Here, Harris responds to the thousands of mostly indignant letters he got for writing "The End of Faith". We might assume he is attacking a stereotype of Christianity, as a fanatically intolerant relic of the Dark Ages. But it seems these Christian letter writers really did convince him, quoting chapter and verse, that their religion stands for bigotry.

To me, Harris's letter sounds roughly like an argument between two Americans, one a critical thinker, and the other some kind of super-patriot who actually insists that everything said or done in American history has been God's will, because America is God's country. That would roughly compare to claims of inerrancy for the Bible's vast record of ancient Middle Eastern civilizations.

Harris makes reasonable arguments against the delusions of thinking we speak for God. We would all applaud his efforts if he was a Saudi Arabian or Iranian doing likewise against Islamic fanaticism. Harris knows this, and uses our current fear of Islamists to discredit similarly fanatical Christians. But most Christians and Muslims both will feel he depicts their religions as believed by their stupidest members.

--author of "Different Visions of Love"

i really enjoyed this book. i had read his other book, the end of faith, and it was ok but this one hits it right on.

Anyone interested in religion and its role in today's society should read Harris brief, one sitting "Letter." Can you spend $8.80 in order to educate yourself on why so many millions worldwide reject religion? Hopefully, folks who buy this book and read it are on the fence about their beliefs. It appears that many of the reviewers here at Amazon had their minds made up prior to even picking up this book (and I must include myself in that group, but I've done quite a bit of reading lately on religion and society).

I was thinking this was going to be much more of an intellectual book with well thought out arguments. Sam Harris just did not deliver the book that I thought it was going to be, this book is full of holes and bad reasoning. Sam Harris, I thought you were smarter than this...

I have to say that I began reading this book as one critical to the point of view expressed. I thought it was an extraordinarily well-written letter, using good grammar and turns of phrase, that though smarmy and condescending, were still of the highest literary quality. I started sympathizing with the author, because I'll admit, as everyone should, that not all Christians are "tolerant" of other points of view (like Sarah Palin is! ... couldn't resist). Roundabout page 21, Harris's argument got a little thin around the 10 Commandments ... I thought he was overly grasping, just to doggedly make his point. He gradually minced backwards until he admitted that at least commandments 5-9 were good ... and later on, I believe he indirectly endorsed #10 (like oh, by the way, envy, jealousy, coveting, etc. can be bad). Soon after, on page 26 his argument got a little thin again ... I'll let you read it for yourself.

This micro-tome on the injuries and idiocy of organized religion finished stronger than it started out, but still lapsed occasionally into sneering and pure name-calling. Also, conspicuously missing is any more than a passing mention of atheist ills and wrongdoings. Harris, Dawkins and basically every atheist advocate (though rightly reproachful of religious mobs) all fail to acknowledge the murder records associated with famous atheists. Thomas Aquinous, Popes Pious X and XII were famous Christians mentioned ... let's talk about some atheists that really got the world's attention! Socialism (to use the general term, which includes[ed] Nazis, Marxists, Communists, Maoists, and a dozen other political ideals which hinge on a faithless society to govern. BTW, Hitler cannot be described as anymore than a nominal, non-practicing, non-observant child of Christian parents, who admired the tenants of at least 3 religions insofar as they would further justify his persecution of Jews and his championing of the master races), anyway, Socialism is responsible for far many more murders/deaths/kills than Christianity. China's Great Leap Forward alone ended in roughly 25MM premature dirt-naps. Part of this is organizational (governments have more horsepower when it comes to killing than do private entities like a religious group), and part of it is that most religions condemn killing without good cause. He makes the irrefutable point that many groups of Christians, Muslims, Hindus and myriad others still have killed, though fails to mention there has always been dissent among them as well, showing a lack of dedication to religious killings overall ... socialist atheists haven't even this mild influence, and are thus left to depend on the (Harris's atheist assertion) intellectually obvious "morals" non-religious people can arrive at without the influence of religion. Nice job, Stalin! Way to misuse or ignore the Harris System to kill over 14MM (just like Christians, Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists have ignored the basics of religion ... and there I was thinking atheists were superior?!?!). Oh yeah, and Harris thinks science and religion don't mix ... this is where I stare at the screen and contemplate what would happen if the most integral part of science were faith, or the keystone of religion were emperical proof. Thanks for the head's up, Harris.

I find his framing the whole abortion issue around 3-day old blastocysts, used for stem cell research to be especially ludicrous yet prima facia ingenious. If you let Harris couch the argument as such, you really are missing out on the whole partial-birth thing ... oh yeah, that ... the thing that makes most people want to puke. I have seen folks get up and leave the discussion, the table and the room when the details of why partial-birth abortions are murder come up. These are pro-choice individuals without the stomach to fly the flag of their "convictions". I've heard them say, "If men had babies, abortion would be sacrosanct!" While a memorable and catchy phrase, this is not a valid argument any more than, "If Africans had reciprocally traded in white slaves, then slavery would've been OK." It has an air of fairness about it, but entirely misses the point. The harvest of thousands of petri-dish-blastocysts (though troubling to some) isn't really what the abortion battle is about. It is, however, viewed by both sides as a crucial stepping stone to partial-birth.

We religious nuts (which I'm actually not ... not even a moderate or religious liberal; I use this phrase only to identify with the thinking of the actual church folk, and to satirize Harris's caricature of believers as somehow mentally inept), anyway, we nuts aren't st-st-stoopid. We realize the benefits of stem cell research, and know all about the roughly 50% of all pregnancies being naturally aborted. We also know that a fetus torn limb from limb on the mother's whim is a grotesque miscarriage and misapplication of morals, and even writing about it makes me want to get up and leave the room . I know partial-birth bans are a stepping stone to blanket bans ... I also know framing the abortion issue around blastocysts is a chicken-poo and small minded tach, and is thusly receiving all the respect it deserves here in my review.

