Customer Reviews

Godless: How an Evangelical Preacher Became One of America's Leading Atheists

5 star:		(72)
4 star:		(19)
3 star:		(8)
2 star:		(5)
1 star:		(8)

 

 

Dan Barker's life is an amazing testimony to the power of reason and science over the delusion of believing in Christianity. As an influential Christian evangelist and song writer he shares in this book why he could no longer remain a Christian, and why he became an atheist. It is a powerful and profound story that almost brought tears to my eyes, having experienced a similar change of mind as a former minister and apologist for the Christian faith.

If a skeptic wants to get into the mind of a Pentecostal Christian then she needs to read Barker's story. Dan tells of how everything that happened had a "spiritual significance" for him, even to the point of following so-called divine hunches while driving, to turn right, and then left, wondering if these hunches were actually voices from God. Dan tells of a time when he followed them and found himself at a dead end in the middle of a cornfield! He concluded God had merely tested him to see if he'd be faithful! Isn't that the hoot!

If a Christian wants to say people like Dan and I leave the faith because we just didn't want to believe, then she needs to read Barker's story. Dan tells us that this process "was like tearing my whole frame of reality to pieces, ripping to shreds the fabric of meaning and hope, betraying the values of existence...It was like spitting on my mother, or like throwing one of my children out a window. It was sacrilege." Right that.

As he became an atheist he went through an "awful period of hypocrisy." Especially moving was when Dan, who had recently become a closet atheist, was asked to preach in a service where an openly atheist person named Harry was in attendance. Dan shares how he wanted to say, "Harry! You are right, I'm sorry. There is no God, and this is mumbojumbo nonsense." That was his last sermon. This story highlighted for me how hard it is to leave that which we had invested so much of our lives in. It can be very painful to leave what you've believed so fervently and preached with such intensity for many years. You feel lost. It's a real struggle. You don't really want to leave. But leave it he did.

Dan has some interesting and creative arguments as well, when it comes to the Kalam argument for the existence of God, and the resurrection of Jesus, two kingpins of William Lane Craig's apologetic. He critiques the coherence of the concept of the theistic God too. In one chapter we find a letter written by God to theologians where he asks them to explain where he came from, how he decides what is right and wrong, and even who he is.

Many skeptics merely list some Bible contradictions, as if that's all they need to do to debunk the Christian faith, and Dan lists plenty of them. But he also goes into some depth in a separate chapter on one of them, to show he could do that with the others he merely listed. He focused on the discrepancy between Acts 9:7 and Acts 22:9, with regard to whether the people with Paul on the Damascus road heard the so-called heavenly voice, or not. Dan made his case.

I don't think he made his case that Jesus was not a historical person though, and I think such an argument will put Christians off. Only skeptics who do not accept the Christian faith will consider it, and it indeed is a worthy question. Also, I think there are several other issues Dan could've dealt with that he didn't, like the coherence of the concept of a triune God, the incarnation, the atonement, the devil, and the resurrection of the body.

While I myself am quite familiar with the arguments in the book, I especially liked his personal story from being an evangelist to one of America's leading atheists. He is a great writer, a creative writer, and it shows in this book. In it he talks about his subsequent debates (64 of them so far!), the debate tactics he's used, as well as some of the court cases he's been involved in on behalf of the separation of church and state. He also shares a personal painful story of when his pregnant wife, Annie Laurie, had an eclamptic seizure (look it up) and survived, giving birth via c-section to their daughter Sabrina. At no time during this traumatic experienced did either of them pray to god for help. "We didn't even consider it," he wrote.

While Barker says that "atheism has no hierarchy, no clergy and no chosen people more `holy' than anyone else," he is surely to be considered the reigning bishop of those former Christians and ministers who have "lost faith in faith." This is his new church, and he's still preaching today. Instead of being "brothers in Christ" we are now "brothers in reason." I greatly appreciate my older brother.

When you add to his book my comprehensive approach to debunking Christianity in which I spend over half of my book defending an anti-supernatual bias before examining the biblical evidence in the last half of it, I consider us to be brothers in a tag team wrestling match made in hell against believers.

The question for Christian believers is why God let Dan slip out of his hands if he knew in advance he would lead others "astray" from the fold like he has so effectively done. He's now preaching a new message, a powerful message, that God does not exist and that we can do better without such a belief.

Preach on brother! Preach on!

