This elegantly written book, published in the very useful Penguin Lives, is probably the clearest, most serious introductory text to any Eastern religion in English. In the first place, Ms. Armstrong, offers us a traditional biographical narrative of Siddhatta Gotama. This biography draws on both very traditional and recent sources and balances very well indeed the demands of writing a lively narrative without losing intellectual rigor. In order to main this rigor, Ms Armstrong draws on the Pali Canon and many English language and German sources. Beautifully integrated into this biographical narrative is Ms Armstrong's thoughtful account of the main concepts of the Buddhist tradition: Anatta, Atman, Dhamma, Dukkha, Iddhi, Nibbana etc. Finally, for the ordinary reader, Ms Armstrong includes a helpful preface on Buddhist sources and a Glossary containing succinct explanations of key Buddhist term. There is also a convenient map of the Gangetic plain at the time of the Buddha. The only criticism to be made of this book is that the author tends to overplay the important of an "Axial Age." This philosophical tic, also present in Ms Armstrong's other books, diminishes the singularity of Buddhist thought and is something of an oddity in this otherwise excellent work.

I first heard of Karen Armstrong during her interview on NPR (National Public Radio). I was intrigued by how someone with such a heavy Christian background would approach the Buddha and his philosophy. I am a Buddhist and am always eager to learn more about my philosophy of choice, never forgetting one of the main principles of Buddhism: inquire further. Well, I bought the book, read it, and now I must thank Dr. Armstrong for having done such a good job. Forget about petty criticisms concerning indexes (sometimes a decision made by the publisher, not by the author); about lack of bibliography -- it's all in the notes; about guesses as to whether the Buddha would have approved of a bigraphical account. All these are mere excuses from people incapable of doing (and appreciating) what she did: writing a thorough, respectful, enlightening book about him and his teachings. My respect and my thanks to Karen Armstrong!

I have little background in Buddhism, the study of yoga, or related topics. I read this book because I had lately been reading some of the Dali Lama's thoughts and wanted to understand more about Buddhism. I was surprised to find this book a page-turner! This book about ancient ideas literally kept me up reading for hours, and I don't usually stay up late! Couldn't put it down. Karen Armstrong develops insights about world history and the evolution of human thought through her exploration of the Axial Age and the probable activities of the man, Gotama Siddhatha. She draws upon religious texts, historical knowledge and myth/legend in balanced and creative ways. What I found most exciting was her portrait of the society and times of Siddhatha. She draws cogent parallels between those ancient times and our own time. She explains how yogis and other spiritual seekers were regarded in that society- as respected people and pioneers of the human spirit and potential. This is quite different from Western society, which tends to marginalize and disrespect those who reject the mainstream. It was the vivid contrast of ways of living in society and being human that amazed me. Her description of what yogis were willing to do gave me renewed insight into human potential. The story of the man who dared to do all those things, and question and then reach forward to become a new kind of human avatar- is the focus of a stirring book that helped me understand humanity's potential in a new way!

Read the Saint, Founder and Prophet, the most exhaustive and complete compendium of source documents on the life and spirituality of St. Francis. Adrian House references documents contained in this compendium in his creative interpretation of what is actually known about St. Francis. In particular, his discussion of St. Francis' sexuality bears no resemblance to the source documents from which he says that he obtained his background information. It is true that the Church rushed to canonize Francis and so the Church authorized biography by Thomas of Celano was very one sided and lacking in candor, especially concerning Francis' life before conversion. However, subsequent second hand accounts of Francis' life as well as critical writings and analysis by many scholars and historians have provided perspective, at least sufficient in scope to paint a consistent portrait in key lifestyle areas. Adrian House writes well and his perspective is interesting, but it's very far from a reasonable, scholarly interpretation of the best source information available. His reference to credible sources may lead the reader to believe that what House writes as fiction is supported by historical fact. Read the sources and make up your own mind.

I have long admired St. Francis of Assisi. A truly holy man, I was confirmed under his name. And yet, his ideal of living a life of poverty and service is something I could never find the courage to emulate to any significant degree. Still, it is heartening to read of his life. In our modern world, we need all the inspiration we can find. Adrian House has done a good job of using the life of Francis to provide inspiration for us.