Finally, Harris closes with a moderately smug and again condescending entreat for all readers to please read up on the topic and join him and the other culturally enlightened souls who despise organized religion. The language is more than a little demeaning and harsh, which I sort of let slide, and his logic is mostly in step with the jack-booted rank and file atheists who want to tear down monuments and waste public dollars making uncultured and rustic rubes like me feel inferior. To rephrase, it gets a little thin more than once. I like that this book makes one think, and in that, I would say Harris enjoys total success. He isn't a bad writer or some demon-man (as far as I can tell). In short, nice little book with good points scattered throughout. If you finish it, and say to yourself, "I agree with everything HE said", then I would say, "GET right on outta town!"

Just as so much Christian rhetoric is merely preaching to the choir, so too is Harris' little letter. The new wave of atheists, and not the most intellectual of the bunch, will rate this 5 stars and applaud just as blindfolded Christians will do the same for so many of "their" books.

Get out your google and you will find critical reviews not only from the religious but from the most sophisticated atheists, just as you will for the work of Hitchens, Dawkins and the rest of the new crew. I couldn't help but laugh when I read The God Delusion, and many atheists couldn't help but wince.

But I digress. I am Christian. Let's get that out of the way. I am not the stereotypical "moral majority," "right-wing," Bush lover or anything. Just a Christian who tries to be like and follow Christ. So, now that that is out of the way, I will just say this: I have been challenged by many atheist books (and books of other faiths) and have consequently been forced to wrestle with a variety of issues. This book was not challenging, threatening (except for the overtly communist and liberty threatening tones), or in any other way discomforting to me as a Christian. For one, there is absolutely nothing new in here. Besides that, the logical fallacies, misuse (knowingly or unknowingly) of references and statistics as well as the amateurish treatment of history are all uninspiring.

For the most part, this book will be railed against by Christians just being defensive (and probably fearful that their faith won't stand up to these tired rhetorical arguments) and staunchly defended by atheist who are so ignorant as to think that anything in here constitutes a death knell for faith. Oh well.

I'm giving it one star, not because I am a Christian who hates atheists or is afraid of science or some other stupid notion. It gets one star because, even as an atheist I would not think this book accomplishes much other than to preach to the choir with the same type of rhetoric and device that I abhor preachers using in churches. The scholarship is lazy and relies too much on the laziness and trust of the reader.

While they are not perfect either, for a critical look from a more consistently Christian perspective, one might check out Letter From a Christian Citizen by Doug Wilson and The Return of the Village Atheist by Joel McDurmon. Again, I know they are not perfect either, but they do help to demonstrate some of the misconceptions, logical flaws, and slight of hand attempted by Harris.

This is one of the first atheism-oriented books I read once I realized that I was probably an atheist and that it was ok to read books on the subject to learn more. If I remember correctly, it was #4, after The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins (great), God Is Not Great by Christopher Hitchens (I couldn't get into it, even though I really liked his writing), and Harris' own The End of Faith (mostly pretty good).

This book was written as a direct response to the criticism Harris received from The End of Faith. It's written directly to "Christian America", and attempts to address the biggest issues and apparent omissions from his previous book. As a result, it reads more like a conversation than a lecture, which really helps.

Though I enjoyed The End of Faith, I found Letter to a Christian Nation to be much easier to read, to understand, and to recommend to others. Harris addresses specific questions that you commonly hear when theists are questioning the atheist point of view (as they should, even though they rarely apply similar questioning to their own religion), and in a calm, matter-of-fact way.

In fact, this book seems more mellow and casual when compared to The End of Faith. This helps it a great deal, because the book can't be as easily dismissed as the angry ranting of a "militant atheist" (a term which seems to refer to any atheist who doesn't just sit down, shut up, and let the status quo do what they want).

The best part is that it's short. It's only 144 pages long (or 2 hours in audiobook form), which makes it much easier to digest for the common reader. Harris doesn't ramble or tell unnecessary anecdotes or quote other books very often. He specifically focuses on Christianity (as if the title of the book wasn't a big clue) in order to tailor this book to the general US public. If you want to read his opinions on other religions, he covers them at great length (especially Islam) in The End of Faith.

I listened to the audiobook version on my MP3 player, which I think is a great way to go. The narrator is very good, and either believes the material he's speaking, or he's an excellent actor. His calm voice lacks any venom that could distort what Harris is really trying to say.

The best thing about this book is that it's actually something you can give to your believer friends to help them understand why you can't believe in God. It specifically addresses the common Christian throughout its pages. Will it convert them? Probably not, unless they're already on the fence. And true believers won't be swayed by any of the arguments Harris makes, of course. But most rational believers will probably come away with a better understanding of who atheists really are, and they'll probably never look at their own religion the same way again.

[...]

Sam Harris' "Letter To A Christian Nation" is a short, simple essay that took only about two hours to get through; yet those two hours provide a concise summary of the principles of atheism and why (according to Harris) a religion-oriented society is outdated and unnecessary in the modern civilized world of the 21st century. This little book, a followup to Harris' "The End Of Faith," became a New York Times best-seller...and if a better book was written especially to piss off the vast majority of mainstream Americans has been written in the past decade or so, I haven't heard of it. This is Harris' real objective in this book: to make you angry, to make you think about the principles of faith, and to question the absurdities built into religion in general. When taken as a generalized argument against religious faith, the book succeeds pretty darn well.

However, during my reading of the book, I found myself thinking of little ways that would probably be used by a critic of the book to oppose and disassemble some of the individual points Harris puts forth. For instance, one of the reasons why he disdains the Bible stems from the way that Biblical scholars casually toss aside the parts of the book that they don't like, especially the parts that contradict their own beliefs and philosophical points; then he does precisely the same thing near the beginning of the book when he points out that the most completely non-violent and altruistic religious dogma ever devised (at least in his eyes) is that of Jainism, a belief system from India that influenced Mahatma Ghandi. Harris briefly mentions that Jainism isn't perfect and it has its bad parts, too, but he casually puts that fact aside after bringing it up. If he were basing his entire book on Jainism, then he could be faulted for using this rationale; but that's not the major point of this essay, so I'll forgive him for it.