-----------

I'm the author of "Why I Became an Atheist," and the edited books, "The Christian Delusion" and "The End of Christianity."

This is a very good book. I had not been a big Dan Barker fan, but I am now. He did the extraordinary in fully responding to something I had heard from nearly every Christian I've met in the past ten or so years: "You were never really a Christian." I thought my bono fides were pretty good, having a radical conversion experience at 17, scrubbing my plans to become a marine biologist to go into the ministry, obtaining a biblical studies degree from a respected evangelical college, working in churches and for Billy Graham...but Barker has me over a barrel. I can say with Barker that I loved my Christian experience, and that I am an atheist not because of anger, disappointment, bitterness, or temptation, but just because we found that Christian claims are mistaken. They are not true. It is a painful realization that Barker quite rightly likens to a divorce, but we have to find ways to live with ourselves, and living with a lie can only work so long.
The part of the book that presents various arguments against theism is good. I've read pretty widely in atheist literature, so there was nothing really new for me there, but Barker does have a very pleasing writing style, so what I mostly got out of that section are ideas for better expressing myself on, for example, the problem of evil or Pascal's Wager.
But there's something that just about ruins the book, I think, and that's the Richard Dawkins foreword. First I must state clearly that I have enormous respect and affection for Dawkins, go to his website every day, have read nearly all of his books and articles, and count myself a huge fan. But with Dawkins, when it comes to religion you know what you're going to get, and the offering here is typically unsympathetic, coldly rational, and comically insulting. In other words, some of the very things that make his things written for atheists so compelling, fresh, and entertaining.
But in the context of the first words a reader is going to see in a book that might otherwise have made an IDEAL gift for a person questioning her faith, the tone and attitude are toxic. Again, don't misunderstand--I agree with everything that Dawkins wrote. But if an inquisitive mind is a fly, and the rest of the book is honey, the reader has to somehow buzz through a mist of vinegar to get to it. I realize that Dawkins has--deservedly--incredible cache among atheists. But this was a book with promise to reach well beyond the choir that's always singing to itself, and let some fresh air and sunshine into the lives of benighted fundamentalists. I am concerned that with Dawkins's contribution, this is less likely.
On the other hand, I could be completely, utterly mistaken. Some person with a growing set of questions might come to that foreword and think, "Yes! Finally! Someone is saying the sort of thing that I've been starting to think for some time now, and not just pitter-pattering around it but jumping in with both feet, making a statement, taking a stand. I like that very much and am now much more receptive to the rest of what the book has to say."
But I don't think that's the smart money bet.

This is a masterful book that powerfully refutes the bible using logic and reason. Powerfully written, this book should stand in the way in many of those Christian missionaries who preach the bible as an infallible book at face value.
What is also great about this book is that it uses intelligence and common sense as opposed to emotions.
This book serves as a big wake-up call to many Christians who never seriously questioned their faiths.

Dan Barker has the apparent talent in writing with an entertaining, lucid, live, and humorous way. He also has gathered a wealth of knowledge on the subjects of preaching, the bible, and Christianity and became an enthusiastic Evangelical Christian at an early age. Insomuch he became an Evangelical preacher as well as a Christian songwriter for many years. It wasn't until a later age where Dan approached his Christian beliefs by reason and thought, and thus cost him his faith altogether. It's worthy here to note that Dan is part of the "Prometheus society" which requires an extremely high IQ entrance.

With depth and clarity this book sheds light on the ignored side of Christianity that many people who adhere to this faith seem to have no real knowledge about. In this thought provoking book, you'll end up realizing that there is no real reason to believe that Christianity is greater than say, Buddhism.
Dan tells his amazing story in a very interesting and an easy to read way. He explains the various conflicts in Christian doctrines, the fallacies in Christian reasoning ( e.g. resurrection, atonement, ... etc), and the various inconsistencies and contradictions in the Bible, as well as the morality behind many of its teachings. This book is a powerful evidence that many of the Christian Preachers today preach at face value.

Barker's "Godless" serves as an excellent primer for some basic (and not-so-basic) reasons why a person shouldn't affirmatively believe in a god. It's mainly targeted at Christians, and mostly of the Protestant Evangelical brand, but its broader message (especially the philosophical points it makes) are well applicable to most theism.