One of the main things I like about House's work here is that he provides the story of man who is truly human. I quickly tire of biographers who try to throw only good light on their subjects. This is a particular danger when writing of a person many consider to be a saint. Still, for saints to really inspire, to lead us towards the good, we must be able to see ourselves in them. Like many great saints (Paul, Augustine, etc.), Francis lived the rather loose life of a wealthy young man for many years before the revelation that turned him into the man he became and House is not afraid to show us this. Even better, House recounts instances of Francis losing his temper and making mistakes after his transformation but with the caveat that Francis, unlike most, always tried to make amends for his transgressions. This, in my mind, is what is best about Francis.

The weakness of this book is that is caters a little too much to a modern, ecumenical audience. Francis was a product of twelfth century Italy and we lose a sense of time with all the interspersed quotations from post-Middle Ages, multicultural sources which shed little light on the man Francis was. I love to read Shakespeare, Buddha and the like, but not here. This is somewhat a matter of taste, however. I am already well-versed in the Christian milieu and, therefore, don't need help to connect to Francis. Non-Christians may find this book more palatable because of House's style.

On the other hand, the only really modern writing I want to see is modern scholarship and, fortunately, there is that too. House handles Francis's mystical side very well and I liked the way he points out how the Orders Francis founds get hijacked and turned away from Francis's ideal. People like to criticize modern religions expression but we should take the time to look back at the original spirit of these groups and rituals before decide it has no value. House's book gives us this opportunity.

Excellent book on St. Francis. The only complaint I have is it isn't very good with maps and showing the reader where Francis traveled. Having been in Assisi helped me to imagine where Francis traveled. It's wonderful to read that the saints are human and do err. Faith gets them through! An excellent introduction to the life of one of the most revered saints, and also a good introduction to his faithful compainion, St. Clare.

A good one, if you like the clear definition style of Karen Armstrong. This book looks at faith and believes system outside of the common day practices of the different religions. I enjoyed it.

The Main Man by Tim C. Leedom, Harry W. Carpenter, and Linda Adams

While presenting an interesting story, the authors attempt to warn us about the danger posed to society by ultra-fundamentalist Christians. There are thus two primary levels to this work. These are the novel itself and the underlying debate between fundamentalist and rational thinking. The authors advocate the latter position. Unusual to a work of fiction is an introductory essay that outlines the main themes of this debate and the importance of myth to a culture. This in itself is worth the read. However, I do have a quibble with the essay's author. She (Karen Armstrong) suggests that there is no extra-Biblical evidence for the Kingdom of Israel. This term is unclear as it could refer to David's empire as well as the subsequent successor states of Judaea (south) and Ephraim (north - also called Israel in some Biblical passages).

The story begins as Thomas Lazlo (the protagonist), a professor at a Southern fundamentalist college, discovers some new Dead Sea scrolls that will radically alter the traditional view of Christ. The aftermath of this discovery is interwoven with a plot by fundamentalists to hasten the supposed Second Coming of Christ. Essentially this group believes that there are three signs to his return, the last being the re-construction of the Temple of Solomon in Jerusalem. The only problem is that the Dome of the Rock, a sacred Moslem mosque, currently occupies the site.

How all this plays out as well as how the authors present their philosophy without being heavy-handed about it makes for a very enjoyable read. Therefore, I can, without hesitation, recommend this novel.

Karen Armstrong labels herself a "freelance monotheist" and, as a British ex-nun, has some knowledge of religious history. But in this book, as she often does, Ms. Armstrong effusively promotes Islam while maintaining persistently negative characterizations of Judaism, and to a lesser extent, Christianity. These contrasts color her narrative of the ancient city established by King David as a capital of the Jewish people in Biblical times.

The book, for example, describes Islam's "inclusive notion of holiness," the Qur'an's humane attitudes and Islam's benign expansion. In contrast, it deplores Judaism's "separations and exclusions," which the book exemplifies by citing Jewish dietary laws, observance of Shabbat and ancient regulations that controlled who could enter the first and second Temples. The book, however, does not compare these supposed weaknesses in Jewish observance to Dhimmi laws imposed by Jerusalem's Muslim conquerors during Medieval times, as explained in Moshe Gil's History of Palestine, or to the fact that the holy city of Mecca remains closed to all non-Muslims even now.

