Religion Books

Rabbi Ed Friedman was a groundbreaking scholar in applying Bowen Family Systems Theory to religious worshiping communities (churches and synagogues). "A Failure of Nerve" was to be the capstone of his lifetime work in leading congregations (as a rabbi), consulting congregations and businesses, community relations, teaching, and writing. Sadly, Ed Friedman died before he could finish "A Failure of Nerve." However, his children and colleagues collaborated in bringing this work to publication anyway--publishing the material Friedman had already written and turning his remaining notes into narrative. The result is a stinging critique of our American leader-crushing culture and a call-to-arms for leaders to transform our culture.

The first part of "A Failure of Nerve" provides an analysis of leadership--how leaders come into being, their mindset, their makeup, and the challenges they face. He heavily emphasizes the leader's thirst for adventure and their high regard for curiosity. He argues that the adventure-and-curiosity values of (primarily) Columbus, along with Luther, Calvin, Copernicus, Shakespeare, and others brought the world from Dark Ages to Renaissance. Were it not for Columbus et. al's leadership, sense of adventure, self-differentiated nature, and willingness to risk failure, the world would not quickly have gone from the highly-anxious leader-poor Dark Ages to the less-anxious leader-rich Renaissance. Unfortunately, Friedman argues, current western culture more resembles the Dark Ages than the Renaissance with regard to leadership.

Friedman argues that Western cultural values (e.g. the propensity to avoid leadership by immersing one's self in a sea of books and data; the fear of offending other people; the societal value of empathy; the fear of strong personalities, calling them narcissistic and autocratic instead of full of integrity and individuality) need to be challenged by some of the boldest of leaders so that more leaders can follow suit. He argues that the very thing that made the people of the Renaissance apt to become adventure-seeking heroes--rapid change--has now created so much instability that societal anxiety and undifferentiated persons run amok. The result is that potential leaders are sabotaged, worn down, and discouraged for ever attempting to lead in bold, new ways.

The solution, Friedman argues in the book's second part, is not simply less-anxious, highly-differentiated, highly-connected leadership...but also the steely backbone necessary to lead. Leaders in these ensuing generations need to stand up to the pressure to conform like no other generation of leaders; they will need to be bold, integrity-rich personalities in the face of opposition; they will have to stand firm and face weak less-differentiated opponents who somehow have claimed the moral high-ground. The result of this Columbus-like leadership may very-well be a new age of highly-differentiated leaders and a transformed American culture.

While this book does present excellent ideas, these ideas remain unrefined. Friedman's groundbreaking work, "Generation to Generation" was characterized by a playfulness and engagement with the reader that is absent in "A Failure of Nerve." The result is a darker, more pessimistic book. Further, the vast majority of this book defines the problem in modern America. The solutions--by far the more important part of the book--was left unfinished at Friedman's death and is thus much shorter and much less-developed. It was as if Friedman was building up to a crescendo...but then died before the apex of his thoughts. The reader is much poorer for this untimely death.

While inferior to "Generation to Generation," Friedman does provide many, many excellent points worthy of reading and digesting. While Friedman writes, "...I will be quite content if all I have succeeded in accomplishing is to supply this century's best candidate for book burning (28)," this book need not be burned. It should be discussed, taken to heart, and turned to often by those who have a strong desire to lead in their communities and countries...by those who have a vision for a possible future and are willing to risk their reputations, their fortunes, and their relationships for the good of others.

Although it is lacking in polish and development, the raw material is well, well worth a thorough read...or two...or three.

Friedman is not rehashing old work here. This is a new application of the Bowen Family Systems work as applied to leadership within the culture. I think his insights on anxiety in the culture are right on, and as always there is more hope where there is more understanding.
I recommend this to book to preachers, teachers, writers and analysts because these insights are distinctive and helpful.

After reading this book, I am now clear on why I am so frustrated with corporate and non-profit companies in the US. It's excellent and I plan to use it in my consulting practice - I've ordered copies for my clients!

