Losing Faith in Faith: From Preacher to Atheist

Rating:
Summary: Atheism Develops a Media Culture
Review: Lately, I have noticed the rise of the "tv evangelists" of free thought. When a Christian, Barker was involved in producing some of the most groan inducing versions of the mass marketed American version of "Christianity." He has simply switched products. One cannot play his atheist music, for example, without fealing a bit guilty. His "Happy as can be. . . I am your neighborhood atheist" gives Shatner a run for his money for unintentional musical parody. Do yourself a favor listen to his music... and then consider: if his music is this bad (where you have some ability to judge and where his "credentials" are strongest), what does that suggest about his philosophy?

Barker has little or no training in philosophy and then deals with what he has read in a juvenile manner. His story begs several questions. . . including personal motivations for leaving the faith.

Rating:
Summary: A unique and significant contribution. Well worth reading.
Review: In "Losing Faith in Faith", Dan Barker chronicles his tumultuous journey from preacher to atheist, and enumerates the many arguments and observations that eventually lead to his loss of faith. It is true that there are dozens of other books supporting atheism that are far more scholarly, with incomparably better scientific support, and vastly better philosophical arguments. However, this book has something that very few others have; a fascinating and engaging personal story. It is first and foremost a candid and meticulously documented journey from belief to non-belief, with all the attendant tribulations. Along the way, Dan Barker shares his insights, his experiences, and his emotions. His arguments definitely have merit, and are well worth considering, but they are not the major strength of this book. I think the book is properly viewed as a new type of "witnessing"; it is a first-person testimony to believing Christians that there be not dragons on the other side--rather, there is another world that has its own rich rewards in intellectual freedom, compassion, and the deepest respect for honesty. It truly is a great place to live and to think. That is a message worth communicating, and I believe that it comes through in Dan Barker's writing.

I do not consider this book to deliver a fatal blow to Christianity in general; as many have rightly pointed out, it is more appropriately viewed as an attack on fundamentalism. I have read the comments of many thoughtful Christians who agree with Dan Barker on a great many points, rejecting much of the dogma and fabulous embellishment of Christianity, yet holding on to the core tenets. I cannot help but see this as a very positive thing; it lessens the distance between believer and non-believer and illuminates a vast common ground. I like common ground; it's spacious.

The arguments in this book were not new to me--I was already familiar with most of Barker's criticisms of Christianity--and I was already an atheist. Nevertheless, this book had an important and long-lasting effect on me by convincing me of two things:

1) Atheists are denigrated far too frequently in our society. They are perhaps the most openly disparaged minority in the US. As a people we need to outgrow this, just as we have outgrown many other forms of bigotry.

2) Toward that end, there is a need for more role models and outspoken advocates of atheism. Many people need only a nudge--a mere hint that there are other ways of thinking--to set them off on their own liberating path of discovery. (Indeed, this is how it happened for me.) One need not and should not be righteous or overbearing; simply honest.

I believe Dan Barker has done a great service in writing this book. He has done much to comfort those who have lost their faith by showing them that greater rewards await them, that they are by no means alone, and that they have already procured an incomparable gift in thinking for themselves. Barker has also done much by way of his writing and his organization (FFRF) to safeguard the precious principle of church-state separation. I do no wish to be alarmist. I am not suggesting that this principle is in serious jeopardy; yet, it most certainly warrants a watchful eye. Thank you for your vigilance, Mr. Barker.

It's rather amusing that two things seem to have remained fixed in Barker's life, despite his radical transformation: his enthusiasm and his outspokenness. Watching Barker debate, as I have on several occasions, I'm sure we are seeing vestiges of Dan Barker the witnessing Christian, and Dan Barker the preacher. This is not an indictment; it's merely an observation that Barker has managed to carry his ebullience from one side to the other.

I feel obliged to inject one last comment: The atheist songs included in the book, such as "Friendly Neighborhood Atheist" and "You Can't Win With Original Sin" are, well, sappy. Clearly Barker intended to break down barriers by injecting some much-needed humor, and by showing that atheists are ordinary people too, but I suspect that many readers will grimace with discomfort upon reading these--much like being subjected to off-key karaoke. Let me assure you that atheists are not lining up with song books in hand (much to everyone's relief, I'm sure). Yet, I cannot fault Barker for his enthusiasm, nor for his willingness to reach out in every way he can; It's far better than coming across as nasty or nihilistic.

In short, this book provides a unique perspective on atheism; It offers a great many rational arguments for rejecting religious claims (specifically those of fundamental Christianity), but more importantly, it presents a richly detailed view from one who has lived passionately on both sides of the fence. It's hard for me to imagine how anyone could fail to find this book fascinating, if not enlightening.

Rating:
Summary: A Dissapointment
Review: As a Christian who enjoys reading literature on both sides of the fence, I feel that I am generally quite open-minded with regards to rating atheistic books. For example, I gave Atheism: The Case against God a decent review. This is because, despite its flaws, The Case against God actually went somewhere with regards to accomplishing its purpose (in other words, the book put up a good effort to make a "case against God".) However, I found Losing Faith in Faith to be completely unsatisfactory.