Other reviews have covered various details of the book's content at length, so instead I'll focus on what I got out of it as a firm and committed agnostic (former Orthodox Christian):

The Good:
--Engaging and moving account of Barker's journey from fundamentalist theism to rationalist atheism. His enumeration of particular thoughts and mindsets will strike deep chords in most Christians.
--Excellent and nuanced discussion of some of the higher philosophical arguments for and against God. Complex and somewhat obtuse, but highly compelling once understood.
--Particularly well-reasoned and hard-hitting discussion of the historical-critical method and its implications for the Gospel accounts and the historical Jesus.
--Explains in simple language why divinely-ordained morality is unworkable and how men can be good without God.
--Generally takes a less rabid and polemical tone than folks like Dawkins and Hitchens; Barker is as sympathetic to Christians as he is unrelenting to Christianity, and this makes it more readable and appealing to the audience that actually needs to hear what he has to say.

The Bad:
--Rough around the edges when it comes to dogmatics. Barker's Christian background was quite theologically rudimentary, and it shows when he talks about the details of doctrine, especially when it comes to Catholicism; Orthodoxy, unsurprisingly, goes unmentioned. This leads to unfair and inaccurate characterizations and conclusions (such as his bizarre anthropomorphism-filled "letter" from God to a theologian), which are sure to turn the true believer off and cause dismissal of his many more valid and hard-hitting points.
--Odd focus with certain arguments. Barker spends pages and pages dissecting the rather easily refuted Kalam Cosmological Argument, while giving far more common arguments (e.g. teleological, argument from morality, argument from beauty, argument from reason) only a cursory treatment. He does a good job covering everything he covers, but his focus seems more tailored to his personal interests than to detailing the fallacies of the most common arguments and the nuances of their superior alternatives.
--The significant portion of the book devoted to debunking "Biblical morality" was an huge disappointment. Barker unapologetically uses only the most rabid and fundamentalistic interpretations of quite a few Bible verses to prove that the morality set forth in the Bible is unacceptable. This refusal to accept potential ambiguities and alternative views amounts to basically a straw man thrown at the totality of Christianity. It's a real shame, because his conclusion is sound, and he could have much more persuasively made his case had he extended every interpretative benefit of the doubt to show that no matter how you play with it, Biblical morality contradicts universal ethical norms.
--I was bugged by Barker's occasional equivocation. For example, he uses a contemporary definition of "love" and thereby argues that New Testament morality is silly because it advocates warm fuzzies toward one's enemies. "Love" as set forth in the NT is, of course, not an emotion at all, but a mindset, an approach, a commitment to compassionate action (hence its common rendition as "charity" until late in the past century). Such rhetorical tactics are beneath Barker, particularly when he spends so much time taking Christians to task for intellectual disingenuity.
--Finally, I was quite annoyed whenever Barker committed the fallacy of composition, i.e., "Christians do immoral things, so therefore Christianity is immoral." Barker often fails to clearly separate what's taught from how it's understood, and equally fails to distinguish that from what people actually do and how it relates back to the teaching and understanding. I imagine he would jump all over any individual who asserted that Stalinism means atheists as a whole teach and are disposed to evil, so it's vexing to see him fall into the same polemical trap, and I could see a Christian totally tuning him out after rhetorical fallacies like this and his occasional equivocation.

In sum, the book is largely excellent, an easy and compelling read, both a gripping personal story and a high-minded intellectual endeavor. Barker has generally done his homework extensively, and it shines through. While marred by a few significant flaws that prevent my recommending it without reservation, "Godless" is a great read that is well worth the time of both atheist and open-minded believer alike.

Because I just ordered my third copy, I felt it was time for me to speak up and tell you why. First, you will need one copy as a source of evidence to which you will frequently refer. There will be miles and miles of underlining as you mark the pages of special interest to you.

You will need your second copy to lend to others. You will be enthusiastic about this book, and you will want to share its wisdom with family and friends. Be warned, however, that you will never get it back, because others will likewise want to share it, and the book will never be returned to you.

Finally, you will want a third copy to be in pristine condition on your bookshelf, since Dan Barker has created a volume which will only grow in its historical significance.

Others have spoken up here on Amazon to attest the quality of this magnificent book. If I may be original at all in my review, it is only to suggest that, sooner or later, you will be ordering additional copies. You might as well save yourself time and shipping by ordering them all at once. I recommend ordering three copies.

Thank you, Dan Barker, for this incredible book and for your years of admirable devotion and service to the freethought world. Your esteemed reputation is richly deserved.

