Book Review: Kull: Exile of Atlantis by Subterranean Press

 Before the time when the oceans drank Atlantis, there was an age undreamed of. When empires lay spread across the world like shining jewels, but the greatest empire of all was Valusia. Hither came Kull of Atlantis, black haired, grey eyed, an exile, a slave, a gladiator, an army commander and finally, a king.

Welcome! To the age of king Kull, a world of heroic fantasy, magic, adventures, and philosophy. Kull, is one of the characters created by the father of sword and sorcery sub-genre, Robert E. Howard. This talented Texan author has forged many fantastical characters and adventures such as Solomon Kane, Bran Mak Morn, Conan the Cimmerian, El Borak, and Kull of Valusia, in the short period of less than two decades. Today, Robert Howard's influence in sword and sorcery genre can only be rivaled by J.R.R. Tolkien in the sub-genre of high fantasy.

King Kull is my favorite literary creation from Robert E. Howard. Not only because I am fascinated with epics about barbarian warriors dealing whirlwind like death, with battle axes and brandished broad swords, but I also prefer reading stories where the character thinks and ponders on philosophy and epistemology. Kull stories have it all! Some people say Kull is prototype Conan. I do not agree. It is true that both characters are formidable barbarians in the art of war, but the essence of these two characters are completely different. Conan is a character who lived by the philosophy of existentialism (live in the moment). Kull is a much more introspective character who wanted to build a kingdom that would last. In short, Kull is a thinking man's barbarian and a barbarian as a thinking man.

In the 1920s, early in his career, Howard wrote Kull stories. At that time, he was experimenting with different writing styles. At this stage of his career, Howard let his imagination run free. It is easy for the readers to see that Kull stories are heavily influenced and inspired by Shakespeare's Macbeth, Julius Caesar, and writings from Edgar Allan Poe. Together with Howard's personal interest in philosophy and history. The result is epic tales of blood and thunder, philosophy, mysteries, adventures of the metaphysical and the physical. Howard's style of poetic lyricism made him a master story teller, and the Kull stories read like a combination of forgotten heroic tales lost in the sea of time, prose poems and philosophical fables. On that note, Howard's wrote his fantasy stories with a strong focus of realism. The realism of a world that Howard crafted by his imagination and typewriter.

Since 1998, the publisher Wandering Star re-published a collection of Robert Howard's writings. These high quality, hardback books are fully illustrated by artists and the contents are unabridged texts from Howard's typewriter . The objective was to expose modern readers to the creations of Robert E Howard, and treating Howard as an author with the respect that he rightfully deserves. However, Wandering star never published Howard's Kull stories in hardback format. In 2008, a small but profitable book publisher called Subterranean Press, published a glorious edition of Kull in the same style as the books from Wandering Star. This book is titled "Kull, Exile of Atlantis". This edition is  limited to 1500 copies, and contains all of the Kull stories written in Howard's life. This book is also fully illustrated with 12 color plates, and numerous black and white illustrations alongside the texts, drawn by artist Justin Sweet. I have included samples of some of color illustrations in this book.

 Disclaimer: I do not own these images, the copyright of these drawings belong to Mr. Justin Sweet, and these images are taken from http://www.justinsweet.com

   This volume collects 11 Kull stories, 3 poems an other unfinished fragments. My favorite stories are The Shadow Kingdom, The Mirror of Tuzun Thune, and Kings of the Night. The Shadow Kingdom was written in 1925, and is often recognized as the first true sword and sorcery story ever written. This story has many parallels to Shakespeare's Hamlet and HP Lovecraft's Cthulu mythos, and is regarded as the best, and the original sword and sorcery story. The Mirror of Tuzun Thune is a bizarre and fascinating story about the reality, the illusion and the relativity of space and time. Kings of the Night is a finely knitted story which blends historical fiction and sword and sorcery, with theme of time travelling. The story involves a Roman invasion, Pits, Gaels, Vikings and epic battle scenes, featuring both King Kull and another of Howard's creation, the Pictish king Bran Mak Morn. 

Subterranean Press crafted a gorgeous book here. It has top notch bindings, beautiful slip case design, dusk jacket covering, high quality paper, and thunderous illustrations that give off sparks to these unbeatable stories. This wonderful edition of Kull, Exile of Atlantis is an absolute knock out on my bookshelf.

Robert E Howard stopped writing Kull stories in 1930. His was shifting from Kull to Conan. Although Kull's world and Atlantis sank beneath the ocean, Conan and the Hyborian age were coming! Nevertheless, the saga of Kull are shining gems in the genre of fantasy fiction. The fantastic stories which feel so real that they often blur the line between fantasy and reality, lost in the winding passage of space and time.

Book Review: The Language of God - Francis Collins

Introduction:

The thirst for knowledge, and the seeking of truth, are unique traits in the human kind. Throughout human history, there are many famous thinkers who formulated ideas, synthesis and theories based on both the physical and the metaphysical. These are attempts to solve the big question of "how, why and where?", which ultimately takes us to the quest for the meaning of life. The seriousness of this big question can be best reflected, when thinking about the problem of "lunch": 1) How do we eat lunch? 2) Why do we eat lunch? and 3) Where do we go for lunch? And if we are on the right track, somehow we might find the meaning of life is "42.4665813" (now up to the accuracy of the 7th decimal place, since the original publication of the hitchhiker's guide). 

While sometimes it is helpful, to use humorous relieves as we wrestle with the big question in life. (as I have applied the sense of humor akin to Douglas Adams in this case). But needless to say, despite what you "believe", or "disbelieve". Every single human being will be confronted with this big question of "how, why, where? And the meaning of life", sooner or later, because what you believe/disbelieve about the answer to this question will constitute to your character, value and principle. This will define what you are about.

Like many others, I had realized the true answer to the big question of "how, where, why? The meaning of life", lies with the Christian faith. In salvation by grace through faith in the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Back in my mid twenties, in the early years of my walk with Jesus, I constantly struggled with the "war" between science and religion. As someone whose life's work at that time was based on science (I was an engineering PhD student), I constantly felt the pressure from some of my fellow Christians to surrender to the view that science, is a lesser truth compared to the Bible. Therefore I was "supposed" to submit to the view that science, should be made to fit a certain interpretation of the Bible passages whenever a "seemingly" contradiction appears. 

At that time, I was attending Central Sydney Presbyterian Church. It was through the pastor's (David Thurston's) positive guidance and encouragement, as well as reading various books and literature written by Christian and non-Christian thinkers and scientists, that I gradually gained a better and healthier perspective on science and religion [1-10]. (see the list of recommended reading in the "reference section of this review).  As I continue to expand my understanding in science and religion, it was only a few months ago that I finally came across this book called "The Language of God", written by Dr. Francis Collins. And I am delighted to say that this is probably one of the best Christian book addressing the topic of science and religion so far, but not without minor issues.

What's this book about:

Some people might never heard of the Human Genome Project, and I would suspect that even less people have ever heard of Francis Collins. The Human Genome Project, was arguably one of the most ambitious scientific project since NASA's mission to the moon. Where the project's goals were to find the sequence of the chemical base pairs that made up the DNA, and to successfully map the 25,000 genes from the human genes. A few years later, Dr. Collins took on the leadership as the director of the project. The announcement for the working draft of the genome was made in 2000, and completed in 2003. Francis Collins is not just a scientist, but he is also a Christian. In this book, Francis Collins shared his thoughts on the topic of science and religion. 

In the first chapter of the book. Collins gave a testimony of his own journey from atheism to Christianity. Starting from his childhood to early adulthood as a medical student as an atheist. As a medical student, Collins was looking after some patients from North Carolina who were suffering from tremendous illness. Collins testified that he was often struck by how well these people handle suffering. Especially when he witnessed how these people's Christian faith has given them the strength to endure the suffering they were going through.  When he was 26, he encountered a patient he was looking after, who was a Christian old lady suffering from severe untreatable angina on daily basis. This old lady shared her Christian faith with him, and asked him the question of "what do you believe"? Collins stated that the question struck him deeply, and lead him to investigate the evidence for and against belief seriously. Later, Collins went to visit a minister at a methodist church. After listening to Collin's questions, the minster gave him a booked called "Mere Christianity", written by the legendary Oxford scholar C.S. Lewis [11]. Where he realized his previous constructs against the Christian faith were not sound. Collins said the argument that struck him the most, was the argument of ethics (right and wrong) and the meaning of the universe. It was Lewis' argument for Christianity, based on the moral law and altruism that finally led Collins to reason that if there is a God, then this must be a God who wants some sort of relationship with human beings. In other words, Collins reasoned that if such a God exist, then this must be the God of Abraham, the God of the Bible. Collins testified that after struggling with this question for a while. He finally made a "leap" and became a Christian. 