I found Friedman's work very interesting and insightful. I am a parent and manager, so the concept of leadership is important to me. He puts his sometimes radical concepts into easy to digest sections, without watering in down at all. This is not your average management mumbo-jumbo, step-by-step, how to book.

At times it reads like a textbook, and some of his analogies with scientific discovery and history are long-winded, but all in all this was a book that made me think differently about how I act as a leader. It's very different from the standard stuff I have read before on leadership, managing and parenting. This is a book of well thought theory and examples. There is a lot of meat in this thing and it requires active reading skills.

Not for the weak of mind or self-help junkies.

A Failure of Nerve presents a unique approach on leadership among the books I have read on the topic. Friedman concentrates on several themes throughout the book that combine lessons learned from decades of experience and research.

The themes include the necessity of a sense of adventure and the possession of courage in leaders, the importance of self-differentiation, focusing on strengths instead of catering to weaknesses, the destructive nature of relationship triangles and the challenges leaders face among followers.

He highlights some negative practices of leaders in our culture, mainly the over-dependence on data and information and the misplaced emphasis on emphathy over action.

In this book, readers will find practical, simple ways to improve leadership. This book will challenge some of the accepted practices of organizational leadership today and should open readers' eyes to necessities of effective leadership.

All of Friedman's themes are applicable to families, congregations, businesses, government, etc. This is an especially useful book for parents and pastors/rabbis.

The downside of the book is that it was published posthomously, so the last three chapters were collected by colleagues who also edited the book. The effect is that it is not as cogent and concise as it might have been if Friedman had lived long enough to complete the writing himself.

This is a dense book on leadership that is definitely worth the effort of reading, as it will change the way you lead and relate to others.

Craig Stephans, author of Shakespeare On Spirituality: Life-Changing Wisdom from Shakespeare's Plays

If you want a good audio Bible for either your home or your Church for Bible studies this is the complete audio Bible for you "Inspired by the Bible Experience" is the one that you should have cause it has great audio effects as well as a wonderful script and great actors playing the parts the best way they know how. also if you use this for a Bible study this will be a good way to tell the story so they can really get the feel of what the bible is really about. So I highly recommend "Inspired by the Bible experience"

This was a wonderful collection!! I travel a lot and have listened to the Bible on CD before but this is a classic...it is so well acted out that I have cried, laughed but mostly pondered the messages. Talk about making "it real"! Nothing takes the place of reading the Word for yourself but this is excellent...I strongly recommend it.

I LOVE this Bible! It really puts you right there in Biblical times and the way the actors read the text gives you a different perspective on how Jesus and the disciples (as well as other people) said things and might have been thinking and feeling. I really strongly recommend this Bible!The gospel of John Ch. 17 where Jesus is talking to his disciples before his crucifixion is incredible!!

In the past we have purchased other Bible readings on casette primarily to study the Bible while traveling. This new version is so dynamic with sound effects along with the emotion of the reader that I want to pull off the road so I don't miss a thing. Our pastor who introducted us to this product has fairly thoroughly checked the reading with the same written version of The Holy Scriptures and finds them to be the same. Before, simply listening to some voice reading the bible was not that interesting. The Bible Experience has made listening to the Bible an enriched learning experience. The drama in the stories of GOD'S work and word are now so exciting. Our thanks and prayers to all involved in this project. However, nothing can replace seeking that special quiet place to read and meditate on GOD'S wonderful Word.

I love the music score and the actors' voices, except a few small bit pieces. I love how they continually read the books without interrupting with chapters numbers. It is an Experience, as they say. I also really liked the sleek case the complete set came in. I'd give it more than 5 stars if I could.

The reader should prepare himself for a terrifying look into the Religious Right's assault on religious freedom in America.

Mr. Hedges names this assault "dominionism." In the process of describing it, he reports many testimonies of those who were or still are caught in the web of the Religious Right's machinations. Such personal stories show how the Religious Right instills and exploits despair, fear and confusion. As deadly, is the Religious Right's efforts---reflecting an Orwellian world---to change the meaning of words. 'Life' for them means to die for Christ. 'Liberty' means obedience to the Religious Right leadership, suspending one's own thinking. 'Freedom' is slavery to self-sacrifice.

