Book Description
"He comes as yet unknown into a hamlet of Lower Galilee. He is watched by the cold, hard eyes of peasants living long enough at a subsistence level to know exactly where the line is drawn between poverty and destitution. He looks like a beggar yet his eyes lack the proper cringe, his voice the proper whine, his walk the proper shuffle. He speaks about the rule of God and they listen as much from curiosity as anything else. They know all about rule and power, about kingdom and empire, but they know it in terms of tax and debt, malnutrition and sickness, agrarian oppression and demonic possession. What, they really want to know, can this kingdom of God do for a lame child, a blind parent, a demented soul screaming its tortured isolation among the graves that mark the edges of the village?"
–– from "The Gospel of Jesus," overture to The Historical Jesus
The Historical Jesus reveals the true Jesus––who he was, what he did, what he said. It opens with "The Gospel of Jesus," Crossan's studied determination of Jesus' actual words and actions stripped of any subsequent additions and placed in a capsule account of his life story. The Jesus who emerges is a savvy and courageous Jewish Mediterranean peasant, a radical social revolutionary, with a rhapsodic vision of economic, political, and religious egalitarianism and a social program for creating it.
The conventional wisdom of critical historical scholarship has long held that too little is known about the historical Jesus to say definitively much more than that he lived and had a tremendous impact on his followers. "There were always historians who said it could not be done because of historical problems," writes Crossan. "There were always theologians who said it should not be done because of theological objections. And there were always scholars who said the former when they meant the latter.'
With this ground–breaking work, John Dominic Crossan emphatically sweeps these notions aside. He demonstrates that Jesus is actually one of the best documented figures in ancient history; the challenge is the complexity of the sources. The vivid portrayal of Jesus that emerges from Crossan's unique methodology combines the complementary disciplines of social anthropology, Greco–Roman history, and the literary analysis of specific pronouncements, anecdotes, confessions and interpretations involving Jesus. All three levels cooperate equally and fully in an effective synthesis that provides the most definitive presentation of the historical Jesus yet attained.
Customer Reviews:
Massive, Important Scholarship.......2007-08-22
For all its flaws, John Dominic Crossan's "The Historical Jesus" is certainly essential reading for anyone interested in, well, the historical Jesus. Crossan is a scholar of the first order, and his massive erudition brings together otherwise disparate pieces of ancient history and literature, biblical and secular, to create an honest and methodologically consistent portrait.
Alas, it is his method in which I think the most flaws are to be found. The two most cited sources for his program of stratifying the "first layer" of the Jesus tradition which then moves on to multiple attestation are the "Sayings Gospel" Q and the extracanonical Gospel of Thomas. While Q is a pretty uncontroversial result of over a century of scholarship, it is uncertain, first, whether such a document exists, and second (and much more controversially) whether different layers of its construction can be identified. As for the Gospel of Thomas, his remarkably early dating in the 50s CE (compare with canonical Mark, which in his view does not come around until the early 70s, although here he is at least more or less backed up by the majority of critical scholars) is certainly open for debate. John Meier, in the first volume of his "A Marginal Jew" series, convincingly summarizes a case for the dependence of Thomas on the synoptic gospels. It is something of a shame that Crossan's portrait of Jesus depends so heavily on questionable dating; the preacher of a sapiental Kingdom of God, at least, would not have anything near the force it currently does were the Gospel of Thomas put in the second century, which is where many scholars place it.
Still, the merits of this work are many and much-needed. Among them are his critical reading of Josephus, the analysis of different protest movements in the Roman Empire (which follows on the work, primarily, of Richard Horsley), and his always insightful reading of Jesus' parables. While Crossan is often credited, and criticized, for classifying Jesus as a sort of Jewish cynic, I don't think the radicalism he sees is necessarily dependent on any philosophical "type." It's a natural enough result of his stratigraphy of the Jesus tradition.