Less easy to take straight is the way he argues in favor of abortion by describing an embryo as a "blastocyst" - not because I disagree with him, but because he falls for one of the more common logical traps used in an emotional debate such as this one: invent a new name to call your opponent, so as to make it easier to see the opposition as less than human, and thus make the easier to dismiss. This is seen regularly in the abortion battles, as pro-lifers refer to pro-choicers as "baby-killing pro-choice yahoos." A seasoned anti-abortion veteran would no doubt ridicule Harris' use of the term "blastocyst," as it takes away from the overused pro-life tactic of using emotional buzzwords to describe the fetus ("baby," "innocent life").

These are not the only details in the book that can be countered; they're just two examples of many presented in the slim book (less than one hundred pages). I don't disagree with Harris on these points, either. I simply note his that his arguments are not infallible, and this is why "Letter To A Christian Nation" has upset so many people to the point that they feel they have to respond (often with threats and Bible quotes). But the flaws in Harris' arguments do not detract from the overall conclusion he reaches: that religious thinking is dangerous in a world where many, many people have access to modern-day technology, because it is standing as a major obstacle to the advancement of science - especially the development of scientific methods and treatments that can help many people worldwide.

As for the book's intended role as a new weapon in the ongoing war between religion and science (which is what many of the more idiotic controversies in modern-day Western society boil down to), Harris does make some logical fallacies at times. These fallacies, naturally, are what his critics seize upon in their published responses to the book...of which there have been at least five so far. The fact that so many people have taken the time to attack Harris and reply specifically to his book shows that he has certainly succeeded in forcing them to think. I consider that a point in his favor. What I consider even more amusing are the ways his self-appointed opponents attack his arguments - often using the very same flawed arguments Harris disproves. Go onto Amazon and read the responses to his book, especially the "one-star reviews" for the book, and count how many of them use quotes from the Bible to prove the Bible is true, and that God exists. I only wish I had the capability to outrage and troll so many readers in the logical and (mostly) cool-headed manner that Harris has done with this book.

BRAVO!!! This is one the most clearly argued and important cultural critiques of the last decade. Mr. Harris gives elegant voice to the concerns many of us have over the power that modern religious groups wield to alter not only history but our daily lives. We need many more rational narrative voices like that of Mr. Harris in contemporary America to expose dangerous religiosity for the divisive force that it is.

Short, sweet, and to the point.

As would be expected, the book generated lots of polarized reviews/comments.

This book's message is the most impotant one of our time and should be read by all of you religious nutter Americans. As well as all the other religious nutters (not just christians either) around the world. But it'll never happen, you'll write me off as a heathen who just bought himself a ticket straight to hell and you'll continue to dilude yourself and wage war in the name of your magic invisible man in the sky and his derranged set of ethics.

To be frank, Sam Harris is ignorant. I don't claim much knowledge, but I know enough to know he is wrong. Anyone who says that Martin Luther King's prime "influence" wasn't the Gospel message, and that the Church aspect of the civil rights movement wasn't the greatest faith based movement in history, I won't listen. And Ghandi was animated not only by his faith but also principally influenced by the teaching of Tolstoy, and Tolstoy by the Gospel message. Ghandi, though not a "christian," was one of the greatest christian teachers. And if we are looking for modern men who embody the Prophetic witness of the old testament, it is these three men. Sam Harris is one who's brain stopped developing after freshman year of high school. So, Mr. Harris, Shut up!

I agree with Mr. Harrs on all his points. I have read these points before, and I still stand by them.

Regardless of how correct Mr. Harris is, his book misses the mark. As a letter to Christians, it fails miserably. I would be surprised to learn of any Christian reading this book and saying, "Oh, I've been doing it all wrong then."

The reason for this is Mr. Harris's tone. As an atheist, even I cringed at tactlessness. I would imagine that a Christian--often someone who holds his belief near and dear to his heart--would overlook the good points Mr. Harris made and simply see, "Dumb Christian, dumb Christian, dumb Christian." This book will not persuade anyone. The only people who would see Mr. Harris's wisdom are those who already recognize it. Ironically, Mr. Harris is "preaching to the choir." The book does succeed in cataloguing the many flaws of religion; what took me several months of discussion forums and web surfing can be found concisely packaged in "Letter to a Christian Nation."

Although, I must concede that perhaps Mr. Harris was not trying to convince Christians of anything. In his conclusion, Mr. Harris states that this book is "the product of failure." As a society, we have failed to prevent superstition and mysticism from governing our lives. In that regard, this book boils down to simply being a rant. There is nothing in this book that you can't find in the discussion forums. But then, little in the forums achieve the eloquence of Mr. Harris, so that is in the book's favor.

In summary, this is a great book for non-Christians, who can seek affirmation from someone who has been in their shoes. It is a good book for Christians too, but not many Christians will realize this fact over the distracting cries of "dumb Christians". I can only suggest that a Christian try to read it from another point of view. As Mr. Harris points out, a Christian can easily see why Islam is clearly a false religion. It doesn't take a very large step to view Christianity in the same light.

At the very least, any Christian who succeeds in not throwing the book away in disgust may have something new to ponder over--something that could either eliminate his false faith or make his true faith even stronger.

This "letter" is short, sweet and deliciously direct. Harris comes out swinging and sustains his rational assault on the contradictions and absurdities of religion and religious belief from start to finish.

That said, such an aggressive approach will likely be ineffective with religious believers as it will instantly drive them to a defensive posture. Think of a cornered animal; they will respond as a threat to their very existence. Most of us were indoctrinated as children to feel dirty by merely thinking that maybe it's all nonsense, and that's not an easy thing to shake.

This book is a compact expose (compared to the more rigorous analyses by Hitchens and Dawkins) that will confirm the conclusions of unbelievers (preaching to the choir, if you will), but even those who are on the fence, who deep down feel that they've been hoodwinked, are reluctant to come out and say "I don't believe in God." Depending on your family, business, and cultural environment, admitting that you are an atheist can be a social death sentence.

