Powered by
Movable Type 3.2
Design by
Danny Carlton

Made with NoteTab

November 08, 2005

Book Review: No more Christian nice guy

This will be a longer review than before, because, while I enjoyed the book, and recommend it, there are several part I want to focus on. [translation: complain about]

The book starts out good, with the exception of the annoying habit many authors have of version shopping when quoting scripture. (find a version and like it, okay!) The first chapter gives a great description of how society and the modern church emasculate men.

The second chapter, however, weakens the book with some over exaggeration about Jesus' character as well as simply beating the point to death, then stomping on the grizzly remains, then stomping on its some more, then...you get the idea. 

Chapter three started off in the worst way possible...by quoting Cotton Mather. If there's anyone you need to avoid when trying to speak on Christian men asserting themselves, it's Cotton Mather. Mather is one of those behind the Salem Witch trials in which several confessed witches accused several confessed Christians of being witches. Mather along with a slave-trader posing as judge proceeded to kill off as many of the core of the New England church as they could get away with until finally being stopped by the General Court of Massachusetts. Even after that Mather used his position to molest young girls while pretending to be examining them. Mather single handedly turned back a crowd that was about to free the preacher George Burroughs, who was quoting Lord's prayer as the hangman's noose was tightened around his neck. As a witness recorded...

Mr. Cotton Mather, being mounted upon a Horse, addressed himself to the People, partly to declare, that he [George Burroughs] was no ordained minister, and partly to possess the People of his guilt; saying, That the Devil has often been transformed into an Angel of Light

Unfortunately the author didn't research who he quoted, otherwise he most surely wouldn't have used such a horrible example of the message he was trying to convey.

Chapter three also has a very one-sided view of the history of women's rights, portraying women as helpless victims of a male dominated society in previous centuries, which leads to a sad rationalization for Feminism. There is also a very false view of the role of fathers in family life before the “sexual revolution”.

He did make some good points on the Church's unbalanced preference to women, but later (page 56) misses the point of the husband's role in his wife's happiness.

After that the book improved. Chapter five had such excellent points I broke my long held rule of writing in books, to actually underline a passage. Chapter six (page 108) has an excellent definition of what sex is to men.

I do take issue with his assertion (on page 117) that Feminist had “legitimate” goals. I'm sure the KKK will claim they have “legitimate” goals as well..

Page 124 has a great explanation of the difference between self-defense and revenge and why the former, not the latter is what “turn the other cheek” is referring to.  Chapter seven end with some great advice to mothers, and an excellent comparison of male and female focus and how women try to shame men.

But in chapter eleven he gets into the old “neuron” nonsense of modern psycho-babble. The concept of “neurons” controlling thought was invented by Atheists, so they could rationalize away the reality of the soul as independent from the body.

Remember, I'm a grouch, so while I may be complaining about several parts of the book, as a whole I found it to be very much worthwhile, and am glad I had the opportunity to read it. I recommend it, but make sure you keep an independent mind.

Posted by Danny Carlton at November 8, 2005 05:26 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:


Post a comment

Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)

Security verification

Type the characters you see in the image above.