In chapter 2, Collins discussed the different worldviews that are at war against each other. Which is a war that every seeker of truth will face on their journey. Such as: 

1) Is the believe in God simply a self wishing fulfillment? 

2) The problem of the evils done in the name of religion, 

3) Why would God allow suffering in the world? 

4) How can a rational person believe in miracles? 

Francis Collins provided very satisfactory answers to all of these questions. Personally, I particularly enjoyed Collin's argument for 4), where he used a combination of mathematical statistics in a poker game and Occam's Razor [12], to demonstrate the logical fallacy in denying the possibility of miracles, invoked by a supernatural entity such as God.

In Chapter 3, the author gave a brief history on the development of astrophysics and cosmology. From the struggle of scientists such as Copernicius, Kelper, Galileo against the Catholic church, all the way to Einstein's theory of relativity, Edwin Hubble's laws and the evidence supporting the big bang. For those who are interested in finding out more about this area, one can refer to the books and literature listed in the reference section of this review, particularly reference 2,3,4 and 7 [2-4,7]. Collins then moved on to discuss the question of "what about before the big bang?". He used Anthropic principle [6] and the cosmological constants [8] to construct an argument for a universe that is fine tuned for the existence of life. Collins argued that while this argument does not give us any conclusive proof that a God can exist, but the anthropic principle does favor the argument of a creator God. At the end of the chapter, Collins proposed a synthesis for someone who is seeking a true God through the moral questions mentioned in chapter 1. This synthesis is in harmony with modern scientific discoveries.

Chapter 4 and 5 are essentially, the meat and bones of this book. This is where Francis Collins discussed why the theory of evolution is, pretty much a scientific fact. The discussion was made based on the discoveries made in the human genome project, as well as the fossil record. Collins also emphasized that just because science is still unable to solve certain questions about the natural world. One should not hastily use God as a way to fill the gap in our knowledge, lest our faith will be in danger if science has discovered the knowledge to fill the gap in the future. 

In chapter 6, Collins gave a brief discussion on why the theory of evolution is still such a controversial theory in the public, yet it is a widely accepted theory in biological science just like the law of gravity. Collins also mentioned the delicate nature and the difficulty in the interpretation of Genesis. Such that Christians should not hastily take a side, and insist that Genesis contains scientific data meant to be interpreted word by word. Such is also the view and warning from St. Augustine of Hippo, one of the greatest Christian thinker in history. As Christians, we should continuously update our knowledge about the natural world [9]. Collins pointed out an important message, as Christians, we should not play the role of antagonist against revelations from the scientific truth. Quoting Collin's own words: " If God created the universe, and the laws that govern it, and if He endowed  human beings with intellectual abilities to discern its workings, would He want us to disregard these abilities? Would He be diminished or threatened by what we are discovering about His creation?"

In Chapter 7, 8, 9 and 10. Collins presented the different options of belief/disbelief:

- Chapter 7, the title is: Atheism and agnoticism (when science trumps faith)

In this chapter, Collins explains the difference between weak and strong atheism. As well as Agnoticism. Collins argues that it is a logical fallacy on Richard Dawkin's behalf to insist that science demands atheism. As Collins stated, Dawkin's argument demands science to go beyond its boundaries. Because if God exists and he is the creator of the universe. Then science, which only deals with the things OF this world, can neither prove nor disprove his existence. Therefore Atheism, is then a system of ideology based on blind faith, because it adopts a belief system that cannot be defended based on pure reason. 

- In chapter 8, Collins discussed the view of "creationism" (where faith trumps science). Collins stated that if this definition is centralized on the idea that a God is directly involved with the universe that He created. Then many Christians and himself will have to consider themselves "creationist". However, Collins went on to explain that his main topic of discussion in chapter 8, is focused on Young Earth Creationism. That is the belief that Genesis should be interpreted word by word, leading to the belief that the earth was created 6000 years ago, in a six, 24 hour days period. Collins gave a brief history of the rise of Young Earth Creationism in the last 50-100 years. Young earth creationists often call evolution a lie, and that the Big Bang is a wrong scientific theory, or "just" a theory (see this article to understand the true meaning of scientific theory [16]). In this regard, Collins explained why an "ultra-literal" interpretation of the Genesis is unnecessary. Not only that, Collins made a few examples of the problems of interpreting the entire Bible word by word, and the incompatiblities of young earth creationism with science. Furthermore, Collins argued, why would God created the universe to be young, but made it to "appear" to be billions of years old? (including all the fossil records, DNA, RNA that are strong evidence of evolution) Is God a great deceiver? Collins pleaded to use reasoning to discern the truth.

- In Chapter 9. The discussion was focused on the idea of "intelligent design" (where science needs God's help). Collins gave a short history on the development of the "intelligent design" movement. He revealed the movement is essentially, "God of the gaps" ideology masqueraded as science, by rejecting modern science such as evolution for some ulterior motives. Furthermore, Collins pointed out the theological problem with "intelligent design", because this ideology portrays God as a clumsy designer who cannot, perfect his creation in one attempt, but needs to keep on re-creating and perfecting his creations on earth, by driving the previously existing ones to extinction (refer to the fossil records). Such a god is surely not the all mighty God described in the Bible. Side note: Kenneth R. Miller has written a great book on this topic, for further reading [13].

- In Chapter 10, Francis Collins presented the idea of "Bio Logos" (science and faith in harmony). This is essentially the view that God created lives on earth through evolution. Collins argued that this view brings science and faith into complete harmony, and this perspective also makes Christian scientists to be intellectually fulfilled and spiritually alive, both worshiping God and using the tools of science to uncover the mysteries of His creation. 

In the final chapter, Francis Collins pleaded the careful examination of the evidence for Christian faith. He argued that the foundation of the Christian faith, the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, was historically documented in the Bible. That no historians will doubt the existence of Jesus. He quoted F.F. Bruce's word: "The historicity of Christ is as axiomatic for an unbiased historian as the historicity of Julius Caesar [14]. Finally, Collins called for a truce between science and religion, where extremists on both sides, should stop making science and faith warring against each other. In Collin's own words: "Science is not threatened by God; it is enhanced. God is most certainly not threatened by science; He made it all possible. So let us together seek to reclaim the solid ground of an intellectually and spiritually satisfying synthesis of all great truth. That ancient motherland of reason and worship was never in danger of crumbling. It will never be. It beckons all sincere seekers of truth to come and take residence there. Answer that call, abandon the battlements. Our hopes, joys and the future of our world depend on it".

My thoughts about the book:

In general, I think this is a great book. Francis Collins has made some powerful arguments for Christianity, and made a great attempt to reconcile science and religion. I will like to share some of my thoughts about some of the points he raised in the book.

A) In this book, Francis Collins mentioned the phrase "free will" several times. Mainly to make an argument that human beings, are at the cause of "human related tragedies" and not God. From his argument, I speculate that he meant "free will" to be "pure will" (as "will" purely from human beings). The phrase "free will" is only mentioned in the Bible as "free will offering" (Psalm 54:6, Leviticus 22:23). The reason why I think his argument would be better by replacing "free will" with "pure will" is because, according to Immanuel Kant's view. Human beings, although rational and self conscious, but are limited with impure freedom of choice. For example, if I like to eat chicken, then I will always want to eat chicken instead of salad, because chicken is my preference. Therefore, my choice is already affected by my personal preference prior to the food decision I make. Unless someone comes along and influence me otherwise. However, that is not to say that we do not have the ability to "choose". Because human beings are self conscious and rational beings. This means human choice can be affected but not determined by impulses, and therefore the choice we make is of ourselves. Not pure but can be brought into action by "pure" will (purely our own) [15]. A lawless free will (a will without pre-existing laws) is therefore incomprehensible in this natural world. But as I said before, I believe what Francis Collins tried to say is, we are responsible for our actions.