Ostensibly about three faiths in Jerusalem, the book fails to mention Judaism's strong attachment to it, or that this city of the first and second Jewish Temples (constructed in Biblical times) figures prominently in dozens of Jewish prayers and holiday celebrations, many of which originated here. Omitted are the tremendous devotion felt by religious Jews to Jerusalem and more than 600 citations to it in the Jewish Old Testament.

The book also portrays Israeli's rule in Jerusalem derisively, as one which "cannot be justified in Jewish tradition by the overriding sanctity of Jerusalem," by virtue of the inescapable "moral imperative to justice" emanating from holiness. But in recounting the city's history, the book neglects Jordan's illegal rule over the Old City of Jerusalem from 1948 to 1967, which went unrecognized by most nations and the United Nations. Nor does the book note that during that period 100,000 Jews were evicted, all 58 Jerusalem synagogues destroyed and headstones from the ancient Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives were used to line roads and latrines. This volume, finally, does not acknowledge that Israel's rule opened all previously closed religious sites to all faiths, except for the Temple Mount, which Palestinian Authority administration has closed to all non-Muslims.

In other words, Ms. Armstrong's history of Jerusalem does not fairly reflect the city's religious significance to all three faiths. It favors Islam, at the expense of Judaism and Christianity. Better history can be found in Jerusalem in the Twentieth Century (Martin Gilbert), O Jerusalem (Larry Collins and Dominique LaPierre) or Jerusalem and its Environs (Ruth Kark and Michal Oren-Nordheim). Alyssa A. Lappen

As someone who is not part of the Jewish, Muslim or Christian world, I found Ms Armstrong's narrative well-paced and meticulously detailed. This book is written from the point of view of a religion expert, and the construction of the pre-Christian times of Jerusalem are particularly creative and evocative. Certainly, Ms Armstrong captures the complexity of problems that Jerusalem faces.

Be careful, though, of Ms Armstrong's strongly pro-Muslim bias. The history and present of Jerusalem are convoluted to say the least and Ms Armstrong does tend to paint the Muslim community's role and current stance with flattering brush strokes, and that of the Jews and Christian with disparaging ones.

I do agree with her eventual conclusion - tragically, the history of Jerusalem does not make a solution to the current situation very likely. In fact, it is possible to see history being repeated for the umpteenth time with the most recent events.

I walked into this book having read several of Karen Armstrong's books, so I knew of her leanings that other reviewers have pointed out. Of course, if you are going to write about three major faiths, it is natural to expect some bias towards one of them. That aside, I found her history to be very interesting and helped put this city into a perspective I had not had before. She shows how an off the beaten path city became one of the most important places for three of the world's religions, and a contentious site of conflict. What Armstrong does well is to show the shifting lines that have occurred between areas of the city as various religious powers came to control. But more importantly she brings the various pieces of Jerusalem and puts them in a coherent organized narrative. Many of the places mentioned in the bible are put into perspective with each other, and their historical changes are traced over time. Even more useful is that the author generously includes maps throughout the book to show the changes and shifting lines of groups throughout time. As someone who knew little about the geography of Jerusalem, I found this to help keep all the players and movements straight. The book lags at points but overall moves very well through the centuries. This is an excellent overview history of this holy city and would be a very good introduction to the reader wishing to know more. It should not be the only book you read on the region, but rather use it as one view of the history which has brought us to the modern religious conflicts of the area.

Frances Hill does what her subtitle (A Full Story of the Salem Witch Trials) promises. In a Delusion of Satan, the author tells the grippping and horrifying story from beginning to end in a fast-paced narrative that takes the reader through every pertinent detail. Along the way, she discusses motives, both psychological and material, that may have influenced the participants, as well as briefly glancing at the number of theories that have arisen in our more modern times. The author does not provide a large historical context in which to slide the events into, perhpas, but she does give just enough details to keep this story comprehensible and fascinating. The book does not dwell on modern analogies (they are too painfully obvious, at any rate). A recommended look at this terrible time.