The charlatans who administer the world's religions have too much to lose by doing anything less than unreservedly repudiating logical arguments such as Harris'. I hate to admit it, but I'm afraid that their worldwide influence and control are so pervasive that the heroes of reason who would pull back the curtain on their fraud will always be popularly perceived as evil, when in fact the opposite is true.

it comes to no surprise that these anti-religious loons are trying to convert as many people to atheism and humanism when events like 9/11 were sparked by religious fundamentalism. It is fundamentalism that is the problem, not religion itself. However, these people who have limited understanding of God seek to do damage which is not supposed to be the role of individuals but rather a collective of people who seek to prove that they are right and everyone else who is not like them is wrong. These secular fundamentalists are no different nor any better than their religious counterpart, I find it interesting how much they have in common yet they hate each other.

This war on religion should be more so focused upon the war against fundamentalism, not religion, nor God. These inspired texts have caused much conflict, no one can deny it, but they have also cause people to reach potentials never before reached. Could it be that fundamentalism is the problem being that fundamentalism is what has caused religion to be used for war and personal gain? These critics of religion should be willing to help their religious heretical counterparts in breaking down dogmatic fundamentalism. Instead they dont, they attack all of religiosity as if it was the full problem. These books and others like them are based on ignorance.

After reading this book I have gathered two conclusions pertaining to Sam Harris. One, he is a very good writer and should teach an English class on rhetoric. Two, while Harris is at Stanford it may do him some good to take a couple theological classes. Below are the reasons I came up with for my assertions. Because time is short I will only give a few of my reasons.

Harris begins the book declaring that Christians are atheists towards all other religions. Well this isn't exactly true. In fact if you would take Islam, Judaism, and Christianity what you would see is remarkable similarities, it is the atheist who is in fact the odd man out. When a Christian rejects Islam we are not rejecting everything about Islam. However when one asserts atheism they are rejecting all components of religion. Religions accept and understand why 93% of those around the world have some instinctive sense that God exists. Some atheists meanwhile fail to shrug of their childhood tendencies while calling each other "Brights".

Harris proceeds in addressing Old Testament Ethics. One thing is beyond clear is the idea that Harris believes the only approach to hermeneutics is a static approach. Yet from the time of Augustine through the Reformation there have been theologians who have questions this approach. My point is his entire argument on Old/New Testament Ethics is ill-relevant for those who do not take a static approach to scripture. For those who take a redemptive hermeneutics approach, such as William Webb who wrote, "Slaves, Women, and Homosexuality", would find Harris' argument a Strawman. Peter Enns and his book, "Inspiration and Incarnation" also allows for a different hermeneutic approach that deals with the Old Testament stories and the science behind them, Harris ignores this hermeneutic approach as well. These approaches are held by many Christians not simply because it allows them to escape Harris' static approach but quite frankly make the most sense if we consider who God is and how he speaks to those around him. If Harris wants to take on the task of addressing Old-Testament ethics he needs to not be lazy about it and address the hermeneutics of scripture.

Harris then attacks the leaders of Christianity suggesting that it is their faith that caused them to do such acts. Pertaining to Christianity it is beyond obvious that all followers of Christ are sinners, what Harris has to do is show how Luther, Calvin, and Augustine were not products of their culture but rather Christ taught the need for inquisitions to be done by people who follow him. Harris does no such thing. Then Harris goes on to suggest that Hitler may have been a Christian or sympathized with Christianity during one of his speeches in his early years. After reading up on Hitler this was more than obvious that this was not Hitler's true ideas but rather political rhetoric. Here is a private quote that show his true nature.

"The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity. Bolshevism is Christianity's illegitimate child. Both are inventions of the Jew. The deliberate lie in religion was introduced into the world by Christianity. Bolshevism practices a lie of the same nature, when it claims to bring liberty to men, only to enslave them....The decisive falsification of Jesus's doctrine was the word of St. Paul."

So it seems Harris is stuck in a serious problem. Here we see Hitler AND Stalin catering toward materialism/atheism as their compass for decision making. Yet there is a book that has come out today called, "The Plot to Kill God", by Paul Froese. The nice thing is the Bolsheviks were good at record keeping.

He then makes the "Red State/Blue State" argument. Name any city with a high crime rate and you will quickly see that those cities aren't loaded with Republican mayors and Republican city councilmen. Can anyone say Detroit? However this is well besides the point. No Christian should say atheists, in general, are more dangerous than Christians. If they do they don't understand the grace associated with Christianity. And this lead me to my last point.

Harris spends a large amount of time claiming objective morality and the errors of morality in Christianity. However this is where he is weakest. No where does he give an ontological basis for his morality. Harris claims pleasure/pain creates a basis morality. Okay, who's pleasure and who's pain and on what basis am I obligated to concern myself with someone else's nerve endings? There is no basis and this is where his book stinks like rotten eggs. He brings up slavery so I will use slavery as my example. Given atheism where am I obligated to concern myself with the slave.

The point is beyond clear. And for those who were "shocked and awed" by Harris and are no longer "devout" Christians I truly wonder what your definition of devout is?

I read this in about an hour at my library; it's very short, but gets to the point: the dangers of Christianity, mainly fundamentalism. So Christians, read this! It won't take long, and it'll give you some things to think about.

Like all good replacements for that awkward moment when you suddenly discover you haven't any toilet paper, Sam Harris comes to the rescue.

I must admit, I've never wiped my rear-end on any atheist books before, but I liked the feeling so much (and it really cleaned it well) that I may even try a Hitchens or a Dawkins to use in place of the errant bog paper.

I would recommend extensive arse wipeage with this book, because while the arguments aren't worth a crap, this book can certainly clear up my crap in a very satisfying way.

I still think he should have put the Charmin bear on the front though!

As a once devout Christian, I wish I'd found this book much sooner after leaving the church. Harris does a wonderful job of pointing out all of the problems with the church, its mindset, and the hypocrisy of picking and choosing which parts of the bible you want to follow. He makes harsh and concise points concerning abortion, suffering, and all of the sticky areas that Christians like to talk around instead of addressing. I didn't find it to be hateful, instead I was stunned at the truth of his words and wondered why I didn't see any of these issues in the church earlier. A favorite of mine, easily read in a couple of hours.

