Exploring Religion and Faith: An Analysis of Why I Am Not a Christian and Other Essays

Mr Bee Good: The book arrived on time and in excellent condition!

United States on Nov 23, 2023

Chuck Smith: I haven’t Gotten or Read The Book Yet! But He Was A Great Man With A Wonderful Mind, So I’m Looking Forward To This Book!

United States on Aug 10, 2023

Elia Scattolon: I love this book! And I love Russel's style: witty, polished, elegant yet absolutely savage. He confronts religion leaving it no escape.

Italy on Apr 11, 2023

PROFE: Lenguaje cloaro y accesible a todo público.

Mexico on Feb 19, 2023

Book Shark: Why I Am Not a Christian by Bertrand Russell

“Why I Am Not a Christian” is a very representative book of essays of the great British philosopher and man of many talents, Bertrand Russell (1872 - 1970). This book includes the following essays: 1. Why I AM Not A Christian, 2. Am I An Atheist Or An Agnostic?, 3. My Religious Reminiscences, 4. A Free Man’s Worship, 5. Religion and Metaphysics, 6. Has Religion Made Useful Contributions to Civilization?, 7. How I Came by My Creed; Or, What I Believe, and 8. Why I Am a Rationalist.

Positives:
1. Well-written collection of essays despite the fact that these essays were written decades ago.
2. The lucid thoughts of the great British philosopher Bertrand Russell.
3. Eight essays that cover a wide-range of Russell’s lifetime.
4. Destroys the first-cause argument. “If everything must have a cause, then God must have a cause. If there can be anything without a cause, it may just as well be the world as God, so that there cannot be any validity in that argument.”
5. A look at the argument from design. “You all know the argument from design: everything in the world is made just so that we can manage to...

United States on Feb 04, 2017

judith R Johnson: I enjoyed reading this book although I disagree with many of the views expressed. Opposing views of others are interesting when given with their reasons.

Bertrand Russell's arguments from science have largely been discredited because science has constantly evolved and he is using ideas we no longer believe. This must always be the state of science at any time; it is what we have proved thus far.

His references to the Bible are often taken out of context, eg he suggests that all Christians are directed to sell all their possessions and give them to the poor but this was directed to one person for whom possessions were an idol that prevented him prioritising God. There are many such examples.

His references to the interpretation of the Bible are based on the beliefs of the Catholic church, often in those areas where Protestants would differ.

Some things he says are just plain silly, for example that Christians disapprove of sex; most think God invented sex.

On rationalism, he cannot empirically prove that we should only believe something we can empirically prove; therefore he cannot empirically prove his philosophy. His 'strong rationalism' is not...

United Kingdom on Jan 24, 2016

S. Heptonstall: First time I've read any of Russell's work and I wish I had have known more of his work when I was a teenager - his explanation of the problems with religion is pure joy to read.

I am still amazed that any intelligent, primary educated person has anything to do with religion at all and Russell was of that view decades ago. When I hear people saying "thank God ..." for this that and the other I tend to think they have some kind of mental affliction - especially politicians and (bless them) Americans.

This book is a really great read and allows some level headed thinking about what it is to be human, or at least just an animal existing on Earth - splendid!

United Kingdom on Jan 06, 2016

David Robertson: I loved reading this. Having spent much time in discussion with many of the 'new' atheists, it was great to discover that there are arguments are not new at all. There is nothing that Dawkins says that Russell did not say (and say it better). What comes across though is how dated some of his arguments are - for example that the universe is eternal (this was pre-big bang) and his laissez faire attitude to women and sex - arguing that virgins should not be allowed to be teachers! Well written, clever but ultimately falls far short of a realistic challenge to Christianity. In response to this book Solas CPC (of which I am director) commissioned a number of people to write 'Why I am not an Atheist'. Feel free to get it to get the other side. My own contribution is an answer to Russell.

United Kingdom on Apr 02, 2014

Thinking Fellow: I really like Russell on numerous grounds, such as his ethical/social/political views. He is well known for his anti-religious views.

In his essay "Why I am Not a Christian," he presents his case convincingly and his prose is notoriously simple and a pleasure to read without him going into abstract thought as most philosophers do. But the thing I care less for, is the fact that when he argues his case against existence of God, he is so flippant and spends little time over why he believes such n such. Maybe the essay should be taken more as his personal credo and I am wrong to critize him for that, but he comes off to sure of his beliefs. He states why its not so, and then moves on as if he as adequately dismissed the argument.

He is in fact that direct ancestor of Dawkins and Hitchens for good reason - Russell is in a long lineage of atheists who come off as bombastic, a la Volaitre, etc. There is probably a certain need for a bombastic attitude to jolt the general public into thinking a new way. But unlike Hitchens, who goes over board, Russell keeps him composure and seems likely to be able to find middle ground with rational theists. The dogma that atheists fight...

United States on Feb 11, 2009