Opposing Views Books

I thought EVEN NOW was a great book, but WOW . . . EVER AFTER was incredible. I read the last hundred pages through blurry eyes and a wad of tissues. EVER AFTER takes up where EVEN NOW leaves off. Emily's parents, Lauren and Shane are finally reunited. But their opposite views on the war, continue to be an obstacle to their happily ever after. In the meantime, sharing the patriotic views of her father, Emily gets a job on an army base and soon falls in love with Justin Baker. When Justin is deployed for Iraq, and Lauren decides to leave Shane and go back to reporting the war abroad, Emily feels her world is turning upside down. Now, two of the people she loves the most are in the most volatile place in the world. Justin - fighting for what he believes in, and her mother - reporting what she sees as a waste of time and human life. When Emily receives devastating news, her faith is put to the test and her hopes for a happily ever after. This was a great book. It sums up what I assume are the feelings of many Americans. It gives perspective to the war we rage on foreign soil to preserve our freedoms and give freedoms to the people who have never experienced it. Great book, Karen! I can only hope that someday my writing might affect others the way yours has affected me.

Emily wasn't looking for love but it found her anyway. Justin was a young reservist, on his way back to Iraq for his second tour of duty; he wasn't interested in dating until he met Emily. Soon the two became inseparable and made plans to marry.

Then Justin came home from Iraq draped in a flag, everything changed.

When Shane and Lauren couldn't reach an agreement about the war, she went back to Iraq as a war correspondent. Justin showed her how much our troops were helping the Iranian people and her perspective began to change.

Justin's death throw her into confusion until she realizes, she can't walk away from love again because life offers no guarantees.

I loved everything about this book. While there are many tragic moments, true love wins and there is a happily Ever After.

This is an awsome book! I really liked the military aspect. It opened my mind and reminded me what is going on outside my little world. We need to support our troops. They are keeping us FREE!

Wow.

I totally wasted my money purchasing this book, but I read Even Now and I was curious. I've pretty much lost all interest in anything Kingsbury writes. It's the same book every time!! You can skip entire chapters in this book because they are so full of contrived drama - contrived because they cover and recover the same ground over and over. And the characters are really poorly developed and so unrealistic it's not even funny.

I can't comprehend completely why, but Kingsbury is an excessively popular writer - mostly due to her ability to pull readers in with their emotions, tugging at their heartstrings with dramatic and tragic stories. Unfortunately, she uses the same old lines in every book. This book really bothered me, though. The "patriotism" was so closely linked to being a Christian and supporting the war in Iraq/soldiers. (I couldn't figure out which was the point she was trying to get across; it seemed to change from page to page at times.) From this book you get the impression that all soldiers are Christians, they all care about helping the Iraqi people and that nothing but good happens over there. Kingsbury constantly berates the media for being one-sided, but this book is just as biased - in the opposite (and also unrealistic) direction.

Kingsbury has gone too far in this book in my opinion. The implication to me is that Christianity equals patriotism equals support for the war in Iraq without any intelligent discussion of the very real concerns that people have. I think that, perhaps, Kingsbury should stay out of certain hot button issues unless she is fully prepared to offer a thoroughly informed picture, even if she takes a side. This just came across as blindly supportive of one side of an extremely complex and difficult situation with the attitude that there is only black or white and no gray involved ('either you're with us or against us" mentality).

In my opinion, if you want to read a book with real substance, Kingsbury isn't the right author for you.

The novel runs in some parts like a sappy love story, and in others like a perfect propaganda piece. Karen Kingsbury clearly has opinions on the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, which she is entitled, but when she mixes such a heavy subject with an already saturated love story the result is less than desirable.

In regards to the war, she fails to mention nuclear weapons that never materialized and other important facts as to why the US is at war. Kingsbury only brushes the surface on major points in the war, and completely evades others. All the characters are devoutly Christian, something rare in our society. The dialogue is downright childish, and all the characters are one dimensional, with either good hearts, or bad hearts. There is no mental dialogue, just sentiment. Justin as a character is too perfect, and in that sense, completely flawed.

This novel is very poorly written. The author mentions that it took five days to write, and I think that explains a lot. She must be used to pumping books out every so often and "making deadlines". This creates very poor literature, evidently. I think only her most loyal fans with like this one.

This book presented opposing viewponts on capital punishment from two prominent Biblical theologians. While I did not agree with either theologian on all points, this somewhat overly scholarly debate did help me reexamine my own beliefs and determine why I believe what I believe.

Dr. House argued that capital punishment is not only condoned but also commanded by God in the Old Testament, and he used New Testament passages to affirm those commands were universal and unchanging. His arguments relied heavily on his interpretion of Genesis 9 (the Noachian Covenant) as a universal mandate establishing God's relationship to man, and man's relationship to each other. Unfortunately, I felt he took the "easy" way out by claiming that the entire Mosaic Law had been invalidated by Christ and therefore was not relevant to his case. I think a more fair analysis would have been to divide the Mosaic Laws into moral, religous, and legal subcomponents and deal with each separately.

Dr. Yoder used a standard "Christ-transforming-culture" argument to assert that God's acceptance of capital punishment has changed from Biblical times to today. The themes of Christ's teachings have helped evolve modern culture past the need for retribution-based systems of punishment (i.e., some Scriptures have to be interpreted in terms of the cultural bias of its authors). Yoder explains away the Noachian Covenant as a reflection of an obsolete era and basis his arguments primarily on John 8, where Jesus pardons an alduteress about to be stoned to death.

I really enjoyed seeing this contemporary issue discussed from Scriptural postions. Both men made interesting arguments, but I felt Dr. Yoder did not respect or believe in the infallibility of Scripture and tried to use secular sources (modern psychology and social science) to bend his interpretations.