B) I think Collin's message about harmony between science and faith, is a particularly important message that is relevant to most Christians. Seeing that neo-atheism has been using science as a tool to attack Christianity. A lot of Christians have reacted with knee jerking reactions by calling science false, further adding oil onto a raging fire. Personally, I believe the same thing as Collins does. And that is scientific truth should not be made to fit a certain interpretation of the Bible. Nor should we call science false. Because the Bible was never meant to be a science textbook. It is a manual from God that teaches us about Him, about ourselves, and about how we ought to live to glorify Him. As Christians, we are to put our faith, build our hopes on Jesus Christ. Not on a particular view on how Genesis must be interpreted. Furthermore, we must be very careful not to build our faith on other things other than Jesus. 

To give the readers more insight into this important issue. I will debunk a popular Christian arguments for intelligent design, to show you how dangerous it is to build Christian faith on human ideas. Namely, the watch maker's analogy.

A Christian who build his/her faith based on the William Paley's watch maker's analogy (intelligent design, apparently Darwin was once very fond of this analogy until he formulated theory of evolution), is in danger of having a faith crisis when the watch maker's analogy is toppled. How? Well, according to the watch maker's analogy:

- A watch is complex

- A watch has an intelligent designer

- Life is complex

- Therefore life must have an intelligent designer

I will demonstrate how easily this analogy can be debunked. By using the same logic, we get:

- The tape water in my house consists of hydrogen and oxygen

- Tape water, comes from the dam

- Rain, consits of hydrogen and oxygen as well

- Therefore, rain must come from the dam.

I think the logical fallacy of William Paley's watch maker analogy, is pretty obvious when I apply the logic to different objects, as shown above.

Similar danger exists for those who radically build their faith on the ground that science is false and Genesis should be interpreted word by word. Equally as dangerous is the intelligent design movement, which uses God as the way to fill the gaps in our scientific knowledge. These are serious issues that can lead people to fall away from their faith. If they discover that scientific truth does not support their interpretation of Genesis, or that science has discovered ways to fill in the previous gaps in our scientific knowledge, causing people to think that science leaves no room for God. This can happen, if we do not build our faith on Jesus. Indeed, we have been given warnings by great Christian thinker such as St. Augustine more than one thousand years ago [9].

C) As Francis Collins pointed out. There is no need for science and faith to be in a war, because science deals with the "how" in this world. Christian faith deals with the "why and where" in this world. One may argue that knowledge of science is more reliable, because it belongs to the realm of "epistemological realism". While knowledge of Christianity is less reliable, because it belongs to the realm of "epistemological idealism". But the heart of the problem is, as human beings. We cannot radically separate them and only follow one. Any complete human being and experience, consists of both subjectivism as well as objectivism. For example, no one can really appreciate his wife's beauty in that green dress by interpreting the light reflected from the green dress as 540THz! Similarly, it is not very wise to insist to get a tan quickly by sun bathing without any protection cream! The interface between Science and Christian faith, is also about the healthy balance and harmony of epistemological realism, and epistemological idealism. 

Final thoughts:

  

The Language of God, is a great book written by a sincere Christian scientist. The messages are clear:

For Christians, it is a call for the time to end the war between science and Christian faith. We cannot bring glory to God by devaluing scientific truth and shun reasoning. 

For atheists/agnostics who have elevated scientism. While science is great at telling us "how", but it does not lead us to know the "why and where". Science alone, cannot teach us the meaning of life. Just like my joke at the beginning of this review. While the answer to "how" life  started may turn out to be 42.4665813, but the meaning of life is simply NOT 42.4665813 (down to the 7th decimal place, mind you), because that is just not human!

For truth seekers, the Bible said "Seek and you will find" (Matthew 7:7). Consider the human moral laws, why is there good and evil? Why do people display altruism when it clearly does not benefit them at all? Is it all meaningless, or an accident? Great thinkers such as Francis Collins and C.S Lewis have all been through this journey to seek the truth. In the end, they have come to worship Jesus Christ as their lord and savior. Why? Perhaps it is time for seekers to weigh the evidence and reasons more seriously and sincerely.

Harmony between science and Christian faith, lead us to gain even more awe for the complexity,  beauty and the wonder of God's most divine and sacred gift. Perhaps it is when we finally stop the war between these two truth, then we can gain even more awe and admiration for our amazing creator, by gazing into the chasm of scientific revelations, of the laws that govern the eons in the past and the future of this universe, the language of God. 

Reference (Recommended reading, item 1-10):

[1] Dinesh D'Souza, What's so great about Christianity, Regnery Publishing, 2007

     Link: (what's so great about Christianity) 

[2] Stephen Hawking, A brief history of time, Bantam, 1998 

     Link: (A brief history of time)

[3] Albert Einstein, On the electrodynamics of moving bodies, in Annalen der Physik.

     17:891, 1905 Link: (on the electrodynamics of moving bodies)

[4] Albert Einstein, The meaning of relativity, Princeton University Press, 5th Edition, 1966 

     Link: (The meaning of relativity)

[5] Charles Darwin, The origin of species, Penguin Classics, 2009 

     Link: (The origin of species)

[6] Frank J Tipler and John D Barrow, The Anthropic Cosmological Principle, Oxford University Press, 1st Edition. 1988 Link: (The Anthropic Cosmological principle)

[7] John D. Barrow, The Origin of Universe, Basic Books, 1997

     Link: (The Origin of the universe)

[8] Martin Reeves, Just Six Numbers: The Deep Forces that Shapes the Universe, Basic Books, 1st             Edition, 2001 Link: (Just Six Numbers)

[9] St. Augustine of Hippo, The Literal Interpretation of Genesis Vol.1 

      Link: (On the Literal Interpretation of Genesis)

[10] David Bohm, The Special Theory of Relativity, Routledge, 1996 

       Link: (The Special Theory of Relativity)

[11] C.S Lewis, Mere Christianity, HarperSanFrancisco, 2001 

       Link: (Mere Christianity)

[12] Blumer A, Ehrenfeucht A, Haussler D, Warmuth MK, Occam's Razor", Information Processing    Letters 24 (1987), 337-380 Link: (Occam's Razor)

[13] Kenneth R. Miller, Finding Darwin's God: A scientist's research for common ground between God and evolution, Harper Perennial 1st edition, 2000 Link: (Finding Darwin's God)

[14] F.F. Bruce, The New Testament Documents, Are they reliable?,Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing, 2003) Link: (The New Testament Documents: Are they reliable?)

[15] Immanuel Kant, Metaphysics of Morals 6

[16] Holbrook J, Rannikmae M, The meaning of scientific literacy, International Journal of Science and Enviornmental Education, Vol. 4:3, 2009, pp.275-288 Link: (The meaning of scientific literacy)

Video game review: Diablo 3

  When I was still a teenager in 1997, the video game developer Blizzard released this game called "Diablo". I still remember installing this game on my Intel Pentium I PC, with 120MHz CPU and 16MB of RAM. The game ran flawlessly on Windows 95, and I had a heck of a good time playing this game. Some of the most fond memories of Diablo I, included playing against a friend from school using dial up modem connection. The game became a must-play classics for every hardcore RPG gamers in the late 1990's.

3 years later, in year 2000. Blizzard released the sequel Diablo 2. The sequel turned out to be a bigger and more elaborate game than Diablo 1. Diablo 2 became one of the most popular RPG to embrace the video game market. I remember playing Diablo 2 from time to time until 2005. Those great memories of playing Diablo2, came from the days when my friends and I used to have a LAN party after our university exams.

Diablo 3 was first announced in 2008 and released in May 2012. Despite the fact that Diablo 3 has broken the record of "most pre-ordered PC games on Amazon", I was not particularly excited about it. Largely because I only play video games on special occasions these days, but also because I no longer possess the same enthusiasm about video games as I once did. Although I wasn't particular thrilled about the news of Diablo 3, but for old time's sake, I pre-ordered the game anyway.. simply because it's a Diablo game.

