Rating: 
Summary: Powerful refute of Christianity. Score one for Skepticism.
Review: There is one word that can sum up the effect of this book for me: "powerful". Most of the books I have read about religion have been pro-religion and this is very different from the old "We need religion to fill the spiritual side of ourselves" claims they always make about it. These books produced a response from my heart, but this book produced a response from my mind. It makes the claim that there is no more evidence of God than there is of Zeus, or any other god that humans have created for their stability throughout history, and it is very effective in proving this claim. It is about time someone cries out for the intellectual awakening of people instead of one more emotional one.Dan Barker was an evangelical minister and missionary who did everything from writing songs and skits for children to working with youth groups to preaching street sermons to adults. However, somewhere in the course of this career he began to be aware of the fact that his religious beliefs were in serious conflict from his intellectual knowledge about our scientific world. This book brought many negative aspects of Christianity to light that had been completely ignored, conveinently explained away, or totally unknown to me in my super-religious past. I never realized the Bible was so anti-family and that the various qualities we attribute to God are so self-contradicting. It also further examined some parts of the Bible I had already wondered about, such as its blatant sexism and racism, and its inaccuracy in accordance to history, although I had been told by every preacher out there that it was correct. If you are from a Christian religious background I can only imagine the response my little book review is illiciting, and I totally expect to receive self-righteous hate mail under the guise of loving Christianity. However, I completely understand, for if I had read a book review like this during my very devoutly religious stage, I would have felt the same way. All I can ask you to do is read the book for yourself. If you read it and disagree with my conclusions, that's great and there is no harm done. I think that if anyone can truthfully answer to themselves the questions that this book raises about religion and can still say that it is in accordance with what they feel is moral and intellectual, their faith will only be strenghtened. But if you have ever been able to sing along with good old Alanis "In the name of the father, the skeptic, and the son, I have one more stupid question..."- in other words, if you have had some doubts about religion that you would like to explore but have never known a way to do this, you will really appreciate this book. All I can say is that it totally changed my perception of religion and I was as strong a believer as anyone out there, having been in church since I was an infant and continuing it in my youth by going on many mission trips to foreign countries. I was not an atheist who picked up this book so that I could prove I was still right; I was actually a pretty strong Christian who was beginning to have some doubts, and when this book was offered to me by someone I had serious pre-conceived judgements about it and even started reading it with the desire to prove the guy totally wrong. I was sure everything he would say would be like "I don't believe in God because I want to do what I want and no one can tell me what to do." However, this book appealed to my mind as well as my sense of moral rightness, and although I started page one with a preconception that it was totally offbase, I finished it with a strong "Amen, Amen. Finally a book about religion makes totally sense!"
Rating: 
Summary: Every Christian fundamentalist must read this book!
Review: This is the best book around which shows why Christian fundamentalism must be stamped out! Barker's book is the best tool to show that fundamentalism cannot stand in the real world. But theism and the deeper and broader aspects of the Christian faith are as solid as a rock, and they show a profound logic and rationale. Barker clearly shows that his perspective on Theism and Christianity are from a fundamentalist perspective, so it comes as no surprise to read that he found no logic or satisfaction with life in the 'fundamentalist fold'. This book shows why Christian fundamentalism turns people away in their droves towards humanism, secularism and naturalism - all in search of spiritual 'freedom' from the chains of religious regulations and dogma. But Barker fails to realise that when viewed from a deeper and broader perspective - divorced from the regulations and narrow scope of fundamentalism - theistic faith and the Christian message exhibits a deeper and more profound rationale. Cries that "God is a joke" which must be "let go" are futile and themselves must be "let go". Barker's attitudes themselves reveal a lack of logic and a lack of depth toward reality and our existence. He seems to think that 'faith' is not required, and thinks that science has answered the eternal philosophical questions - that all calls for a 'Creator' are redundant, that the Universe is without meaning, and that our existence is an "accident". These claims are all emotional ideologies, but what makes Barker's assertions so dogmatic ("once a preacher