Commentary Review: Blomberg & Kamell on James

I recent­ly received a review copy of the Zon­der­van Exeget­i­cal Com­men­tary on James by Craig Blomberg and Mari­am Kamell.

I was par­tic­u­lar­ly excit­ed to receive this book for two rea­sons:

So here’s my take on the com­men­tary:

  1. It’s nice and short. This is a plus, not a minus. Too many com­men­taries today run to the thou­sands of pages. This vol­ume is long enough to help­ful­ly explain puz­zling aspects of the text with­out being so mas­sive that the cen­tral mes­sage gets lost.
  2. It pays atten­tion to usabil­i­ty. For exam­ple: the com­men­tary on each verse is pre­ced­ed by a bold­ed Eng­lish trans­la­tion of the verse fol­lowed by the Greek text. Con­trast this with most com­men­taries that seem to assume you’ve got three or four books open on your desk (or win­dows on your mon­i­tor) at once (view the expla­na­tion of James 1:2 to see what I mean).
  3. It keeps you ori­ent­ed. Every sec­tion begins with an out­line of the sur­round­ing text and an extra­or­di­nar­i­ly clear gram­mat­i­cal out­line that makes the author’s argu­ment clear. You can see a sam­ple page at Google Books (click that link — seri­ous­ly).
  4. The com­men­tary ends with a very help­ful sum­ma­ry of the over­all the­ol­o­gy of the book of James — some­thing I wish more com­men­taries did. The dis­ci­pline of Bib­li­cal the­ol­o­gy would be much rich­er if that were the case.
  5. It uses foot­notes. Yay!
  6. I dug into some of the more puz­zling vers­es in James and thought that Blomberg & Kamell explained them with clar­i­ty and wis­dom. Dis­claimer: I have not read this com­men­tary all the way through.

Over­all, I rec­om­mend this com­men­tary if you need to preach or teach on James any­time soon and urge you to look care­ful­ly at the oth­er vol­umes in the series as reviews on them become avail­able (the linked web­site — bestcommentaries.com — is, in my opin­ion, the best place to begin search­ing for a com­men­tary).

Thanks for the free­bie, Zon­der­van! I would have told the truth if your com­men­tary was lack­lus­ter, but I am delight­ed to report that this is a sol­id expo­si­tion of the book of James.

How To Get Better Grades In Physics

Enrico Fermi (1901-1954)Ben Shank is a Ph.D. can­di­date in physics at Stan­ford, where he also serves as a teach­ing assis­tant (TA) for an under­grad physics course. At our recent Thanks­giv­ing par­ty he began rat­tling off advice to one of our stu­dents on how to get bet­ter grades in physics (or almost any tech­ni­cal course). Said stu­dent was amazed and beseeched Ben to make this infor­ma­tion more pub­licly avail­able, and so he typed it up and sent it to our Chi Alpha email list.

With Ben’s per­mis­sion, I also share it below (empha­sis is mine):