David Mills
Author of "Atheist Universe"

I've just finished reading three books on a common theme: losing one's (Christian) religion and becoming an atheist. All three are excellent, but each approaches the topic from a very different perspective. I thought I might review them all together, and post the combined review on each book at Amazon. I don't know if this is consistent with the Amazon review policy, but never mind.

The first book is Godless: How an Evangelical Preacher Became One of America's Leading Atheists by Dan Barker. I was slightly put off by the subtitle: "How an evangelical preacher became one of America's leading atheists." After all, one of the key points about atheism - and one that we have to keep reminding theists about - is that atheism is not an organized body of belief, it's no more a religion than "bald" is a hair colour. So how can anyone be a "leading atheist"? Who's being led? However if one substitutes "prominent" or "influential" for "leading", we can let that pass. And Barker is certainly influential: he's co-president of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, which is one of the most active groups working to uphold the Constitutional prohibition on church-state entanglement, and seeking to counteract the negative image of atheism in this country.

The second book that I considered was William Lobdell's Losing My Religion: How I Lost My Faith Reporting on Religion in America-and Found Unexpected Peace. Lobdell is an award-winning journalist who covered religion for the Los Angeles Times. After writing about many aspects of religion for many years, he finally decided to write about his own journey.

The last volume in this trilogy was Why I Became an Atheist: A Former Preacher Rejects Christianity, by John Loftus. Like Barker, Loftus was also an evangelical preacher, but although the arc of his experience was similar to Barker's, the result is a very different kind of book.

Let me begin by saying that each of these books is really good, and deserves a place in the library of anyone who is interested in the contemporary debate between religion and atheism. I hesitate to rank them, or recommend one over another; nevertheless I find myself compelled to do so. Of the three, Lobdell's "Losing My Religion" is the most essential, for two reasons. First, he is an excellent writer, and his prose is simply a delight to read. Secondly, he concentrates on his personal experience in a way that I haven't encountered before in books by atheists. Both Loftus and Barker set out to tell their story and argue their case, albeit in different ways, and each draws on writers as diverse as Dennett, Wells, Price, Martin, Shermer, Carrier and Nielsen in setting forth their arguments. Lobdell just wants to recount his own story, and what he has learned from it. He's not interested in converting anyone, or scoring debating points. As he writes, "To borrow Buddha's analogy, I've just spent eight years crossing a river in a raft of my own construction, and now I'm standing on a new shore. My raft was made not of dharma, like Buddhism's, but of things I gathered along the way: knowledge, maturity, humility, critical thinking and the willingness to face the world as it is, and not how I wish it to be. I don't knopw what the future holds in this new land. I don't see myself crossing the river back to Christianity... [or] adopting a new religion. My disbelief in a personal God now seems cemented to my soul. Other kinds of spirituality seem equally improbable. Besides, I like my life on this unexplored shore."

For Lobdell, the thing which provoked his crisis of faith was people: the yawning gulf between the ideals of a religion and the lives of those who practice and - especially - lead it. The horrific abuse of young people by Catholic priests, and the way it was covered up, refutes the claims of religion in many different ways. In particular, it challenges believers to justify theodicy (the "problem of evil"), as well as the Dostoievskian idea of religion as a bastion against the chaos of amorality. In contrast, for Barker and Loftus, the unravelling of their fundamentalist faiths was due to ideas: to the incoherence of religious dogma, and its incompatibility with science and reason.

Both Loftus and Barker were preachers. There are many distinct aspects to being a preacher: the performance artist, leading a collective act of worship; the scribe and teacher, explaining and interpreting the texts and practices of the faith; and the counsellor and confessor. All of these roles have roots in the shamanic and magical. As a believer, Barker was a performance artist, and he remains so in his newly found unbelief. He encourages the closeted skeptic, and fights fiercely for the rights of the non-religious. Loftus is a scribe: the apologist, the teacher. He was the defender of faith against its critics, and with the detailed knowledge that he acquired in this role, he has become the sharpest critic of religious apology.. Each of their books reflects the way that they interpreted the role of preacher.

Both Barker and Loftus seek to encourage those who seek affirmation of their skepticism or unbelief. Barker concentrates on the emotional, the social: "you are not alone", "you are not a bad person". Loftus focuses on the ideas, the dogma: the Bible is riddled with inconsistencies, the supposedly biographical accounts in the New Testament are demonstrably fictitious, the attempts by contemporary theologians to construct a coherent interpretation of the contradictory mess are failures, and so forth. If you have read some of the authorities that Loftus cites - Mackie, Martin, et al - I would still recommend his book, because he pulls all of the threads together in a compact and accessible manner. If you are unfamiliar with the literature, Loftus may be all you need. (Add Hitchens for spice, of course!)