always a preacher?") is that he promulgates the message that "faith" is redundant. It takes a LOT of faith to believe that everything in existence is a huge, purposeless accident. Barker has not lost his faith at all - rather he has moved it. Barker experienced the theistic perspective of reality through a very narrow, dogmatic framework (Christian fundamentalism) and this explains why he now rejects any kind of theistic belief. But his outright denial of theism, faith and a deeper spirituality is the most narrow minded notion of them all. While reading through this book, the reader gets immersed with fundamentalist perspectives, dogma, narrow minded attitudes and biblical literalism. All of these attitudes were adhered to by Barker during his years in the 'fold', and it is no wonder he failed to SEE that theism actually makes very good sense of reality. But whether we belief in an Almighty Creator or not, 'faith' is the key - for every human being alive. If Barker sincerely believes that science has proved that the Universe and our existence is purposeless, and that science can answer why there is something (wonderful) rather than nothing, then Barker has revealed a narrow dogma of his own. A mathematically ordered Universe which happened to become aware of itself, and which gave rise to friendship, love and spiritual creativity is not a good sign that the Universe is purposeless and that our existence was not intentional. The fact that something exists, rather than nothing at all, is also not a good sign that the Infinite is inherently meaningless. As Dan Barker does not possess an infallible knowledge of everything, his assertions must be based upon faith, and atheists' attempts to deny this are futile. Barker wished to free himself from a narrow scope, from childish regulations, and from dogma, but it becomes apparent that Barker has only shifted his faith sideways. From a spiritual perspective, when the 'chains' of fundamentalism are broken, Christians are then in the position to grow, to mature, and to appreciate the infinite depths and pathos of God and spirituality. Barker failed to realise that for Christians to be free from narrow scopes, childish regulations, and dogma, they must search DEEPER - not sideways. By the way, to address a previous reviewer - of course we have evolved, but the theory of natural selection (i.e. that we evolved 'accidentally') is facing MASSIVE problems when used to explain the existence of nervous systems, brains and consciousness - and it has been far from proved at all. (How can inanimate atoms "accidentally" experience joy, tears, and love? The personal conclusions of scientisis like Richard Dawkins are grounded in FAITH, and when seen from the greater perspective of cosmic evolution, the epic story of the Universe and life exhibits great depth and meaning). Back to Barker - he ought to have entitled this book "Moving from Dogma to Dogma", but with regard to Christian fundamentalism, more and more books like this are being written, and that is the greatest God-send of them all. Hopefully, it will stamp out fundamentalism, and the deeper spirit of Christianity will consequently be able to grow. Stroll on Danny boy - you're doing a sterling job, and you're evangelist skills are finally paying off - big time!
Rating:
Summary: Simply awesome!
Review: Notice how many christians posted horrible reviews for this book and you will realize just how good it is. A must read for all rationale people sick of christians spewing their mythology everywhere they go. Read a book about rationale thought, or read the bible with all its bloodshed. It's time we rid ourselves of mythology and further embrace science and technology. god is a JOKE, get over it.
Rating:
Summary: Dan places the burden of proof on the believer
Review: The first item that theists seem to forget is burden of proof is on the originator of the story. Jesus only existed in one place, the bible story. The history of this man is what Dan eludes to. There is no specific record of a miraculous conception. There either is a direct lie or jesus was conceived in an evolutionary process. The arguments that faith is necessary leads that one must either believe in god or deny god. Dan illustrates how a lack of belief in god doesn't deny belief of actual occurances in nature. He still believes that most people are moral, as they are in many countries without christianity. Dan illustrates how theories override faith. A hope based on faith is completely different than a scientific or philosophical theory. Faith demands that you understand it to the best of your ability and accept. Theories have been accurately changed as more knowledge is gained. The theory of evolution was originally introduced with critiques a mile long. The missing link was the supposed deficiency. Now we have explored this knowledge and realized adaption, micro-evolution, macro-evolution and god's big plan are really evolution as theorized by Darwin and Wallace. The natural selection process may be called a belief system by a theist, when it really is scientific knowledge. Dan was just another person who realized that giving in to a reward system made up for pyschological fulfillment. An avoidance that the truth is when we die our reward can only be of what we left behind in behavioral pattern and knowledge. Thanks for the knowledge.
