The Bible is not the word of God. The Religious Condition is a broad look at the factors that drive Christians to believe otherwise. This part-philosophical, part-scientific overview explores the psychological and sociocultural influences that subtly provoke Christians to maintain their antiquated views of the universe. While billions of people around the world have merely assumed the solid validity of the Bible, The Religious Condition presents a series of profound questions regarding the implications of such premature assuredness.In addition to the conclusions from actual psychological studies that support these viewpoints, covered topics include the various ways that Christians approach scientific conflicts, the defense of a perfectly moral god who commits immoral acts, the illogical methods of argumentation that Christians invoke in the maintenance and defense of their beliefs, and disingenuous methods utilized by those who wish to defend the idea that religious beliefs are based on reason instead of faith. The Religious Condition answers actual reader responses to the previous works of Jason Long, a former Christian. His fresh experiences in the church and advanced levels of educational enlightenment make him the perfect individual to present this vehemently unpopular, yet undeniably appealing topic.
Book Description
Frequently Bought Together
Editorial Reviews
About the Author
Jason Long attended Middle Tennessee State University where he earned a B.S. cum laude in Chemistry with minors in Biology and Psychology. He completed his debut manuscript, Biblical Nonsense, shortly after earning his Doctorate in Pharmacy cum laude from Mercer University. He attended Church weekly for sixteen years.
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
Customer Reviews
|
Share your thoughts with other customers:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
14 of 15 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Revealing the Reasoning of the Believer,
By
This review is from: The Religious Condition: Answering And Explaining Christian Reasoning (Paperback)
I really liked Jason Long's book. In some ways he has done for the average person what I have done in my book for the college student, and for that I can only congratulate him. His book begins by taking a good hard look at why people believe and what believers must do in order to defend their beliefs. This encompasses the first half of the book, or 94 pages (5 chapters). The second half of his book (5 chapters) through to page 248 deals with answering a wide range of specific Christian objections, most of which came from believers who emailed him about his previous book, Biblical Nonsense.
I like his approach very much. In the second half of his book Long's answers to Christian objections are solid and convincing for the most part (which provides many specific examples of what Long claims in the first half about how Christians reason). If you've read his first book you need to read this one just to see how he effectively deals with the many objections Christians have made against it. Even if you haven't read his first book this is a good read with intelligent answers. But the first half of Long's book intrigued me personally the most, especially since I was very familiar with the objections Christians make to our arguments. In this first half Long gives us many examples of how people come to believe strange things and how they in turn defend them, from Virgin Mary healings to UFO sightings to ghost hunters to Mormons to Muslims. Here he includes Christian beliefs as well, since people who adopt a religious faith usually do so based on when and where they were born. One of the lessons of this first part of his book is that "Human beings are unbelievably gullible and illogical creatures. The ability to think skeptically is not innate; it requires practice." (p. 84). In this first part I believe Long made this point very effectively and it should cause all believers to question their faith, subject it to scrutiny and demand hard evidence to believe. But what usually happens it that rather than "initiating an honest and impartial analysis" of any new evidence, believers "simply bury their heads in the sand and continue to observe whatever beliefs...their ancestors thought they needed thousands of years ago." (p. 12). When looking at new evidence believers get into a defense mode where they seek to defend what they believe rather than trying to impartially weigh it, Long rightly charges. Impartiality might be an elusive goal, of course, but we should at least try to look at the evidence. Consider this example from Long: "If you wanted safety information on a used car, would it be wiser to trust the word of a used car salesman or the findings of a consumer report?" (p. 23). I think the answer is obvious. But Christians routinely will only trust other Christians for their information. They don't trust outsiders. Why? If I were interested in car safety information I want an outsider's perspective to get a different, more objective opinion. Sometimes I'll even get a second opinion from doctors or dentists. Why is it that Christians will not read Long's book or mine for a second opinion? I challenge them to do so, even if they might eventually disagree. At least they would be honestly looking at the other side. In this first half of his book Long clearly articulates concepts like "Cognitive Dissonance," "Impression Management Theory," and "Psychological Reactance Theory" and shows how believers defend their beliefs when faced with evidence to the contrary. One story he tells from the Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology is about an evangelical group who believed there was going to be a nuclear attack so they went into a bomb shelter for 42 days before coming out to find no nuclear attack had happened. So what did they conclude? Not that they were wrong. No sirree Bob. "Rather than accepting the obvious conclusion that had erred in their prediction, group members proclaimed that