Unlike Dawkins and Hitchens, whose conceit is such that I can't take seriously anything their saying, Harris gets his point across quite well with a minimum of sarcasm. He is to the point with issues that should concern all Christians, and it isn't filled with the same hatred or anger of a lot of similar works.

I have not read 'The End of Faith' but I plan to now. A friend of mine who didn't like this book says that one is even better.

A well-prepared little book with a well-rounded overlook at some fallacies behind religion. Harris tackles issues surrounding religions in the format of a letter. It is a slight book that is quickly read, but don't underestimate the power behind these few words. Harris says, "While believing strongly, without evidence, is considered a mark of madness or stupidity in any other area of our lives, faith in God still holds immense prestige in our society. Religion is the one area of our discourse where it is considered noble to pretend to be certain about things no human being could possibly be certain about." Everyone should read this book. Christians, Muslims, and others should at least be open to considering other ideas before rejecting them. Harris has rejected religion, but he has not done so without great thought. In his summary, he states, "Clearly, it is time we learned to meet our emotional needs without embracing the preposterous."

Very well written, though I think Richard Dawkins is a level above Sam Harris.
I think ultimately for me will this book be read by the people who should read it, i.e. the religious moderates and liberals, the fanatical will of course dismiss it.
I think its pleasing the increased level of discussion, with Bill Maher's documentary coming out later this year, there is hope for the reasonable and rationale.

I read this book in about two days because it was so good, yes, I know some can read it in one sitting, but I'm fairly busy. Anyway, it was nice to read something that mirrors my sentiments on this topic almost exactly. Sam Harris isn't apologetic in his critique of religion and I think this is a breath of fresh air to simply call hypocrisy for hypocrisy. One thing I did like is that Harris didn't single out just Christianity, but he actually goes over religion in general. I think this is because he didn't want to give out any illusions that Christianity is the sole problem religion out there, it's not, it's all religious conceptions.

One point that I hadn't really given much thought was the financial perspective. Which is funny because I have a degree in finance and economics. Anyway he brought up the concept about the untold millions of dollars that are going into these Christian organizations. Most of this goes to support the infrastructure of the church, you'd be surprised how little goes to charitable organizations. I used to look at Church accounts in an old job and it shocked me how their balance continued to grow versus how much was actually leaving. Some non-profit organization that is? Another point is that there's a drastic opportunity cost. Could you imagine if people took the money they normally give to the church and either saved it on their own, or donated it to medical research to cure something like cancer or come up with a vaccine for AIDS. It's such a crazy notion to think that people willingly give a portion of their income to an organization that is bent on informing them that they are all sinners and none of them are good enough for God, but, hey, he loves you anyway, so give us your money. That's just asking to be beaten down on a regular basis and happily give them your money. Doesn't this fall into a notion of a possible pathological disorder?

One aspect I'm sort of surprised at is that Harris didn't attack the Biblical history. Frankly it doesn't really matter if Christians follow a creationist policy, the fact is most of those stories are borrowed from ancient societies. The Sumerian tale of the flood greatly predates the Bible and Noah's real name was Ziusudra. You'd be surprised at the parallels. Even the Garden of Eden parallel story can be found in a tale about Inanna. Most Christians don't care to acknowledge this cherry picking of other religious stories, but they are happy to cherry pick the "good" quotes out of their Bible to justify that their God is actually only loving and perfect... but we'll ignore that thing about slavery now won't we? Further on the historical note it's pretty clear cut that Moses didn't write the first five books. Aside from blatant borrowing, the Bible was written down in 600 B.C. during the Israelites captivity in Babylon. Yes, the Torah was written in Babylon. Historians figure the Exodus with Moses happened in the vicinity of 1300 B.C. and it's pretty clear he died during that book, so how he wrote it in 600 B.C. is beyond me. I've listened to many Christian preachers and they all purport that Moses wrote the Torah. Did it ever occur to anyone he died before it was finished? In fact it recounts his death and keeps going, it doesn't just abruptly end. This is a very strange literary technique, the dead continuing to write a book...

Another point I'm surprised he didn't attack is the blatant proof that God is an unjust deity. If you read through this text it's made abundantly clear in the New Testament that if you don't follow Jesus you will not be saved. In fact you are doomed to suffer eternal death. This doesn't matter if you are actually a good person, a wonderful and loving father to your children; if you don't follow Jesus you are done. I can't physically think of any concept or proof more unjust than this. Naturally people will quote Pascal, but it's an aberrant proof. Harris blatantly points out that people DO have something to lose and that religion is detrimental to others on a global scale. Maybe it's not God, maybe it's the followers, because they simply can't deal with religion responsibly. It must be imposed on others. I just don't understand this mindset and if God truly is a loving and caring being then the actions of his followers should be making him weep constantly and not an atheist that doesn't rape, murder, and honors his neighbor. But the faithful don't look at it this way, it's the atheist that is the problem, not the child molester who believes and can have his sins forgiven despite his problems.

This book is an outcry to a nation that sorely needs it. Where science is constantly on trial and regardless if science doesn't have a ready answer means God did it. This is a huge problem, more people need to read this book and understand it. Do NOT cherry pick this text like so many love to do with their religious texts. It must be taken in as a whole, much like the Bible should be read, but most people don't read the Bible so they don't understand the hypocritical concepts Harris brings up on a textual level. I know the Christian militant front will decry this review, but I urge you to read about intellectual honesty when it comes to this topic.

This is the calm rational, well thought out response to the rhetoric of the American Fundamentalist movement, and all it's grinning pernicious absurdity.

Sam Harris has written a wonderful little book. It is short and to the point! His arguments are clearly stated and he includes numerous concrete examples to illustrate his points.

I just finished Harris's short book, read on the recommendation of my atheist boyfriend. I am not a fundamentalist anything, including a fundy atheist. Overall, the book is a decent, thought-provoking read, but there are many flaws.