For instance, the Religious Right's call for the establishment in America of patriarchy is not some mis-placed attempt to rectify unjust attacks on American males. It is, instead, a commandment that all females quit their jobs or careers, remain in the home to care for family and children, obey without question the husband's say-so and submit to all other males---particular those in the church---in docile silence, compliance and self-sacrifice.

Many conservatives are beginning to re-think their support of the Religious Right. Good for them. Chris Hedges book will help them see that the primary goal of the Religious Right is not freedom of worship but the opposite.

This book covers essentially the same material as "American Theocracy" by Timothy Ferris. The main difference between the two, in my opinion, resides in Mr. Hedges's more impassioned tone. Mr. Hedges, to his credit, declares himself a religious partisan early in the book. It comes then as no surprise that he condemns the theological position of the "dominionists" against his own, more mainstream, heritage. While the book is well written, I couldn't escape the feeling that Mr. Hedges's passion brought his book into the same kind of panic-mongering of which he, rightly, accuses the dominionists.

This book by Chris Hedges is an excellent explanation of the present United States internal and external agenda. It should be required reading for all educated people.

To me it is no coincidence that we stopped hearing of Nazis in the US and shortly thereafter the American Religious Right appeared.

I believe unscrupulous people could not gain power and destroy rights by the imported racist comments, so now they are using a philosophy that is native to the US, religious fundamentalism. It is a pity that they are so misleading so many souls.

Chris Hedges, a former foreign correspondent for the New York Times and a graduate of the Harvard School of Divinity, takes his readers on an intelligent, well-cited, and frightening tour through the undeniable reasons every American should be wary of the Christian Right and its agenda to create and dominate a fascist regime. Right here. Right under our tolerant noses. His powerful language and repetitive theme, ironically somewhat like a 200-page sermon, was ultimately exhausting for this reader. But I do not deny his point: the awful paradox that when the tolerant tolerate intolerance, trouble is afoot. In a noisy world, important messages may have to be hollered to be heard. Perhaps in a culture of despair, warnings about dangerous solutions must be delivered as powerfully and forcefully as the pitches for those solutions.

I'm usually concerned about purchasing items on line, especially books. I can honestly say that this experience was worth it. I would recommend this seller to anyone interested in purchasing good quality books at extremely reasonable prices.

Buy with confidence, I did!

The book was new and I paid a good price not too bad of one.

great book and Pals uses his creativeness to cover the major philosophers and scientists in a particular order to demonstrate intellectual evolution (intelligence evolves as time passes and we learn from previous ages) and he also brings out how the fact the philisophers (as most humans) try to "prove" THEIR experiences in life as they perceive it. The perception complicates their objectiveness. For instance, Freud was an atheist so Freud was out to prove there is no God. Freud did not want to reveal "truth" but only what HE thought was truth. Whether it is truth or not, was irrelevant to him and many others. Each philosopher builds on the previous with a critical critique of each by Pal and the others. I thought this was a great book and easy to read (unlike other philosophy books which are extremely difficult) 5 stars for Pals!

Refreshingly readable account of the major developments in the science of religion. An excellent introduction to the field for general audience.

I had to read this book for my introduction to the study of religion-class, but it turned out to be a very interesting book. Pals has a good ability to explain complex terms and theories in relatively easy language, even when dealing with quite obscure ideas and material. The purpose of the book is to give new students and interested laymen a basic overview of the eight most important theories various researchers and thinkers have put forward since the birth of the "study of religion". Late in the 1800's, we moved from a strictly theological view of religion, (in reality; Christianity and all the others) to a more comparative perspective.