A Delusion of Satan provides a complete, meticulously researched and riveting acccount of the Salem witch trials. Frances Hill demonstrates that the trials were motivated by greed, a lust for power and control and revenge rather than any spiritual concerns of the community leaders and clergy. The accounts of the mass hysteria that swept through Salem and the surrounding areas is fascinating . This is an excellent account of a sad and infamous episode in American history. Highly recommended

Inspired by a field trip with my students to Salem, I browsed a little through Amazon's selections about the witch trials to find a good book to teach me more about what happened. I settled on this one, and was not disappointed.

"A Delusion of Satan" is both well-written and well-researched. Frances Hill has used evidence from many primary sources to back up her descriptions of what happened in Salem in 1692. She is careful to present all of the information accurately, and has changed nothing except to modernize some of the grammar to make it easier for the reader to understand. The large bibliography at the back of the book attests to the amount of effort that went into researching the book, and also provides suggestions for further reading about the subject.

Although historical accuracy is one of the most important aspects of a book like this, to earn five stars it also has to be readable. Hill's writing is clear and insightful, and many of the people in the story are made very real. The backgrounds of both the accused and the young girls doing the accusing are given in as much detail as is available. Hill's psychological analysis of the mass hysteria is believable and makes sense, at least to this layperson.

The story of the Salem witch trials is chilling. We'd like to think that such a thing could *never* happen today. And yet, as Hill makes clear in her introduction, such modern "witch-hunts" *do* occur, though many of us are unaware. Reading this book reminds you that open-mindedness and willingness to embrace the unknown should be traits that we all share. I highly recommend this book to anyone looking to learn more about this horrible period in our history.

Having read Karen Armstrong's book "History of God" and finding it an excellent book, I bought this one immediately upon seeing it on the shelves.

Though I do not believe "Battle for God" is as excellent as her "History of God", it is an very good history of 'fundamentalism' in the three main 'monotheistic' faiths. Ms. Armstrong does an excellent job of defining a very hard to define "fundamentalism" and being able to find the similarities of the fundamentalist strains of three very different religious perspectives (and their differences). One of her main theses (as I see it) that fundmentalism in all three religions attempts to maintain the 'mythos' (mystical, religious, non-rational 'truth') of the faith through the means of "logos" (rational 'truth') is very insightful and interesting. Of course, I also believe that the thesis she derives from this, that fundamentalism by using 'logo's not only does _not_ return to some earlier truth but creates something very new and not true to the spirit of the religion they are trying to return to, is very true for all three strains of fundamentalism. That thesis though is, I believe, much more open to criticism, especially from Christians, Jews and Muslims of a fundamentalist bent.

Still, the book is excellently written, thoroughly researched and pleasant to read.

I do have two caveats. First, I find the book's premise that 'logos' and 'mythos' were well established and each had its sphere of use and truth in the ancient or pre-modern world somewhat of an unfortunately naive dichotomy. From my reading of religions and history, I do not think the pre-modern world saw these as two distinct ways of truth, rather they were very intertwined. I don't think this weakens her main thesis though. Secondly, the use of specific dates to delineate periods as she does for her chapters is always problematic (when did the "renaissance" actually begin?), but even more so for this study of three different faiths on three different historical trajectories. The author admits this and states it very clearly, I only wish she hadn't used dates as chapter headings, they are a bit misleading. Still, it is a small quarrel :).

And as an aside in response to some reviews: I do not find Karen Armstrong any more sympathetic to Islam than she is to Christianity or Judaism (she is quite sympathetic to all three actually :), nor does the accusation that this is 'new age' tripe hold up at all (it reflects both a very poor understanding of what 'new ageism' actually is and a poor reading of the book). And of course, most who are fundamentalist or have a strong distaste for Islam or Judaism will hate this book.

This is an excellent work by one of the most dispassionate observers of monotheistic religions in the world today. Where "A History of God" was just that, this is a similar history of the Fundamentalist struggle against Modernism. Following the history of fundamentalism in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam from the seminal events of the modern world to the end of the 20th century, she brings their remarkably similar stories to the same end: religious ideologies grounded in paranoia, based on narrow and sometimes novel interpretations of scripture, and made manifest through political activism and hatred. Religious values are perverted by paranoia and fear, the sublime and beautiful are twisted into something ugly and distorted, and the sacred qualities of these religions are made corrupt. She describes this as the defeat of religion.