Harris paints with much too broad a brush, not allowing for the wide variations in beliefs within Christianity as well as within other religions. Having personal friends who are Muslim, and who are peace-loving, compassionate people, his words about Muslims are particularly offensive if taken to heart. One can hope, and I suspect, that like most authors he's also out to sell books. The short, fast, extreme style is much more likely to get bought and read than a longer, more thoughtful treatise.

In science, there are sometimes shades of gray, where sometimes X happens and sometimes Y . . .but in Harris's book, it's all black and white. Too bad, as I would liked to have seen a more thorough and thoughtful book on this topic.

Overall, though, it's worth reading.

There are many examples and claims throughout this book, however, over and over again they are consistently incomplete and not well thought out. One example i will go over is the issue on slavery. Now if a person were to read the passage in Leviticus 25 regarding slavery, he or she might be offended if they did not understand slavery in those days. slavery existed in a very different form in those days compared to what we have understood slavery to become in the past few hundred years. below is a more detailed explanation of this:

"Many see this as the Bible condoning all forms of slavery. What many people fail to understand is that slavery in Biblical times was very different from the slavery that was practiced in the past few centuries in many parts of the world. The slavery in the Bible was not based exclusively on race. People were not enslaved because of their nationality or the color of their skin. In Bible times, slavery was more of a social status. People sold themselves as slaves when they could not pay their debts or provide for their family. In New Testament times, sometimes doctors, lawyers, and even politicians were slaves of someone else. Some people actually chose to be slaves so as to have all their needs provided for by their master.

The slavery of the past few centuries was often based exclusively on skin color. Black people were considered slaves because of their nationality - many slave owners truly believed black people to be 'inferior human beings' to white people. The Bible most definitely does condemn race-based slavery. Consider the slavery the Hebrews experienced when they were in Egypt. The Hebrew were slaves, not by choice, but because they were Hebrews (Exodus 13:14). The plagues God poured out on Egypt demonstrate how God feels about racial slavery (Exodus 7-11). So, yes, the Bible does condemn some forms of slavery. At the same time, the Bible does seem to allow for other forms of slavery. The key issue is that the slavery the Bible allowed for in no way resembled the racial slavery that plagued our world in the past few centuries.

Another crucial point is that the purpose of the Bible is to point the way to salvation, not to reform society. The Bible often approaches issues from the inside-out. If a person experiences the love, mercy, and grace of God, receiving His salvation - God will reform his soul, changing the way he thinks and acts. A person who has experienced God's gift of salvation and freedom from the slavery of sin, as God reforms his soul, he will realize that enslaving another human being is wrong. A person who has truly experienced God's grace will in turn be gracious towards others. That would be the Bible's prescription for ending slavery."

Now, given this further explanation you can easily see how Sam Harris was incomplete in his argument in this book regarding slavery. Many other of his examples can be refuted the same way. i thought this one was worthy of an immediate correction due to it's lack of research and misuse of context to which it was taken from. People, you must do you own studies. This book will not give you all the answers you need. All this books teaches is arguments that are incomplete in thought and research, hence why it is only 144 pages long. You could easily write a 200 page book on slavery and the Bible alone. Any questions? let me know.

Harris had written this book primarily for secularists so as to defend against the threats posed by the Christian Right. Unlike "The End of Faith", he says little about other religions, in particular Islam. This book was shorter and more about what I am familiar with.

Preaching to the choir? Undoubtedly to large extent but unlike "The End of Faith" I do not expect many secularists will feel he is unfairly extreme: this time he seems to be speaking well to address the concerns of many of us including those liberal and moderate Christians (and even conservative Christians) who do not feel well served by the political activities of the Christian Right.

Harris comments that "atheism" isn't any more necessary as a label than having to have "words for people who doubt that Elvis is still alive...". Anti-Elvisians? But would it be rude to the memory of Elvis, who, despite reported problems, was indeed a great performer? I did see and enjoy his movies. Perhaps Elvisism deserves founding, perhaps it already has been. Perhaps I could become a Elvisian apologist. Just show one of the movies or concerts and I'd have no trouble finding believers? Would you join? Pledge? Agree with me that Elvis not only lived but that I could speak for him. And that Elvis did not want your children learning about evolution in public schools. Or maybe gravity.

Foolish? Harris writes toward the end of this book "Clearly, it is time we learned to meet our emotional needs without embracing the preposterous". Harris expresses understanding: he writes that he does not "doubt that your acceptance of Christ may have coincided with positive changes in your life". He expresses no wish to discount those experiences but points out that many people now and before have had what seemed to him similar experiences in many ways, religious and otherwise. But he also believes that such experiences can be misinterpreted as one may do for those of other faiths. Claims that one's own religion is that different seems extraordinary and, as Carl Sagan popularized, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".

I, for one, can see no good reason why I would deny that Elvis lives if credible existence of that existed, especially if it promised me some life after death in Blue Hawaii, an opportunity to frolic with a youthful Ann-Margaret for eternity. I would gladly read the books of Elvisian apologists if I felt uncertain. It would all seem silly if there were not efforts underway at this moment to discredit evolution in public school science textbooks and even to establish a Christian nation with Old Testament laws.

Harris says it far better than I can, he's forceful but succinct (less than 100 pages). He concludes with a list of ten recommended book (I've only five of them to date) that would make for good next reading steps. You may also consider registering with the Brights' Network (see their web site) and supporting the National Center for Science Education (NCSE, also see their web site, they defend the teaching of evolution in public schools ).

Sam Harris' book "Letter to a Christian Nation" is a must read for everyone who calls him or herself a Christian. It shows how narrow-minded and unscientific we often are, and how we are perpetuating the false beliefs that actually prevent us from becoming aware of the infinite Divine Presence within ourself and everywhere.
Well written.

For the few who are willing and honest enough to watch Mr. Harris' arguments melt away as they are put to the fire, I challenge you to read a rebuttal to this sad and ultimately weak work. In 'The End of Reason', Dr. Ravi Zacharias declares "the emperor has no clothes" and then proceeds to dismantle Mr. Harris' arguments one by one all the while avoiding the venomous prejudice that so characterized 'Letter to a Christian Nation'. If you aren't afraid to take an honest look at both sides, 'The End of Reason' is a must read.

