I'm feeling a little guilty for reading so much Witherington lately instead of getting a broader variety of sources, but I just like him so much. This is another great title.
This was a little skimpy compared to the depth of commentary that I am used to. However, I've had people ask me for a good 'first commentary' and now I can recommend The New Cambridge Bible Commentary.
I've never fallen in love with a narrator's voice as quickly as I did this one--the fact that Death is the narrator probably tells you something about me. This was as excellent book--highly recommended.
Mogel attempts to base child-rearing on Jewish principles. This serves as a useful corrective to our child-obsessed (but, paradoxically, child-neglecting) culture. But her execution leaves a lot to be desired. I often sensed that she said what she wanted to say and then mined 3000 years of Jewish tradition for a quote to support her viewpoint. She was also maddeningly vague: Yes, we all agree that kids need reasonable limits (who would argue with that?) but what precisely should those limits be?
Ranking as one of the very best books I have read in a long time, Johnson makes the 1854 cholera epidemic in London fascinating. His wry humor, good storytelling, deft elucidation of the big issues, and great details make this one highly recommended.
Bruce Metzger is the main man of twentieth-century textual criticism of the Bible; this volume had a few interesting anecdotes in it, but was otherwise simultaneously too scanty and burdened with numbing detail.
This was a pretty good commentary; definitely the best of the three that I read. My esteem for the ABC series increases, but I am still annoyed by their decision to cram references into the text instead of into notes.
I never would have picked this up--I only own it because some doofus from half.com shipped the wrong book to me and then told me to keep it. I decided to give it a whirl before I got rid of it and . . . it was fabulous. The author played fly-on-the-wall for a year at a group therapy. The stories are fascinating. The best part, however, is the surprise twist at the end (which then changes the tenor the reader's impression of everything that came before) but I don't want to give it away . . .
At first I thought that this book was going to do for time travel what Twilight did for vampires. But about half way through the story kind of sputtered and by the end I was just vaguely annoyed.
I normally like Bill Bryson quite a bit, but I think he shot himself in the foot by writing a book that is, to paraphrase, true except for the parts that aren't. It wasn't as funny this way--it was just mindless.