She is most sympathetic to the Islamists because of their history of colonial occupation and exploitation by the West, and least sympathetic to the Jewish Fundamentalists. She makes a very good case for both these positions, but don't get me wrong, she does not make these judgements herself, she lets the facts speak for themselves. The only reason I did not give her five stars is that her discussion of Christian Fundamentalism is less energetic than the discussions of Islam and Judaism. It is as if she feels Christian Fundamentalism has been brought to heel by the modern world and does not pose a threat.

The thing that struck me the most is how much people like Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, the Ayatollah Khomeini, and Meir Kahane all have in common: an inability to come to terms with the world in which they live.

IÕve always been interested in comparative religion, but in the aftermath of September 11, it has felt urgent to understand what brings people to beliefs that are so obviously grotesque distortions of any religious tradition. I picked up Karen ArmstrongÕs book because after reading several articles about Islamic fundamentalism, it seemed to me she was the only writer I encountered who had a clue what she was talking about. While others spouted platitudes and engaged in useless debates about whether Islam was a religion of peace or war (virtually all religions are a mixture of the two), Armstrong offered clear and fascinating analyses of how Islamic fundamentalism developed and what its relationship was to the politics of the Middle East.

The book, a comparison of Christian, Jewish, and Islamic fundamentalism, has more than lived up to my high expectations. The world isnÕt less dangerous after reading it, but it makes a little more sense, and I feel better equipped to cut through the platitudes and nonsense.

Armstrong argues that in the modern world "we can not be religious in the same way as our ancestors," and yet without any religion at all, life feels as if it has no meaning. And so all of us, whether devout, agnostic, or atheist, search for meaning, for "new ways to be religious." Fundamentalism represents one of those searches, but it is a way that grows out of fear.

One of the things I found most interesting about this book is that Armstrong emphasizes that this "fear" isnÕt simply some bizarre paranoia. ItÕs often quite legitimate. American Protestant fundamentalism grew up among poor, rural, badly educated people who felt that powerful and sophisticated people were laughing at them and their beliefs. And, to be fair, they were right. And so, in a virtual parody of the people who were looking down on them, they began to argue that their beliefs were "modern" Ñ the Bible was historically and scientifically verifiable. Jewish fundamentalism developed in the aftermath of the Holocaust, which left many Jews with valid reasons to fear annihilation and hope that a picayune observance of "GodÕs law" would save them. Islamic fundamentalism developed in societies asked to modernize too quickly and in ways that had horrendous social consequences. Many Islamic fundamentalist movements, ironically, began as positive attempts to provide social services like health care and education that governments were not providing, but political repression radicalized them and made them more aggressive.

All three fundamentalist religions, Armstrong says, have positive aspects. TheyÕve helped people operate in a confusing modern world without losing their sense of the meaning of life. But all three have also shown a dangerous tendency to lose the compassion that is at the core of any authentic religion, and to degenerate into "a theology of rage and hatred."

Armstrong concludes that fundamentalists need to become not less religious, but more so Ñ more faithful to the compassion that is the heart and soul of religious faith. But at the same time, secularists and people with more liberal notions of faith need to recognize the real fears that fundamentalists face, and deal with the problems that spawn those fears. Fundamentalists are not going away. We need to understand them.

While taking an unbiased view of the history and interactions of the three monotheistic religions that follow the tradition of Abraham seems destined to offend some (just read some of the previous reviews), "A History of God" is a book that tackles the hard issues with sensitivity and intelligence.

Karen Armstrong is at her best in the opening and closing thirds of the book, where she examines the climate Judaism originally sprang from and then where the three great religions are today. In between, the book is almost too full of information, with important movements and sects getting only a paragraph at times, due to Armstrong's rush to cover everything, at least in passing. The middle sections desperately need a study guide, or a Web browser (not available when I first read the book, in its first edition in the early 1990s) to find out more about the different thinkers and movements.

But even at its densest, Armstrong does an excellent job of discussing the crisis points all three religions came to and how each handled it. (Have a thick skin when your faith is addressed, as the all-too-human members of each major religion have dropped the ball, and Armstrong shows how it happened, although she never passes judgement.)