Diablo 3 collector's edition content

The funny thing is, when I finally picked up the game from the shop on the release day. I couldn't help but felt a tinge of excitement, as I held the massive box that contains Diablo 3 collector's edition in my hands. All of the sudden, as I stare dumbfounded at the size and the weight of the game's box. The memories of my nerdy teenage years flashed back in my mind, I remembered the good times I had playing Diablo I and II, as well as the days when I played the game with my friends of old.

With this new sense of excitement. I went home and installed the game, then start the game. I was first greeted with the message of user agreements, then I was notified that I needed to create a battle net account. Then I realized, Diablo 3 requires constant internet connection to play. "No problem", I thought, "I have unlimited broadband internet, surely this will not be a major issue". How wrong was I to have thought so...

I created the battle net account, chose my username and password. Then eagerly launched the game, thinking of re-living my nostalgic and glorious gaming memories of the past. An error message popped up, saying that the server was too busy and refused to let me log in. The next 30 minutes consists of desperate, and unsuccessful attempts to input of my battle net password to try to access the game, with no luck. Disappointed, I visited Blizzard forum, only to realize that there are hundreds of post from people on the same boat as me.

Apparently, too many people wanted to log in and play Diablo 3 on the launch day. The server network at Blizzard could not handle the traffic, and folded...

At that point, I wondered to myself: "Can this Diablo 3 really be the high quality Diablo game I remember from my teenage years?" Here I will give you my review for the much anticipated Diablo 3.

Examples of Barbarian concept art

Story:

 The story of Diablo 3 started 20 years after the original events in Diablo 2. New evils threaten the world of Sancturay. In the face of new threats, new heroes came from all corners of Sancturay in attempt to defeat this new evil.

The adventure starts in a town called New Tristram. The old town of Tristram, after the events of Diablo I and II now lay in ruins. People have re-built the town in a new location. Following the event of a fallen star crashing into the town, news of the appearance of demonic monsters spread. The would-be hero arrived at New Tristram to investigate this new threat. Only to discover a series of evil plots, and raging battles that will lead to the resurrection of the Lord of Terror, Diablo himself.

Character selection screen

The story telling method in Diablo 3 has been revamped. In previous Diablo games, while the story was interesting, it was never very involving. In Diablo 3, many new elements in the story telling method give the player a more immersive experience. For example, the player character is now fully voiced, and can have conversations with NPCs. The towns in act 1 to act 3 are also bigger, with more NPCs to speak to. On top of this, the NPCs and followers sometimes have conversations with the player character through real time speech, or cut scenes in the dungeons. This method of story telling prevents interruption with the pace of the game. Most importantly, there are beautifully rendered CG movies, narrating the story from the protagonist's perspective. To make the adventure more interesting, there are also events that will trigger randomly as the player happens upon them. Finally, the world of Sanctuary is full of lores, these lores can be picked up in the form of lore books. The player can listen to these lore books while adventuring, if they are interested to explore the background of the game world a bit deeper.

There are four acts in Diablo 3, each act varies in length and intensity. While the first half of act 1 may develop slowly, but after that, the pace and the intensity of the game pretty much resembled an aeroplane taking off on a runway.

Gameplay:

The gameplay in Diablo 3 remains very similar to the previous Diablo games. The player chooses one of the five characters in the game: Barbarian, Monk, Wizard, Demon Hunter, and Witch Doctor. In Diablo 3, now the player can choose to pay either male or female for each character class. Each character class has his/her own unique skills and strategy in game. When the player logs in, he/she can either embark on a crusade against legions of demons in a solo adventure. Or, alternatively the players are also free to choose to wage the war against demons in co-op mode with their friends.

Desert land (zoom in)

There are four difficulty levels in Diablo 3: Normal, Nighmare, Hell and Inferno. When the player starts a new character, he/she is playing at normal difficulty, beating the game will unlock the next level of difficulty. Blizzard has issued a claim, saying it is impossible to solo in Inferno level because the difficulty is too high.

The co-op mode shines brightly in Diablo 3, offering much challenges and fun . The difficulty of the game rises as you team up with your friends. This means if you are building a large team, you better have a team with balanced skills, and wide range of character classes to complement each other. Only then can you hope to defeat the toughest demons that spawned from the deepest recess of hell.

The game still uses the isometric camera view, and the control only involves mouse and keyboard. Left click on the mouse attack, right bottom of the mouse activate special attacks. Which other keys that can be assigned to execute special skills.

Blizzard is the master at crafting games that provide non-linear gameplay experience. This is done by using randomly generated dungeons. Every time, when the player re-play a dungeon, it will never be the same map. In addition to this, when monsters are slain, they will drop random loots. This means even if you created 50 wizard characters , you will build 50 very different characters, because you don't know what equipment you will get in the game for each character. This obviously adds great replayability value to the game, a trademark for the Diablo games.

Desert land (zoom out)

In previous Diablo games, when the character levels up, the player can choose to increase attribute points such as: Strength, dexerity, vitality, and intelligence. In Diablo 3, the attribute system is dropped. Instead, when the character levels up in Diablo 3, the player can acquire skills. The higher the character's level means more skills can be unlocked to aid the player's quest to anguish minions of Diablo. However, the interesting thing about the new skill system is, the player is free to switch between skills at anytime. Meaning the player can choose a combination/set of skills that best suit their play style and strategy. While able to change to a different strategy if they want to. This new skill system works wondrously, because this encourages people to experiment with different strategies and explore different skills, allowing the player to have more freedom to explore the gameplay mechanism in more details.

Another new addition to the game is the follower system. Previously in Diablo 2, the player can hire mercenaries on their epic quest. However, the mercenaries are essentially mute and dont' have stories, when they die, you just go back to the town and buy a new one. It was not very interesting at all. In Diablo 3, the new follower system is in place. There are 3 followers that can join your honorable quest to defeat the Lord of Terror: Templar, Enchantress and Scoundrel. Each follower has his/her own unique background story, and will have conversations with the player character randomly. The player can customize the follower's skills and equipment. When I played Diablo 3, I took followers with me because it was interesting to have them along.

Inventory screen in Diablo 3

The most useless feature of the new gameplay system, is the newly incorporated feature of auction house. The idea of the auction house is that the player can put their excess items on auction (because some items are class based, so if you are using a barbarian you are unable to use the equipment of a wizard), in a public domain on the Blizzard network. Other players from around the world, can purchase the equipment of interest by using in-game gold, or alternatively, using money in real life. Personally, I think this is a poor excuse for Blizzard to make more money, by handling the transactions from such trades in the auction house.

Graphics:

Many people will say that the graphics in Diablo 3 is not spectacular. While it is true that the graphics is no match for Mass Effect 3 or Batman Arkham City, but I do think the graphics in this game suits its purpose for a game like Diablo 3. The isometric view is probably the most efficient method of display in a hack and slash RPG. This allows the developer to craft big areas in the game. At the same time the explorations of the dungeons won't feel overwhelmingly long. Furthermore, the graphics look superb on a 3D TV, with great 3D depth and elevations for environmental details.

The centre of New Tristram

One of the most interesting thing about the graphics in Diablo 3, is the use of color in the art design. I noticed that each act in the game have their own unique color set. Creating a sense that each chapter is distinct in its area, location and lore. The use of the color scheme also created great immersion for players, a sense often missing in traditional hack and slash RPG. Overall, the atmosphere of the game stays true to the previous Diablo games, dark, bleak and depressing. With a sense of dangers looming around the corner.

Music and sound effect:

The music of Diablo 3 remains to be one of the best aspects in the game. The soundtracks are atmospheric and sometimes, creepy. The sound effects are very well done, from the slashing sound of the sword to the death cry of the demons. The sound effect and the music of Diablo 3 brings this dungeon crawling adventure to your living room.

