Rating: 
Summary: Let's Dispose of Dogma
Review: Mr. Barker gets points for setting up the problem and reconsidering a position formerly held. Too many people are going to use this book 1) to let Mr. Barker do their thinking for them, or 2) to butress a dogmatic position of their own. Next to some of the intellectuals of the 20th century who came to faith in Christ -- Stravinsky, Eliot, Adler, Lewis, Solzenhitsyn, Christabel Pankhurst, et al -- the book looks lightweight, but it is the result of someone's serious thought. Unfortunately, too many Christian and anti-Christian people give less serious thought to what they believe than what brand of toothpaste the buy; most in both groups (and I've been in both groups, and the people in them are pretty much the same) reject or accept a position out of hand, so at least it's refreshing to see someone being thoughtful. Ten years ago I might've welcomed the book, when I didn't know enough about scripture to find holes in Mr. Barker's arguments, but my own my own spiritual journey went the other way and I accepted Christ. Nearly every position formerly held, where I thought there was nothing higher or finer than my Self, was changed by the power of the Holy Spirit and also by the scripture that should be foremost to all, 1 Thessalonians 5:21, "Test everything." (NIV) If you get this book, I would also urge Mortimer Adler's HOW TO THINK ABOUT GOD: A GUIDE FOR THE TWENTIETH CENTURY PAGAN; and "The Paradoxes of Christianity" in ORTHODOXY by G.K. Chesterton, another agnostic intellectual who came to faith. Jesus died for you, specifically, not "mankind", and out of love for you, specifically. Whatever your belief system, whether agnostic, athiest, humanist, or Christian, think seriously about what it is you believe, don't be told what to think, but learn how, and make your own decisions. Don't build a fort around your own dogma.
Rating: 
Summary: Bravo - Religion could not stop his thinking mind!
Review: Brilliant, courageous, (one of my most treasured inspiring books) and you don't have to be a dry intellectual to enjoy this gem. One is never too young, old or rooted for this must read. Thank you Dan for making the world a better place with your works! freethought! freespeech! freeworld!
Rating:
Summary: Religious folks: Discover REAL freedom
Review: Everyone else has already said it so I'll be brief. This book is GREAT. Notice how the people who didn't like it can't offer any specific criticisms? That's because the arguments and evidence in this book are overwhelming for them that they're left to retreat, clinging to the bars of the cages to which they are so attached. Get over your fear already, people. There's no god. You're going to die. And that fact makes this life much more valuable then the vision presented by those who say, "Oh, without religion whatever will we do?" My answer: appreciate this life. Feel how valuable it is. Try it and then see if it's possible not to feel more compassion towards your fellow, impermanent beings.
Rating: 
Summary: Read the Bible for yourself
Review: I just looked at the online version of this book...and it scared me. Mr. Barker's quotes from the Bible are really taken out of content and are representing the Bible in a very misleading. Please read the Bible for yourself. Forget what anybody has ever told you about it( weather it was a pastor, Jehova's witness, Mr. Barker, or even an angel from the sky). Bible has been the most controversial book in the history so it is much more worth reading than all the commentaries written on it. So read the Bible FOR YOURSELF and decide weather YOU believe that YESHUA ( Jesus ) is the messaiah, weather the Bible is the word of God, and weather you believe it or not. May God Bless you all (including Mr. Barker ) regardless of your decision.
Rating: 
Summary: Dan is moral because of his natural human instinct, not GOD
Review: One of the major factors that Christians tend to believe is that morality is linked to God and the Bible. The extraction of the positive points in the Bible always seems to overlook the negative behavior. Dan was a moral person during his Christian times and will continue to be. It is natural instinct taught through societal and parental teaching. Human natures is instinctive to kindness, we don't need a fear of hell, we need to understand consequences of bad behavior. Dan is an supreme example of human behavior without God.
Rating:
Summary: Wonderfully written, intelligent, and remarkably informative
Review: _Losing Faith in Faith_ is one of the most prized books in my collection. It not only presents the great story of Dan's de-conversion from minister to atheist (which is reason enough alone to buy the book), but it also contains a large collection of well reasoned arguments why the rational person should outright reject the Christian faith.Although there are some arguments presented in LFIF that I would personally shy away from, all around it's a vary honest publication and well worth your time and money. And despite the faithful protests from our Christian friends (...), Dan presents his arguments against Christianity and theism quite well. I have yet to see any persuasive criticisms against Barker's thesis (although an awful lot of personal-incredulity). A primary example being the silly sophism in regard to Eastern vs. Western Orthodox Christianity, given the fact that none of Barker's arguments had any dependent relationship to the distinctions among the Nicene-Constantinopolitan and filioque creeds.
Rating: 
Summary: A nice try - But ultimately a failure.
Review: Dan Barker's work LFIF is a failed attempt to debunk WESTERN Christian thought and thus a diatribe against faith in God. It is tired and reworked in it ideas, although well phrased and catchy at times. But the biggest problem is Barker fails to realize there are other ways of viewing the Judeo/Christian God. With his main focus on western Christian thought he fails to address Orthodox Judaism and Eastern Christian thought which in many ways is diametrically opposed to much of Western Christian thinking. None the less, this is a good book to have just to attempt to understand so called "de-conversions".
Rating:
Summary: Story of a man willing to admit he was wrong
Review: Dan Barker was about as deep into Christianity as a person could be. He composed songs for Christian children's musicals, he played piano for nationally-known evangelists, and he appeared on TV. . . .then he began to have doubts. After years and years of Biblical training, he realized he'd never really given much skeptical thought to what he'd learned. He started scrutinizing his faith just to discover that many of his most closely-held truths simply weren't valid. Eventually, to quote the author, "I threw out the bathwater to discover that there was no baby". About half of the book is Barker's story of his conversion and deconversion. The other half are a collection of essays Barker has put together about biblical errency, his TV appearances and debates, and his experiences in the atheist community. A modern classic of freethought literature.
Rating:
Summary: Was that a review?
Review: "A reader from South Alabama" seems to have confused this review panel with a discussion panel. Did you even read LFIF? Just to show that I'm not a hypocrite, I won't reply to "A reader from South Alabama" here since I have already expressed my view of the book. My e-mail address is plain for everyone to see; use it if you want a real response for once.
Rating:
Summary: Proves the Point
Review: Why do people believe in a supreme being? This question has nothing to do with some sort of ontological connection (or causal connection, as you seem to believe) between majority opinion and existence. Rather it has to do with explaining BELIEF. Indeed, WHY do most human beings believe in an ultimate foundation for existence? I challenge you to answer that question. I do believe it is a legitimate one. If you do not think so, please defend that position. (I think it would be very difficult to explain why this question is illigitimate, especially since Marx and Freud addressed it. They must have thought it important enough to answer it in a detailed way) I'm willing to wager that most "thoughtful" people, such as yourself, would agree, once you understand what the question actually is. So, it would seem that you have misunderstood the argument. It is called the argument from the best explanation. (most beginning philosophy classes discuss this mode of argumentation)
|
