My intro to comparative religion. Should be read by all. ( )

Mrs. Armstrong offers wonderful information. A must-read for anyone interested in religious studies. This was a great read. ( )

A tour de force through the history of the predominant Western human conceptions of God that have emerged, changed, co-merged, diverged, died out, and re-emerged across the centuries, across regions and cultures, and within religious communities.

While Armstrong does have a personal perspective in her writing, she is a powerhouse in history of religion.

If one is wanting a contemporary scholarly overview of the historical origins and developments of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam; if one likes researched, dense text when compared to other popularizers; if one aspires to the Golden Rule and disdains fundamentalism of nearly all ilk; the reader will come away pleased and informed in the history of conceptions of, beliefs about, and practices concerning the conceptions of God in the history of the Western human civilization. ( )

Masterful! ( )

Why does God exist? How have the three dominant monorheistics religions shaped and altered the conception of God?

I just couldn't do it. I'm not much of a non-fiction reader, but I thought I'd try to expand my horizons. It is an interesting subject matter and written in a very acessibly way, but I just plain got bored about half way through. I was going to force my way to the end, but I found that I was avoiding reading altogether because I wasn't very into the book. It's a good book. Really. Just not for me- at least not at the moment.

A survey of the changing conceptions of God in Christianity, Judaism, and Islam throughout the centuries. A New York Times bestseller.

So so great, and I will keep going with all the rest of her books. Although, it takes time. She really opens the eyes and really loves humanity. I love her back! ( )

Very informative book by a very talented author. Her credibility on the topic immediately caught my attention and I was not let down. ( )

It is difficult to know where to begin when reviewing this book. What appears to the eye as a slender tome of some four hundred pages turns out to be quite a long read. The reason for this is that it covers some three thousand years of religious and philosophical history and does not skimp on the details. Sufiism, Kabbalah and Gnosticism, as well as more mainline theological ideas are all well-covered along with a healthy sprinkling of Hindu, Buddhist and Zoroastrian concepts.

Karen Armstrong begins with a discussion of the origins of monotheism and then proceeds to a describe its development within the three main monotheistic religions - Judaism, Christianity and Islam. While there are probably better, more detailed accounts of each (ie. Hodgson on Islam), she does a credible job of describing many of the nuances of the three. Her primary thesis, agree with it or not as you will, is that religion and its conception of God changes with time. She charts these changes and dwells upon the similarities and relationships between Islam, Christianity and Judaism with considerable insight. She devotes considerable time to the problems of theology each encountered and discusses specific issues such as original sin, the trinity, creation (ex nihilo versus emanation) and the perennial conflict between rationalism and mysticism.

While many who practice the faiths in question will find much of what she says disturbing or heretical, her ideas provoke thoughtful contemplation. She is generally even-handed in her analysis and has a sympathetic tone for almost all of the ideas on which she touches. She is perhaps harshest with Christianity - not surprisingly - since according to the introduction, she spent her early life in the Catholic tradition. Her softest spot seems to be for mystical spirituality and she gives short shrift to modern-day fundamentalism. I find curious her idea that atheism is one in a long line of mystical approaches to the spiritual.

If I have one concern with this book it is that it is too much Karen Armstrong and not enough of anyone else. She holds strong views on nearly everything and is unafraid to state them as if they were objective truths. Dissenting voices are often entirely ignored, leaving the reader unfamiliar with this material feeling that opinions are facts. While the author's analysis is sharp, fresh and eye-opening, it is not necessarily the last word on the subject. Still, as one who comes from the Christian faith, I would recommend this book to those who don't mind having their preconceived notions challenged. ( )

Throughly researched, throughly documented, and absolutely fascinating history of three of the world's major religions. ( )

This is a massive tome--one which clearly delineates, in fantastically-researched detail, the notion that the notion one holds of God depends strongly on the needs that God fulfills. There are clearly universal needs to be met--issues of the meaning of life, creation of the universe, the soul. However, each religion, as described by Armstrong, has its own unique needs--ones which change across the course of time and circumstance.