What I think about the game:

I thin Diablo 3 is a very good game, hands down. This is probably the best game in the series. It has a lot of improvements on gameplay, story telling and graphics compared to its predecessors. The story is the good old fashioned tale of good versus evil. With a mixture of tragedy, desperation, loss of hope and the ultimate triumph of good against evil. While the story is not epic in scale such as Baldur's Gate, the story of Diablo 3 is interesting enough to attract the players to spend time to listen to the lores, talk to the NPCs and wanting to know what will happen next.

The gamplay mechanism added new elements and improvements in Diablo 3. The new skill system is very interesting, and will encourage the players to explore different play styles and strategies. While some may accuse Blizzard of "dumbing down" the game mechanics. Personally, I think the new system allows the player more freedom to craft their own unique strategies and play styles. Everything else about the game, from the graphics to the music and sound effects are pretty good, well suited for a game of this genre.

In other words, I think Diablo 3, is definitely (or better than) the Diablo games I remembered from my nerdy teenage years. But I am also sad to report that my experience of Diablo 3, was ruined by cob webs of technical problems.

An example of a skill tree layout

A more terrible foe than the Lord of Terror:

As if the quest to vanquish Diablo does not put enough chills into the spines of the would-be heroes. There is a even more horrifying foe that stands as the insurmountable enemy, threatening to thwart our noble quest. That foe, is none other than the abominable entity known as "Blizzard server network infrastructure".

Seriously, other than unable to log in to the game on the launch day. In the first two days, I experienced constant error messages (error 3007). Telling me that I have been "removed" from the server. This happened at 15 minute intervals. Thousands of people have posted on Blizzard's forum, reporting they the same problem. This means everytime this happened, the game crashed and I lost all the progress I made in the game. In the 20 hours that I played this game, I experienced in excess of 100 disconnections, meaning I had to restart certain dungeons more than 100 times! Honestly, this is not a technically sound product. While it is true that the network problem, is due to the network traffic caused by millions of users playing this game on the server. However, this does not excuse Blizzard from the responsibility of preparing for this kind of network traffic before the game was released.

Currently, the work around for error 3007 is to join the general chat in game. This also requires the player to say something on the general chat channel every 15 minutes. To "keep the network connection alive". In the last two days, whenever I played Diablo 3, I was always frantically type in something on the general chat channel. In order to remain connected. Suffice to say, I am not the only one spamming the general chat to avoid the infamous error 3007 message.

The reason for this network failure, is because Blizzard has made Diablo 3 to requires constant internet connection. Even in solo single player mode! Why do I need to be constantly connected to the internet, if I am only playing solo adventure? All we can hope is, Blizzard will release a patch shortly to address this problem. Otherwise in the meantime, Diablo 3 is almost unplayable due to the technical problems with the servers

Verdict:


Story 8.5/10
Gameplay 9.5/10
Graphics 8.5/10
Music and sound effect 9.5/10
Replayability 9.5/10
Recommended age of audience: Mature audience only

Final score: 9.1/10

I really like Diablo 3, I think it is a great game. And unlike Skyrim and Mass Effect 3, I can actually see myself playing this game from time to time in the next few years. From its game play mechanics, random dugeon/loot system, multiplayer co-op mode, and wide range of characer class choice. Diablo 3 has much to offer in terms of replayability. I wouldn't mind playing this in co-op mode with my friends. unfortunately at the moment, the more diabolic element of the game is not Diablo himself, but the poorly designed Blizzard network infrastructure, which has rendered the game almost unplayable. Today I heard that Blizzad issued an official apology to the customers. Promising to release a patch to fix all the problems. Let's hope they do so in the very near future. Otherwise, it will be a shame to see such a jewel of a game being ruined by a poorly executed technical infrastructure.

P.S. This game is quite violent, and the atmosphere of the game is very dark and depressing. The general vibe is a blend between horror and fantasy. Therefore, I do not think it is suitable for younger audiences. The horror theme might frighten younger audiences (I used to have nightmares in my sleep after playing Diablo I some 15 years ago), and the game can be very violent at certain places.

 ** This review is based on playing in normal and partially, nightmare difficulty (both solo and co-op mode). Game play experience might vary according to different game play difficulty settings.**

Book Review: The Saga of Beowulf

Beowulf, is arguably the oldest surviving English literature. The epic poem tells the story of heroes and glorious battles in the days long gone. This piece of literature has been passed down from generation to generation for the last thousand years. The epic poem of Beowulf, is one of my most favorite of all time. To me, not only is Beowulf the Scandinavian version of Robert E. Howard's Conan the Cimmerian in epic poetry, but the character of Beowulf himself is a hero of mythic proportion. Everything about Beowulf is intriguing: A hero with the strength of 30 men, slayer of giant sea serpents, swimming for days, the hand to hand battle with the troll Grendel, the battle against the troll hag and his final confrontation with the dragon, has captured my imagination ever since the first time I opened up the magical pages of this ancient poem. In fact, it is not hard to find traces of Beowulf in J.R.R Tolkien's Middle Earth  Saga [1], and C.S Lewis' Chronicles of Narnia.

Independent author R. Scot Johns, after a decade of research on the historical background of Beowulf, and the ancient poem itself. Has written a novelization of this epic poem, titled "The Saga of Beowulf". While the original poem consists of roughly 3200 lines, this novelization version amount to almost 620 pages, and is quite a hefty tome. The would-be reader must be willing to invest some time if they are interested in this book. Is this book worth your time? Let's find out.

Story:

To begin with, forget about the 2007 Hollywood movie "Beowulf" with Ray Winstone and Angelina Jolie. All I can say is, that movie was not a faithful adaptation of Beowulf. In fact, it is everything but Beowulf, with main storyline so disfigured from the original. This is hardly a surprise since the script was written by Neil Gaiman (author of American Gods) and he was on a mission to not only remove all the Christian elements from the original poem, but Gaiman has taken a step further to attack Christianity in his script. The bottom line is, if your only impression of Beowulf is based on the 2007 movie, then you need to read the original poem. Only then can you appreciate the beauty of the original story and realize how poorly written is the Hollywood adaptation (the only redeeming quality of the 2007 film were the soundtracks, and the 3D effects in the cinema).

It seems that the modern attempt to adapt Beowulf into a movie has failed to capture the spirit of the original poem. What about this massive novel? Before I give a brief summary of the story, I am happy to report that most of the essence of the original Beowulf poem has been captured in Scots' novel, but not without flaws.

The story of Beowulf probably took place at around 500-600AD, mainly in Denmark and Geat land (in modern Sweden). Unlike the original poem, the novelization portrayed Beowulf as more human, and has more background stories about the history at the time, and also has many complex characters in the book.

The story started with a troubled mead hall of Heorot in Denmark. The kingdom has been besieged by a monstrous troll, Grendel for 12 years. The human eating monster comes into the hall night after night, and no warriors can stand a chance against this super natural monstrosity. Many brave warriors have stood in front of the monster and fell. Including Beowulf's father, the crimson warrior Edgetheow, an exile from the Geat land and a right hand man of the Danish king Hrothgar. However, Grendel has never attacked the king himself. After a siege of 12 years, most of the king's warriors are slain and Denmark was in a pitiful state. As a grown man, and a warrior of renown, Beowulf led a small war band to Denmark, in attempt to slay the monster and also avenge for his father's death. In an epic battle, Beowulf managed to tore off Grendel's arm in hand to hand combat, and in effect slain the troll that has laid waste to Denmark. Little did Beowulf know that the Orge battle is but the beginning of a series of struggles against fate, where his struggle will leave behind an epic tale of legends.

What I think about the book:

R. Scot Johns has done a great job at novelizing Beowulf. It is evident that he has done thorough research in the historical background of 5th century Scandinavia. This book is on the borderline between a historical fiction, and a historical fantasy novel. Johns has successfully portrayed the human side of Beowulf that were present in the poem, and presented Beowulf as a complex character who is more than just having the strength of 30 men with a bunch of heroic deeds. Equally as well done, is the cast of supporting characters in this book. From the heroes to the villain, all the characters are well developed and their motivations are well presented to the readers, making this a deeply involved story.

