Religious Culture and Religious Faith not contradictory
927059
The title of this book, which is approved by the first sentence of the book on p. 3, seems to indicate that religious culture and religious faith are contradictory.  On the contrary, at least for Christianity, religious culture has always supported faith, and faith always re-energizes the culture.

On p. 18, Somerville seems to agree with the English idea that the seizure of the Church's lands and shrines was 'secularization,'(such an euphemism) not merely theft.  On p. 19 he observes that "the Reformation would sweep out the [rood] screens which had heightened this sense of mystery to make auditoriums for the Word of Faith;" few Anglicans could enjoy this description of their churches.  On p. 49, Somerville observes that the translation of the Bible and the Sunday service into English, while at first may have seemed like a boon, soon turned into indifference and then contempt.  It is easy to see why the poet George Herbert stated that "we are fallen . . .from superstition to coldness and atheism."

It is surprising for a scholar like Somerville to make a gross error like the following:  "'Sacramentals were instituted with a similar power to convey grace as the sacraments themselves."  Anyone who knows the first thing about Catholic doctrine knows that there is a difference in kind, not in degree, thus dissimilar, not similar, between the Sacraments and sacramentals.

Somerville states that "Protestants claimed that simple folk were not able to make the distinction" between adoration of God and devotion given to the saints; if this is true, then that is an act of elitist condescension by Protestant leaders to their people.

Somerville's most grievous error is found on p. 111, where he claims that " . . since religion is best defined in terms of power."  This is in comparison with the power of the state, so it is easy to see how Somerville could mistake the 2.

However, we must be grateful to Somerville for noting that "Anthony Collins, Thomas Chubb, Thomas Gordon, John Trenchard, Thomas Morgan, Viscount Bolingbroke, John Toland . . can be seen as extending the early Protestant attacks on popish superstition to something of a logical conclusion."  This something i have long thought, and glad to have confirmed.  When was the last time you saw the words "popish superstition" not surrounded by apostrophes?
2322321
The Faith: What Christians Believe, Why They Believe It, and Why It Matters by Charles Colson and Harold Fickett is a concise, cohesive, coherent look at why the United States most popular religion is still relevant despite the recent polemical diatribes that have been released saying otherwise. Colson sticks to orthodoxy in his explanation of tenets and doctrines without the pluralistic overtones taken by many of today's religious leaders. Colson pulls no punches and takes no prisoners while explaining issues about Jesus and the Trinity. On occasion, he even takes on Christopher Hitchins and Richard Dawkins who have attacked Christianity with an almost religious fervor and zeal. Colson doesn't stoop to their level; however, he avoids hate mongering and keeps a cool head while pointing out where their logic fails. This is a vital book for Christians to read and would make an excellent Bible study for churches.
2036734
Well outlined presentation of the connection between faith in Christ and the religious forms that are sometimes associated with or embraced in it's stead. The antidote to judgementalism presented here is effective as the malady is well diagnosed. Man wants to be the judge of all things, himself, others, and God. In eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, man came to mistake judgmentalism for righteousness and the rest is the visible history of the empire of churchism. Read it and get mad, read it and repent, or just read it.
799789
This book explains in clear terms why Sunni Islam is a religio-cultural worldview that is so different from the worldview of the West (and probably the rest of the world), that it will be impossible for Islam and the West to find common ground.  As long as the Sunni sect of Islam is ruled by Asharite thinking, the mainstream of Islam will believe that (1) all of nature is recreated from moment to moment by the will of Allah; (2) reason is not only a deficient method of explaining the universe, but is a sin, a contravention of Allah's will; (3) there is no good or evil, except what the Qur'an says, and what the Qur'an says can be superseded at any moment by the exercise of the will of Allah; (4) there is no guarantee that things will unfold as they have unfolded in the past - if things do that, it is only because that is the habit of Allah and an acorn could just as easily turn out to be a Chevrolet as an oak tree, depending on how Allah wills it.  This kind of thinking makes the words I always smiled at in "Lawrence of Arabia," "it is written" makes sense in a way I never considered before.  The critic here who pointed out that Americans have great difficulty understanding values and cultural assumptions that other civilizations have is absolutely right.  When the Muslims tell us that they aren't interested in negotiating with us, but that they intend to destroy us, this book tells us why that is profoundly true.
1454869
The author's argument that Christian orthodoxy grew out of the political considerations of the day, and served to legitimize early church leadership is well-made. The book confirmed what I suspected, that a "gnostic" religion (i.e. one based on knowledge of the self) could never survive against one that was based largely on politics and easily distillable bromides for the masses. The situation is no different today. Successful religions are still based on establishing power (real or imagined) over the followers and discouraging independent thought.
3790725
This is not for the faint of heart if religious basics are a bit loose.  Food for thought, but not to be taken as fact.  Good read.
3925617
Why do people always point out hypocrites who preach forgiveness yet are judgmental about others? Why do religions believe in peace, yet go off on crusades and war? In Darwin's Cathedral, the author David Sloan Wilson explains exactly why this is. There is a different morality for within the group, as opposed to a different set of rules for dealing with outsiders. All religions are like that. The author explains the world and how it works, why science and only the facts, isn't enough to sustain a culture. How our world is full of symbolism. This book is all science and facts. You don't need faith to understand how everything works. But there is a twist at the end. I love it!
1361577
Well balanced and persuasive argument reconciling religion and science  The right brain left brain differences help to make the case that science "takes things apart to see how they function" while religion using the right brain ascribes meaning
1823238
The language is plain and direct; no minced words about the author's thoughts. A little over the top in expressing views, but one cannot disagree with him if one does not accept the belief in an afterlife to begin with. He gives no margin for being a "little atheistic" or being agnostic; you either believe or you don't - period.
I do not regret having purchased it and having read it.
This book will never convert the religious; it will fuel arguments for the non-believers of the world - of which there are plenty.

