Rating: 
Summary: Pagans 2 - Christians 1
Review: As a practicing Reconstructionist, I read this book to find out what went wrong - how was it that the pagan religions which satisfied diverse cultures for so long were discarded for Christianity? The answer this book gives is that people like to have fewer choices and be told the one true way of believing. I found the discussion of ancient Egyptian monotheism and the different trends in Jewish belief interesting corollary to the discussion. No wonder modern fundamentalists of various persuasions condemn Western culture as 'pagan' - it's because we have choices: in what we buy, how we amuse ourselves and who we elect. The author highlights the modern political crisies which have resulted from conflicts among the three big monotheistic faiths, but stops short of suggesting that rational human beings might look elsewhere for spiritual comfort and enlightenment.
Rating: 
Summary: Kirsch Is Usually Much Better
Review: As a rule, I am a huge fan of Mr. Kirsch's books. He is a very provocative writer on religious issues and certainly has produced another interesting volume here. However, I wasn't as pleased with this one as I have been with his previous works.In this book, Mr. Kirsch examines the triumph of monotheism over polytheism in the West beginning in the fourth century AD. In it, he takes through the period of Emperor Constantine and those that followed him, particularly Julian. He uses these two men to illustrate the competing factions of Christianity (Constantine) and "paganism" (Julian). And, in many ways, he succeeds in making an important point: that, despite what we would like to believe and often put in our histories, the triumph of Judeo-Christian monotheism was by no means easy or assured. As usual, it is a good point and one worth making. On the other hand, this book has many flaws that I haven't seen in Mr. Kirsch's previous work. The most notable, and irritating, is the self-contradictory nature of his prose. He says that Christians were not persecuted that harshly as he goes on to describe a persecution; he says that pagans rarely made bloody sacrifices as he goes on to describe a horrific ritual; he says that sexuality was rarely part of pagan religion as he goes on to describe temple prostitutes. Though I believe Mr. Kirsch is probably right in his assessment of polytheism and his charges of Christian hyperbole, he didn't make his point very well. Ultimately, there is a theme of comparative tolerance here; namely, that Christianity brought in a tyranny of cruel orthodoxy whereas the pagans were more generally accepting of diversity. Though this may be true on the face of it, Kirsch hits wide of the mark when he implies that the modern horrors of religious persecution and war would be absent in our modern world had polytheism triumphed. Certainly "religious" persecution and war would be less. But I suspect persecution and war would remain much the same. In fact, maybe Christianity and Islam have done something to lessen the impact at times. Kirsch tries to save himself when he says in the very last paragraph of the book, "The dark side of monotheism, of course, is not its only side. The blessings of Judaism, Christianity and Islam far outweigh--and, we must hope, will long outlast--the curse of religious fanaticism that is implicit in the very notion of the Only True God." However, this is merely the largest and last contradiction in a book that has its best and most important points muddled by a mind that seems unsure as to whether he's really willing to make the leap his own work implies.
Rating:
Summary: Kirsch Is Usually Much Better
Review: As a rule, I am a huge fan of Mr. Kirsch's books. He is a very provocative writer on religious issues and certainly has produced another interesting volume here. However, I wasn't as pleased with this one as I have been with his previous works. In this book, Mr. Kirsch examines the triumph of monotheism over polytheism in the West beginning in the fourth century AD. In it, he takes through the period of Emperor Constantine and those that followed him, particularly Julian. He uses these two men to illustrate the competing factions of Christianity (Constantine) and "paganism" (Julian). And, in many ways, he succeeds in making an important point: that, despite what we would like to believe and often put in our histories, the triumph of Judeo-Christian monotheism was by no means easy or assured. As usual, it is a good point and one worth making. On the other hand, this book has many flaws that I haven't seen in Mr. Kirsch's previous work. The most notable, and irritating, is the self-contradictory nature of his prose. He says that Christians were not persecuted that harshly as he goes on to describe a persecution; he says that pagans rarely made bloody sacrifices as he goes on to describe a horrific ritual; he says that sexuality was rarely part of pagan religion as he goes on to describe temple prostitutes. Though I believe Mr. Kirsch is probably right in his assessment of polytheism and his charges of Christian hyperbole, he didn't make his point very well. Ultimately, there is a theme of comparative tolerance here; namely, that Christianity brought in a tyranny of cruel orthodoxy whereas the pagans were more generally accepting of diversity. Though this may be true on the face of it, Kirsch hits wide of the mark when he implies that the modern horrors of religious persecution and war would be absent in our modern world had polytheism triumphed. Certainly "religious" persecution and war would be less. But I suspect persecution and war would remain much the same. In fact, maybe Christianity and Islam have done something to lessen the impact at times. Kirsch tries to save himself when he says in the very last paragraph of the book, "The dark side of monotheism, of course, is not its only side. The blessings of Judaism, Christianity and Islam far outweigh--and, we must hope, will long outlast--the curse of religious fanaticism that is implicit in the very notion of the Only True God." However, this is merely the largest and last contradiction in a book that has its best and most important points muddled by a mind that seems unsure as to whether he's really willing to make the leap his own work implies.
