Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.82 AVERAGE
3.82 AVERAGE
First of all, potential readers should be aware that this is NOT a casual read and probably not the best book to start with if you do not have a lot of background knowledge of the Abrahamic religions. I had to mark the glossary (which I used a lot) and keep post-it notes with the names of various people and groups I kept forgetting.
It is a worthwhile book if you already have an interest in & some knowledge on the subject. The author mostly writes chronologically & shows how the three religions developed & influenced each other. Reading this book helped me put what I already knew into a larger overall context; as well as introducing me to a lot of new information & showing me what areas that I need to study further.
The author did seem to have this tendency to favour more obscure word choices when it wasn’t necessary. I love learning new words, but dislike writers who consistently do this. She also uses foreign words/phrases without translation or explanation. And not just ecclesiastical Latin or common Arabic words that she could justifiably expect readers to be familiar with.
It is a worthwhile book if you already have an interest in & some knowledge on the subject. The author mostly writes chronologically & shows how the three religions developed & influenced each other. Reading this book helped me put what I already knew into a larger overall context; as well as introducing me to a lot of new information & showing me what areas that I need to study further.
The author did seem to have this tendency to favour more obscure word choices when it wasn’t necessary. I love learning new words, but dislike writers who consistently do this. She also uses foreign words/phrases without translation or explanation. And not just ecclesiastical Latin or common Arabic words that she could justifiably expect readers to be familiar with.
challenging
informative
reflective
slow-paced
Content Warnings
Minor: Religious bigotry
I cannot express just how masterful and comprehensive this work is. A genuine triumph in what for anyone but Armstrong would be an impossible task: to fairly discuss the history of three complicated religious traditions in one volume. My only complaint is that I wish it were 50 pp longer -- not to include any more content but simply to allow the reader space to breathe.
This was a really interesting read, it took a while to get through but I liked it. It definitely feels dense and slow at times, but overall it seems pretty accessible to the average reader.
Superbly written by Karen Armstrong. A most delightful reading that will make any religious endorser, no matter of his ideology and affiliation to better comprehend how God's history evolved in the three fundamental religions of the world, Judaism, Christianity and finally, Islam.
I really want to give this 5 stars because anything with this depth of scholarship and analysis deserves it for the sheer amount of work. It's a bit frustrating because this is a high quality book that many, many more people should read but the structure renders it unpalatable to most readers.
I learned a lot from this book, some history, some philosophy, and some about how firm I am in my own spiritual convictions.
Armstrong essentially traces the development of the world's three major monotheistic religions from their tribal origins through the modern era, focusing narrowly and almost exclusively on their conception of God. She shies away from teaching any history directly, so it helps to come at this with some world history knowledge, as there are only vague references to major events. (I suspect I would have benefited even more from this book if I had a working knowledge of Middle Eastern history in particular.)
The strength of Armstrong's narrative lies in tying different eras and religions together by the commonalities in their philosophies while being careful to point out important differences, no matter how minute. Her tone is largely non-judgmental, making it easier to process the large quantity of information she's imparting. She acknowledges religion's shortcomings but that is not what this book is about; readers looking for common ground between religions or deeper spiritual traditions will find much to consider here.
I dropped it one star for two major reasons. The first is the formatting of the book itself. The dry, scholarly tone of the writing and the massive amounts of information mean that it's difficult to read a chapter in a single setting. The book would benefit greatly from interspersed maps and section breaks so that there were natural places to put it down and think awhile. The second is Armstrong's inability to separate her knowledge from that of the reader. She name drops quite frequently with little to no context of who she's discussing (I Googled a lot). She also tends toward a voice that makes it hard to distinguish when she, the analyzer, is commenting versus when she is summarizing the philosophies of the great thinkers she is profiling.
This book is a one-of-a-kind read. For someone with a background in the topic, you're likely to get a great read. It's still worthwhile for the lay person but it will only reward a patient reader who is willing to slowly progress through the excellent information that Armstrong presents. Highly recommended for persons interested in the history of religion and philosophic thought, with the sad understanding that few are likely to make it through a read this dense.
I learned a lot from this book, some history, some philosophy, and some about how firm I am in my own spiritual convictions.
Armstrong essentially traces the development of the world's three major monotheistic religions from their tribal origins through the modern era, focusing narrowly and almost exclusively on their conception of God. She shies away from teaching any history directly, so it helps to come at this with some world history knowledge, as there are only vague references to major events. (I suspect I would have benefited even more from this book if I had a working knowledge of Middle Eastern history in particular.)
The strength of Armstrong's narrative lies in tying different eras and religions together by the commonalities in their philosophies while being careful to point out important differences, no matter how minute. Her tone is largely non-judgmental, making it easier to process the large quantity of information she's imparting. She acknowledges religion's shortcomings but that is not what this book is about; readers looking for common ground between religions or deeper spiritual traditions will find much to consider here.
