What are you reading?

[bèlla]

It is hard to find adult Christmas books that do not involve whirlwind romance and "my life is incomplete, miserable, and falling apart without a perfect man" mentality.

Beth Wiseman has a great collection of Amish novellas with nice storylines and Christian values. There are several Amish themed Christmas books by reputable authors. You can view them on Goodreads.

~Bella

 

[bèlla]

.

 

[bèlla]

.

 

[bèlla]

.

 

[( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)]

After a season of hiatus, continuing my note taking from David J. Schwartz's classic.

What a treasure trove of great insights.

 

[bèlla]

.

 

[bèlla]

.

 

[public hermit]

The Meaning of Marriage by Timothy Keller

Timothy Keller shows that God created marriage to bring us closer to him and to bring us more joy in our lives. It is a glorious relationship that is also the most misunderstood and mysterious. With a clear-eyed understanding of the Bible, and meaningful instruction on how to have a successful marriage, The Meaning of Marriage is essential reading for anyone who wants to know God and love more deeply in this life.

I really like Keller. He is an effective communicator and has done a really good work in NY. He also has a great sense of humor, which goes a long way. I don't know if I'll read his book on marriage, but I have enjoyed his other works.

 

[bèlla]

I really like Keller. He is an effective communicator and has done a really good work in NY. He also has a great sense of humor, which goes a long way. I don't know if I'll read his book on marriage, but I have enjoyed his other works.

I agree. If I lived in NYC I would visit his church. The marriage book is well regarded. I’ve been planning to read it for a while.

~Bella

 

[bèlla]

@public hermit

There are some interesting nuggets thus far. Some I’ve encountered through experience, books, and a few a-ha moments. Here’s three for your enjoyment.

Within this Christian vision of marriage, here's what it means to fall in love. It is to look at another person and get a glimpse of what God is creating, and to say, I see who God is making you, and it excites me! I want to be part of that.

I want to partner with you and God in the journey you are taking to his throne. And when we get there, I will look at your magnificence and say, 'I always knew you could be like this. I got glimpses of it on earth, but now look at you!

In any relationship, there will be frightening spells in which your feelings of love dry up. And when that happens you must remember that the essence of marriage is that it is a covenant, a commitment, a promise of future love. So what do you do? You do the acts of love, despite your lack of feeling.

You may not feel tender, sympathetic, and eager to please, but in your actions you must BE tender, understanding, forgiving and helpful. And, if you do that, as time goes on you will not only get through the dry spells, but they will become less frequent and deep, and you will become more constant in your feelings. This is what can happen if you decide to love.

This principle - that your spouse should be capable of becoming your best friend - is a game changer when you address the question of compatibility in a prospective spouse. If you think of marriage largely in terms of erotic love, then compatibility means sexual chemistry and appeal.

If you think of marriage largely as a way to move into the kind of social status in life you desire, then compatibility means being part of the desired social class, and perhaps common tastes and aspirations for lifestyle. The problem with these factors is that they are not durable. Physical attractiveness will wane, no matter how hard you work to delay its departure. And socio-economic status unfortunately can change almost overnight.

When people think they have found compatibility based on these things, they often make the painful discovery that they have built their relationship on unstable ground. A woman 'lets herself go' or a man loses his job, and the compatibility foundation falls apart.

~Bella

 

[public hermit]

In any relationship, there will be frightening spells in which your feelings of love dry up. And when that happens you must remember that the essence of marriage is that it is a covenant, a commitment, a promise of future love. So what do you do? You do the acts of love, despite your lack of feeling.

You may not feel tender, sympathetic, and eager to please, but in your actions you must BE tender, understanding, forgiving and helpful. And, if you do that, as time goes on you will not only get through the dry spells, but they will become less frequent and deep, and you will become more constant in your feelings. This is what can happen if you decide to love.

"You do acts of love, despite your lack of feeling." That cannot be said enough. I agree with everything he is saying here. Hmm, I may have to look at this book after all.

I see what you did there.

 

[bèlla]

"You do acts of love, despite your lack of feeling." That cannot be said enough. I agree with everything he is saying here. Hmm, I may have to look at this book after all.

I see what you did there.

What did I do? I fear you’re giving me credit I don’t deserve.

~Bella

 

[keith99]

Right now The Selfish Gene by Dawkins.