their beliefs had been instrumental in stopping the nuclear attack." (p. 48). Citing from the most authoritative books on persuasive psychology, one written by Robert B. Cialdini, titled "Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion" and another one written by Richard E. Petty and John Cacioppo, titled "Attitudes and Persuasion: Classic and Contemporary Approaches" Long proffers several other examples of this kind of thinking among what could be called as normal people who do the same thing with regard to everyday examples. Human beings truly are "unbelievably gullible and illogical creatures." We're more likely to buy unusual items when priced higher; we're more likely to buy items that offer coupons even though there is no price advantage; we're more likely to agree to absurd requests if preceded by ones of greater absurdity; we're more likely to consider attractive people to be more intelligent; and we're more likely to go along with the crowd if the crowd we hang with thinks a certain way because we want to fit in; and so on, and so on. (pp. 84, 88-89) All we must do is look at these things to realize that as humans we MUST be skeptical about what we believe! In my opinion these studies reinforce my claim that the default position is skepticism. To embrace this default position is to be an adult mature thinker with regard to what we believe. Instead of being mature, Long shows us that Christians do not seek to be skeptical about what they have been taught from their parents. They seek rather to defend what they believe. They are resistant to any contrary evidence. They seek to ignore it or look for any answer that might solve the cognitive dissonance this new evidence creates just to maintain their comfort zone, even if it is a non-answer, a glib answer, a far fetched answer. Long tells us that we believe both because of emotional reasons and because of logical reasons and he illustrates this with two people, one who has the fear of heights and another who thinks old skyscrapers are not as safe as newer ones. (pp. 76-77). The latter person has intellectual doubt about the older skyscrapers and must be given reasons to think otherwise. But the former person who has a fear of heights has an emotional problem. He knows people go up to the top of the skyscraper and come down safely. So we cannot convince him by showing him the steel beams, or the safety ratings of that building. He must face his fears. He must get to the first floor and look around. When he's comfortable he must go up to the second floor, and so on until he gets to the top. This may take a long time and he must be willing to face his fears. This, Long argues, is the plight of the believer, since he thinks there isn't any good evidence to believe in the first place, and I agree. But since believers think we're wrong about this I challenge them to consider the possibility they are wrong for a moment. Consider a more objective perspective coming from two former believers who have investigated the reasons to believe and found them seriously wanting. Given the overwhelming psychological data Long presents you've got to at least consider this as a real possibility, and if that's the case then Long says that to free you from your religious indoctrination "we must delve into the history of the individual's beliefs to find the avenue from which they originate." (p. 77) This echoes what I've said about the Outsider Test for Faith. When testing your beliefs as an outsider you need to revisit what the reasons were for adopting your faith in the first place. What were they? Most of them were clearly emotional, weren't they? Were they intellectual? If so, when looking back on these reasons do you now consider those initial reasons less than persuasive? Would those same reasons convince you to believe today or are they much too simplistic? What I argue is that you initially adopted your faith for less than good reasons but from that moment onward you see the world through colored glasses by which you now analyze and examine the evidence. YOU NEED TO TAKE THEM OFF, is what Long and I argue, as best as you can. Julia Sweeney told us she put on her "No God Glasses" for just a few seconds and looked around at the world as if God did not exist. Then she put them on for a minute and then put them on for an hour, and then a day. To me this would be just like climbing up that skyscraper Long wrote about. That's one way to face your fears. But fears they are, Long says, especially since believers think they have a "mind-reading god" always present who monitors their every thought. (p. 74). With such a mind-reading God, believers are just too fearful of being honest with themselves about their doubt. So they refuse to truly look at the evidence to the contrary. To such people Long suggests telling God you are sincerely going to look at the evidence "to determine if the Bible is really his word. Ask forgiveness in advance if you feel you must..." This is great advice. If God really cares he should allow you to be intellectually honest with yourself. All in all, as I said, I really liked this book and I highly recommend it. It is unusual to other comparable works because it seeks to articulate the real reasons why people believe and reveals the mental gymnastic contortions needed to defend ignorant and comfortable beliefs. This type of book just may go a long way to help Christians be honest about their delusional beliefs.
6 of 7 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Former Christian explains Christian reasoning,
By
This review is from: The Religious Condition: Answering And Explaining Christian Reasoning (Paperback)
Dr. Jason Long, Pharm.D., a former Christian, has written perhaps the best analysis and refutation of evangelical Christianity for laymen that is available today. The book, The Religious Condition, is Long's second volume. His first work, Biblical Nonsense, dealt more specifically with the Biblical text demonstrating the problems associated with thinking its the Word of God.