  1. From the first day of class, sit in the front of the room toward the cen­ter. At least one study has shown that stu­dents who sit in the front are 2–3 times more like­ly to get an A and 6 times less like­ly to fail than stu­dents sit­ting in the back even when seats are ran­dom­ly assigned on the first day of class. We can debate why this is so all day, but it is so, so take advan­tage of it. (By ‘the front’ i mean the first ten or so rows of Hewlett 200.)
  2. Be sure to get plen­ty of sleep the two nights before the exam. Of all the bad con­di­tions you could be in going into a physics test, being tired is prob­a­bly the worst one that is legal. Stud­ies indi­cate that the sec­ond night before the test is even more impor­tant than the night imme­di­ate­ly before. A clear, think­ing, cre­ative mind is your sin­gle great­est asset for any physics you might encounter. If you have been keep­ing up with the class, get­ting two full nights of sleep is prob­a­bly more impor­tant than any amount of study­ing you might do dur­ing those two days.
  3. That said you will prob­a­bly want to do some study­ing. If you haven’t already, I high­ly rec­om­mend find­ing some­one else in the class to study with. Go over prob­lems togeth­er. Go into the lat­er prob­lems in each chap­ter and pick some that you’re not sure you can both do. Tak­ing an exam well is very sim­i­lar to teach­ing the grad­er how to do the prob­lems, so even if you are teach­ing a friend how to do some­thing you already know, you are prepar­ing for the test. If you both (or all) get stuck on some­thing, con­tact a TA.
  4. Read every prob­lem at the begin­ning of the test. Your mind will con­tin­ue to process prob­lems you are not look­ing at, pro­vid­ed it is awake. (See Tip 2) Stud­ies show that you are best served load­ing all the ques­tions into your brain at the start to give your­self max­i­mum time to con­tem­plate. If you get real­ly stuck on a prob­lem, leave plen­ty of space and move on. Odds are you’ll have bet­ter insight when you come back to it.
  5. DON’T PANIC. Attempt every ques­tion. This sounds real­ly obvi­ous, but we occa­sion­al­ly get blue books that have a few scrib­bles labeled ‘Prob­lem 1’ and noth­ing else. As best we can tell, these stu­dents are look­ing at the first ques­tion, pan­ick­ing and star­ing blankly at the paper for forty-five min­utes or just walk­ing out. This is some­thing worth prac­tic­ing to avoid. If you find your­self in a pan­ic: stop, look away from the paper while slow­ly count­ing to ten. If you are feel­ing calm, you can go back and draw a dia­gram or write down some pos­si­bly rel­e­vant equa­tions. If you start pan­ick­ing again, repeat Steps 1 and 2. If you are not feel­ing calm, turn a cou­ple pages and start the next ques­tion. Things will look bet­ter when you come back to this one. Trust me.
  6. Now for a few tips on get­ting the most [points] out of your graders. Grad­ing a midterm takes 4–5 hours. As much as we try to assess each of you accord­ing to all the knowl­edge of physics you demon­strat­ed, we are going to get tired and even­tu­al­ly parts of our brains are going to go on autopi­lot. If your answers are in clear­ly marked box­es (prefer­ably near the left side of the page) and they are right, there is a reduced chance of any error in your work being marked off. If an answer is wrong, but it’s in a box near the left side of the page imme­di­ate­ly below the work that pro­duced it, then it is very easy for us to find the one lit­tle error and give you most of the points. I know hav­ing all the answers in one box at the bot­tom of the page feels con­cise, but if one of them is wrong we have no idea where on the page to look for the mis­take. On a relat­ed note, it is bet­ter if you work one part of a prob­lem and then work the next one below it. Believe it or not, grad stu­dents can get con­fused if part c is to the right of part b instead of below it. It’s sil­ly, but after a few hours of grad­ing that’s the way we are, so you might as well not let it hurt you. As a gen­er­al rule, each line on the page should only have one equa­tion or state­ment on it. (pic­tures exclud­ed) You may use up more pages that way, but there’s no short­age of blue books.
  7. When­ev­er pos­si­ble, draw a pic­ture. Not only will it help you think, but it also helps us know what you were think­ing. If you are not absolute­ly con­fi­dent in your solu­tion, a minute spent draw­ing a decent pic­ture is prob­a­bly worth it in terms of par­tial cred­it. Too often I’ve sus­pect­ed a stu­dent knew more than their answer indi­cat­ed, but they did­n’t leave a good record of their thought process so I could­n’t grant par­tial cred­it. And that makes me sad. (Orga­niz­ing graph­ics are also great anti­dotes to pan­ic, see Tip 5.)
  8. When you get an answer, check that it makes sense. Neg­a­tive lengths and times are often indi­ca­tors that you’ve made a mis­take, as are e.g. mega­Coulomb charges and kilo­Amp cur­rents. If this hap­pens to you, go look for the error and fix it. If you can’t find it, let us know that you don’t like the answer and why. One of the eas­i­est ways to tell that some­one is lost is if they give you a non-phys­i­cal answer and don’t blink. As a physi­cist, it is much eas­i­er to grade lenient­ly if a stu­dent indi­cates that they under­stand why the result of their cal­cu­la­tion can’t be right. If noth­ing else, the grad­ing rubric often has a point des­ig­nat­ed just for hav­ing a result that could be true. You’ll at least get that.
  9. It is well known that hav­ing good hand­writ­ing improves the atti­tude of those grad­ing your exam. What is less well known is that hav­ing tiny hand­writ­ing can hurt you. Often what is per­fect­ly leg­i­ble to you while you are curled up with your nose 12 inch­es from the paper makes our eyes hurt after the third or fourth hour of grad­ing. Obvi­ous­ly this vast­ly reduces the incen­tive to hunt for that tiny lit­tle math error you made in part a. This is not a small mat­ter. I, for one, tend to get a migraine when I bend over small text for too long. So imag­ine a three hour migraine and then gauge the incen­tive to just mark you off so I can stop look­ing at your paper. Find a test that you have tak­en recent­ly. If you (or bet­ter, a friend) can’t clear­ly read your text at arm’s length, you might con­sid­er con­scious­ly writ­ing larg­er on all tests from now on. Grad­ing fatigue isn’t lim­it­ed to physics TAs.