I am not going to go into how intelligent I want to make myself sound on a review or sit here and point fingers and say you are an idiot. What bothered me about the book was not what Mr. Harris tries to do, it is the response he got from "christians." Christians are their own worst enemy and I don't think anymore books on atheism or about the lack of god need to be written. They will destroy themselves, while the actual christians will be worshipping god in the way that he instructed them to do. I don't want to say what my faith is and I don't want to point out errors he made in the text, all I got to say is Mr. Harris has every single right to say what he wants, no matter what he believes as long as he doesn't push it on anyone. I would hate to be living in a time where information like this was not available to us. I think he doesn't have a clear understanding as to what christianity is, but that doesn't matter. I am glad he and other athiests wrote their books. We never want to supress anything intellectual. Thank you for the book.

I must admit that I had some reservations picking up 'Letter to a Christian Nation'. I enjoyed 'The End of Faith', but was surprised to see how short the 'Letter' was. Regardless,...whoever you are...you need to read this book. Harris gets right to the point. His letter is critical...to be sure...but it is also an expression of hope. Harris is a master of identifying the contradictions of religious dogmas and the problems of religious diversity. The Letter slices through nonsense like a Ginsu! Highly recommended!

an excellent work accurately outlining the attitudes in america today. unfortunately, those who should read it, ie: christians, probably won't.

Perhapse all religions fail too. Why shouldn't this book become required reading material in high school? I don't know. But, it should be read by all individuals. It's true that morality is not attached to religious dogma. Atheists are just as likely to make moral decisions based on personal convictions not convictions tied to their paticular religiosity. This is Sam Harris's second book; he is an exceptional writer; I hope he continues to write other books on the same direction. In this tiny book, Sam Harris discusses why fundamental religions (not just Christianity) are causing a serious problem in this country both educationally (by promoting such things as creationism which allows people to base science on the bible's narrow view of how the world was created by a supreme being) and threatening further scientific development (by letting religious dogma on certain matters as stem cell research take a very sharp regression). If we don't forge ahead we will cause a significant deterioration of our civilization in the name of religion; these are but a few themes of this remarkable book.

Yes, let's defame those stinkin' Christians! They have to be discredited so we can take away their rights and get them out of society so they won't bother nice, decent atheists with their crazed zealous notions about trying to help their fellow man avoid damnation.

That's basically the gist of this book. If the author wasn't a little man of even littler importance, this repugnant work could be to militant atheists what Mein Kampf was to National Socialists. This book certainly has a similar slanted, propagandistic, delegitimize-those-we-don't-like approach to things.

We're supposed to be better in this country than books like this.

I was not at all impressed with this little book. Yes, the author did make several valid points, but virtually none of those good points, need to contradict the true teachings of G-d's Torah (Old Testament). Most of the time, the author was either vague, or simply showed his ignorance, distorting what G-d and His Torah are all about. If Sam Harris is genuinely interested in the truth, he should consult his local competent Orthodox Rabbi, who would be able to easily refute just about any and every point that this author thinks he made.

A must read for all Americans with more than a few brain cells. Sam Harris stakes out how crazy our society is for putting so much effort, stock, and energy, into Christian religious beliefs, and how such an enterprise is bad for all of us. Any objective assessment demonstrates that Christian beliefs are a hodge- podge of stories, than in any other context should have as much relevance to society as fairy tails. However so many, who subscribe to these beliefs, force their cherry picked standards from bibles they have not read, from codes that are clearly man- made, in a way that is antithetical to a democratic society. Sam wants Christians to wake up and take a rational look at themselves and lays out the case that they have no more legitimacy to impose their fantastical delusions upon America than any other religious belief system. This little book is a clarion call for everyone who is sick of the Christian right forcing their agenda onto the public discourse.

When this book starts to out-sell the Bible, then I'll say there is some creedance in it. But until then, this is just another soured individual unsuccessfully trying to topple the truth in the Bible. This book will be relegated to the bargin bin in a year.

Mr. Harris makes a very important point very effectively. At our nation's founding, a great many of the people had a consciousness of how important it was not to deny the freedom of conscience to anyone. The history of Europe and Christianity is full of the oppression, persecution, and brutal violence of people who disagreed on what God commanded people to kill for. Through the slaughter of heretics and blasphemers by mobs, inquisitions, and culminating in the horror of the conflict between the Reformation movement of Protestants and the Counter-Reformation of Catholics that covered the continent with blood and whose violence still continues, people had grown weary of the fight and come here to escape from the dictates of established churches. When we got here, we began making the same mistake all over again, as when the Hartford Baptists were prevented from worshipping by the Episcopalian authorities of the locally established church. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison together with a coalition of followers of non-established churches, including Baptists, Methodists, Quakers, and Unitarians, among others, set down in the Constitution and laws that the government wasn't to meddle in religious affairs, and established a tradition that our nation would protect the freedom of conscience of all. This book re-asserts this tradition and clearly opposes the current efforts of Fundamentalist Christians to impose their values and beliefs on everyone else. His arguments should persuade all but the most fanatic and pious that we're better off without a national religion and need to find another way to educate our children not to harm others than to smack it into their heads with Bibles and telling them that Christian charity extends only to those Christians that have been government-approved.

Harris does a fantastic job of getting his point across without being pretentious. Both atheists and christians alike should read this book.

