Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #978 in Books
• Published on: 2007-10-16
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Hardcover
• 348 pages

From the Inside Flap
Is Christianity obsolete? Can an intelligent, educated person really believe the Bible? Or do the atheists have it right? Has Christianity been disproven by science, debunked as a force for good, and discredited as a guide to morality?

Bestselling author Dinesh D'Souza (What's So Great About America) looks at Christianity with a questioning eye, but treats atheists with equal skepticism. The result is a book that will challenge the assumptions of both believers and doubters and affirm that there really is, indeed, something great about Christianity. D'Souza reveals:

*Why Christianity explains what modern science tells us about the universe and our origins--that matter was created out of nothing, that light preceded the sun--better than atheism does
*How Christianity created the framework for modern science, so that Christianity and science are not irreconcilable, but science and atheism might be
*Why the alleged sins of Christianity--the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Galileo affair ("an atheist's fable")--are vastly overblown
*Why atheist regimes are responsible for the greatest mass murders of history
*Why evolution does not threaten Christian belief, but actually supports the "argument from design"
*Why atheists fear the Big Bang theory and the "anthropic principle" of the universe, which are keystones of modern astronomy and physics
*How Christianity explains consciousness and free will, which atheists have to deny
*Why ultimately you can't have Western civilization--and all we value from it--without the Christianity that gave it birth.

Provocative, enlightening, a twenty-first-century successor to C. S. Lewis' Mere Christianity, Dinesh D'Souza's What's So Great About Christianity is the perfect book for the seeker, the skeptic, and the believer who wants to defend his faith.

About the Author
Dinesh D'Souza, a former White House domestic policy analyst, is currently the Rishwain Research Scholar at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. He is the bestselling author of What's So Great About America, Ronald Reagan: How an Ordinary Man Became an Extraordinary Leader, and many other books. He can be reached by e-mail at DineshJDSouza@aol.com.

Customer Reviews

excellent book
I thoughly enjoyed this work. Even athiests and Agnostics will gain in their stances regarding the divine. Its not a blindly religous text, it does leave the reader contemplative on the foundation of western civilization.

Strange Claims for Erudition
I'm glad to see this book has been written. The worst response to Hitchens, Dawkins, et al's recent efforts would be silence and neglect. Also, I admire the writing skill, research, and occasionally good insights D'Souza puts into his book. Unlike most religious writers I have read, there is no astoundingly ignorant contradiction of science to be found in his work, and he seems to be legitimately interested in the findings of recent science. Many historical references he gives are enriching as well. I was, for example, quite impressed to learn that Augustine predicted there was no time before the big bang. Though it was only a guess, it is nevertheless amazing that he was able to conceive of this possibility long before modern science understood such issues more thoroughly, much like Democritus's atomic hypothesis. However, on other historical points, such as his revisionism of the Galileo trials, this book was less enjoyable. Or take the statement, "Yet science as an organized, sustained enterprise arose only once in human history. And where did it arise? In Europe, in the civilization then called Christendom." (p.83) I suppose he is unaware of the scientific triumphs of the Arab world, where in fact the scientific method was born. Or how about his claims regarding the role of religion in inspiring art? I think most people would agree that the most primitive art in civilization's history came from the Medieval period; it was a actually a big step down from Greek and Roman art. Furthermore, did great art disappear after the 1700s when the church ceased to be its sole sponsor?

Despite my atheistic beliefs, I enjoyed much of the book and so am not going to declare jihad on it, although I'm sure D'Souza would applaud my religious fervor were I to do so. Even at its weakest, this book is still light years ahead of C.S. Lewis's tripe, which is why I give it 3 stars; it does indeed "elevate the debate". (The weakest park of the book, by the way, is the following argument given on p.124-5: We don't know what caused the universe to exist. Define this cause as god. Therefore god exists.) And to those readers who only gave 1 star, where's your atheist charity?