I recommend all three books.

Dan Barker's "Godless" is a excellent book about a former Evangelical Preacher who became a atheist and why. During the years of migration, Dan tells how he went through intense inner conflict and knew something was wrong. A inner voice--the voice of reason was calling. The book covers many important areas that raise alot of questions---evil in the world, needless suffering by humans, Bible contradictons and immoral acts the Bible supports, did Jesus exist and did he really rise from the dead to name a few. Dan Barker was a very dedicated preacher who loved his earlier life. While reading this book, you can sense his sincerity and the fact he believes he made the right choice for his life. Every theist should read this book with a open-mind and ask themselves if maybe they should make some changes in their own lives.

I am a former fundamentalist.

I grew up in a fundamentalist Christian home, with both Baptist and Pentecostal influences. As such, I had what is commonly known as "spiritual" experiences during my years as a "born again" Christian and it is something that for many years I've struggled to come to terms with. One of the reasons that being a former Fundamentalist is so difficult is that I rarely meet anyone who has left that faith, and who can understand and share what I feel concerning the subject.

Enter Dan Barker, former evangelist and president and co-founder of the Freedom from Religion Foundation.

I had the pleasure of hearing Mr. Barker speak at Skepticon II, a skeptic/atheist/freethinker conference in Springfield, Mo. I was very pleased to find out that he was a former fundamentalist preacher and someone who might just understand my difficulties in explaining my experiences and reconciling those experiences with my new found disbelief. After hearing his talk at the conference, I ordered a copy of his book, "Godless" from Amazon.

I was not disappointed.

The first few chapters of the book could have been my own biography, in the depth of his former belief in the specific sect of Christianity I had been involved in. The spiritual experiences, the unwavering devotion to the religion, and the acceptance of the literal interpretation of the Bible were all pages out of my own book as well. His journey toward first questioning, then rejecting Christianity over the course of several years echoed my own de-conversion. As his journey continues, he explains how he went from feeling a need to spread the good news of his religion, to a desire to spread the good news that religion is not necessary for a happy, full life. Barker consistently regards religion with a rational and uncompromising eye, as he moves the story from his own transition to atheism to the reasons why religion, specifically Christianity, is illogical.

He devotes chapters to the plethora of contradictions in the Bible, both the Old and New Testaments, outlining a very convincing case against the literal interpretation and inerrant nature of the Bible. Similarly, he presents arguments that bring into question the existence of a historical Jesus, with several theories on how both the story of Jesus and Christianity itself could have begun, with little to no historical basis - even taking into account the writings of historians such as Josephus.

Morality is discussed at length, especially in relation to the Bible's distinct lack of a true moral direction; Barker even shows how the Ten Commandments are a poor model for the moral fabric of society! Dan shows us how being "good" is something we often do in spite of religion - not necessarily because of it.

It was in the chapter about the historicity of Jesus I found my only major complaint about the book. I was dismayed to find that, like many in the atheist/skeptic community, Barker gives some credence to the Mithraism/Jesus comparisons that have been en vogue since the launch of the pseudo-conspiracy theory film, "Zeitgeist". In spite of the lack of historical evidence for the parallels depicted in this film, this version of the Jesus Myth has gained a foothold amongst many who debate the historical existence of Christ. While Barker doesn't state that he believes this theory (he in fact states that many of these theories are somewhat unbelievable), he does seem to give it some validity.

For anyone interested in the ongoing battle(s) concerning government neutrality in matters of religion, and the many court cases regarding the separation of church and state, Barker goes into great detail about the lawsuits formulated by the Freedom from Religion Foundation toward those goals.

In the final pages, Barker makes an excellent case for why the Atheist's reality is meaningful, and why he should live life to the fullest. Far from being hopeless and despondent, Barker's recurring theme throughout "Godless" is one of hope, freedom and joy in our very existence.