Rating: 
Summary: History explains the real truth behind religion
Review: I am so happy there are people like Jonathan Kirsch writing about religious history because there is a true history to all religions and it is hard for religious people to accept. When you study the beginings of religion you quickly realize that it's more about humanity than God or gods. And when you get down to it the only difference between 'God' and 'Gods' is an "S". Mr. Kirsch has done alot of hard research and developement for this book and he should be commended highly for it. Thank-you Mr. Kirsch. Randy
Rating:
Summary: A Book with an Agenda -- Name One that Doesn't Have One
Review: I had to write after reading the negative reviews below. It always amazes me how people can claim to have read a book, and then describe something that bears only a passing resemblence to the actual text. Seth, for example, contends GAtG only covers the period of Constantnie to Julian. Since Constantine doesn't show up until page 119, I'm assuming he skipped ahead to the parts he wanted to complain about. The book actually begins in ancient Egypt, when a Pharoh tried to remove the polythestic gods of his culture and set up the first monotheistic religion. It then moves on to Moses and the other Jewish prophets and their attempts to keep the sometimes straying Jews (golden calf, anyone), in line with the monothestic faith they wanted all their tribe to follow. It then discusses the waxing and waning fortunes of the Jewish faithful (and not so faithful) as their interactions with Romans (and polytheism), shift and move back and forth between rigorist monotheism and comprimise with the pagan, polythesitic culture of the classical age. While all this is happening, Christianity is introduced, and we get the first case of a monotheistic faith battling a monotheistic faith -- Jews following Jesus against Jews who don't. And so on, as Christianity spreds into Rome, but refuses to obey the laws of respecting ALL Gods -- which was considered a civic obligation of the Roman citizen. Constanine shows up after all this is clearly laid out. Seth claim that this is a book "against" Christianity reflect his bias -- Kirsch clearly has it in for Monotheism in general, and that includes Judaism, and Islam. He admits up front that if there's going to be religion, he admires the accepting polytheism of classical Roma and Greece. Monotheistic faiths, he contends, don't just say someone who dosn't worship the right god is wrong, but that he must be "corrected" into believing the right way to believe, because all other beliefs are wrong. If that means torture or death on the path to redemption, so be it. (By the way, Kirsch points out the ways the polytheists persecuted Christians and Jews. He suggests, though, that the persecutions weren't as horrific as Christian and Jewish historians wrote, and cites other historians as agreeing with him.) Meawhile, Eric suggests that "secularist liberals will see it as a confirmation that religion is inherently evil and stultifying; the religious conservatives will see it as a distorted attack on the remaining source of morality in the modern world." Um, no. I'm a liberal Catholic, and I found the book fascinating. I'm particularly fascinated by the way I can see a parallel between religion in the United States and the polytheism of classical Rome and Greece. People move around between denominations, between faiths, adding in Yoga, crystals and horoscopoe readings even as they go to Church, Temple or a Mosque every week. I'd offer that this flexibility (as opposed to living under Islamic hardliners), is a blessing, and something I hadn't considered (a new polytheism), until I read this book. It gave me a new way of looking at the world around me. Could I give it less than 4 stars? Nope.
Rating:
Summary: Should Be On Every Pagan's Bookshelf!
Review: I just got the book yesterday and am devouring it. I knew some of this before, but it really comes alive with Kirsch's writing. This book needs to be on every serious Pagan's bookshelf!
Rating:
Summary: A Legacy of Religious Tolerance
Review: I read GOD AGAINST THE GODS for two reasons. First, I saw a lecture by Mr. Kirsch some years ago and I enjoyed his rather different but erudite perspective. But most of all, I love reading and learning about when cultures, societies, religions, and ideas meet. How they mix, how they borrow from each other, and how they come into conflict. The Greco-Roman period is one of my favorite periods. Both the empires of Alexander the Great and the Romans, because of conquest and expansion, contained diverse people as well as an incredible variety of religions. This book covers the idea of religious tolerance as largely practiced by the Pagans of the ancient world; the one trip into monotheism by an Egyptian Pharaoh, Akhenaton, and his worship of the sun disc, The Aton; the Jewish religion and how it changed over a vast period of time; and the beginning of the Christian religion until the death of the Emperor Julian in 363 C.E. He navigates the waters of history, to contrast the legacy of religious tolerance of the polytheistic world with the exclusion and intolerance that often comes with the practice of monotheism.