No one can accuse Crossan of being unprovocative, and this work has inspired lively debate within the now puttering historical Jesus enterprise. Even if you disagree with him utterly, he is a force to be reckoned with. I find that my loyalties lie more with scholars like Meier and E.P. Sanders, since their portraits do not rely on terribly specific dating of the gospels, much less different layers within them, which I believe Crossan judges with too much confidence. Meier's volume 1 to "A Marginal Jew," mentioned above, contains the best criticism I have seen of Crossan and others' tendentious dating methods. Donald Harman Akenson, in his "Saint Saul," also has good critiques of such methods, although at times his criticisms amount to little more than personal attack.
As Crossan says in the closing paragraph, "if you cannot believe in something produced by reconstruction, you may have nothing left to believe in." In this I think he is quite correct, and even if his isn't the best, it is certainly one of the most formidable and enduringly interesting.
Crossan's Jesus.......2006-11-22
Crossan writes well, and his "historical Jesus" is a must-read and a fast-read for anyone interested in Jesus or Christianity.
There is a trend for academics teaching the Bible or religion to write popular works that would hopefully capture the imagination of the non-initiated or the curious (e.g. Bart Ehrman's or N.T. Wright's rapidly accumulating volumes). They come from both ends of the political/world-view/ philosophical and what-have-you spectrum and in between. This book was one of the pioneers of this approach.
In any case, works that touch on the figure of Jesus and beliefs about him are bound to elicit controversy and discussion. That is often part of the author's agenda. And they all must be taken with a grain of salt - whether it's Schweitzer's Jesus, Bultmann's Jesus, Ehrmann's Jesus, Fredericksen's Jesus, Sanders' Jesus, Wright's Jesus, Vermes' Jesus, Liberation Theology's Jesus, the Jesus Seminar's Jesus....
What matters is that the author should be responsible enough to take into account conflicting issues, proceed in a reasoned argument, and be intellectually honest.
Kross'n Crossan.......2006-11-04
I'm not a card shark, so I'm going to tip my hand. I am both a Christian and a scientist. I want you to know at the outset that as brilliant as this man is, and as logical as his method seems, he nevertheless fails to deliver the Goods.
Make no mistake, J.D. Crossan is a creative genius. His brilliance is seen in the scholarly and systematic manner in which he brings together various threads of anthropological and historical data. His work evinces a comprehensive familiarity with the literature. For those of us not versed in "stratigraphy" and the finer art of reading between the lines of a historical document, he weaves a compelling story.
Crossan describes his method as "scientific history." Using the word `scientific' implies that he is willing to adapt his paradigm if the evidence directs. In the final analysis, Crossan uses his method in the service of his own worldview. Crossan preserves his presuppositions through his analysis of the facts instead of allowing the latter to transform the former. This is not `scientific' in the true sense.
In this review, I will focus on his method, because it is easy to end up at his final destination unless you can see how and where he might have gone wrong.
Crossan's methodology -
Crossan says that his method analyzes the problem on three levels; anthropological, historical and literary. That is true. Further, he insists that these "cooperate fully and equally to achieve an effective synthesis, thus demanding equal sophistication on all three levels at the same time." He says, "the discipline of this book is to work primarily with plurally attested complexes from the primary stratus of the Jesus tradition." The scope of his program clearly has scholarly merit, and sets him apart from his peers in historical Jesus research. But I think there are some areas where his execution of the program falls short of the promise.
(1) He treats all prospective "gospels" on an equal basis, apparently disregarding traditional canonical lines of demarcation. His primary concern is establishing a probable genetic lineage of Jesus' sayings. Crossan appears to believe that God doesn't have an interest or a direct hand in the way we get scripture. This may make sense for naturalists or deists even, but not for theists.
(2) He uses an analytical concept called the "complex" for analyzing and organizing ancient texts into their basic units of meaning. The difficulty is that isolation of these complexes is an intensively hermeneutical process with huge potential for disagreement. Are these complexes based on events, or on themes? And, to what extent do these "complexes" conflate similar but distinct accounts?