This book is for anyone who wants to following conceptions of God through the course of history. It took me a long time to get through this book, both because it is crammed full with information, and because many concepts she discusses are not easily digested. But it is definitely worth the effort.

This book would make a good reference text for those who do not/can not read it straight through ( )

As someone who's constantly making comparisons with structured belief systems (and someone with eclectic spirituality herself) this book gave me a new cultural and comparitive look at the "big guns" of monotheism. This book has a very well lain out format where it could have been a comlicated mess of many complex issues at once. There are parts that are a bit drawn out, but that's almost unavoidable because of the subject matter. ( )

I am a big Karen Armstrong fan! I liked this book, it is a good overview of the western religions, given by someone that respects the basic beliefs of the religions. ( )

This subject was really fascinating to me. I knew the religions shared commonalities. Karen Armstrong did an excellent job connecting the similarities and highlighting the differences. I listened to an abridged version. ( )

http://community.livejournal.com/thec... ( )

My opinion of this book changed enormously during the course of reading it. This is not a particularly interesting subject to me, but I realize that it is an important one and Armstrong was recommended to me as a particularly good authority. I don't know enough about the literature of the field to say if this is generally worth reading for all its flaws, or if other books do the same job better.

For the first half of the book Armstrong recounts the rise of Judaism, Christianity and Islam in a reasonably dispassionate and sympathetic manner; this is what I wanted. Viewing religion as a human historical event is, of course offensive to some, and I’m sure that one hundred scholars would have one thousand objections to her facts and interpretations, but I would take that as unavoidable no matter how excellent the book. Armstrong has obviously done an enormous amount of research and she comes across as both learned and lucid. While it is not an easy read, I never felt puzzled by the concepts. I feel that I have learned a lot and reading this book has been worthwhile for me, despite my upcoming criticisms. I am also willing to cut her a little slack on the subject of Western Christianity; writing in English, she can assume that most of her readers are either familiar with the topic or at least have access to other sources.

She seemed to be focusing upon the formal theology of the religions, and not the day to day aspects as experienced by the typical believer; when this struck me I reminded myself that this is not a cyclopedia of religion and she cannot cover everything.

She then began to become a little partisan, dispraising Western Christianity and idealizing Islam, which I attributed to a laudable desire to enhance the Western view of Islam, although the attack portion of her program probably backfired with some readers. But as I read on, the work becomes more and more judgmental, personal and advocative. Armstrong’s hatred of Western Christianity as the least mystical and most fundamentalist creed is revealed in ever stronger terms as she goes along. According to Armstrong’s theses, Islam and Eastern Christianity should have produced societies that were more tolerant, eqalitarian, and generally possessed of fewer social ills than Western Christianity owing to what she considers to be their more advanced and healthier beliefs. I cannot say that all this has ever struck me as being so unfailingly true as to be self-evident, and she does not even attempt to prove it.

Her coverage of the last couple of centuries seems somewhat spotty. Armstrong discusses the effect of European colonization of the Islamic heartland on Muslims, but says nothing of the effect of decades of Communism on any religion. Her section on the Jewish theological response to the Holocaust is somewhat sketchy, and there is little or nothing on the modern divisions of Judaism. Sikhism is briefly noted, but Bahai, oddly enough given her professed admiration for religious fusion, is never mentioned, nor is Mormonism. Meanwhile, and hardest to explain in terms of size limitations or focus, Eastern Christianity virtually vanishes from the book after the fall of the Byzantine empire.

Armstrong sounds remarkably foolish to me for the last fifteen or so pages of the book; perhaps her apparent belligerence is to convince herself. Armstrong proclaims that the failings of Western Christianity make it too brittle to absorb change and have lead to the so-called “Death of God” and for the health of our society *we* need to create a vibrant new mystical faith to assuage the despair of humanity. I have visions of a pageant of piety for the benefit of the *less advanced* or perhaps Prozac communion wafers. Who is "we" and who is "not we?" Are we talking about deluding ourselves, or is an elite going to manipulate the hoi polloi for their own good?