Ron Smith
4603570
Islamic Jesus is a thought provoking book.  The author, Mustafa Akyol, a Muslim, argues that early Christian writings support the Qurans assertion that Jesus while divine, was still just a prophet.  He acknowledges that there is not direct path (independent of the Quran) to this conclusion but he lays out some compelling circumstantial evidence, including a close reading of the New Testament to make such a conclusion at least plausible. In this regard, Akyols thesis is not unlike the premise of biblical scholar John Barton in his book How Jesus became God.

Christians often forget that Christianity spread east as well as west through the Roman Empire (or in a Pauline manner, as in the Apostle Paul) and not all Christian tradition is Pauline Christianity.  Akyol also goes into some detail about Jewish groups in Biblical times that saw Jesus as a Messiah, but not the Son of God.  Scriptures these groups considered holy did not assert Jesus as the Son and God.  These scriptures either by design, or more likely as a product of geographic isolation from Pauline Christianity, did not make the cut in the Bible we know today.

Akyol spends a substantial amount of time describing how revered Jesus is in the Islamic faith (including a tomb, next to Muhammed for Jesus earthly and mortal return to Earth).  In the last chapter in particular, he argues that modern-day Muslims should remember how important Jesus should be to their faith.

However, as a Muslim, Akyol struggles with traditional Christian view of the trinity and that the Son of God walked on Earth.  He points out that in the paganism of the Roman Empire, Gods could take human form and walk among mortals.  Akyol essentially argues that Pauline Christianity co-opted this tradition and (falsely) proclaimed Jesus as the Son of God.

Also, Akyol, like virtually all Muslims cannot reconcile a belief in one God with the Christian concept of the Trinity.  In the Muslim faith analogies are important, so here is analogy to help better understand the Trinity.  Water is H20, whether formed as ice, water, or vapor it is still just H20.  However, in context it is just more convenient to say ice, water, or steam instead of saying H20 in solid form or H20 in liquid form.  So with the Christian trinity, it just more convenient to say Father or God, Son of God or Jesus, or Holy Spirit/Holy Ghost.  It just isn't any more complicated than that.

While Akyol challenges some traditional Christian beliefs, he does so as a scholar.  He clearly has no ill-will towards Christianity (or Judaism) and believes good Muslims should feel the same way.  However, if the vast majority of modern Christians have it wrong (about the true nature of Jesus) then virtually all modern Christians are not true adherents to what in Akyols mind should be genuine Christianity.

By logical extension of his argument, these false believers are not true Christians and are not the type of Christians that deserve respect as mandated in the Quran.  They are, in simple terms, heretics and to many heretics should be dealt with harshly.  So, despite his intention otherwise, Akyols thesis could provide the intellectual underpinning for ill-will, even violence, towards the modern-day Christian.
1743654
The assumption about the writer of this book may be that he is skeptical and subjective about his subject: religion. Well, he is not. I found that Hitchens was very objective, rational and methodical in his approach to religion. He doesn't berate anyone's belief system. He merely goes through, and step by step gives examples of the negative sides to religion, and the darkness it can, and always does seem to bring. I wouldn't so much call this book anti-religious, as much as a simple commentary on the history of people's abuse of religion, and the tendency people have to skew the definitions and parameters that religions outline. He doesn't single out any one religion, either, but covers a wide range of religions, including Christianity, Buddhism, Taoism, Muslim faith, etc. Hitchens isn't the type of person to just spew off opinions about things he knows nothing about. A highly educated man, he really knows his stuff! He is well versed in all the religious texts one might mention. The Bible, the Koran, Buddha's teachings, etc. He has read and studied them all. If you want an educated, academically based analysis of religion across history and culture, this book is for you. If you are looking for any type of historical, literal, scientific or factual evidence for any of these religions, this book is also for you, as Hitchens outlines the reasons why religions, in general, contains almost none of these things. I am greatly enjoying this book. It has made me question and really think things through, and I think that is a good thing. We should all know why we believe what we believe, and be able to explain those beliefs in rational, reasonable ways, if not to others, than at least to ourselves! If you can't do that, you might want to read this book to become more educated yourself.
3348327
This book attempts to address, from the Christian position, the substantial differences between the two major world faiths in a humble, honest and diplomatic manner.
It provides the Christian proselytizer with a handy overview into the vast cultural and religious differences and how best to address them in a way as to avoid offense.