I dropped it one star for two major reasons. The first is the formatting of the book itself. The dry, scholarly tone of the writing and the massive amounts of information mean that it's difficult to read a chapter in a single setting. The book would benefit greatly from interspersed maps and section breaks so that there were natural places to put it down and think awhile. The second is Armstrong's inability to separate her knowledge from that of the reader. She name drops quite frequently with little to no context of who she's discussing (I Googled a lot). She also tends toward a voice that makes it hard to distinguish when she, the analyzer, is commenting versus when she is summarizing the philosophies of the great thinkers she is profiling.
This book is a one-of-a-kind read. For someone with a background in the topic, you're likely to get a great read. It's still worthwhile for the lay person but it will only reward a patient reader who is willing to slowly progress through the excellent information that Armstrong presents. Highly recommended for persons interested in the history of religion and philosophic thought, with the sad understanding that few are likely to make it through a read this dense.
It was an interesting book and Armstrong certainly seems to know what she is talking about, but at the same time I felt that the book was bogged down at times with too many names, places, dates etc. I like that she worked to include all of the facts, but it was just too much of a tome for my liking.
A History of God is not a history of the Abrahamic religions; it is the history of the development of various understandings of God in the Abrahamic religions. It seems a subtle difference at first, but will contribute heavily to your reading experience of this book. Armstrong delves into philosophical and metaphysical conceptions of God from antiquity to the present day, but she doesn't really dwell on the history of the Abrahamic religions themselves. I had gone in expecting something more historical and was disappointed with the intense and often inscrutable philosophy I got instead. That said, it is a testament to Armstrong's skill that I, a person who loathes philosophy and metaphysics, was able to get through this entire book in a relatively short time.
My rating is frankly irrelevant; regardless of whether or not I enjoyed it, this book is a remarkable intellectual achievement. There is no denying that it is dense academic book, despite not being published by an academic press, and Armstrong's lack of sections or headings in her long chapters are a detriment to the lay reader. There were some portions that I found absolutely riveting, and there were some parts that I find dreadfully dull. That's going to be inevitable in a book that deals with such a broad subject. That said, I did enjoy this, in the sense that I feel like it has made me a better, more intelligent person. I've walked away from A History of God with a fuller and more expansive mind and mindset.
I grew up in a moderately conservative Arab Muslim family with its own very particular (and limited) conception of God. I also live in the United States, a country known for its very fundamental interpretations of Christianity. It can easily lead one to believe that these infantile and literal interpretations of God as a Man in the Sky are the only ones that have ever existed, and that they are inextricably tied to the religions behind them. Armstrong shows us that this is not, and has never been, the case. It is absolutely remarkable to me just how many different understandings of God there have been throughout history, particularly in Islam - I especially found the Sufi conceptions of God fascinating and freeing. My family considers Sufis and other mystics heretics, which is not surprising given how radical their understanding of God is, but as a Muslim-turned-atheist-turned-agnostic, it is so liberating to read about how there is room in Islam for such flexible interpretations of God. In particular, I was intrigued by the concept of God as an ineffable reality.
I was also fascinated by just how torturous and pedantic doctrinal differences can be, particularly in Western Christianity, which has split up into a myriad of different sects based on tiny, and, to outsiders, irrelevant doctrinal differences. And as a modern reader it can seem utterly bizarre just how intensely historical philosophers and scholars were devoted to understanding God's role in the world; in fact, I had no idea that so many of the famous Renaissance and Enlightenment thinkers discussed God and religion so heavily in their works. These people tied themselves up in knots and performed the most convoluted mental gymnastics to try to understand God and religion, which bolsters Armstrong's overall point that religion is integral to human nature.
While Armstrong isn't terribly concerned with historical events, she does go into the historical development of Judaism and Christianity, in a chapter that I think I will have to read at least three more times to truly internalize, as the emergence of Judaism is, well, confusing as hell. Christianity is no better; there are so many different and contradicting accounts of Jesus' life and his nature. I had no idea just what a flimsy historical foundations both of these religions were built on! The process of compiling the texts integral to these religions is just as dubious, and learning this makes it even more astonishing to me just how much some people will cling to the Bible as a literal historical account rather than parables.
Armstrong is thorough, intelligent, and balanced; her lack of bias and her open mind shine through her careful depictions of the three Abrahamic faiths' theological developments. It is particularly refreshing to see a Western academic discuss Islam and the Prophet Muhammad in such neutral, and even occasionally laudatory, tones. I've come away from A History of God with an immense trust in Armstrong's intellect and research, and will certainly be seeking out more of her work in the future.