As a former Christian myself ([...]), I find that Long understands precisely how Christians think and how they argue. He knows this because he was one himself. For this reason, I think Long's book is more effective than some of the "new atheist" authors (i.e., Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, etc.). Since the "new atheists" are writing as outsiders to the faith, they don't have the same insights into Christianity that a former devout believer such as Long. Some will wave off Long's work because he is not a "biblical scholar" and does not quote all the current scholarship in the field. But Long is writing as an educated laymen who has experienced the indoctrination of Christianity and was able to free himself from it through logical and rational analysis. Long begins by showing how people typically come to believe in their religion. They are indoctrinated into it by their parents and/or the culture in which they are reared. He cites the American Religious Identification Survey of 2001 which shows that 84% of Americans belong to the same religion as their parents (p. 8). This is not surprising as parents are the most important formative element in a child's view of the world. For those who claim that they chose Christianity on their own, Long says: Individuals who claim to have made a rational, uninfluenced decision to join Christianity seem oblivious to how likely it was that they would walk right into the church. If that society had been propagating an Islamic viewpoint, the odds are that it would be right into the mosque (p. 9). Many people do not seem to realize how the beliefs of the society around them shape their own beliefs. Man is a social creature and needs to "fit in" to the society and culture in which he lives. This influences most people to adopt the religious ideas that are dominant in their society. After showing why many people have the religious beliefs they do (i.e., societal conditioning and indoctrination), Long explains why people do not give up these beliefs in spite of the evidence against them. He cites the psychological phenomena of "confirmation bias" and "cognitive dissonance." Long gives many examples of these two phenomena (pp. 21-52). Confirmation bias involves assuming the truth of one's beliefs and then working backwards to confirm it. This is clearly seen in virtually every Christian apologist's writings. Long argues: In short, either religious followers ignore evidence that is contradictory to their beliefs, or they superficially rationalize it. They interpret according to their preconceived notions and biases. When a skeptic points out a likely error, the Christian begins with the premise that it is not an error and then proceeds to defend by any means necessary what he is already convinced is the truth (p. 28). When confirmation bias does not resolve the problem, cognitive dissonance kicks in. Cognitive dissonance tends to either minimize the problem or try to divert attention away from the problem by emphasizing the many good points of the belief. In the next part of his treatise (pp, 53-160), Long gives examples of this bias and dissonance in the arguments of Christians as it relates to science and the Bible, philosophical "proofs" for God, and other issues. Christian apologists have "answers" to all the problems but the question is, are these answers really plausible or are they merely theoretically possible? In the last section of his book (pp. 161-245), Long addresses many of the objections he received from Christians concerning his first book, Biblical Nonsense. Long deals with these honestly and fairly and conclusively shows how bankrupt the Christian's arguments really are. This part of the book will be extremely helpful to skeptics who encounter these "Christian answers" on a regular basis. I highly recommend this book to believers and non-believers alike. For believers, it will help them understand how they came to believe what they do and why it is so difficult to honestly question those beliefs. For non-believers, it will give insight into how conservative Christians think and the best ways to argue against their beliefs. As I mentioned earlier, no one can refute a position better than someone who used to hold that position.
10 of 13 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
An interesting and informative read,
By
This review is from: The Religious Condition: Answering And Explaining Christian Reasoning (Paperback)
"The Religious Condition" takes a very interesting look at how individuals come to believe in religious dogma. The book explains how important of a role persuasive psychology plays in religion. To demonstrate how strong an individual's belief in religious dogma has become, the author uses some of the negative criticisms he received from actual readers of his previous book, Biblical Nonsense: A Review of the Bible for Doubting Christians. I enjoyed reading his responses to these criticisms and arguments as some of them were ridiculous and funny. His inclusion of these criticisms lends further support to his idea that persuasive psychology is a major tactic in convincing individuals to believe in some outrageous ideas.
I was lucky enough to be a proofreader before the book was published, and I am looking forward to reading this book again. I encourage anyone who wonders why some people hold on to religious dogma (even after it has been shown to be outrageous and improbable) to read this book. It will help you better understand why some people are so set in their beliefs.
Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
|
|
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Suggested Tags from Similar Products(What's this?)Be the first one to add a relevant tag (keyword that's strongly related to this product).
|
Sell a Digital Version of This Book in the Kindle Store
If you are a publisher or author and hold the digital rights to a book, you can sell a digital version of it in our Kindle Store.
Learn more
Customer Discussions
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|
Listmania!
|
|