This book contains a prologue entitled The Everlasting Fire (The Dark Side of Monotheism, the Bright Side of Polytheism). It is then divided up into two books. Book One is called The God That Failed and contains four chapters. These chapters are: Chapter 1: Against All the Gods of Egypt (A Young Pharaoh's Experiment in Monotheism and Why it Failed); Chapter 2: What Did Pagans Do? (The Case Against Classical Paganism - And Why It Was Wrong); Chapter 3: Terror and True Belief (The Jewish King Who Reinvented the Faith of Ancient Israel); Chapter 4: Confessors and Traitors (Pagans and Christians Go to War in Ancient Rome). Book Two contains six chapters and an epilogue. The chapters are: Chapter 5: "In This Sign, Conquer" (The Curious Encounter of Christ and Constantine in the Struggle for the Roman Crown); Chapter 6: The Harlot in the Bishop's Bed (The War Within the Christian Church over the Divinity of Christ); Chapter 7: The Ruler of the Whole World (The Invention of the Totalitarian State by the First Christian Emperor of Rome); Chapter 8: The Orphans of Macellum (The Christian Prince Who Survived A Blood Purge and Struggled for the Restoration of Paganism); Chapter 9: The Secret Pagan (Gods, Empresses, and Julian's Unlikely Rise to the Imperial Throne); Chapter 10: "Behold, the Rivers Are Running Backwards" (The Pagan Counterrevolution of the Emperor Julian) and Epilogue: The Handless Scribe (The Price of Victory of the One True God). The book also contains a map of the empire of Constantine and Julian, a chronology, a list of major historical figures, notes, bibliography and an index.
Often what we get out of a book is what we bring to a book. This book is written in an easy, breezy style with provocative titles that are meant to shake readers out of their complacency. But the author did his research and cites such authors as Robin Lane Fox and Jacob Burckhardt, which ironically one reviewer refers others to read instead of this author. A couple of the previous reviewers of this book either did not read the whole book or decided before hand what it was about and that it was bad. And of course, one reviewer sees this book as part of some vast secular conspiracy. Considering the subject matter of this book, the irony of their opinions can only make me grin. "Religion has treated knowledge sometimes as an enemy, sometimes as a hostage; often as a captive and more often as a child; but knowledge has become of age, and religion must either renounce her acquaintance, or introduce her as a companion and respect her as a friend." - Charles Caleb Colton (Lacon, 1825 C.E.).
Nothing is black and white, and Kirsch does give examples of Pagan intolerance -- the very famous example of the Maccabees and the persecution of the Jews by Antiochus Titus. He goes into the Jewish wars with the Romans. He also talks about the persecution of the early Christians by some of the Roman emperors. What is interesting to me is how one reviewer missed chapter six that talks about how Christians persecuted each other in the early years of the religion's foundation! This sad tendency has continued over the centuries to our present day.
As for Mr. Kirsch's hypothesis in regards to the Pagan legacy of tolerance, here are two quotes.
"What is god and what is not god, what is between man and god, who shall say?" -- Euripides (Helen, 412 B.C.E).
"What church I go to on Sunday, what dogma of the Catholic Church I believe in is my business, and whatever faith any other American has is his business." - John F. Kennedy (address, Washington D.C., 1960 C.E.).
This book will appeal to those who are interested in the history of religion and the possible legacy of religious tolerance and to those interested in the meeting of the Pagan world with the Jewish and Christian ones in ancient times.