The eight (really nine, but oh well) theories were put forward by the following people, that each get a chapter before the conclusion ends the book in it's last chapter; E.B. Tylor & J. G. Frazer, Sigmund Freud, Émile Durkheim, Karl Marx, Max Weber, Mircea Eliade, E. E. Evans-Pritchard and finally Clifford Geertz. Each chapter contains a small biography of the thinker, an overview of the theory and the history of it, summaries of the most important works, analysis of the material presented, critiques put forward in response, notes and finally a bibliography of suggestions for further reading.

I found the book to be very useful and interesting, and it is an excellent introduction to the field for newcomers. The book shows relatively well the madness and basically evil ideas that is represented by Marx, Freud and to some degree Durkheim. "Strangely", these very people are of the same racial background, and all their ideas have had major negative effects for gentile culture, see a connection anyone? It is a very peculiar and suspicious side to Pals that whenever a theorist is doing something good he's a Jew, but when his ideas are bad for European cohesion, he's "a German" or a "Frenchman". This way, suddenly Freud, Boas and various others in the books are suddenly just your average Fritz German doing objective research with no political consequences. A volume that should be read along with this book is Kevin Macdonald's book "The Culture of Critique", available here on Amazon.

The two scientists that are most filled with genius in this book seems to me to be Mircea Eliade and Max Weber, the first one interestingly enough being friends with two major European freedom fighters; Corneliu Codreanu and Julius Evola. Eliade was actually a member of Codreanu's organization back in his native Rumania, something that should give you a good hint of his honourable soul.

To summarize; a sturdy hardcover book that gives you a highly valuable introduction to the field and that should be of interest to anyone remotely interested in politics, philosophy or religion.

Highly recommended!

I actually needed this book for my Introduction to Religion class but I'm sure I will keep it even after I am finished with the class. Pals breaks down the theories into their simpliest forms and makes them so easy to understand. He summaries each theorist's section with an analysis and a critique which makes the interpretation of the text that much easier. This is a wonderful book and I would suggest it to anyone looking for possible explanations of some of the world's most popular religions...

With all the sensational blurbs and media attention, I expected a lot more from Ehrman on every front. His sensational appeals to evil, sophomorish generalizations of Scripture, dogmatic simplifications of controversial texts, and syrupy emotive commentary mix simplistically and crudely (not to mention sometimes inaccurately), as if pulled off in a couple of "all-nighters." Moreover, his caricatures of UNC college students and Evangelical Christians is smug, arrogant, and simplistic. Finally, with his apparent angst about world suffering, I find his "eat, drink, and be merry" agnosticism hypocritical to the point of nauseating. There are more trustworthy agnostic authors.

This book, by a bible scholar and former Christian, is a sort of personal memoir / biblical analysis / meditation on world suffering.

It does not claim, however, to be a remotely adequate overview of the theological "problem of suffering". Rather, it purports to narrow itself to the question of what the BIBLE has to say regarding this issue. But the author states, correctly for all I know, that the Bible never directly addresses the "problem of suffering" (as Erhman and other moderns define it), for the simple reason that no-one ever raised the issue before the seventeenth century. One would think therefore, that this would be an extremely short book.

Not so. Erhman thinks he has found, in the Bible, a sparring partner who he can count on not to hit back, and is determined not to waste the opportunity. As for the thinkers who have, since the seventeenth century, addressed themselves to this challenge, Ehrman dismisses them with a waive of the hand. He seems to admit that their views are exhaustively and logically laid out. His complaint, essentially, that he does not find their arguments emotionally satisfying. Not remotely does he describe their arguments or give them a fair hearing, so as to help his readers form their own views. He dare not address fellow scholars, contemporary or otherwise. He only wants to argue with the Bible, and with inarticulate folk he meets at cocktail parties.

Part of the book is a descriptive overview of various religious explanations for suffering (but not for the "problem of suffering" as such) offered in various parts of the Bible. Some of this is interesting, but is woefully incomplete. Ehrman strains to imply that the various explanations offered for suffering somehow contradict each other. Has he never heard of the parable of the Blind Men and the Elephant? Also, since Ehrman, at the very least, heavily insinuates that the Problem of Suffering disproves Christian faith, ought he not give the New Testament, particularly the Gospels, a bit more priority in his analysis and resolve any perceived contradictions accordingly?