(3) Crossan uses the familiar phenomenon of geologic stratification as a metaphor to explain his approach to establishing chronological layers within the literature. He presumes Scripture is naturally generated and so looks to establish pathways to explain how the text came to be transmitted. But if we expand on that metaphor, how does one interpret a petrified tree that passes through all of the strata? It forces one to reassess his assumptions. Specifically, what happens to our stratigraphic continuum when there is clear evidence that early documents depend on supposedly later documents? Such anomalies could leave Crossan standing in mid-air.
(4) Central to Crossan's method is his assessment of attestation. This is his metric for credibility. But Crossan admits that determination of the degree of attestation is in many cases a scholarly best guess. In this, Crossan appears not to allow himself to be guided or influenced by any theological notion that certain New Testament writers are inspired. He employs an editorial process he calls "bracketing singularities." In this, accounts of Jesus' sayings and actions lacking in plural attestation are called `singularities' and they are not considered admissible in reconstructing the historical Jesus. This leaves us without the virgin birth, the sermon on the mount, the Lord's prayer, the last supper or the empty tomb. This is Crossan's razor and it cuts deep, leaving roughly half of the New Testament on the editing room floor. This is a problem.
Assessment -
First, this book is very unbalanced, focusing almost exclusively on the historical and anthropological contexts, as if knowing the background of a subject tells the whole story. To echo the words of a friend, `Reading Crossan's Historical Jesus, I can't help feeling like I'm searching for something that isn't there. It is like looking at a master painter's portrait of Christ in which the image of the Master has been carefully extracted from its artistic context leaving a mere shadow of an outline, until all that remains is context without subject.'
Second, the methodology Crossan describes may be considered adequate as a component of a naturalist or deist epistemology. But it fails in a universe of sparse observers where "singularities" are important. What Crossan's method lacks is a criterion for assessing the credibility of singly attested scripture passages. I'm no historian, but I suspect that the bulk of ancient history would succumb to Crossan's razor.
Finally, the bigger question that these considerations raise for me is this, `Is this truly sophistication, or is it merely sophistry?'
My assessment is that it is truly unfortunate for all of us that Crossan has chosen to employ his considerably noteworthy talents in the service of a lesser god than the Jesus of history.
Do Not Take Up Your Crossan and Follow Him.......2006-08-30
In "The Historical Jesus" John Dominic Crossan attempts to de-mythologize the New Testament in order to recover the Jesus of history (as opposed to the Jesus of faith). Unfortunately, his methodology and presuppositions end up creating a layer of mythology, not dissolving the one he thinks is there. He relies heavily on the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Peter, and the Epistle of Barnabas as containing the oldest traditions. However, the Gospels of Thomas and Peter are mid-late 2nd century documents, the second of which is an admitted forgery, and Barnabas, though probably from the 1st century, is also widely acknowledged as a forgery. A look at the early church fathers reveal as much. Crossan also relies on a completely fictional document he concocted called the "Cross Gospel," which he says is embedded in the Gospel of Peter. These documents were used by Mark to construct his Gospel, which was then used by the other three Gospel writers.
According to Crossan, Mark invented a number of literary devices to put forward his theological agenda. If we only look at the inventions Crossan finds in Mark pertaining to the Resurrection and the presuppositions he brings to the data we can see the fatal flaw in his entire project. Crossan's first presupposition regarding the Resurrection is that he rejects the supernatural; miracles are out of bounds and the events they describe must have some other explanation, usually a combination of natural/psychological factors and political/social allusions. Crossan claims not to deny the Resurrection, but he redefines it to mean something completely different. He believes the "Saturday" after Jesus' crucifixion lasted at least 5-10 years while the followers of Jesus tried to make sense of his death. Finally, it occurred to them that Jesus is still alive in their hearts and that his message of love and egalitarianism was still relevant and needed to be preached. This realization is symbolized in Easter, and this is what Crossan means by the Resurrection. Thus, he can use the word and sound orthodox but be speaking heresy. It's a shell game.