While it is almost impossible to cover this topic without offending either side whilst affirming the validity of one, this book goes as close as is possible.
The author shows the many points at which Islam contradicts the Bible and Christ's teachings. He points out the many false assertions that many Muslims have of Christianity and the Bible.

Because the ultimate aim of this book is to be a guide for those Christians who wish to discuss their faith with Muslims, I recommend that it should not be read by Muslims. Invariably they would be put off by reading why Islam is a false religion, much in the same way a Christian would also be uncomfortable hearing incessantly that we are wrong.

This book is only designed to be a general overview for the average Christian. It is not a comprehensive and scholarly study of the two religions. For that reason it is quite an easy read for any Christian.
For those who have only a cursory interest in Islam, then this book is perfect. In fact most Christians should become familiar with Islam and all it's various religious and cultural idiosyncrasies. Because, in the multicultural society that we live in today, it is only a matter of time before we have some form of relationship with somebody of the Muslim faith.
499600
This book is very straightforward and takes a hands on approach to understanding the parts of each religion that the practitioner would find meaningful in daily life.  It provides a uniquely Christian approach focusing on the similarities and being very open about differences, both pointing them out and honoring them.

This book is a helpful basis for exploring faiths which you may know very little about.  This is an academic and intellectual book.
2036546
The author lumps all religions together in his commentary, in a satisfying way - since one of the principle illusions of most  religions is that they consider themselves separate, different - their "one" religion is right and the exception to all the others. Dr. Wilbur sets out the idea that all religions meet essential human needs and that humans designed and adapted them to do the same work in the world.

The book has 16 chapters organized by topic, discussing the use of religion in society - from religion in power, corruption, and politics, to religion in science and health.  Dr. Wilbur combines his observation of human nature as a scientist and practicing physician with many citations from his study of other works about religion, society and history.  He is even-handed, pointing out religion's use for both good and evil, depending on the purpose intended by it's proponents.

Every society has had it's religion(s).  (Dr. Wilbur notes that even attempts at non-religious society were essentially faith based - faith in an attainable utopia.)  One quote from the book gives a good taste:  "These belief systems are adaptable, sometimes plastic, and make many "truth" claims that can never be disproved.  This is one thing that has given them great currency everywhere....it might be safer for us all if more people realized that such institutions are deeply and ultimately human in their construction, modification, and application to our world.  Such a realization might limit some of the darker uses of religious belief."
Dr. Wilbur's book and personal observations are highly interesting and deserving of thoughtful reading.  The reader's viewpoint will almost certainly be expanded and challenged.
1708138
A very straightforward book, written with humility, that encourages seeking common ground.  For me, a compelling idea he explains is trying to not conflate truth with beauty.  A beautiful spiritual experience can be treasured for its ability to inspire gratitude, good will, and awe, instead of being interpreted as evidence of the truth of all the details of my religion.  At the same time, finding out something from the scriptures or from my church's version of its own history is untrue does not erase or invalidate the beautiful spiritual experiences I have had.  Of course there is beauty outside of religion as well (nature, helping others, etc).  As I learn the truth about the church history, or disagree with the church's leaders about current policy, I can still be faithful in my own path of trying to follow Christ.  Keeping truth separate from beauty, and trying to balance these with goodness, has brought me peace, and has helped me appreciate all three aspects of life.
3990309
Very easy reading, and there are no wild claims to disturb rational thinking. Very good treatment of religious issues - issues related to cause and effects probably occurring to everyone. While beginnings are left for a different analysis, development of what is knowable fairly covers the broad span of human existence. Not as supportive of present religious thinking being pantheistic, personally, but good perspective for those inclined to take up the issue from contemporary awareness of life. Interesting to consider that what is believed is less important than understanding that a need to believe pre-exists.
2823963
It is refreshing to read a book that has no violence or sex but shares belief in God.  Very interesting without being preachy.