He gives short shrift to the doctrine of the fall, and overlooks one explanation almost entirely. He virtually ignores the fact that the ancient Hebrews, like virtually all ancients, believed in DEMONS and other supernatural spirits who haunted the World and caused all kinds of mischief. Monotheists differed from Pagans not in that they denied the existence of such beings, but rather that they forbade their worship. It is not until the advent of the Age of Reason that people stopped believing in Supernatural Evil.

This omission proves useful in Ehrman's one-sided discussions. For instance, while he at one point seems to concede that God's respect for "Free Will" to some extent might explain why God permits human-inflicted suffering, he nonetheless argues that such cannot possibly explain the suffering caused by a hurricane or an erupting volcano. This argument conveniently ignores what virtually all assumed to be true until at least the seventeenth century - that nature is haunted. If Ehrman had wished to throw light on this subject, he could have told us that in the New Testament, it is NOT stated that Satan and his demons are not confined to Hell (this is a modern notion). They inhabit the World, and it will not be until the day of judgment that they are confined to the place of Eternal Punishment.

This partly explains why the "problem of evil" argument (and the attempts to address it) did not arise until the advent of relatively modern times. Perhaps, until folks stopped believing that Satan and his minions haunted the World, the "problem" just did not appear as one worth addressing. Evil volcanoes were no harder to explain than Evil men.

But Ehrman's Biblical elucidations still leave him too little to say. So how does he fill the rest of the space? He does so by continually insisting that any discussion of the theological "problem of suffering" must focus on the incomprehensibly vast suffering collectively endured by incomprehensibly vast numbers of people.

But this is dead wrong. The problem of suffering is individual. Each and every one of us has lived. Each and every one of us will die. All of us, in the interim, have suffered and will suffer. Some, admittedly, will suffer more than others, in the course of shorter or longer lives. Some of us will die deaths that are quick and easy. Others will die deaths that are protracted and terrible. But there is a limit to the amount of suffering a person can endure before body and mind give way. Although we sometimes speak of "unbearable suffering" the fact is that all suffering is bearable, if only because the sufferer has no choice. When it ceases to be bearable, the victim dies, and his suffering, as far as mortals can observe, is at an ends.

The Christian concept of God is of an omnipotent being. This does not mean that God can create a contradiction in terms -- like a square circle, or free-willed entities who are not in some way free to defy God. But, at the very least, it does mean that vast numbers are no obstacle to God. If God can resurrect one crucified man, God can resurrect a trillion crucified men. If God can raise to glory one young woman burned at the stake, God can raise to glory a trillion young women burned at the stake. If God can do justice for one horribly murdered child, he can do justice for a trillion horribly murdered children. If a man is prepared to follow Christ's example, and carry his own cross, and face his own death, then there is no reason why all the starving children in Africa should shake his faith. If he believes that God, in His infinite mercy, can in the end do him justice, he will have no reason.to doubt that God can do the same for all the starving children. And yet Ehrman continues to invoke vast numbers as though it matters.

Ehrman tries to bully us into despair with tales of vast global suffering beyond our limited power as individuals to correct. His apparent aim of convincing us that if we cannot hope to fully correct such suffering, obviously God cannot do so either. He heaps more and more tortured corpses onto the pile in the hope that we will finally cry out "Okay, Okay, You must be right - God cannot possibly resurrect so many." It is an argument that starts and ends with lack of faith.

But Ehrman does perform at least one valuable service, in that he shows very effectively that the "prosperity gospel" promoted by televangelists and the like, has nothing to do with the teachings of Jesus and his Apostles. Jesus, who set us an example by dying on the cross, never promised his followers that they could avoid suffering before the day of judgment.