The book is set up like one tirade after the next. Many chapters contained the same assertions and the same "arguments from outrage" again and again, ad nauseum. Each chapter is much too short to develop any sort of strong argument, so the book generally consists of a bunch of assertions and "Any reasonable person doesn't believe this sort of ..." quips. It left me feeling like I gained little by reading through the entire book.

For example, one chapter is on Biblical contradictions. Rather than develop and explain a few of the more potent ones, Barker merely lists different Bible verses. He almost never actually addresses any sort of apologetic response (he claims that they are all, "absurd", "completely unsatisfactory", and "rationalizations"- as if we are supposed to take his word for it!) More importantly, however, Barker doesn't even address why he believes that Biblical innerancy is such an important issue anyways. I, for one, accept innerancy, but my Christian faith isn't going to crash and burn if there are a few (inconsequential) contradictions in the Bible.

Barker's modus operandi continues with his discussion of Biblical morality- merely quoting some of the harsher passages in the Bible and making quips like "who could believe this junk?" He doesn't even consider apologetic responses, he just whines about unfairness. This chapter may have "shock value" for Christians that are unaware of some of the harsher passages in the Bible, but beyond that his chapter is useless.

The main problem with this book is that it does not consider any topic sufficiently. The evidences for the existence of God cannot be "refuted" in 10 pages. The evidence for the resurrection cannot be dealt with in 20. Yet Barker seems to think that we Christians should stop being "blinded" by falsity, and we should see the truth. In actual fact, the evidence is on the side of the Christians, and a mature view of Christian faith involves the intellectual realm. Barker's view of faith is severely misguided. And if he thinks that he can shake my faith with a collection of mini tirades, then he should think again.

Rating:
Summary: Dan is Still Preaching,,,,albeit Dans word not God's
Review: As an ex-Atheist raised in a Christian home....I thought this book would be interesting, and useful in debate. Mr. Barker seems to be a "Green-Thumb" in debate. Infact, if his claim that some christian colleges wouldnt take him up on debating him....if true...they did him a favor. His arguments are very simple, and he hangs himself about every chapter. This guy is just tooting his own horn....and it's shrill. His so-called christianty sounded like he and his parents were a spinoff from pavlovs dog experiment. They seem so weak minded that I suppose I should feel sorry for these malcontents. Dan you are still preaching, but now I guess you are God.....Good Luck. How about a refund!

Rating:
Summary: A Freethinker's Delight
Review: I found this book to be, pardon the phrase, "a real God-send" as a former Christian. I have been a freethinker for about a decade now, and it is refreshing to find like-minded people. The book is not too scholarly so, in addition, academics may wish to read "The Gospels & Acts: Questions & Problems" by Elliot Lesser.

Rating:
Summary: Well written, meaningless, and hypocritical
Review: I want to applaud Barker for writing what so many feel. He has captured the desire, and freedom that many wish to obtain - to be free from the chains of a faith, and the demands they do not wish to have. I think that Barker is sincere, and so are those who write positive reviews here about this book.

That being said, his story is sad and pathetic. While I found his prose to be at least tolerable compared to the delusional rantings of his fans here, in the end he has made a fundamental flaw of reasoning. He assumes a nuetral worldview. Anyone who is truly a "freethinker" knows that it is scientifically impossible to be free from bias. He has unwittenly duped himself into exchanging one faith for another. What are the benefits of his new found faith v. his old faith? Well, let's see: As a Christian he had accountability, he had to be a servant to another, he had to align to a set of principles that were outside his own desires, by definition he had to admit he was fallen and lost. What does his new faith require of him? NOTHING. That's right folks, absolutely nothing of him.

However, it does require something of you, the person outside of his views. It requires that you believe as he did or be deemed to be "narrow minded" or otherwise pitied. So despite the nonsense of other reviewers here who claim that he isn't telling anyone what to believe, he is in fact placing consequences on those who have a different faith than he does. The consequences are to be marginalized and arrogently dismissed.

The fact that he is a "believer" in atheism, and has accepted a new set of faith based ideas, seems lost on him. That is OK in my opinion because he has never demonstrated, by his own admission throughout the book, a level of self awareness and an acknowledgement of his limitations. What is truly tragic are those who follow his religion of "freethinkers" all the while comically thinking they are somehow immune from the bias inherent in all worldviews.

If it were not for this fatal flaw of reasoning, and the arrogence and hypocritical views of those like him, I would applaud his change of heart. If delivered in reality - a true choice of exchanging one belief system which placed undesirable demands on him, for a belief system that freed him to do as he pleases - I would see him as a true freethinker, and one who knowingly chose to place his faith where he would seem to most benefit. As it is, he, and the rest of the mindless drones who follow his lead, are far more pitiful than those they criticize, because at least the Christians I know acknowledge they have faith, while the atheists mistakenly believe they have a nuetral worldview that doesn't require any.