In fact, I think this book needs a good bit of charity. It's probably not a good thing when the most convincing points in the book come from the supposed straw men arguments of elites so brilliant, they ought to inspire some real "fear and trembling" among believers: Feynman, Weinberg, Hitchens, Dawkins, E.O. Wilson, and Stephen Hawking are among those quoted. Note that the great minds invoked by the author on the side of faith come mostly from an era when being Christian was a de facto inevitability. Is it really that significant that Newton, for example, was a religious zealot? What else would he have been? A Hindu? An atheist? He also fervently believed in crackpot ideas like alchemy and was surprisingly unchristian at times, like when it came to acknowledging Leibniz's contributions to calculus.

D'Souza points out that the population of theists around the world is growing exponentially--and this is a good thing, I ask? Should he be so gleeful to see the faithful adherents overpopulating in a meat grinder like Rwanda, a country so choked by population already that each person barely has enough dirt outside his hut to grow the meager food that sustains him? Perhaps some circumspection regarding the anti-contraception edicts of the church would benefit these people, but D'Souza is only cheered by their blithe self-destruction. Shouldn't the Scandinavian countries that he criticizes for low birth rate instead be praised for responsibly dealing with the population crisis? Nope. Apparently zero population growth is only the result of secular gloom, he contends. I rather think it's natural for reflective people to have concern for the future--hope is only justified if we take action to prepare for impending problems, which is to say that faith isn't enough to solve our most pressing problems, and in fact, it isn't of any real use at all. I love the assumption he makes that atheists don't reproduce as much as the faithful because they are dour and hopeless. He seems to think that religion has a monopoly on happiness, although this is the last thing one would conclude from watching a parade of self-flagellation, or recitation of endless mantras over tightly clutched beads.

One has to wonder in the end why the author is so impressed with the rise of blind fanaticism in the world. The unexamined beliefs of the superstitious, uneducated, and starving masses hold more weight for him than the reasoned skepticism of western scientists and thinkers who have reached the fullest potential of our species. Why exalt the lowliest of low? "The worth of a street sweeper on the streets of Philadelphia was as great as that of Jefferson himself." (p.68) Does anyone actually agree with this? I think he is confusing the notions of worth and accountability. The value of a Jefferson to civilization is immeasurably greater than that of a street sweeper, but I think most of us would agree that the two should be held accountable to the same set of civil laws. This does not imply that the street sweeper is "just as valuable" as Jefferson, but rather that universal justice is a cherished principle.

"It is no use responding that Mill was a product of the Enlightenment understanding of human freedom and equality. That notion was itself a product of Christianity. Where else do you think the enlightenment thinkers got it?" (p.77) I hate to tell anyone who believes this, but if our impulse to respect other sentient beings wasn't a part of human nature to begin with, no preacher could possibly have instilled it. I prefer to claim enough dignity for myself to say that, as a human being, I can appreciate equality without supernatural backing. It's funny how D'Souza is telling me, as an atheist scientist, that my motivation to promote science and secularism are actually thanks to religion. This would be a bit like telling Hitler that his idea of German superiority pays homage to the Jewish idea of a chosen people. In other words, the Enlightenment thinkers' and my own dislike of religion is obviously not a teaching of religion. John Adams did not learn from his father, a pastor, to say, "This would be a perfect world if only there were no religion in it."

At times, I was irked by D'Souza's disrespect or lack of understanding of science. Like when he takes on Stephen Hawking's mathematical idea of multiple universes (p.136), he criticizes the "unreality" of imaginary time. "Imaginary" may be a misnomer for numbers that are very real, but I don't think this point deserves to be criticized as being too abstruse. The imaginary time formalism, also called a Wick rotation by physicists, is used routinely in quantum field theory to simplify the calculation of four dimensional integrals, since Euclidean space is more convenient to work in than Minkowski space. The results of these calculations are amazingly accurate predictions of observables, such as the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron, so imaginary time is actually a very useful concept.