My rating is frankly irrelevant; regardless of whether or not I enjoyed it, this book is a remarkable intellectual achievement. There is no denying that it is dense academic book, despite not being published by an academic press, and Armstrong's lack of sections or headings in her long chapters are a detriment to the lay reader. There were some portions that I found absolutely riveting, and there were some parts that I find dreadfully dull. That's going to be inevitable in a book that deals with such a broad subject. That said, I did enjoy this, in the sense that I feel like it has made me a better, more intelligent person. I've walked away from A History of God with a fuller and more expansive mind and mindset.
I grew up in a moderately conservative Arab Muslim family with its own very particular (and limited) conception of God. I also live in the United States, a country known for its very fundamental interpretations of Christianity. It can easily lead one to believe that these infantile and literal interpretations of God as a Man in the Sky are the only ones that have ever existed, and that they are inextricably tied to the religions behind them. Armstrong shows us that this is not, and has never been, the case. It is absolutely remarkable to me just how many different understandings of God there have been throughout history, particularly in Islam - I especially found the Sufi conceptions of God fascinating and freeing. My family considers Sufis and other mystics heretics, which is not surprising given how radical their understanding of God is, but as a Muslim-turned-atheist-turned-agnostic, it is so liberating to read about how there is room in Islam for such flexible interpretations of God. In particular, I was intrigued by the concept of God as an ineffable reality.
I was also fascinated by just how torturous and pedantic doctrinal differences can be, particularly in Western Christianity, which has split up into a myriad of different sects based on tiny, and, to outsiders, irrelevant doctrinal differences. And as a modern reader it can seem utterly bizarre just how intensely historical philosophers and scholars were devoted to understanding God's role in the world; in fact, I had no idea that so many of the famous Renaissance and Enlightenment thinkers discussed God and religion so heavily in their works. These people tied themselves up in knots and performed the most convoluted mental gymnastics to try to understand God and religion, which bolsters Armstrong's overall point that religion is integral to human nature.
While Armstrong isn't terribly concerned with historical events, she does go into the historical development of Judaism and Christianity, in a chapter that I think I will have to read at least three more times to truly internalize, as the emergence of Judaism is, well, confusing as hell. Christianity is no better; there are so many different and contradicting accounts of Jesus' life and his nature. I had no idea just what a flimsy historical foundations both of these religions were built on! The process of compiling the texts integral to these religions is just as dubious, and learning this makes it even more astonishing to me just how much some people will cling to the Bible as a literal historical account rather than parables.
Armstrong is thorough, intelligent, and balanced; her lack of bias and her open mind shine through her careful depictions of the three Abrahamic faiths' theological developments. It is particularly refreshing to see a Western academic discuss Islam and the Prophet Muhammad in such neutral, and even occasionally laudatory, tones. I've come away from A History of God with an immense trust in Armstrong's intellect and research, and will certainly be seeking out more of her work in the future.
An extremely interesting and insightful read. Gave me a newfound respect for the history of all three major monotheistic religions, while also reinforcing my sadness at the state of them today.
I know I'm an atheist and all, but I still enjoy Armstrong. Wrote this review several years ago:
Rarely does one come across a book that is recognized as erudite, essential, and readable simultaneously. Karen Armstrong's The History of God has brilliantly analyzed the rise of fundamentalism as a reaction to the emphasis on logos of the Enlightenment as opposed to mythos that had been essential to one's view of the world. "The economic changes over the last four hundred years have been accompanied by immense social, political, and intellectual revolutions, with the development of an entirely different, scientific and rational, concept of the nature of truth; and once again, a radical religious change has become necessary." As science and technology began to become associated with such visible successes in overcoming disease and social ills, the tendency was to believe that logos (rational, scientific thinking related exactly to facts and external realities) was the only “means to truth and began to discount mythos [that which is timeless and constant, “looking back to the origins of life . . to the deepest levels of the human mind . . . unconcerned with practical matters” and rooted in the unconscious, that which helps us through the day, mythological stories not intended to be literal, but conveying truth:] as false and superstitious.” The temptation is to think of mythos as meaning myth. Inj this context that would be incorrect. Armstrong uses this word as it relates to mystery and mysticism, rooted ultimately in traditional biblical and Islamic history “which gives meaning to life, but cannot be explained in rational terms.”Logos, however, was unable to assuage pain and suffering leading to a vacuum the fundamentalists sought to revive. The danger unseen by modern fundamentalists is that they have tried to imbue mythos with an element of literalism essential to logos. The difference between these two concepts forms the basis for the battle between modernism and fundamentalism.
She traces the beginning of the fundamentalist movement back to the time of Columbus when a crisis occurred in Spain. Ferdinand and Isabella expelled both Muslims and Jews from Spain. The three religious groups had actually coexisted quite happily and profitably together for several centuries, but the prospect of modernity and threats from a new world view, science, threatened age-old traditions and myths. The fundamentalist movement was an attempt by traditionalists to retain a sectarian view of the world.