I just finished the second book in The Sharing Knife series by Bujold. She has a nasty way of having her heros treated realistically which is often badly.

 

[bèlla]

Right now The Selfish Gene by Dawkins

That’s been on my TBR list for a while along with Survival of the Prettiest. Happy reading!

~Bella

 

[public hermit]

Right now The Selfish Gene by Dawkins.

I would be curious to hear your thoughts on The Selfish Gene, if you're so inclined.

 

[bèlla]

@public hermit

Keller touches on happiness and holiness and how the latter often leads to different partner choices. I had an interesting dream that corroborated his perspective. Perhaps its a holy FYI.

This reminds me of Sacred Marriage by Gary Thomas. You may want to consider it.

~Bella

 

[keith99]

I would be curious to hear your thoughts on The Selfish Gene, if you're so inclined.

I'm only a few chapters in but wanted to say some things now in case I can't find this thread later.

It is easy to understand in the sense that the prose is quite clear. For me it is easy to follow, I don't want to assume it would be for someone lacking scientific training. But it seems to me that it is as clear as one could make it for such a person.

Dawkins uses analogies to illustrate things quite a bit and one is apt to learn several interesting things through the course of those analogies. And come to think of it some rather interesting backwaters of biology.

Dawkins argues that the real basic unit of natural selection is not the organism, tribe or herd but the individual gene. If noting else this idea explains some actions of individual animals that would seem to run contrary to a simplistic view of Darwin's theory but fit rather well when looking at the survival of the individual gene. (I have not got that far yet, but to illustrate it does not matter to a gene if it survives in me or in my brother. What matters to the gene is how many copies get passed on to teh next generation).

Dawkins explicitly states that natural selection at the gene level DOES NOT mean some sudden lack of brutal competition. In fact he explicitly says that while he would like a more cooperative society our genetic reality works against that and we need to realize that fact to have any chance at all of creating the world he would like. I mention this because I have seen people claim he said almost the opposite of what he said.

If you can read even the first few chapters and not learn something interesting then you are either the smartest and best educated person I have ever communicated with or a complete dullard.

 

[public hermit]

Dawkins argues that the real basic unit of natural selection is not the organism, tribe or herd but the individual gene. If noting else this idea explains some actions of individual animals that would seem to run contrary to a simplistic view of Darwin's theory but fit rather well when looking at the survival of the individual gene.

That's interesting. Is that idea original to him or is he popularizing it?

it does not matter to a gene if it survives in me or in my brother. What matters to the gene is how many copies get passed on to teh next generation

That means what may be beneficial for the gene may not be for me. I wonder how he connects the survival of the species with the survival of the gene?

If you can read even the first few chapters and not learn something interesting then you are either the smartest and best educated person I have ever communicated with or a complete dullard.

I think I will read it. Thank you for responding and for reminding me I wanted to read it! Haha.

 

[Ada Lovelace]

I don't want to throw a spoke into the wheel of the thread by writing about the political books I'm currently reading so I'll instead recommend one of my favorites from the past few months.

Know My Name by Chanel Miller, who had previously been known to the public as "Emily Doe," the victim of Brock Turner, "The Stanford Rapist." I cried so much reading it I had to keep tissues on hand to wipe away the tears on my iPad. Her pain is raw and palpable, and it is searing. But her memoir ultimately felt to me like a booster shot in courage. I think it's extraordinary.

Know My Name is difficult to read in part because it is beautiful to read. Its lush words are accompanied by the specter of all that might have been—the shadow of the path that was, without Miller’s say, so violently bent in another direction. Miller’s talents might have found expression in a form other than a book about the effects of sexual violence. When trauma is transformed into art, there will always be a paradox at play: The art’s existence is beautiful. But it shouldn’t have to exist at all.

 

[keith99]

That's interesting. Is that idea original to him or is he popularizing it?



That means what may be beneficial for the gene may not be for me. I wonder how he connects the survival of the species with the survival of the gene?



I think I will read it. Thank you for responding and for reminding me I wanted to read it! Haha.

As far as I know the idea was his and was almost as revolutionary as Darwin's work.

At one point he makes a comment regarding computers and typists saying typists will still be needed for decades. It is easy to make the knee jerk response of thinking he missed one, until you remember the copyright date and realize decades have passed since he wrote it.

I'm pretty sure he goes all in for survival of the gene and the species surviving is seen as quite secondary.