And that’s what Ben has to say about that. Hope it helps you out as finals draw nigh.

The Most Amusingly True Sentence I’ve Read In A While

Wik­iLeaks is what hap­pens when the entire US gov­ern­ment is forced to go through a full-body scan­ner (Evge­ny Moro­zov)

I laughed out loud.

being a Christian in a sorority

PanhellenicA recent con­vert told me she’s strug­gling with life in her soror­i­ty, so I asked anoth­er soror­i­ty gal I know to give her some advice.

Soror­i­ty gal emailed the recent con­vert and, with her per­mis­sion, I’ve anonymized it and present her email for your con­sid­er­a­tion. I’ve trimmed off the begin­ning because it’s impos­si­ble to anonymize with­out mak­ing it use­less (she iden­ti­fies a spe­cif­ic Chris­t­ian in the recip­i­en­t’s soror­i­ty for her to con­nect with), but the rest of her let­ter is more broad­ly applic­a­ble:

I think [your soror­i­ty and my soror­i­ty] may be dif­fer­ent in terms of their empha­sis on par­ty­ing and drink­ing, but I will def­i­nite­ly try to give you my two cents, and if you want to meet up at any point, let me know and I’d love to get togeth­er to talk and/or pray with you about it.

I have always felt very at home in [my soror­i­ty] as a Chris­t­ian. There are 10–15 Chris­t­ian girls in [my soror­i­ty], and many more who aren’t into get­ting drunk/hooking up. My big is a Chris­t­ian, as is my twin, and my twin’s lit­tle. I try to sur­round myself with these girls, rather than the partiers. I do still go out to the events where there is drink­ing, but I only drink mod­er­ate­ly (if at all) and still always have a great time. Do you have a group of girls like this in [your soror­i­ty]? Are there oth­er Chris­tians in [your soror­i­ty] you can team up with?

Anoth­er thing that helped me ensure that there are enough events that don’t cen­ter around drinking/partying was get­ting involved on the sis­ter­hood com­mit­tee. If you guys have a com­mit­tee like that, I would encour­age you to get involved and make sure those kinds of events are hap­pen­ing.

If you are feel­ing like [your soror­i­ty] is a place where you can’t be your­self or where you are encour­aged to make poor deci­sions, deac­ti­vat­ing might be the right choice for you. My biggest advice to you would be to pray about it and go with your gut. I do think there is room to be a Chris­t­ian in Greek life, but I also think it varies a lot depend­ing on the frat/sorority. Many of my clos­est friends aren’t Chris­t­ian, and I think this can def­i­nite­ly make it more dif­fi­cult to do the right thing at times. But, I think that as long as you have that Chris­t­ian com­mu­ni­ty some­where, you can make it work.

I feel like I haven’t done a very good job giv­ing you advice here, so please let me know if you want to talk about it over cof­fee or some­thing!

I think that, on the whole, it is pret­ty good advice. What would you have said?

the NIV reloaded

Bible Study 2I sent an email to my stu­dents and it occurred to me that it might be of more gen­er­al inter­est:

Chi Alphans,

You might be inter­est­ed to know that the NIV trans­la­tion of the Bible has been revised. You can’t buy it in stores yet, but it is avail­able online at biblegateway.com

I think you’ll find the trans­la­tor’s notes inter­est­ing. They include a sec­tion on lan­guage and gen­der and also have a list of key pas­sages that have changed in the newest trans­la­tion. http://www.biblegateway.com/niv/Translators-Notes.pdf

And while I’m on the sub­ject of new releas­es of the Bible (which is a weird sen­tence), I should men­tion that there is a new, aca­d­e­m­i­cal­ly legit com­pi­la­tion of the Greek New Tes­ta­ment avail­able at http://sblgnt.com/

Final­ly, remem­ber that every trans­la­tion opti­mizes some things at the expense of oth­ers. There is no “best” trans­la­tion. It’s far more impor­tant you read what­ev­er you have than that you engage in some fruit­less quest for the ide­al. In oth­er words, your exist­ing NIV will do just fine from now until you die.

Glen

P.S. There is no “best trans­la­tion” but there is an option you might not have con­sid­ered — you can learn to read the Bible in its orig­i­nal lan­guages. It’s not for every­one, but just think of it: you can earn Stan­ford cred­its while grow­ing in your under­stand­ing of God’s Word — it’s a twofer!