For many of these people the world can be divided into two camps: good and evil and those forces that are not allied with their own narrow view of the world are labeled as evil. That these believes are rooted in fear does not lessen their impact or importance to the faithful. Often an arrogance and condescension – I plead guilty here – make secularists insensitive to those who feel their religious beliefs have been undermined and challenged. The seemingly irreconcilable difference between rationalism and mysticism perhaps make militant fundamentalism inevitable. The danger for fundamentalist lies in their attempts to turn mythos into logos, e.g., have sacred texts be read literally and inerrantly as one would read a scientific text. That may lead to inevitable discrepancies between observation and belief that may hasten the defeat of religion.
Of great benefit, is Armstrong's clear explanation of the differences and conflicts that exist in Islam. Shiite and Sunni branches represent very different interpretations of a major faith.
The eventual outcome of the dichotomy of secular versus sectarian remains unknown. What is apparent is that fundamentalism cannot tolerate pluralism or democracy and compromise seems unlikely. The author identifies two major threads in the development of fundamentalism: (a) fear of the modern world and (b) that the response to fear is to try to create an alternative society by preaching "an ideology of exclusion, hatred, and even violence." She warns at the end of the book, "If fundamentalists must evolve a more compassionate assessment of their enemies in order to be true to their religious traditions, secularists must also be more faithful to the benevolence, tolerance, and respect for humanity which characterizes modern culture at its best, and address themselves more emphatically to the fears, anxieties, and needs which so many of their fundamentalist neighbors experience but which no society can safely ignore."
Rarely does one come across a book that is recognized as erudite, essential, and readable simultaneously. Karen Armstrong's The History of God has brilliantly analyzed the rise of fundamentalism as a reaction to the emphasis on logos of the Enlightenment as opposed to mythos that had been essential to one's view of the world. "The economic changes over the last four hundred years have been accompanied by immense social, political, and intellectual revolutions, with the development of an entirely different, scientific and rational, concept of the nature of truth; and once again, a radical religious change has become necessary." As science and technology began to become associated with such visible successes in overcoming disease and social ills, the tendency was to believe that logos (rational, scientific thinking related exactly to facts and external realities) was the only “means to truth and began to discount mythos [that which is timeless and constant, “looking back to the origins of life . . to the deepest levels of the human mind . . . unconcerned with practical matters” and rooted in the unconscious, that which helps us through the day, mythological stories not intended to be literal, but conveying truth:] as false and superstitious.” The temptation is to think of mythos as meaning myth. Inj this context that would be incorrect. Armstrong uses this word as it relates to mystery and mysticism, rooted ultimately in traditional biblical and Islamic history “which gives meaning to life, but cannot be explained in rational terms.”Logos, however, was unable to assuage pain and suffering leading to a vacuum the fundamentalists sought to revive. The danger unseen by modern fundamentalists is that they have tried to imbue mythos with an element of literalism essential to logos. The difference between these two concepts forms the basis for the battle between modernism and fundamentalism.
She traces the beginning of the fundamentalist movement back to the time of Columbus when a crisis occurred in Spain. Ferdinand and Isabella expelled both Muslims and Jews from Spain. The three religious groups had actually coexisted quite happily and profitably together for several centuries, but the prospect of modernity and threats from a new world view, science, threatened age-old traditions and myths. The fundamentalist movement was an attempt by traditionalists to retain a sectarian view of the world.
For many of these people the world can be divided into two camps: good and evil and those forces that are not allied with their own narrow view of the world are labeled as evil. That these believes are rooted in fear does not lessen their impact or importance to the faithful. Often an arrogance and condescension – I plead guilty here – make secularists insensitive to those who feel their religious beliefs have been undermined and challenged. The seemingly irreconcilable difference between rationalism and mysticism perhaps make militant fundamentalism inevitable. The danger for fundamentalist lies in their attempts to turn mythos into logos, e.g., have sacred texts be read literally and inerrantly as one would read a scientific text. That may lead to inevitable discrepancies between observation and belief that may hasten the defeat of religion.
Of great benefit, is Armstrong's clear explanation of the differences and conflicts that exist in Islam. Shiite and Sunni branches represent very different interpretations of a major faith.
The eventual outcome of the dichotomy of secular versus sectarian remains unknown. What is apparent is that fundamentalism cannot tolerate pluralism or democracy and compromise seems unlikely. The author identifies two major threads in the development of fundamentalism: (a) fear of the modern world and (b) that the response to fear is to try to create an alternative society by preaching "an ideology of exclusion, hatred, and even violence." She warns at the end of the book, "If fundamentalists must evolve a more compassionate assessment of their enemies in order to be true to their religious traditions, secularists must also be more faithful to the benevolence, tolerance, and respect for humanity which characterizes modern culture at its best, and address themselves more emphatically to the fears, anxieties, and needs which so many of their fundamentalist neighbors experience but which no society can safely ignore."