To support his take on Jesus' resurrection, Crossan claims that Mark has invented a number of fictions to symbolically tell in a narrative way the process of how the Gospel came to be in the form we have it in the New Testament. Crossan accepts the crucifixion of Jesus as indisputable fact, but rejects his burial as told in the New Testament. He believes if Jesus was buried at all it was in a common grave and was likely food for scavenging animals. Thus, Mark had to somehow get the body from Pilate and into the hands of Jesus' followers so that he could be buried and that the tomb could be found empty to symbolize his still being alive. Mark's stroke of genius was to invent Joseph of Arimathea as a go-between, someone who had a foot in both Pilate's and the disciple's worlds. Crossan sees Matthew, Luke, and John as adding their own takes on Joseph and thus exposing the accrual of the myth. Mark says Joseph is a member of the Sanhedrin, Matthew says he's rich, Luke says he is good and righteous, and John says he secretly follows Jesus because he fears the Jews. Crossan looks at these characterizations as each adding to the myth. But clearly the more responsible reading is that they are complementary descriptions. Similarly, Crossan finds myth accruing in the different descriptions in the burial cloth and the tomb itself. This leaves the discovery of the tomb by the women as obviously invented, though it does speak to the egalitarian message of the Gospel as Crossan sees it.
There are a number of problems with this recasting of the Resurrection that go beyond reading complementary accounts as contradictory. In the first century the testimony of women in a court of law was considered unreliable at best. So why have the first witnesses of the empty tomb be women if it was an invention? They could have been accompanied by men, therefore fulfilling the egalitarian agenda. But they alone were the first witnesses of the most important event in the ministry of Jesus. Why, if this was an invention, choose the very people whose testimony would be discarded out of hand? The far better explanation is that they actually were the first witnesses to something that actually occurred.
And what does Crossan do with 1 Corinthians 15:1-19? Here Paul claims that if the Resurrection of Jesus did not happen then our faith is in vain; find another explanation for it and Christianity fails. Not only that but Paul embeds a creed in vv 3-7 that states that Christ died, was buried, was raised on the third day, and appeared to a number of his followers. This creed can be dated to within 1-3 years of the Resurrection. Crossan's ignoring of this seems a clear case of special pleading. He does deal with the passage, however, and dismisses it as a power-play by Paul to get the respect of the other Apostles based on vv 8-11.
In the end Crossan not only fails in recovering the Jesus of history he thinks is hidden, he actually buries Jesus under so much myth that he can no longer be found or even recognized.
Who to follow?.......2006-01-22
Great book. Author is sensitive to likely human need for faith and belonging, while remaining fearless and faithful to the task of asking difficult questions. Breadth and application of sources is exceptional. Not for those seeking easy comfort.
Average customer rating:
- Sadly, a must read on the subject
- Cuts through the propoganda
- Recommended Reading ............
- Great technical insight on neutron weapons
|
The truth about the neutron bomb: The inventor of the bomb speaks out
S. T Cohen
Manufacturer: Morrow
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Unknown Binding
 General
| Military
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Military Science
| History
| Subjects
| Books
ASIN: 0688016464 |
Customer Reviews:
Sadly, a must read on the subject.......2005-03-06
Yes, I have read this book. And yes I have read other books on the neutron bomb (I will spare the jargon), nuclear policy, and Cold War history.
Sam Cohen out-Tellers Teller here, making the case for how his technological child would play well with others on the battlefields of Western Europe. This book is, first and foremost, a marketing scheme for the product...the product being the neutron bomb.
I find the section in which tank crews are described as being (somehow) zombified after irradiation especially disturbing. Make no mistake about it, the neutron bomb, or any enhanced radiation weapon, is as morally bankrupt an invention as the most deviously injurious of landmines.
Sure, read this book--too bad everybody has not read it--but make sure you read other studies as well.
Cuts through the propoganda.......2001-12-12
There wa a lot of nonsesne and disinformation about the
so-called neutron bomb back in the heady cold war days,
and as Cohen is the father of said weapon, and its greatest proselytizer,
his description might be taken as authoritative. Viz:
Let's start with a fission weapon of Hiroshima size- about 20Kt. 85% of the
energy partition is blast and heat; 10% is delayed radiation from fissile
products (the lighter parts of the split nucleii) and 5% is prompt radiation
in the form of neutrons and gamma rays.