The problem is that D'Souza doesn't see any difference between a Stephen Hawking, who says "Here is a consistent mathematical theory that may or may not be true--perhaps we can collect evidence for it," and a religious fanatic who says "I know why the universe is here, and I'm willing to sacrifice my life and others' lives for it," except that the latter is apparently more praiseworthy. What the educated and circumspect thinker realizes when pondering the biggest of big questions is that we simply don't know the answers. It is a triumph that we can even consider the possibilities on such a high level as theoretical physics. One has to wonder whether D'Souza realizes just how ingenious is a man such as Stephen Hawking, but once again we see the principle of "exalt the lowly" at work. Feynman, Weinberg, Hawking--all simpletons, while the common ignorant man of superstition is avowed as holy.

I find it incredible that the author uses his erudition in an attempt to elevate some of the most base and primitive ideas of man. I just can't fathom why he would go through the contortions required to defend a backwards way of thinking, even while possessing the powers of logical scrutiny; the hookworm of religion does indeed burrow deeply into the mind.

Hope that wasn't too long. Thanks for reading, and comments are appreciated!

Great Read, Sound Arguments!
Wow, where do I begin! I have been engaged in written as well as verbal discussions with both atheists and other religious/non-religious people regarding the existence and nature of God as well as the Creation-Evolution debate. Always I find that when we really begin to get to the heart of the issues of Christianity or Evolution, the arrows of insults and hostility are directed at me with gusto. I find that it is nearly impossible to adequately answer the innumerable objections to Christianity and remain engaged in rational conversation.

In his book "What's So Great About Christianity" Dinesh D'Sousza has done just that, presented a cogent, rational, well documented presentation that address nearly all the atheistic objections ever conceived. His presentation is structured and measured. He begins by laying out the basic framework of the argument that God does not exist and that religion, particularly Christianity are unnecessary and have in fact been proven dangerous in light of those who carry the torch of knowledge and understanding, the Scientists. Mr. D'Souza points out that the motivation behind this purely naturalist view of the universe and life is based on Darwinism and the belief the nature itself has paved the way to our existence. We have no purpose in life except to perpetuate the species.

After laying the ground work and noting that Christianity is not dying, but actually growing, Mr. D'Souza address the issues and objections. He begins by showing that the current state of the world has been shaped in no small way due to the Christian presence in society for the past 2000 years. And it is not the problems that are due to the Christians, but progress. The progress that has resulted from Christian thought has been on all fronts. He then shows that even science itself is really the result of devoted Christians trying to understand the awesome creation of God. This is then reinforced by the fact that we see design everywhere, but most importantly in life itself.

Moving on to the philosophical underpinnings of life, Mr. D'Souza does an excellent job of addressing how the existence of God is not only logical but is necessary based on reason and the limits of our reason. Using the arguments of some of the greatest philosophers he builds a solid case that we are incapable of eliminating God from the equation, we don't even know what true reality looks like outside of the limits of our five senses.

From there, Mr. D'Souza tries to defend and mend some of the tarnished history of Christianity. This admittedly it is a difficult thing to do since so much harm is done in the name of religion, but the point is that men do the harm, not the teaching of Christ or the foundations of Christianity. However, it is men, and men without God commit the most heinous crime of all. The horror of these crimes against humanity is solidly addressed and documented. Mr. D'Souza makes no bone about placing the blame directly in the lap of atheism and Darwinism where is rightfully belongs.

Finally Mr. D'Souza presents a rock solid case against Atheism and one for Christianity by exploring the issue of Morality. It does really come down to the personal desire for a license to do what ever we darn well please doesn't it! We can justify anything, especially if there is no God, no Judgment, no afterlife, and no accountability. Masterfully, Mr. D'Souza hits the nail on the head here and lays open the real and most powerful motivations for bad behavior, self pride, selfishness, and sexual promiscuity.

Mr. D'Souza ends the book with a weak, but none the less sincere, invitation to accept the Gospel and Jesus Christ. He does this with dignity and humility.

This was a great read. I found it difficult to put the book down as if I was reading a mystery novel! As for content, I have only scratched the surface. And while I thoroughly enjoy the book and thought it was not only well constructed and very accurate, I recognize that not everyone will receive it that way. I know that there are some who will hate it as much as they hate the Bible. But to the sane, this only illustrates the truth presented in the book. After all how can you be upset with some thing unless it hits you directly where it hurts? Regardless, read it, you need to.