One of my favorite quotes from the book nearly brought me to tears, as it is how I now view life as a fairly newborn Atheist:

We are not above nature. We are not just a part of nature. We ARE Nature. We are natural creatures in a natural environment. Through the startlingly sloppy, painfully unpredictable, part-random, part determined process of natural selection, life has become what it is: imperfect yet doggedly hanging on. And that's what makes life valuable: it didn't have to be. It is dear. it is fleeting. It is vibrant and vulnerable. It is heart breaking. It can be lost. It will be lost.

Dan Barker will be speaking again at this year's Skepticon event. If you live near Missouri, I certain suggest checking out his talk and the entire event.

If you can't make it to the conference, please pick up his book at Amazon.com.

Many people know Dan Barker as the co-host of the Freedom From Religion's radio show and Podcast, Freethought Radio. During these broadcasts Dan or his co-host and wife Annie Laurie Gaylor (who he met during a taping for the "Ophra" show) often refer to Dan's past as an evangelical preacher but until reading "Godless", I didn't realize how deeply Dan was ensconced into the world of fundamental Bible literalists. The book is subtitled "How an Evangelical Preacher Became One of America's Leading Atheists" and the first section of the book outlines Dan's childhood and even how he believed that he was called to the ministry when he was 15. He was raised in a fundamental Christan home, in fact his father had aspirations of being a preacher himself. The family formed a music group with Dan on the piano and traveled to multiple churches performing gospel music. Dan took this calling very seriously and before long was preaching full time not only in California but doing missionary work as well as continuing to play and compose gospel music. Eventually after really thinking about the historical truth of the Adam and Eve story, Dan started his fall from fundamental beliefs and into rational thinking.

The second part of the book entitled "Why I am an Atheist" moves away from the auto biographical and starts to build the case against religion. Dan starts this section by listing many of the ad hominem arguments we atheists constantly hear from Christians and refutes them. He also goes into a detailed discussion about the different ways to refute the existence of a God, using examples from the hundreds of debates with Christians he has participated in over the years. This section of the book would be very useful for a new atheist that wants an introduction course on how to debate Christians as he outlines many of the arguments that will be thrown out for the existence of a God and how to refute them quickly and logically.

The third section of the book moves into examining "What's Wrong with Christianity" starting out with a dissection of the Bible as a book of morals by looking at the book itself. Many verses are printed showing how the Bible can't be used as a guide for behavior focusing on how the Bible argues from authority not from reason. Some of my personal favorite verses are discussed in this section including Job 14: 1-4, "Man that is born of a woman is of few days and full of trouble...who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? Not One." Dan also goes into great detail about the contradictions in the Bible as well as a very interesting discussion about the existence of Jesus. I have read several articles about this topic but Dan's writings are very clear, concise and thought provoking. While reading this section I dog-eared several pages to come back to if I decide to write a post about the existence of Jesus or discuss it on one of our podcasts.

Finally, in the fourth section, Dan brings us up to speed on what has been going on in his life and with the Freedom From Religion foundation including a trip to the Supreme Court for Hein v. Freedom From Religion where the FFRF lost in a 5-4 the right for taxpayers to sue the administrative branch of the government over breaches of the Establishment Clause. The five votes against the FFRF all came from the practicing roman catholics on the bench.

I found the book to be an enjoyable and informative read. As I hadn't read Dan's previous book, "Loosing Faith in Faith", the first section about his becoming a preacher and his "fall" were especially interesting. I was also very interested in the discussions about the existence of Jesus and thought Dan did an incredible job of outlining his argument for a purely fictional character. I highly recommend the book to anyone sitting on the fence between belief and reason as well as to long time freethinkers looking to brush up on knowledge for their next discussion with a Christan. Dan is one of America's Leading Atheists and sets a great example for us all.

I really enjoyed reading this book; Barker's story is very intriguing and adds a personal angle to his arguments. The book is a great light overview or introduction for the reasoning behind atheism. If I were to suggest any book for the average believer to read to help them understand a little more about why I am an atheist, it would be this book. (If you want something more in depth, go for "Why I became an Atheist" by Loftus.)

Pros:
-- Easy to read and interesting.
-- Being a former preacher, Barker really knows what he is talking about and has some great insights on things like Hebrew translations.
-- Pretty comprehensive and spends just enough time on each subject.

Cons:
-- His personal story, while interesting, gets into too much detail and goes on for what seems like forever. Plus, he already wrote a book about that: "From Preacher to Atheist".
-- For someone who has already read a lot about biblical criticism or the philosophy of religion, Barker does not add a whole lot of new information that you wont already be familiar with.

All in all, I highly recommend this book.