Now, let's say we build a small fusion weapon with a minimal fission trigger
resulting in a 1Kt fission-fusion weapon. The energy partition in the fusion
reaction is 80% prompt radiation and 20% blast and heat. The result is that
this 1Kt weapon has only 0.05 the blast and heat effect of the straight
fission, but equivalent prompt radiation effects. (Recall that most weapons
in the US arsenal are fission-fusion-fission weapons, which is sort of
a way to build a much bigger fission weapon than would otherwise be possible
or practical). We also have no delayed radiation from the fusion reaction,
although there is still some from the fission trigger- though much less from
the straight 20Kt fission weapon.
Cohen's ultimate plan was to develop a pure fusion weapon with no fission
trigger. That's been mentioned in this list before, and I have absolutely
no idea if such a weapon was ever developed. However, if it *could* be develope
it would then be possible to build a 0.01Kt pure fusion device with half the
prompt radiation of the 20Kt fusion device, no delayed radiation, and blast
and heat effects of a large (20,000lb) conventional bomb. Such a device could
be detonated at a comparitively low altitude and result in no blast effects
reaching the ground while still having a kill effect from prompt radiation
over a radius of over 1000 yards.
From this Cohen conceived his idea of a defense plan for Europe and Germany
in particular: Small, cheap bomb shelters for the populace with nothing more
than a few feet of earth as a radiation shield. The warning sounds, people
go the the shelters, the N-weapon missiles are launched, and a few hours
later the battle is over.
Cohen's book covers not only the brief technical outline of the bomb (summerized
above) but also the long political history. The USSR steadily portrayed the enhanced radition weapon as inhumane, even as
they were developing their own. It was often called a bomb that "killed people while leaving real estate intact", but as Cohen pointed out, the people were advancing troops of the Red Army,
and the real estate was the cities and homes of Western Europe.
Highly recommended.
Recommended Reading ...................2000-04-25
No discussion of the neutron bomb is complete without reading this book.
Sam Cohen writes a bitter discription of how the US politically adopts weapons. He writes about the first debate over the neutron bomb in the 1950's and 1960's, and later offers opinions of the second debate in the 1980's.
He describes how a Neutron Bomb (Enhanced Radiation Weapon) works, and how the concept was first pruposed by himself, and championed by the US Navy. The idea was not well received by the US Air Force, which viewed it as a threat to it's Strategic Air Command - being tactical in nature.
This is a must read for those interested in US Radiological Warfare (RW) history. While he does not discuss any of the now known attempts to develop RW bombets, his discussion of non-nuclear RW is insightful.
The author is highly critical of the US Air Force, which he claims biased every discussion of nuclear warfare. The US Air Force, supporting the Strategic Air Command, sought to eliminate the development of any tactical nuclear weapon. He also points to the persistent belief by US planners that NATO would be the first to employ nuclear weapons, which was not supported by fact.
The surprise twist is the author's discussion that the Soviet Union may have actually been the first to devise a neutron bomb, and that during the 1960's debate of the weapon, the Soviet military openly discussed the advantages of using such weapons in combat. Further irony is gleamed in the author's claim that the US's only neutron bomb is actually not a neutron bomb at all...contrasting the neutron bomb as a fussion device without any blast effects on ground structures, and the US's weapon as a fission device with a considerable blast effect.
Great technical insight on neutron weapons.......1999-07-27
The author explains in excellent terms the functioning and employment of enhanced radiation weapons. The neutron bomb essentially releases a short burst of radiation with a low half-life that leaves buildings standing...basically a weapon which allows you to destroy the enemy without destoying buildings or leaving a nuclear waste. Dr. Cohen outlines the political difficulties associated with the development of the weapon and strategic application. A must read for any strategist or nuclear activist of any kind.