It is interesting to note that the author has removed all the Christian elements present in the original poem in this novelization. I am not sure what the author's intention was for removing the Christian elements. However, while the poem Beowulf was originally a song sang by bards, circulating in Northern Europe in pre-Christian era, it is also know that the first written composition of Beowulf was probably by the hands of Christian monks in 800AD.  Therefore, maybe the author's intention for removing the Christian elements is to present the book with a more accurate historical background. Because in the time when the story of Beowulf took place, Northern Europe has just begun the process of converting to Christianity. Some have even speculated that the written poem of Beowulf in 800AD, was an attempt to reconcile Christianity and Nordic religious belief. Because the poem was largely appealing to the Norsemen's culture and code of honor in battle and glory, and at the same time trying to portray Beowulf as a Christ like character, while the poem bears many imagery to the story of Jesus Christ.

In this novel, all the Christian elements from the original poem are absent. Christianity is presented as a budding religion in certain parts of Europe, while the Norsemen were still pagans who believed that a glorious death on the battlefield, will grant them a seat in Valhalla across the bifrost where Odin awaits the brave and the courageous. Very interestingly, this novel was written from the perspective of Nordic mythology belief, which reflects the Nordic culture and the belief in fatalism, where one's struggle against fate matters little to the entirety of things, but it is the struggle itself that will bring glory and the heroic deeds from the struggle will be sung for ages to come. Perhaps it was the harsh weather in the Nordic regions that shaped the fatalistic belief? I don't really know, but I think some interesting discussions can be followed up on this topic of fatalism, Norse mythology and early Christianity in Scandinavia.

Personally, I think this is a great book. The only flaw is that sometimes the author can get pretty wordy, and pays too much attention to details that becomes distracting to the pace of the story. I have certainly speed through some of the paragraphs that seemed out of place. Nevertheless, the book is very well written, and the 1980's dungeon&dragon style cover doesn't really do justice for this otherwise fantastic novel. I think as an independent author, R. Scot Johns should probably find a good book cover artist to design the cover of his books. After all, appropriate book cover art or even illustrations never hurt, but can only be good to improve the artistic value of the book.

Final score: 4/5

The Saga of Beowulf, is the first novelization of the epic poem Beowulf. R. Scot Johns did a great job at modernising the poem and giving it more story with the rich historical context, complex and deep character development, and is very well written. The only downside of the book is the occasional wordiness in some paragraphs, which distrubed the pace of the story. The novel has successfully captured the spirit of the original poem, and R. Scot Johns has weaved an epic tale worthy of reading.

P.S. If you like this kind of books, make sure to check out Poul Anderson's "Hrolf Kraki's saga", a novelization of the 11th century Norse epic saga "Saga of King Hrolf Kraki'". This saga is actually remotely connected to Beowulf, in that both epics have mentioned King Hrothgar of Denmark.

Reference:

[1] J.R.R Tolkien, Beowulf: The monsters and the critics, Proceedings of the British Academy, 1936 pp. 245-295

Book review: Did Jesus Exist? The historical argument for Jesus of Nazareth by Bart Ehrman

It seems that now days, Christianity is constantly under attack. One of the hottest, and probably the most popular fore-front debate, is the constant discussions between theists and atheists on the topic of science vs. God. Dozens of public debates have took place where famous scientists and thinkers have pitted against each other, arguing for what they believe is right. Hundreds of books have been written about science vs. God where atheists and theists have presented their views on this topic, finally, tens and thousands of debates have been held on internet, where ordinary people have also expressed their views about science vs. God.

What an interesting phenomenon! Sometimes I really wonder why did science become the "supposed" only method of knowing the truth? When did the human society elevate science to the golden throne where it is viewed as the superior way of knowing and understanding, while ranking all other methods of knowing and understanding as second class knowledge? Is science the only way of knowing and understanding? I think not, but this is beyond the topic of discussion in this book review.

I follow Stephen Hawking's writings quite closely, not only because I think he is a great physicist, but I also admire his ability to write popular science books in styles that is readily accessible to the general public. Hawking have previously stated in his book, "The Grand Design" that laws of physics has made God redundant. In my previous book review on "The Grand Design", I have expressed my humble opinion as why Hawking's argument is weak. But after reading a vast amount of literature on this topic, and even participate in a few debates about science Vs. God myself. I finally arrived at this conclusion: Science, cannot be used to prove the existence of God, but neither can science be used to prove that God does not exist. How people view science, is dependent on what they believe. For example, as a Christian, I believe that science is God's wonders. While atheists will believe that science, is the root explanation for existence.

So I realized, perhaps the question cannot be simply answered by science. In order to determine if Christianity is the truth, one would have to look at history, and examine the Bible to come to a conclusion in yourself.

The book I am reviewing today, is written by Bart Ehrman. He is an American New Testament scholar, who is also an agnostic. Ehrman has written various books previously and is well known for his argument against Christianity.

However, this book captured my interest as Ehrman wrote this book to argue for the existence of a historical Jesus, and today, I will like to present a book review for Ehrman's new, interesting book.

Notice:

Before I start the actual review, I need to say that I do not possess any academic qualification in any history related subjects, therefore, I can only base my review on what Bart Ehrman said in the book, and the small amount of knowledge I've acquired during my concurrent research while reading this book.

Synopsis:

In this book, Ehrman used various historical evidence and formidable arguments to establish the high probablity that Jesus was a real person who lived in the 1st century, Jewish, a spiritual teacher and was later crucified by Pilate. As Ehrman stated in his book, he wrote this book mainly to debunk the mythicists (those who believe that Jesus never was a made up figure who never existed).

The book has nine chapters, and is categorized into three parts, here I will give a brief summary for each chapter:

In chapter 1, Ehrman briefly described the popular mythicists views on Jesus. He talked about the history and the development of the mythicists views, and listed a few main ideas of such views: For example, one of the mythicists view Ehrman talked about was the view that Jesus is based on ancient pagan religions for a dying and resurrected God. After listing the different mythicist views, Ehrman gave some arguments why these views are invalid.

In chapter 2, Ehrman listed historical evidences to argue for the existence of historical Jesus. Referencing to historical documents from non-biblical sources, such as the writings of Josephus (Testimonium Flavianum), Pliny the Younger, Seutonius (which doesn't directly refer to Jesus, but mentioned Christians), Tacitus. In this section, Ehrman mostly talked about non-Christian sources that mentioned Jesus. Where Ehrman paid particular attention to the writtings of Josephus, arguing that although the writings of Josephus could have been edited by later Christian scribes, but it can still be used as historical evidence for the existence of historical Jesus. In the conclusion of chapter 2, Ehrman concluded that these non-biblical historical document are not only evidence for the existence of historical Jesus, but we can also get an idea of the life of Jesus, that he really was a Jewish person, a religious teacher, and died by crucifixion under Pilate's reign.

In chapter 3, Ehrman used the New Testament books and letters as historical evidences, to argue for the existence of the historical Jesus. Ehrman said most historians have agreed that each books in the Gospel, can be used to testify the existence for the historical Jesus. Ehrman mentioned that although the four Gospels are written decades after Jesus was crucified, but these books are written based on oral accounts that have been circulating since the early 30 ADs, right after Jesus was crucified. In additional, Ehrman also stated that most historians believe that the earliest Gospel written was Mark, around 70AD, followed later by Luke and Matthew, and John. While Matthew and Luke are believed by most historians to be based on a hypothetical document called Q, that contain information not found in Mark. while Luke and Matthew could also be based on other hypothetical documents called L and M, while John can be treated as an independant source by itself. Therefore, Ehrman argued that in the Gospel section alone, there are all together 7 sources that testify the existence and the life of historical Jesus. Furthermore, Ehrman also provided arguments and historical evidence that there are indeed, oral accounts of the life of Jesus that can be dated all the way back to early 30AD's. Ehrman argued that we can trust that although the Gospels were written in Greek, decades after the crucifixion of Jesus, but we can trust that they are written based on reliable oral traditions around the time of Jesus' crucifixion. Ehrman supported this argument by observing that in the book of Mark, there are keywords in the sentences where it does not make sense in Greek, but makes perfect sense once it is translated into Aramaic, which is a language that Jesus and his followers spoke in the region where Jesus lived and was active. The most striking example is in Mark 2:27-28. Where Jesus used two lines to silence his critics. This is when some of Jesus' disciples were walking through the grain field on Sabbath, and because they were hungry they started eating the grain. The pharisee (a group of Jews observe the laws very strictly) saw this and protested to Jesus because the disciples were breaking the Sabbath. Jesus' response was to say that Sabbath was made for man, not man for Sabbath, and according to Ehrman, the Greek version of this passage is: Sabbath was made for man, not man for Sabbath, Therefore the Son of Man is the Lord of Sabbath. Ehrman said, the last sentence doesn't make sense, because even if Jesus is referring to himself in the last sentence, it doesn't add up because the pharisees are complaining about the disciples, not Jesus. However, Ehrman stated that the senetence makes sense when the key word is translated back into Aramaic, because in Aramaic, it uses the same word for man and Son of man, the word barnash. So the original sentence in Aramaic should read: Sabbath was made for barnash, not barnash for Sabbath. Therefore barnash is the lord of Sabbath. And all of the sudden, the "Therefore" in the sentence makes sense, because the reason why human are the lord of Sabbath is because of what Jesus just said. Ehrman continued to state in the original Gospels written in Greek, there are "punchlines/keywords" that are remained in Aramaic, or make better sense when it is translated into Aramaic. This is an indication that the Gospels are based on oral traditions that can be dated all the way back to 30AD's, just after Jesus was crucified.