This is where is becomes necessary to consider the typical lay person. Perhaps it’s just my ignorance, but I thought that in dealing with the question of evil, the clergy of most of the monotheisitc religions fall back on retribution for sin, divine plans and repentance and prayer, however abstract the official view of God may be. The overwhelming majority of Americans believe in a Western Christian version of God even though Armstrong has declared it to be unbelievable. I’m an atheist and I cannot fathom how any intelligent person can believe in traditional Western Christianity, but I’m willing to face the reality that I am very much in the minority and that I know intelligent people who do believe in it. Armstrong is surprised to find that the faithful are being faithful to what they were previously taught. I am astounded that, given her stated belief that the idea of God is extremely important to most of humanity, she would expect that the laity can be so easily led, that their beliefs are so shallow. Without contesting her assertion that the view of God changes, does she really suppose that a self-appointed committee can simply announce that everyone is to drop their lifelong beliefs and adopt new ones and that will instantly happen? It does not appear to me from the history that she cites that we can count on new views of Gods to be adopted quickly, easily and unanimously. Do the theologians that Armstrong favors have haloes so that the faithful can tell that they are the Lord’s anointed and their opponents are false prophets? What seems clearest to me from Armstrong’s work is that there are always competing religious views and that isn’t likely to change. Theological developments are not necessarily linear and directional; some themes recur presumably because of the not very changeable nature of human beings.

Science is often said to have discredited arguments such as the Unmoved Mover, but the problems with that argument are more logical than technical. People have been pointing out the logical flaws for centuries, but some people still find the argument convincing. I had also gotten Armstrong’s The Battle for God to read next, but I think I’ll give it a miss; I'm afraid that it will take up where this leaves off. ( )

An exhaustive, intensely compressed overview of 4,000 years of theological debate. A fascinating book, excellent for newcomers to the topic (like myself) although the sheer density of the volume is occasionally numbing. ( )

Smart author, but wants to help you understand, not make sure you understand that she is smarter than you are (or at least smarter than I am). Kind of like a book with lots of dates and who did what to whom at times, but overall, a book that a lot of people would enjoy, and that everyone diplomat or politician should read. ( )

Not the easiest book I've ever gotten through, but well worth it. Armstrong offers a fairly concise text on the three major monotheistic religions of our time. If it's possible to call someone a "lay scholar", then that's what I'd deem the author. Her work might be described similarly - scholarly, but written for the lay public. And as an aside, should you be afforded the opportunity to hear her in person, I'd recommend this experience as well. She is equally, if not more, interesting as a lecturer. ( )

Never finished it, maybe someday I will. Really reads like a text book. The early chapters were good covering the beginnings of Judaism, Islam and Christianity. The later chapters were very dry as it started discussing different views on these religions. ( )

i'd like recommand to you who is interested in human and religious history. ( )

Follows the formation and development of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.
I felt this book was very informative. While it was very much a survey (due to an incredibly large amount of subject matter) it managed to put all three religions into a historical perspective, all the while remaining, by and large, neutral. (Total neutrality is impossible.) It was cohesive, and explained a lot about how the modern version of these religions were synthesized. While a bit heavy, Armstrong managed to make the material engaging and present. Highly recommend for anyone interested in religion. 10/10 ( )

Softpedals the violent side of monotheism, but a good erudite overview

This is a wonderful, dense, comprehensive survey. Quite a feat of research to present so many diverse ideas in an engaging and digestible way. The book rarely bogs down, and is staggering in its scope. What a great place to start any sort of study of historical monotheistic religion. Although it's primarily concerned with the Abrahamic religions, Armstrong does take the time to compare and contrast evolving perceptions of God with Hinduism, Buddhism, and other schools of thought. A treasure, for being both educational and absorbing. ( )