Rating: 
Summary: Disappointing and Superficial
Review: Kirsch takes a potentially fascinating idea--the war between monotheism and polytheism--and converts it into a superficial diatribe against the monotheistic religions (esp. Judaism, Christianity, and Islam). He has two over-simplified, intertwined notions. First, monotheism is bad since its insistence on a single legitimate God leads from intolerance for other gods, to general intolerance, to holy war, to the slaughter of innocents. Second, polytheism is good since it allows for many gods and religious beliefs and, therefore, teaches its believers the value of diversity. Kirsch has unfortunately turned what could have been an interesting historical study into a thinly-disguised modern secularist tract. His real point is that diversity is inherently good and that we can trace the roots of modern intolerance to the Judaeo-Christian tradition of monotheistic exclusivity. Neither secularist liberals nor religious conservatives will learn much of anything from this book. It will simply serve to support their pre-conceived political ideologies: the secularist liberals will see it as a confirmation that religion is inherently evil and stultifying; the religious conservatives will see it as a distorted attack on the remaining source of morality in the modern world. This book is most certainly not "The History of the War Between Monotheism and Polytheism" and is simply not worth reading. If you want political propaganda, there are more entertaining authors. If you want serious history, there are real historians of the period (e.g., Peter Brown, Jakob Burckhardt, Robin Lane Fox, Michael Grant, Judith Herrin, Elaine Pagels) who are steeped in the original sources and have something interesting to say about the period.
Rating:
Summary: From Polytheism to Monotheism, and now to Prototheism?
Review: Kirsch's "God Against the Gods" is aptly subtitled -- intriguingly and entertainingly he traces the Western history of monotheism's struggles to replace polytheism, starting with Akhenaton all the way to Theodosius. He attempts to correct the distortions of Paganism perpetuated by the Judeo-Christian historians and he laments the lost riches of Greco-Roman culture destroyed by the Christian purges. He wonders what today's world might be like had not Julian foolishly gotten himself killed but had restored Paganism, and thus might have consigned Christianity to no more than a footnote in history. All in all, Kirsch's latest book is well worth reading.
However I have a couple of concerns with Kirsch's perspective. I suggest that the difference between monotheism and polytheism wasn't that the monotheists believed in only one god. If we apply to Christianity the same definition of `gods' that the Greco-Romans used for all their greater and lesser gods, we'd have to include as `gods': God the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, Mother Mary, all the Apostles, all the saints, and all the angels and devils. (Just as Pagans looked to their patron god, Christians look to their patron saint or guardian angel, i.e. a `god'.) And the Jews not only have Yahweh but their many prophets, plus angels and devils. So the difference between mono- and polytheisms is not belief in just one `god' but rather in a strict hierarchy of `gods'. The Pagan gods were anarchist whereas the Judeo-Christian `gods' are all subordinate to one God. Which is just what the Roman emperors wanted in order to legitimize their power to control their vast empire, provided of course that the emperor could somehow utilize the authority of that God. By adopting and adapting `orthodox' Christianity to the Roman hierarchal system of government and culling the many other `heretical' sects, they hoped to save the Roman Empire. It didn't work, but it did secured the establishment of Christianity.
Second and more important, it's time to trade-in the belief in `gods' for a more enlightened understanding of the origin and root of human's belief in `gods' by utilizing the knowledge that science has gained for us in just the past few centuries. After all, when monotheism originated millennia ago, not only did they think the gods controlled everything above, on and below the Earth, but that the Earth was flat and was the center of the Universe, plus many other misconceptions we now disparage. So we can understand why back then they believed in gods, but why now does belief in God and `gods' still persist? Perhaps there's something in our human nature that science hasn't yet discovered and/or fully explained.
Indeed the first sentence in Kirsch's Prologue reads, "Something deep in human nature prompts us to imagine the existence of a power greater than ourselves, whether we call it `Yahweh' or `Christ' or `Allah', `Mother Nature' or `the Higher Power' or `the Universe'." I believe it's time to move-on from belief in `gods' and search for the source of such beliefs, not in `gods' `out there' but `in here' deep within our own human nature. That's what I've attempted to do over the past several years since my retirement. And I've described my search and conclusions in my new book, "Concepts: A ProtoTheist Quest for Science-Minded Skeptics". (Theism is belief in `gods', atheism is non-belief in `gods' and prototheism is the search for the origin and root of belief in `gods' -- a science of religion.) If you're intrigued by this question, you might take a look at Amazon's detail pages on my book. The book succinctly covers some of the same issues as Kirsch but then continues on to explore the origin and root of belief in `gods', and at how those insights might be applied in our world today.
Rating:
Summary: No width and depth
Review: My take from this book is that Mr. Jonathan Kirsch is a professional writer and he wrote a book to make money. His writing is good but dispassionate. For example compare the book with writing of Karen Armstrong. It is like he got an assignment form a writing professor and delivers it high class. But the book has no width and no depth. It describes the fight between paganism and monotheism in Judaism and Christianity and nowhere else (except some story about Akhenaton in ancient Egypt.) There is no analysis. It elaborates a lot about lives of Constantine and Julian which maybe interesting but not really relevant to the subject.
|