Rating:
Summary: A sad account
Review: Why is it that anyone who doesn't believe in Christianity is deemed to be 'Free Thinking'. You're already showing bias, because you're assuming that it is impossible to be with Faith, and with intelligence.

The Author comes from a Petacostal background. For those unfamiliar, it is a Church based on a misunderstanding of the New Testament - in Acts of the Apostles, at Pentecost, the Holy Spirit came to the Apostles and they were all able to speak in tongues - that is, everyone who heard them, understood them, in their own langugage. Pentacostals speak in 'tongues' but there is not the univrsal gift of understanding as presented by the Holy Spirit - for those interested in this amazon.com has a book "Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future" that deals with this issue.

So there we have it, someone who's faith was never grounded to begin with. If he feels 'let down' by Christinaity, then I can sympathise with that...Why is there a need to 'demolish' Christianity anyway? Some people, such as this author, as so against a religion that teaches peace and universal love. Why? Why are there many reviewers that also hate love? These things are not explained. If you have experienced Christians being 'un-Christian' then by losing faith you are throwing the baby out with the bath-water!

Rating:
Summary: I don't know who to feel more sorry for!
Review: I am not sure who to feel more sorry for, Mr. Barker, who is lost and delusional, or the fools who blindly find comfort in the presence of such weak thinking and wishful hopes. I will give Barker credit for this much: he is consistent. He was lost and deluded as a supposed "christian", having no clue whatsoever of what he believed or why, and where he is today, roughly the same place just the opposite end of the spectrum. Anyone with any intelligence at all sees those who switch sides so radically as being less than credible. Get this: he spends years telling those who do not believe that they ought to, then switches cleanly to a man who is telling those that do believe that they ought NOT to. Unreal, and comical. However, one thing is consistent, he has ignorant fools who follow him wherever he goes. If you gave this book good reviews or are actually so devoid of the ability to think critically that you identify with this guy, then I feel more sorry for you than him, because at least he profits from your ignorance.

Rating:
Summary: Touching autobiography combined with arguments for atheism.
Review: In this astonishing book Dan Barker has written down his personal experiences of his 'conversion' from a religious fanatic preacher to an atheist.
The reader becomes witness of young preacher Dan Barker's - at first dormant - rational doubts about the existance of a god that is both perfectly good, omnipresent and omniscient, while things happen such as murder, and disbelief. Disbelief, as he tried to reassure himself, is a sign of satan's temptations, and atheists are pretty much the same as cynical blasphemic frauds who have either been left astray by their own evil or who have never read the bible. Later on Barker would find out that atheists do not fit this description. His doubt continues to grow, and eventually the young, energetic fundamentalist preacher realises that he is not fighting a spiritual battle against evil, satanic temptations and God's vengeance, but that he is actually losing faith in something which cannot be believed in if you are a sincere mind, seeking the truth.
At this point, after some 7 chapters, Barker realises that he is a free spirit. He can doubt and inquire as he wants and he gradually realises that the absence of a god is in fact the truth, and that 'truth' is not something glorifying, as the christians assumem, but merely the combination of facts and rationally filtered knowledge.
The following phase in his life is a sad one; his christian friends look at him with contempt, fear or confusion. He loses his friends, although most of his relatives stand by him. Dan Barker continues to do good work amongst people. As he claims, a christian is not more moral than an atheist; a christian well-doer would probably have been a good person anyway.
As we can read in the book, Barker's creative energy is now being dedicated to his work as a member of the Freedom From (n.b.; FROM) Religion Foundation. The following chapters are excellent articles on atheism and the refuting of god(s) that Barker Wrote in the FFRF journal Freethought Today.
To many people, including me, Barkers's work and that of the Foundation seems a bit too similar to christian activities; the focus on being together and singing, having your own freethought music, your own freethought artists, your own youth books and your own schools, show resemblance to the way christians organise themselves in order to have fellowship and to keep faith by inspiring each other.
Maybe I see it this way because I live in the Netherlands; here there is no pressure on atheists, as most people are already virtually atheists. To be an atheist in the United States obviously has sociological consequences, which call for a separate circle of acquaintances and networks of unbiased and tolerant people.
Nevertheless, the book is very impressive, very pleasant to read; it is a must-read for everyone; from theist to atheist, to agnostic!
[e-mail]

Rating:
Summary: Absolute genius!!!
Review: I would give this book 18 stars! It needs to come with a built-in highlighter! Barker explains the religious mindset and makes it pretty clear how Christians simply make stuff up just to defend their beliefs. He goes over several debates that he has had word for word. He shows tons of arguments that make religion just look like obvious fairy tales (which it is) and actually gives the other side's arguments too. He's not all one sided. This is actually really smart because he shows us what Christians' arguments are and shows they have absolutely no logic whatsoever. He says a couple things repeatedly but for good reason. They're really good points that he's making. He can't get enough of Matthew 10:34, "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of this own household."
I don't know what else to say other than, "Read it." I strongly suggest everyone read it, believer and nonbeliever. Believers, if you consider yourselves true believers then you should read about the facts of your beliefs. If what you belief is true, then you would have no reason to worry about reading it. Try and consider the facts for once.