaning is a breath of fresh air. I'm looking forward, very much, to his treatment of the undervalued apostle.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Commentary Series Overview

When I write commentary reviews, one of my main goals is to assess how well the commentator hit the intended audience of the commentary and utilized the format of the commentary. This often necessitates cluttering up the post discussing issues of format. To eliminate that, I thought that I would make some general remarks about the format and audience of each of the series that appear in my reviews. Terms like liberal, conservative, etc. are not used pejoratively but simply as descriptors. Many of you are familiar with Jeremy Pierce's commentary series overview. If you don't see a particular series covered here, check out his post to see if it's reviewed there. I am making no attempt at covering every series, just the series that I use. Additionally, new series (such as the NCCS) have been started in the five years since he wrote his very helpful guide, so I thought that it might not be completely out of order to have another person tackle commentary series overviews. This…

Paul's Argument in Galatians 3:15-29

15 Brothers and sisters, let me take an example from everyday life. Just as no one can set aside or add to a human covenant that has been duly established, so it is in this case. 16 The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. Scripture does not say “and to seeds,” meaning many people, but “and to your seed,” meaning one person, who is Christ. 17 What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise. 18 For if the inheritance depends on the law, then it no longer depends on the promise; but God in his grace gave it to Abraham through a promise. 19 Why, then, was the law given at all? It was added because of transgressions until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come. The law was given through angels and entrusted to a mediator. 20 A mediator, however, implies more than one party; but God is one. 21 Is the law, therefore, opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not! Fo…

Doctor Who: Rose Tyler - Traitor?

The end of season four was very, very controversial. When I first saw it, I felt cheated. I was angry. The more I think about it, the more I think I see what Russell Davies was doing. He is too good of a writer and the show is too carefully crafted for him to screw up Rose's character and the end of a four season storyline. So while the ending isn't strictly part of our series, it is tangentially related, and I've agonized over that scene in Bad Wolf Bay so much that I have to write about it. :)

To briefly set things up, near the end of the final episode of season four, there is a meta-crisis, that results in a part human. part Time Lord Doctor being generated. He has all of the Doctor's memories, and thinks and acts like the Doctor. However, importantly, he only has one heart and cannot regenerate. He only has one life to live. The meta-crisis Doctor brought full resolution to the battle fought against the Daleks, and in the process, wiped them out. Thus, the real Doc…