Amazon.com
God's Name in Vain: The Wrongs and Rights of Religion in Politics is a timely work of cultural history by Stephen L. Carter, a professor at Yale Law School and the author of The Culture of Disbelief. The book presents two interrelated arguments: "First, that there is nothing wrong, and much right, with the robust participation of the nation's many religious voices in debates over matters of public moment. Second, that religions--although not democracy--will almost always lose their best, most spiritual selves when they choose to be involved in the partisan, electoral side of politics." In making these arguments, God's Name in Vain cites historical anecdotes ranging from the Abolitionist movement to the Christian Coalition. Carter's writing is rhetorically powerful, his historical knowledge is estimable, and his spiritual and political convictions are passionate. But Carter's real crusade in God's Name in Vain is not intellectual, theological, or political. It is moral. He writes in the book's Introduction: "[M]orality, in religious terms, is nothing but the actual practice of one's religious faith. Religion is what we profess and morality is what it moves us to do. Politics needs morality, which means that politics needs religion." The idea is interesting, and it is popular, but it is a fallacy. Even Carter's most devout readers may be disappointed that his elegant ideology is blind to the reality of secular morality. --Michael Joseph Gross
Book Description
In this sequel to his best-selling Culture of Disbelief, Stephen Carter redefines the role of religion in cultural politics, mapping out politics' involvement with religion from freeze-out to overzealous embrace.
America faces a crisis of legitimacy. It's a crisis that dramatizes the separation of church and state. A crisis that, in the messages sent by our culture, marginalizes religion as a relatively unimportant human activity that plays an unimportant role in the national debate. Because the nation chooses to secularize the principal points of contact between government and people (schools, taxes, marriage, etc.), it has persuaded many religious people that a culture war has been declared.
Stephen Carter, in this sequel to his best-selling Culture of Disbelief, argues that American politics is unimaginable without America's religious voice. Using contemporary and historical examples, from abolitionist sermons to presidential candidates' confessions, he illustrates ways in which religion and politics do and do not mesh well and ways in which spiritual perspectives might make vital contributions to our national debates.
Yet, while Carter is eager to defend the political involvement of the religious from its critics, he also warns us of the importance of setting some sensible limits so that religious institutions do not allow themselves to be seduced, by the lure of temporal power, into a kind of passionate, dysfunctional, and even immoral love affair. Lastly, he offers strong examples of principled and prophetic religious activism for those who choose their God before their country.
Customer Reviews:
OK but very pre-9/11.......2007-06-05
Carter focuses on two issues:
1. To what extent should religion speak about political issues? Carter favors a broad reach for religion; because religion by definition covers every conceivable moral issue, there is no logical reason why political issues should be outside its reach. (And his excellent discussion of the religious element in the abolitionist movement shows that both religious involvement in American politics AND secularist criticism of same are nothing new). However, I wonder whether Carter's book would have been written differently since the rise of radical terrorist Islam.
2. Exactly how partisan should religion be? Carter argues that those who argue in the name of religion should be forever outsiders, lest they become coopted (and thus less radical and less truly religious) by being folded into a political coalition and thus making their allies' views more important than their own spiritual demands. Accordingly, religious leaders should try to avoid endorsing candidates (though Carter opposes legal restrictions on their right to do so). Carter uses an interesting Biblical example of how religious leaders should behave: rather than calling for new rulers in Israel, the prophets called on the existing kings to repent. (Of course, there are exceptions to this rule that Carter does not mention, e.g. Samuel anoiting King David).
I found the latter discussion more interesting than the former. I wish Carter was a bit more attentive to the dangers of overpowerful religion, and that he was a bit stingier with generalities about "American culture." Liberal secularists are part of American culture- but so are conservatives who are happy to hear the latest pronouncements of James Dobson or other religious conservatives.
Carter also devotes some space to legal issues, discussing the paradox of First Amendment religion doctrine: the purpose of the Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses was in part to protect religion from the state- yet the clauses force the state to decide which religions it protects and accommodates, thus giving the state power over religion! This conundrum, however, has no perfect answer.