Chutes To Gehenna

chutes and laddersI believe I have iden­ti­fied my least favorite part of par­ent­ing: play­ing Chutes and Lad­ders. My epiphany came about as I was play­ing the longest round that I’ve ever seen. It was all chutes and no lad­ders. Play­ing was like watch­ing crabs in a sty­ro­foam cool­er: as soon as one char­ac­ter was close to escap­ing it was sent tum­bling back down to the bot­tom.

While that most recent round was par­tic­u­lar­ly tedious, I don’t like the game even when it takes ten min­utes because it’s a game with no skill com­po­nent what­so­ev­er. I will con­fess to think­ing — often — that we could deter­mine vic­to­ry by flip­ping a coin instead of through the inter­minable process of mov­ing the game pieces in accor­dance with the dic­tates of the spin­ner and the require­ments of the board.

That’s bad enough, but there is one more fac­tor that evokes dread in my soul when asked to play. It is this: chil­dren young enough to tru­ly enjoy the game are usu­al­ly unable to move their char­ac­ters prop­er­ly, so I have to do it for them. This means I am play­ing the game against myself. A game I don’t like. A game whose two-play­er ver­sion is log­i­cal­ly indis­tin­guish­able from a coin toss yet which has the poten­tial to endure until the heat death of the uni­verse. Even if I win, I lose. I lost as soon as I took the box down from the shelf.

And yet I will play today and I know I will play again tomor­row. It’s like a tor­ment from a Greek myth. Aaargh!

My heart goes out to thor­ough­go­ing deter­min­ists who nec­es­sar­i­ly regard all of life as a com­pli­cat­ed ver­sion of Chutes and Lad­ders. If that’s you, I sug­gest you arrange to be fat­ed not to think about it.

Yikes — New Students Arrive Today!

In which I describe in great detail my pan­icked yet joy­ous feel­ings as the school year begins.

these are random freshmen from some other school... but you get the ideaNew stu­dents arrive on cam­pus today. Yikes!

To Do:

  • Brush my teeth real­ly well, includ­ing my tongue so my breath does­n’t stink.
  • Shave head. Care­ful­ly. We don’t want a repeat of that inci­dent when I missed a patch and looked like a Who from Whoville.
  • Trim edges of beard. The dif­fer­ence between an epic prophet beard and a crazy cult leader beard is sur­pris­ing­ly hard to define, but raggedy beard edges have some­thing to do with it. That, and neck hair. Say no to the throat beard.
  • Print lit­er­a­ture for tabling: new stu­dent devo­tion­al guide, Why Jesus? essay, The Jesus FAQ.
  • Prac­tice smil­ing in the mir­ror.
  • Dou­ble check on throat hair.

P.S. I don’t think I’ve pub­li­cized it here, but I put a new writ­ing online. I men­tion it above in the “print lit­er­a­ture” bul­let point — it’s a ten-day devo­tion­al guide for new stu­dents called Thrive. It, along with all my oth­er writ­ings, is indexed here.

Look, Ma. I’m in the Stanford Review.

Stephen Colbert in IraqI was recent­ly inter­viewed by the Stan­ford Review (a stu­dent pub­li­ca­tion) for an arti­cle ana­lyz­ing the Supreme Court’s deci­sion in CLS vs Mar­tinez as it relates to Stan­ford (a case I have pre­vi­ous­ly writ­ten about).

As is almost always the case with inter­views, I said way more than they had space to include in the final arti­cle. Since the inter­view was via email, I have the full text of my remarks avail­able. I should note that Autumn Carter, the inter­view­er, asked me sev­er­al ques­tions I declined to answer.

So here’s what I had to say:

SR: What is your opin­ion towards the Supreme Court’s rul­ing in gen­er­al? With regard to Stan­ford?

Me: The Supreme Court’s log­ic would not apply at most pub­lic uni­ver­si­ties since the case at UC Hast­ings is so unique, and it will have no direct impact at all on pri­vate uni­ver­si­ties such as Stan­ford. And I has­ten to point out that the case has been remand­ed back to a low­er court for a clos­er exam­i­na­tion of some fac­tu­al issues. The Chris­t­ian Legal Soci­ety alleges that UC Hast­ings enforced its poli­cies unequal­ly and in a dis­crim­i­na­to­ry man­ner, some­thing which the Supreme Court believes mer­its fur­ther inves­ti­ga­tion.