In Chapter 4, Ehrman argued for the existence and life of Jesus by using the non-Gospel sources. He started by discussing the Christian, but non-biblical historical writings from early Christians: Papias , Ignatius of Antioch, 1 Clement. Ehrman argued that these early Christian writings, can be used as evidence to show that Jesus was a historical figure who really was crucified by Pilate. Following the reference to the non-biblical Christian sources, Ehrman comes back to the New Testament, and used the non-Gospel writings in the NT to argue for the existence of historical Jesus. According to Ehrman, in the Book of Acts, the narratives of the Apostles about the life of Jesus, especially the speeches in the book of Acts, are good testimony for the life of historical Jesus. The reason is because these speeches are based on the oral traditions about Jesus that existed before the Gospels were written. Ehrman then moved on to discuss the non-Pauline NT epistles (e.g. 1 and 2 John, Jude, James, 1 and 2 Peter etc..). Here, Ehrman believes that 1 Timothy is not written by Paul, and there is a non-Pauline source in NT. Nevertheless, Ehrman stated that the non-Pauline epistles in the NT are indeed independant, historical records that testified the life and existence of Jesus. Following this, Ehrman moved on to what I think is a particularly interesting argument from Ehrman, the witness of Paul. Ehrman stated that the earliest NT writing, is probably 1 Thessalonian, which can be dated back to 49AD. This means it is less than 2 decades after the crufixion of Jesus when Paul wrote this letter. Ehrman stated that Paul (also known as Saul), who was a persecuator of the Jews, after some events in his life, converted to Christianity in the early 30AD's, approximately in the same time period when Jesus was crucified. Another historical fact we know, is that Paul is close with Cephas (Simon Peter), and James (the brother of Jesus, both mentioned in the Bible and in the writing of Josephus). This means Paul based his knowledge about Jesus on these two actual disciples who knew Jesus before he was crucified. This makes all of Paul's letters (1 Thessolonians, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Phillipians etc..) another independant source to testify the life of Jesus, Ehrman argues that the fact that Pauls' writings pre-dates the first writings of the Gospels, coupled with the fact that Paul knows 2 out of the 12 actual disciples of Jesus, makes Paul's testimony about the life of Jesus highly credible, this is because Cephas (Peter) and James would have seen, known, heard and spoke with Jesus personally. Not only that, Peter and James would have be around when Jesus was crucified.

In chapter 5, Ehrman discussed what he thinks are the two main historical sources for the existence and life of historical Jesus. Peter and James (brother of Jesus). Ehrman provided reasons and debunked the mythical view that James was not really a brother of Jesus. Following this, Ehrman made another powerful argument to prove that Jesus really was a historical person who was crucified by Pilate, and that the testimony in NT that Jesus is the messiah is actually not based on Pagan religion. Ehrman stated that the ancient Jews never believed that the messiah would die. Actually, the ancient Jews believed that the Messiah will go on living, and never die (this view is confirmed by a pastor who preached at our church camp as well). Ehrman argued that the reason why Paul (Saul) persecuted Christians before his own conversion was because, the idea that a messiah can die is a highly offensive concept to the Jews, so someone who is very high up in the Jewish religious order as Paul, will find it highly offensive and blasphemous, leading to his persecuation of the Christians. Ehrman argued this means the concept of a a dying/suffering messiah in Christianity, is actually not based on some ancient pagan religion, but an original concept at the crucifixion of Jesus, an event that actually took place in history.

In chapter 6 and 7, Ehrman provided discussions and arguments against the popular mythicists views about the non-existence of Jesus. Ehrman debunked the common mythicists views that the Gospels are non-historical sources, in which Ehrman took the view that although the Gospels contain what he called "legendary materials", but can still be used at parts, as historical sources. Ehrman then debunked the mythicists view that "Nazareth doesn't not exist", by providing archeological findings and historical data to show that Nazareth was actually a small town that existed in 1st century, when Jesus walked the earth. The third mythicist view debunked by Ehrman was the view that "The Gospels are interpretative paraphrases from OT". In general, Ehrman focused his arguments to debunk the mythicist view that Jesus is based on ancient pagan Gods and myths.

In chapter 8 and 9, Ehrman focused his discussion to formulate what he thinks is the "real" life of the historical Jesus. In this section, Ehrman used a set of criterions commonly used by NT scholars, namely Criterion of Dissimilarity, Criterion of Multiple Attestation , and Criterion of Contextual Credibility (I can't find a scholar article for reference here, but basically it is saying that traditions are more likely true if they conform to what is known). Ehrman applied these three criterion, and concluded that the historical Jesus is an apocalyptic prophet, who was heavily influenced by John the Baptist, and believed that the end of days was going to occur in his time, then taught that in order to enter the kingdom of heaven, one must keep the laws in the Torah. Ehrman, in his conclusion, said that Jesus died 6 hours after his crucifixion.

My thoughts on the book:

What do I think about this book?

Personally, I think Ehrman definitely has an in-depth knowledge about NT history, the background, ancient culture and history in general. Personally, as someone who did not study any history or biblical history, I have learnt a lot of news things about the Bible. I particularly find it useful to know that the ancient Jews did not believe that a messiah would ever die. Because this is a very powerful apologetic point for Christianity, and not only that, a very powerful argument for the existence and the life of historical Jesus.

In addition to this, I also find knowing that Paul's writings are amongst the earliest NT literature is very useful information. I find Ehrman's argument very convincing, in that because Paul knows Cephas and James personally, this makes Paul's testimony on the life of Jesus highly credible.

Furthermore, I am also very intrigued by Ehrman's proposition that the Gospels, although written in Greek and at a much later time, but are based on oral traditions about Jesus that can be dated to 30AD's. The most intriguing and convincing point was that certain words and keywords in the original written Gospels remain in Aramaic, indicating that they are written based on oral accounts (narrated by eyewitnesses who lived in 30AD's, in the regions where Jesus was active) who actually have witnessed the life of Jesus, his teaching, death and resurrection (the resurrection was ommitted by Ehrman in this book, I have something to say about this later).

I think Ehrman definitely provided some sound, reasonable and if I may say, formidable arguments that pretty much demolished the mythicists view that Jesus never existed. On top of this, Ehrman was able to support all of his argument with his vast knowledge in ancient Greek, Aramaic, NT literature, early Christian history and history in general. I am thoroughly impressed with this well-learned scholar.

However, in the later parts of the book, after much thinking, research and reflection, I decided that my views departed from Ehrman's views on the "real" historical Jesus in chapter 8 and 9, and I will like to discuss them below.