Disappointing. I read this looking for a well thought out defense of atheism. Something that would help me look at things in different ways and identify logical falacies in what I believe. Generally, I was looking for something that would make me a better Christian apologist. There are a few things that made me think a bit, but they were not really new things, they were just reminders of old arguements. I was hoping for an intellectual or at least a scholarly defense of atheism, but this book doesn't provide this. Instead, the author comes across as a lawyer trying to prove his case. Basically, the case he is trying to prove is this: Christianity is wrong and it is harmful. He comes across as a lawyer in that he frequently twists data to prove his case. A writer in search of the truth will never do this. One example of this is when he is trying to make a case that red states have a higher crime rate. To prove this he cites the fact that a large number of cities in red states have higher crime rate than cities in blue states. This is a very inaccurate way of comparing crime rates. If he had looked at the crime rates in the states as a whole, he would have seen that 8 of the 10 safest states are in fact red. Or, if he had looked at a county by county breakdown, he would have seen that the cities in question are all blue. It is difficult to take any arguements seriously from someone who twists statistics in this fashion. Another place Harris says that Christians who have advanced degrees in science who disagree with him are not true scientists and are mearly using their degrees to give their unscientific ideas substance. Harris does not cite any source for this information nor does he give any names or give any specifics on their arguement or any counters to these arguements. But, even more disappointing, Harris does not appear to be qualified to make this assessment. The intellectually honest way to make such a statement would be to find the christian scientists in question and find qualified non-christian scientists to refute the work of the christians and expose them as unscientific. Harris later trys to refute Intelligent design by suggesting ways in which humans are not well designed. Once more, he is unqualified to make this statement and he does not cite any qualified sources. His ignorance of biology is most evident in his apparent belief in recapitulation theory. This is the theory that says that unborn babies show signs of earlier stages of evolution while they are developing - signs such as tails and gills. This theory has been rejected by pretty much all credible scientists for nearly a century. I almost put the book down at this point in frustration. His strawman counter arguements are insulting. His lack of resources and proper citation of resources indicates poor scholarship. His espousing of recapitulation theory indicates intellectual laziness and a lack of knowledge of the subject he is discussing. It takes five seconds to pull this up on Wikipedia! If you are an atheist and looking for something that will feed your beliefs, this book may work for you. But, if you are a christian looking for a thought provoking defense of atheism, there are many far superior books that are more worth your time. You might find some interesting points to mull over here, but it's difficult to filter through all the garbage. If you have read the book and Harris' arguements are new to you, I recommend reading a Christian apologist like Ravi Zecharias. Zecharias provides a far more intellectual and scholarly defense of christianity than Harris does of atheism. If you are an atheist who for whatever reason like Harris, I recommend reading Zecharias so that you can see what scholarly and intelligent discussion look like.

Harris' brief book deftly raises many popularly felt objections with religion in general and concerns with Christianity in particular. Given the erosion of a Christian worldview and the average soccer-mom and business guys' grasp of the Bible is paltry, I suspect Harris' skeptical pose and 'thorny' questions will seem profound and beyond refutation. But that's only because the average American reader's background makes him an easy mark for any anti-religious rambling. Let's face it, the average guy whose dragged to church by his parents (then his wife) is looking for a decent reason to sleep in on Sunday and fudge on his taxes. If that's your baseline motivation for being interested in Harris' work, you'll find it persuasive.

I'd encourage Christians and non-Christians to read this book. THEN, read Douglas Wilson's equally terse reply, Letter From A Christian Citizen (in the interest of fairness). I think Wilson filets Harris' arguments, but you be the judge. Letter from a Christian Citizen - A Response to "Letter to a Christian Nation" by Sam Harris

The title would suggest that this book is or should be of interest only to Christians. However, this is not so. Those of us who have become increasingly critical of Christianity will find that our disenchantment is not limited to us as individuals. Indeed, we may find a great comfort in Harris' book, for it is far-reaching and sufficiently specific to make it a "must read" for anyone of faith or not.

We hear a lot about the United States being a "Christian Nation." The author brings the same tools of logic and reason that we use in every other area of our life to the religious impulse. If you are beginning to smell a rat in your current religious faith, this is the book for you. If not, don't bother to read it. It won't make any sense to you and will just make you angry. Remember the saying old saying? Never try to teach a pig to sing...it's a waste of your time and it annoys the pig.

I just rate this as a five because its essentially a continuation of his first book. If you don't want to immediately jump in to his full work, this is definitely worth reading. I managed to read it in a couple of hours. It is perfect to give you a taste of what his angle is. If you've already read Harris' first book then you don't need me to tell you about it, it's more of the same, but in a good way.

Though, as a religious liberal, I appreciate some of the criticism leveled by Sam Harris at conservative Christianity, it's as though he has no understanding at all about the value of religion in the lives of many who don't adhere to retrograde religion. This book, like many books in a similar vein being published these days, sets up a straw man and tears it apart, rather than dealing in an open way with the many varieties of Christianity that exist these days. As a member of the board of a Progressive Christian seminary and a faculty member of a seminary that's gone beyond being even Christian, I'd say Sam's letter doesn't belong in our mailbox.

Sam Harris does a good job of explaining the basic moral problems with the arguments for religion, particularly Christianity. One problem I have, though, is that Christopher Hitchens does, I think, a better job of that in God is not Great. Not to take anything away from Harris, but I think his approach of attempting to make a moral argument against Christianity TO CHRISTIANS, is a misguided effort destined for failure.

Sam! The book has contibuted to my understanding the road to which the hearts and minds of men must travel! Uneasiness with the status quo of institutionalized "morality" compells thinking men to a larger more comprehensive understanding! people who love their children,their families..communities and country seek the evolution of the human condition ...the need to share the love they have in their own lives with others is a noble cause. Our life's journey should not bring judgement...or to cast the first stone but to increase our understanding of the universal moral maxims which belong to each individual ! Some of us believe in the message not neccessarily the messengers... nor' the manner of delivery! Peace and prosperity for all and especially the indefatigable vanguards who seek the perfection of the understanding of the human being and all his conditions! History belongs to you my fellow rebels.....Good job!

Great book. Well written and to the point. Reiterates what some of us already know. Stirs the pot for everyone else.

It is commonly said that great things come in small packages. This could be no truer if one reads Sam Harris' "Letter to a Christian Nation." In 91 pages, Mr. Harris refutes every Christian argument justifying things such as Intelligent Design or the Immaculate Conception. Anyone familiar with Mr. Harris' previous book should not be surprised that a lot of this work is repetitive. However, anyone willing to take on these arguments and refute them has a tall order indeed.