Rating:
Summary: A book worth reading
Review: "Calling the kettle black" springs to mind while reading some reviews below - especially the reader from Orange County who said the Christian religion is a "cult", yet when you read his other reviews he is into "Witchcraft" and he believes in "angels". For all we know, Barker might be wrong in claiming that the Christian religion is a myth. He doesn't know that, he just believes it, just as the reader from California believes in angels. Now I'm not religious, and I'm not a Christian - even though I sometimes reckon there must be a God of some kind. Who's to say Barker is wrong, but who's to say there are no angels? Who's to say the Christian religion is a "myth"? It's all about belief. If God dwelt in the man Jesus a few centuries ago, then no one today is in the position to say it didn't happen. What if it did? Christians have faith that he did. That's not a bad faith. A bad faith is one that says they don't need faith. "No belief required" says Barker about his new-found faith. That is a claim to be dubious about. Still, the book's worth reading - but it must be better to have a strong "belief" than to deny "belief" altogether like Barker does.
Rating:
Summary: This book tells it like it is- Must read
Review: This is a great first book for someone who is taking their first steps away from superstition and starting to think for themselves. It is a difficult process but one worth the journey. Through Dan Barker, we see how the Christians behave when he so bravely admitted he did not really buy into the whole Christian fantasy anymore. Perhaps they are afraid that he was brave enough to publicly admit what most of them must surely feel in their hearts. Mr Barker also tells, correctly, how most Christians don't really have a clue what their bible says and what their religion is really all about. The sections on the violent, immoral, and perverse bible verses was especially eye-opening.
Rating:
Summary: This is the book to read if you can think for yourself
Review: This was an excellent book about a man that is courageous enough to take on his own "faith", question it with an un-fearing mind, and see it with an unbiased eye. Hooray for you sir ! I implore all to read this book. It is excellent for those seeking to escape the Cult of Christianity. This book should be able to give you the strength you need.
Rating: 
Summary: Can we start waking up please?
Review: By the looks of some of the remarks made in previous reviews defending Barker's book here, it seems clear that many 'free thinkers' are completely oblivious to the fact that a whole hoard of Christian believers live a content life of faith, who do not find themselves restricted within the bubble of extreme fundamentalism which Barker's book primarily deals with here. These Christians are not all out and out 'liberals' who deny the deity of Jesus, but are people who freely accept and believe in the true spiritual liberation of Christianity and the grace of God. In this book, Barker clearly portrays a little 'bubble' of his own, and in the name of 'free thinkers' he professes dogmatically that all spiritual religions are wrong. Barker has written a chapter called 'What is a freethinker?" in which he writes "Truth is the degree to which a statement corresponds with reality. For a statement to be considered true it must be testable, falsifiable, parsimonious, and logical. Arguments based on faith ... are unacceptable." Believers are now in the position to insist that Barker carries the logical burden of these assertions to its full conclusion. What is this 'truth', according to free thinkers? bearing in mind free thinkers must refrain from any appeals to faith, because according to Barker, arguments based on faith are "unacceptable" and "irrational". Okay, is it 'truth' that the Universe has existed forever? Is it 'truth' that the Universe arose from literally nothing at all? Is it 'truth' that our existence was not intentional? Moreover, is it 'truth' that God does not exist and that an intelligent agent was NOT the cause of the material Universe? According to Barker's own criteria, all of these statements are "unacceptable" and "irrational". Due to the fact that human beings do not possess an infallible knowledge of everything, such assertions must NECESSERILY be grounded in faith. The difference between theists and free-thinkers is that theists whole-heartedly accept the necessity of faith. If Barker's book is a reflection of free thinker's attitudes, then