But to get bogged down in the legal maneu­ver­ing is to miss the essence of the case. For a uni­ver­si­ty to force a Chris­t­ian min­istry to accept lead­ers who do not share its beliefs is as absurd as Chi­na’s plan to choose the next Dalai Lama, and I would sus­pect such a uni­ver­si­ty of hav­ing sim­i­lar motives: to con­trol and to under­mine reli­gious belief which the author­i­ties dis­ap­prove of.

Uni­ver­si­ties must decide what they believe tol­er­ance looks like. Are they will­ing to become intol­er­ant in the pur­suit of tol­er­ance? Are they will­ing to achieve their goals through coer­cion rather than rea­soned dis­course? UC Hast­ings appears to have decid­ed that it is. It remains to be seen how many uni­ver­si­ties will embrace their fol­ly.

SR: As you men­tioned, Stan­ford is a pri­vate uni­ver­si­ty and is there­fore unaf­fect­ed by the rul­ing direct­ly. But do you antic­i­pate any moves by Stan­ford to tight­en its own group mem­ber­ship pol­i­cy either inde­pen­dent­ly or as a result of being lob­bied? Or will Stan­ford like­ly main­tain the loos­er pol­i­cy that it cur­rent­ly uses?

Me: Should such lob­by­ing arise I hope that Stan­ford will prove wis­er than the Supreme Court.

In ret­ro­spect, I’m sur­prised the Stan­ford Review chose the quote they did. Some of my oth­er sen­tences seem so much more… live­ly.

Get Better Grades By Understanding How Your Brain Works

Studying for last law school examOne of my favorite blogs is the British Psy­cho­log­i­cal Soci­ety’s Research Digest. It sum­ma­rizes cur­rent research in a way inter­est­ing to non-aca­d­e­mics. I eat that kind of stuff up.

Their most recent post is a real win­ner for col­lege stu­dents: 9 Evi­dence-Based Study Tips. You’ll receive a lot of advice in col­lege — but these prin­ci­ples actu­al­ly have exper­i­men­tal sup­port.

  1. Adopt a growth mind­set: believe that your brain is capa­ble of get­ting smarter. You’re not stuck where you are.
  2. Sleep well: inter­nal­ize that all-nighters hurt more than they help.
  3. For­give your­self for pro­cras­ti­nat­ing: as a min­is­ter, I was quite tak­en by this one. It’s a beau­ti­ful illus­tra­tion of a more gen­er­al les­son on grace as the pri­ma­ry cat­a­lyst for growth in life.
  4. Test your­self: don’t just review the mate­r­i­al — turn it into a quiz.
  5. Pace your stud­ies: review the mate­r­i­al once 20% of the time elaps­es between the day you first learned it and the day of the test. Com­bin­ing this with the pre­vi­ous tip will rev­o­lu­tion­ize your study life.
  6. Vivid exam­ples may not always work best. This is more of a tip for teach­ers, so here’s the stu­dent ver­sion: don’t assume that the charis­mat­ic teacher will help you under­stand bet­ter sim­ply because they enter­tain you more. Be sus­pi­cious of vivid illus­tra­tions because they can make it hard­er to learn the abstract prin­ci­ples you must mas­ter.
  7. Take naps: lie down and rest for 10–30 min­utes. It will help more than you think.
  8. Get hand­outs pri­or to the lec­ture: the evi­dence for this one seemed weak to me. Read it and judge for your­self.
  9. Believe in your­self: con­fi­dence mat­ters. Whether you think you can or think you can’t, you’re prob­a­bly right.

Each tip has a brief para­graph explain­ing the prin­ci­ple in more detail includ­ing links to the research upon which it is based. Go read it now!

You’re wel­come.

Notes From God Is Not One

Interfaith BannerI recent­ly read/skimmed Stephen Prothero’s book God Is Not One: The Eight Rival Reli­gions That Run the World–and Why Their Dif­fer­ences Mat­ter. Prothero is a pro­fes­sor of reli­gion at Boston Uni­ver­si­ty who was raised Epis­co­palian but has since reject­ed Chris­tian­i­ty. He now describes him­self as con­fused. Be that as it may, he makes some true but unfash­ion­able claims in his intro­duc­tion. Here are some bits I was par­tic­u­lar­ly keen on:

The book is well summed up on the inside front dust jack­et:

To claim that all reli­gions are the same is to mis­un­der­stand that each attempts to solve a dif­fer­ent human prob­lem. For exam­ple:

  • Islam: the prob­lem is pride / the solu­tion is sub­mis­sion
  • Chris­tian­i­ty: the prob­lem is sin / the solu­tion is sal­va­tion
  • Con­fu­cian­ism: the prob­lem is chaos / the solu­tion is social order
  • Bud­dhism: the prob­lem is suf­fer­ing / the solu­tion is awak­en­ing
  • Judaism: the prob­lem is exile / the solu­tion is to return to God

In a sec­tion called “Aller­gic to Argu­ment” he described a frus­trat­ing real­i­ty that I see almost every day as a min­is­ter to col­lege stu­dents:

In my Boston Uni­ver­si­ty cours­es, I work hard to fos­ter respect­ful argu­ments. My stu­dents are good with “respect­ful,” but they are aller­gic to “argu­ment.” They see argu­ing as ill-man­nered, and even among friends they avoid it at any cost.… Espe­cial­ly when it comes to reli­gion, young Amer­i­cans at least are far more like­ly to say “I feel” than “I think” or (God for­bid) “I believe.” (4)

I liked this bit, too:

All too often world his­to­ry is told as if reli­gion did not mat­ter. The Span­ish con­quered New Spain for gold, and the British came to New Eng­land to catch fish. The French Rev­o­lu­tion had noth­ing to do with Catholi­cism, and the U.S. civ­il rights move­ment was a pure­ly human­i­tar­i­an endeav­or. But even if reli­gion makes no sense to you, you need to make sense of reli­gion to make sense of the world. (8)

I first heard the fol­low­ing obser­va­tion from Joe Zick­afoose years ago, and the longer I reflect upon it the more con­vinced I am of its truth:

What the world’s reli­gions share is not so much a fin­ish line as a start­ing point. And where they begin is with this sim­ple obser­va­tion: some­thing is wrong with the world.… Reli­gious folk world­wide agree that some­thing has gone awry. They part com­pa­ny, how­ev­er, when it comes to stat­ing just what has gone wrong, and they diverge sharply when they move from diag­nos­ing the human prob­lem to pre­scrib­ing how to solve it. Chris­tians see sin as the prob­lem, and sal­va­tion from sin as the reli­gious goal. Bud­dhists see suf­fer­ing (which, in their tra­di­tion, is not ennobling) as the prob­lem, and lib­er­a­tion from suf­fer­ing as the reli­gious goal. (11)

And I think his four-part analy­sis is one of the more use­ful ways to sum­ma­rize reli­gions:

At the heart of this project is a sim­ple, four-part approach to the reli­gions, which I have been using for years in the class­room and at lec­tures around the world. Each reli­gion artic­u­lates:

  • a prob­lem;
  • a solu­tion to the prob­lem, which also serves as the reli­gious goal;
  • a tech­nique (or tech­niques) for mov­ing from this prob­lem to this solu­tion; and
  • an exem­plar (or exem­plars) who chart this path from prob­lem to solu­tion.

(14)

And in one of his many non-PC moments:

While in Jerusalem research­ing this book, I struck up a con­ver­sa­tion with an elder­ly Mus­lim. When I told him I was writ­ing a book on the world’s reli­gions, he looked at me stern­ly, point­ed a fin­ger in my direc­tion, and instruct­ed me to be hon­est. “Do not write false things about the reli­gions,” he said. Reli­gious Stud­ies schol­ars are rarely hon­est enough to admit this in per­son, much less in print, but we all know there are things that each of the world’s reli­gions do well, and things they do poor­ly. If you want to help the home­less, you will like­ly find the Chris­t­ian Social Gospel more use­ful than Hin­du notions of caste. If you want to find tech­niques for qui­et­ing the mind through bod­i­ly exer­cis­es, you will like­ly find Hin­du yogis more use­ful than Chris­t­ian saints. (20)

The rest of the book is fine, I sup­pose. If you need a sum­ma­ry of the glob­al reli­gions you could do far worse than this one, but it does­n’t live up to the promise of the intro­duc­tion (hence the skim­ming allud­ed to in the first sen­tence of this post).

That notwith­stand­ing, I must con­fess that I liked one image from his sec­tion on Pen­te­costal Chris­tian­i­ty:

U.S. pres­i­dent Abra­ham Lin­coln once remarked that, when he sees a man preach, he likes “to see him act as if he were fight­ing bees.” Pen­te­costal­ism is replete with bee-fight­ing preach­ers. (87–88)

That’s my tribe — the mighty bee-fight­ers.