The Catch-22 of The Generation.......2005-03-31
Carter constructs a very well supported and immensely researched guideline of his ideas of the "Wrongs and Rights of Religion in Politics," however, his attempt is a failure due to the fact that he traps himself in a catch-22 situation where his desired outcome is unachievable because his solution is impossible and his proposed course of action is self-defeating and even at times, contradictory.
For instance, Carter proposes that we should all fight for the freedom of all religions yet later in the book agrees that each religion has sharp differences in beliefs (even his own religion christianity). Nevertheless, I'll agree that Carter's initial statements alone are in good intentions yet as you can see are ultimately self-defeating and unfortunately unfeasible. Because who in their right mind would stand and fight for a belief that they themselves disagree with? The idea is absolutely absurd, plain and simple!
One of his self-defeating ideas has to do with his own made up word "measuism" which he calls "the process by which we evaluate the significant of something by assigning it a number." So in that case the whole book is filled with "measuism" since Carter uses an abundance of statistics to prove his...umm lets call them "dreams." (They are nice dreams nevertheless)
And the list goes on. I would recommend this book if you wanted to know more about religion and politics but not if you are easily influenced and are actually persuaded into taking Carter's word on things into some plausible law changing considerations.
Religion Vs. Politics: Round 1.......2004-10-24
The author Stephen L. Carter uses both recent and distant historical evidence of religions interaction with politics to illustrate what he believes to be the "Wrongs and Rights of Religion in Politics", as in the name of his book. Carter goes on to show the negative effects to religion if it was to become intricatly involved in politics, as well as the negative effects on society if religion was to shun political interaction.
Carter use compelling arguments that target the ethos of both political and religious groups during various levels of interaction. Carter is highly opinionated in his writing but seems to want to present the facts for the reader to base a decision off of then to try and persuade the reader; Carter just wants the reader to be informed. However, Carter does make his opinion very well known and does use facts to strongly back it up, but he still gives evidence to support the opposing view so that a comparison can be made by the reader.
All-in-all, it was a very enlightening book to read that opened both my eyes and my mind to things in the world around me that I was blind to before.
Biased and personal........2001-12-26
I have every book written by Carter. This one is probably the most biased and self-opinionated. I have a hard time digesting his point of view. He advocates sticking to beliefs (quoted Lewis or some other as though they are prophets or supreme beings ??).
I think we all know religion (to some) is paramount. I don't think we can disregard that most wars are fought on the premise of religion neither. Politics change over change because we human do. If he thinks religion needs to have an influence, then religion needs to evolve with time- whether according to him, this is compromise or not, it is still a fact !
I do not recommend this book at all.
How should religious people/organizations influence others?.......2001-05-28
In my opinion, our society will not progress without a better understanding of this subject. Carter's book is the best guide that I have found. Carter's religion undoubtedly influences his beliefs, but he diligently seeks the truth. This book is a must read for those who are interested in helping others more than themselves.
Book Description
This digital document is an article from Church & State, published by Americans United for Separation of Church and State on May 1, 2001. The length of the article is 911 words. The page length shown above is based on a typical 300-word page. The article is delivered in HTML format and is available in your Amazon.com Digital Locker immediately after purchase. You can view it with any web browser.
Citation Details
Title: God's Name In Vain: Stephen Carter's Flawed Logic On Religion And Politics.(Brief Article)(Review) (book review)
Author: David Bloomberg
Publication:
Church & State (Refereed)
Date: May 1, 2001
Publisher: Americans United for Separation of Church and State
Volume: 54
Issue: 5
Page: 20
Article Type: Brief Article, Book Review
Distributed by Thomson Gale
Average customer rating:
|
God's Name in Vain: The Wrongs and Rights of Religion in Politics.(Review) (book review): An article from: Sojourners
Amy Sullivan
Manufacturer: Sojourners
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Digital
General
| Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Politics
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Political Science
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| e-Docs
| Formats
| Books
Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| e-Docs
| Formats
| Books
General
| Nonfiction
| HTML
| Formats
| e-Docs
| Formats
| Books
Philosophy
| Nonfiction
| HTML
| Formats
| e-Docs
| Formats
| Books
Political Science
| Nonfiction
| HTML
| Formats
| e-Docs
| Formats
| Books
ASIN: B0008HL7JI
Release Date: 2005-07-28 |
Book Description
This digital document is an article from Sojourners, published by Sojourners on January 1, 2001. The length of the article is 701 words. The page length shown above is based on a typical 300-word page. The article is delivered in HTML format and is available in your Amazon.com Digital Locker immediately after purchase. You can view it with any web browser.