it is clear that free thinkers' assertions are the ones that are "irrational". Humanism is most definitely an emotional belief, even though in his chapter 'Inaccurate Conception', Barker quotes George H. Smith and asserts that "atheism is not a belief" (whether it be implicit, or explicit atheism). However, atheism has to be a belief, because it exclusively rules out any kind of belief in a supernatural agent or an intelligent Source, therefore, by definition, Humanists BELIEVE that natural causes can account for the whole of reality - including the nature of the infinite, the ultimate source of the material world, consciousness, and the sustaining reality of being. Barker (and Smith's) assertions are fallacious, because atheism is a lack of theistic belief, therefore atheists' belief is NECESSARILY shifted onto materialism and natural causes. Scratch the surface of an atheist who denies 'belief', and you find an agnostic. If the atheist persists in denying the necessity of 'belief' (such as Barker), then I'm afraid you find an irrational human being. In his Chapter 'Why I am an Atheist", Barker equates belief in God with belief in Santa Claus, and claims that you cannot dis-prove the existence of Santa Claus equally as much as you cannot dis-prove the existence of God. Barker concludes "Most of us have matured into 'A-Stana-ists', and some of us have matured into 'A-theists'" If Barker truly sees 'Santa Claus' on an equal level to the existence of the Infinite and deep spiritual fulfilment, then Barker has neatly exhibited how shallow his perspective on reality actually is. I find it interesting that throughout the numerous chapters which contain a dialogue between a Christian and a free-thinker, Barker always endows the Christian with extreme narrow minded attitudes and with the intelligence of a pea. If Barker sincerely believes that all Christians are like this, then again it merely reveals Barker's 'bubble-like' outlook on reality. Barker rigs the dialogue so that the Christian always ends up losing the argument, and this method of deriding an opposing belief reveals spinelessness and pre-meditated fallacies. In short, Barker shows clearly in this book that his understanding of Theism and Christian spirituality is defective. His attitudes toward religious faith are so narrow minded that it ought to be an embarrassment to free-thinkers and humanists the world over. If free thinkers argue "But Dan has been there - and he know what he's talking about!" then my response is similar to what has already been said in reviews below - that Dan has not been there at all. If your definition of "being there" is living the Christian life entrapped in the space of a fundamentalist bubble, then he has not "been there" at all. If Dan Barker had really "been there", then he wouldn't have missed the deep spiritual fulfilment found in God; he would now believe that 'meaning in life' is more than collocations of atoms in the brain; and indeed, Dan Barker would never have written a book called 'Losing Faith in Faith' in the first place.
Rating:
Summary: This book shows what Christianity is NOT about.
Review: Hmmm. "Pay no attention" to previous reviews, was a call from another reviewer earlier. And why might this be? This kind of attitude epitomes narrow minded-ness through and through, and it certainly epitomes Dan Barker's perspective of Christianity. In this book, Dan Barker reveals that he embraced everything in Christianity except the spirit. He embraced and focused on everything that entails dogma, narrow minded-ness and the empty chains of traditional rules. Therefore, it is quite clear that Dan Barker completely failed to find Jesus Christ. A previous reviewer stated that my claim that Barker had never found God was "ludicrous". This shows that Dan Barker's book has also blinded other people into believing that there is nothing more to Christianity than dogma and Biblical literalism. I suggest that 'Chris' (or anyone else who may want to) e-mails me, or at least leaves his e-mail address in another review, so we can have a good discussion about the matter, divorced from any kind of arrogance or narrow mindedness. The Bunnyman.
Rating:
Summary: Losing Faith in Faith
Review: I absolutely loved this book and would recommend it anyone. Dan Barker is the head of public relations at the Freedom from Religion Foundation , and accordingly, has mastered the art of presentation. The stories and reasoning are warm and lucid. Great book, I look forward to the next!
| 