First of all, although I am not a NT scholar. Neither does my educational background grants me qualifications to say much about NT history. However, I noticed that two of the key arguments for Ehrman against Christianity are:

1) Ehrman says that the world wide census mentioned in Luke, there are no historical evidence to support the event recorded in Luke, therefore Ehrman calls this an error in the Bible. Upon reading Ehrman's argument, I was brought to think about this problem. After some research, I found this internet article quite useful. (article). This article explains why the census mentioned in Luke is highly plausible, and although I have not personally checked all 7 references listed in the articles, but I find the arguments constructed by the author highly sound.

2) Another of Ehrman's argument against Christianity, is that the conversation between Jesus and Nicademus in John 3:3 couldn't have happened. In John 3:3, Jesus said to Nicomedmus "unless you are born "anothen" you will not be able to enter the kingdom of God". Ehrman argued that, the greek word "anothen" has two meanings: a) second time and b) from above. Ehrman argued that this conversation is centred on the double meanings of the Greek word "anothen", where Jesus is saying that unless you are "born again", from the spirit that comes "from above", you cannot enter the kingdom of God (this conforms with our NIV and ESV translation if you read from John 3:3-6). The problem, according to Ehrman, is that when this passage in John 3:3 is translated back into Aramaic (the language that Jesus probably spoke), the aramaic word for "born again" is not the same as "second time" as the Greek word "anothen" has double meaning. And without the double meaning of the word "anothen", the entire conversation from John 3:3-6 doesn't flow. Therefore, Ehrman argued, that this conversation in John 3:3-6 never really happened. When I first read Ehrman's argument, it does look very challenging, but once again, after some research, I found this article that shed light to debunk Ehrman's argument about the problems of John 3:3 (article). It turns out, that in the ancient Syriac Peshitta, the Aramaic version of John 3:3 does contain the word "again" in the sentence. This means the original Aramaic version (which is probably what Jesus said to Nicodemus) doesn't require a double meaning word such as the Greek word "anothen" to make sense. Anyway, click on the link I provided above, the explanation to debunk this particular argument from Ehrman is very well done.

Finally, I cannot help but find Ehrman's proposition for his version of the "real" Jesus a bit weak. To start with, Ehrman used the three criterion used by NT scholars to some degree, wrongfully. The criterion of dissmilarity, the criterion of multiple attestation and the criterion of discontinuity, are meant to be used jointly for strictly positive means to support a historical claim, not in a negative way to reduce the historical relability of a claim.

But as I am not a qualified historian, perhaps some would accuse me of over stepping my field of qualication by criticising Ehrman's argument about these criterion.

However, even if I step out of scholarly criticism against Ehrman's negative use of the criterion of authencity. There is still one big problem that I can see in Ehrman's argument in his use of criterion. From a non-scholarly perspective, but from a common sense view.

My biggest protest against Erhman's argument in chapter 8 and 9 is, Ehrman was happy to use the criterion of dissimilarity, and the criterion of multiple attestation, and the criterion of contextual credibility to deduce the high probablity of the existence of historical Jesus. Because the various sources from NT (the Gospels, letters of Paul, and speeches in Acts) has testified that Jesus was once a Jewish religious teacher who lived in 1 century, but was crucified by Pilate, therefore it passes the criterion tests. But why is it that Ehrman is happy to admit the life and crucifixion part of the life of Jesus, but is completely silent about an equally, largely testified part of these historical sources, which is the resurrection of Jesus? Where is the integrity to examine all these historical accounts with an unbiased approach? Surely if Ehrman is happy to say that because multiple sources say that Jesus lived and died on the cross, then by integrity he should also notice that the resurrection account of Jesus should pass the criterion tests. In other words, the reason why Ehrman is completely silent about the resurrection account, is because he has a bias against historical records that contains supernatural phenomenon.

I would like to call for integrity to consider the life, death and resurrection of Jesus be considered in equal terms when analysed by the criterion of authencity tests, because all three parts of the records of Jesus are equally attested in the historical sources of NT.

Human beings, often like to think that just because we haven't seen something, so it cannot happen. But time and again, we have proven that this is an ignorant way of thinking. Even in the field of science and engineering. I will give an true example where we can deter ourselves from finding the truth because of our ignorance.

In the early to mid 20th Century, scientists and engineers used to think that supersonic flight is impossible. This is because in classical aerodynamics, the engineers use a graph called "drag polar", to determine the amount of drag on a moving object travelling in atmosphere. Scientists and engineers in those days (and today), when constructing the drag polar graph from pure mathematicaly and from classical methods, the drag will approach infinity as we approach the speed of sound (Mach 1). This is still an unresolved mystery in the field of aerondynamics and aircraft design. However, we all know that aircraft such as Concord, fighter jets, missiles etc.. can fly supersonically today (faster than speed of sound. We can determine the drag of supersonic flight by recording the coefficient of drag through wind tunnel testing. Do we have a theory to explain why the classical aerodynamics predicts infinite drag at Mach 1, while the reality is so different? No, we can't explain why. But if you were to say to aeronautical engineers back in the days that you want to design a supersonic aircraft, they will surely think your proposition is highly "implausible" because base on what they know, it is impossible to fly supersonically due to infinite drag that's predicted on the drag polar curve.

Yes, science is very differnt to history (well, aeronautical engineering is very different to analysing the credibility of biblical history), but at the core of analysis, human ignorance, ego and the little knowledge that we possess can often cause us to develop a bias, and rule out the critical elements that we regard as "implausible", simply we don't understand it and think it cannot happen. This can sometimes delay/deter us from finding out the truth, until we can see such "implausibility" occur in front of us. In the case of realizing that it is possible to fly supersonically despite what theory tells us, has relatively minor consequences to our lives. However, in the case of the resurrection of Jesus, well, discovering the truth too late will have eternal consequences, if what Bible says is correct. Don't you agree?

In the case of Ehrman's argument that the historical Jesus was just an apocalytpic prophet, I think Ehrman's bias against the things that he thinks as "implausible" has disabled his ability to treat all the evidences and data that lay before him with equal integrity, and that missing piece is obviously, the equally and multiple attested account of the resurrection of Jesus.

I have just spent the last 4 hours writing this exhaustive book review. It is now the 6th April 2012 at half past zero in the morning, it is Good Friday today. This is the day when Jesus was crucified, a multiply attested event in all the historical accounts that is in the New Testament. Equally as well attested event is the resurrection of Jesus, which, according to all historical tests and evidence, should be accredited as a real historical event despite the fact that we do not know how the dead can come back to life. But that is exactly why the resurrection is a miracle, because it is something extra-ordinary. No, the resurrection is more than just a supernatural stunt that impresses people, the resurrection, symbolize hope and God's promise to us, it means so much more. Perhaps, after all the intellectual activities and discussions in the topic of science vs. God, or authenticity of the Bible and history. It is more important to think about what Jesus means to us, to our lives, and how his resurrection means to our lives?

Concluding remarks:

Ehrman is an extremely well learnt scholar, this book demonstrated his in-depth knowledge in the field of NT history research. Ehrman is formidable in debunking the mythicists views about Jesus, and provided some intriguing and challenging things to think about. Overall, a very good read if you are interested in history of the New Testament and want to acquire some basic knowledge about the scholar study of historical Jesus. However, I departed with Ehrman's views in chapter 8 and 9 in regard to the nature of Jesus. My biggest protest is that Ehrman, because of his personal bias against the divine nature of Jesus, is completely silent about the multiply attested resurrection account found in the books in the New Testament. This is importing data without keeping the integrity of the data, due based on personal bias. As a result of this, I find Ehrman's proposition of his version of the "real" Jesus very weak and contains major flaws, because who he thinks Jesus is, is derived based on his own personal prejudice against the resurrection account of Jesus.

P.S.

- The words underlined and colored blue, are links to articles that might be helpful to understand the topic. To access, simply click on the words

- Special thanks to Diony McPherson and Cameron Blairs for sharing, explaining and exchange of ideas and information. Please feel free to comment or correct me if there is anything that doesn't make sense.

- Due to the long the exhaustive length of this article, the fact that it is now 1am in the morning and I've been writing for the last 5 hours, and that I've had a tiring week at work. There might be grammatical and spelling errors that I am unaware of, or sentences that don't flow well. I will come back and perform some revision works in the near future. In the meantime, please excuse me should there be any such errors.