Not a quick read, or a light one, but educational and inspiring. Whether used to enrich one's understanding of their own faith, or for insight into the world around us, "A History of God" is an excellent overview of the history of Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

This is a wonderful book especially for people disatisfied with conventional modern thinking about God as either the Big Stern Daddy in the White Robe or An Obsolete Escapist Fairy Tale. The hardcover edition I originally purchased showed favorable reviews from relatively iconoclastic authors like A.N. Wilson (Armstrong, btw, never, so far as I know, refers to the quest for God as a "Wild Goose Chase" as Wilson did) and from more traditional figures like Sister Wendy Beckett (the smiling English nun who always appears in full habit and writes about Art History).

The book takes a historical approach to the development of God concepts in Judaism, Christianity and Islam and is especially good at explaining Islam, exploring mysticism and less personal concepts of God cross-culturally, reviewing how different things have been considered "traditional" at different times, and examining how and why God-concepts change according to a cultures needs and experiences. It also reviews the different Hebraic concepts of God in the Jewish scriptures in fascinating and provocative detail. Needless to say, the Bible offers several different ways of looking at God. (Armstrong offers very little, however, that I recall on different ways of looking at Christ- for that go to Yaroslav Pelikan's JESUS THROUGH THE CENTURIES or for more radical contemporay views New Testament commentators like John Dominic Crosson, Robert Funk or Marcus Borg. For a better and kinder treatment of the Deuteronomistic writings try Anthony R. Ceresko's INTRODUCTION TO THE OLD TESTAMENT: A LIBERATION PERSPECTIVE). Armstrong has also edited an anthology of Medieval English mystical writers called VISIONS OF GOD.

I found that there was so much to take in when reading A HISTORY OF GOD that I could only read the book about 5 pages at a time. The reason I am only awarding 4 stars is because, like many books of this ambitious scope, it can fall down occasionally on the details. However, it remains a good starting point for your own reseach and for identifying your own interests. This book can changes lives both by vastly expanding knowledge of the issues involved in this field and by offering alternatives to what we have come to think of as "traditional".

A book that is sure to irritate many, A History of God is a history of Western theology, in particular the way the principal Western faiths of Judaism, Christianity and Islam have thought of God over time. For those who view their religion on a more dogmatic level, this book can provide some uncomfortable insights, especially the idea that God - or humanity's view of God - has changed over time, even within a particular faith.

Armstrong definitely knows her material, sometimes too well for easy reading. This book is filled with a lot of historical and theological detail and cannot be read lightly if one is to grasp all that is contained within. Although generally readable, the subject matter makes for slow going at times, and Armstrong does get a bit pedantic at times. Also, while generally objective, she does editorialize every now and then, which interferes with her presentation of the subject.

Overall, this is a good book, with some stylistic flaws but filled with plenty of insight into religious history. For those who want to learn more about the development of theology, this is a recommended read.

This is one of three Iris Murdoch books I have read, as a good friend of mine is a big fan. I have yet to see why. I found Nuns and Soldiers silly and overwrought, an extended but inexplicable love story filled with improbable and self conscious conversations. Do people experiencing a coup de foudre really sit around and dissect their feelings? I don't find the philosophical or moral underpinnings of the story to be compelling, either. Social requirements versus individual desire, I guess.

An interesting take on the old theme of nuns/soldiers and vicars/tarts, this one. Most of you will know the story, but I shan't spoil it for those who have not yet read it. I am surprised that that girl from Titanic could write something as clever as this.

Whenever I read an Iris Murdoch novel, I am reminded how much I enjoy and appreciate Murdoch's work. Her books are always a pleasure to read, and a pleasure that I would be sincerely sorry to miss.

At the moment of the death of her husband, Gertrude is reunited with her best friend from University-- Anne. Anne and Gertrude had been separated when Anne had joined the nunnery, and it is this occasion of great loss for both of them (Anne has lost the solace of the nunnery) that brings them together. _Nuns and Soldiers_ questions both the notion of great love and the morality of the expression of love.

My book club was not overly fond of _Nins and Soldiers_ because they found the character of Gertrude so utterly unsympathetic. And she is truly atypical for Murdoch-- her feminine passivity and self-centeredness are not normal characteristics for Murdoch heroines, but it fit so well with the story that I wasn't bothered by it.

There are very few Murdoch books that I'd hesitate to recommend.