Citation Details
Title: God's Name in Vain: The Wrongs and Rights of Religion in Politics.(Review) (book review)
Author: Amy Sullivan
Publication:
Sojourners (Magazine/Journal)
Date: January 1, 2001
Publisher: Sojourners
Volume: 30
Issue: 1
Page: 54
Article Type: Book Review
Distributed by Thomson Gale
Book Description
This digital document is an article from The American Prospect, published by The American Prospect, Inc. on November 6, 2000. The length of the article is 1373 words. The page length shown above is based on a typical 300-word page. The article is delivered in HTML format and is available in your Amazon.com Digital Locker immediately after purchase. You can view it with any web browser.
Citation Details
Title: God's Name in Vain: The Wrongs and Rights of Religion in Politics.(Review) (book review)
Author: Mark Silk
Publication:
The American Prospect (Refereed)
Date: November 6, 2000
Publisher: The American Prospect, Inc.
Volume: 11
Issue: 23
Page: 54
Article Type: Book Review
Distributed by Thomson Gale
Book Description
This digital document is an article from Church History, published by American Society of Church History on September 1, 2001. The length of the article is 1105 words. The page length shown above is based on a typical 300-word page. The article is delivered in HTML format and is available in your Amazon.com Digital Locker immediately after purchase. You can view it with any web browser.
Citation Details
Title: God's Name in Vain: The Wrongs and Rights of Religion in Politics.
Author: Michael Lienesch
Publication:
Church History (Refereed)
Date: September 1, 2001
Publisher: American Society of Church History
Volume: 70
Issue: 3
Page: 597
Distributed by Thomson Gale
Average customer rating:
|
Bird Navigation: The Solution of a Mystery?
Robin Baker
Manufacturer: Holmes & Meier Publishers
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
Birds
| Field Guides
| Outdoors & Nature
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Birdwatching
| Outdoors & Nature
| Subjects
| Books
Ornithology
| Zoology
| Biological Sciences
| Science
| Subjects
| Books
ASIN: 0841909466 |
Books:
- The Pursuit of Victory: The Life And Achievement of Horatio Nelson
- The Real Jimmy Carter: How Our Worst Ex-President Undermines American Foreign Policy, Coddles Dictators and Created the Party of Clinton and Kerry
- The Skills to Pay the Bills: The Story of the Beastie Boys
- The Tender Land: A Family Love Story
- The Unwanted: A Memoir of Childhood
- The Valachi Papers
- They Found the Secret
- Traveling Music : The Soundtrack to My Life and Times
- Underboss: Sammy the Bull Gravano's Story of Life in the Mafia
- Unlimited Access: An FBI Agent Inside the Clinton White House
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- Refuge of the Apocalypse: Doorway into other Dimensions
- NIV/The Message Parallel Bible
- Gideon's gift: Based on the novel
- Juan de la Rosa: Memoirs of the Last Soldier of the Independence Movement
- Mastering Unreal Technology: The Art of Level Design
- History: Fiction or Science
- Monsieur Proust
- Ancient Egyptian Calligraphy A Beginner's Guide to Writing Hieroglyphs
- Nature Walks In Eastern Massachusetts, 2nd: Nature-rich Walks within and Hour of Boston, features th
- The planktonic diatoms of northern seas,
The Birth of Christianity : Discovering What Happened in the Years Immediately After the Execution of Jesus
Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography
In Search of Paul : How Jesus' Apostle Opposed Rome's Empire with God's Kingdom
Excavating Jesus: Beneath the Stones, Behind the Texts: Revised and Updated
God and Empire: Jesus Against Rome, Then and Now