But I have to wonder, what kind of Christian was Ehrman? Ehrman invites the question by turning this book into a sort of personal memoir of his loss of faith. He gives us some rather unsavory glimpses of the sort of Christian he was. We find out, for instance, that when he thanked God for his food, he was really congratulating himself for being so deserving. Good thing he stopped! And he seems to assume most Christians believe that all non-Christian dead will burn eternally in Hell. But isn't that God's business and never ours ("judge not lest ye be judged", etc.)? I have no objection to disproving THAT sort of arrogant self-satisfied "Christianity" and almost think his loss of faith may have been a step in the right direction. Ehrman all-but tells us his terror of suffering helped induced him to become Christian; and that the "problem of suffering" caused him to lose faith. But I cannot quite buy the idea that it is the suffering of OTHERS that bothers him the most. I cannot help thinking he panicked when he realized Jesus really meant it when he said "Pick up your cross and follow me."

I rec'd this on time, the book was clean and packaged well. Very pleased.
Kathy

*** Too much suffering. *** According to Ehrman's own testimony, it was God's seeming inattention to and/or inability to end all the suffering in the world that led Ehrman to trade in his evangelical Christian faith for agnosticism (and liberal theology). As he expresses it: "Eventually, though, I felt compelled to leave Christianity altogether. ... In particular, I could no longer explain how there can be a good and all-powerful God actively involved with this world, given the state of things. For many people who inhabit this planet, life is a cesspool of misery and suffering. I came to a point where I simply could not believe that there is a good and kindly disposed Ruler who is in charge of it. The problem of suffering became for me the problem of faith" (page 3).

While Ehrman's point of view is not without merit, and his concern for suffering people admirable, here and throughout his book he reflects the common but badly mistaken practice of blaming God for the bad in this world while simultaneously refusing to credit God for the good.

*** The Bible's answers. *** The title of the book is a bit of a misnomer since, as Ehrman himself aptly demonstrates, the Bible provides many answers to the question of why people suffer, including:

- As punishment from God for sin/disobedience.
- As a consequence of sin, with sinners oppressing and exploiting their helpless victims.
- As a way for God to bring good out of evil.
- As a part of our meaningless existence, which is to say there is no ultimate answer as to why we suffer.
- As part of an apocalyptic scheme in which malevolent "cosmic forces of evil" rule until God intervenes to set things right.

However, in his apparent desire for a single, all-encompassing answer to suffering, Ehrman dismisses the Bible's sundry responses as contradictory theories rather than complimentary truths. The one possible exception is the "all is vanity" approach advocated by the writer of Ecclesiastes (Ehrman's favorite Bible book). Because he automatically dismisses many of the Bible's foundational truth claims, no doubt Ehrman would likewise dismiss the deceptively simple truth that we suffer because we are fallen people living in a fallen world.

*** Liberal scholarship. *** Ehrman's heavy reliance on liberal scholarship has led him to reject supernatural miracles; deny the Bible's historical trustworthiness; and malign the element of future fulfillment contained within the Bible's prophetic writings. Liberal theology is a philosophical system which sprang directly from 18th century Enlightenment rationalism, and which often draws severely critical conclusions for which solid evidence is lacking. While we can certainly learn from its emphasis on "open-mindedness, freedom from tradition, tolerance and humane respect for the individual" (New Dictionary of Christian Ethics and Pastoral Theology), the same cannot be said for its overly "optimistic view of human beings, emphasis on immanence, on the goodness of creation and on progress, and a view of Jesus as [no more than] the perfect moral example" (New Dictionary of Christian Ethics and Pastoral Theology).

*** Innocent people and free will.*** Throughout his book Ehrman repeatedly refers to the suffering of "innocent" people, in the process failing to reckon with the biblical teaching that there is no such thing as a completely innocent person. Thanks to the actions of our first parents, Adam and Eve, everyone comes into this world a sinner, separated from and in rebellion against God. It is incredible that God chooses to have anything at all to do with us, and it is unfathomable that he offers a full pardon -- including eternal life -- to us his sworn enemies.

The vast majority of the suffering of which Ehrman writes is man-made: sinful human beings exercise their free will to sin against their fellow human beings, producing much suffering in the process. This type of suffering is man's doing, not God's. Conversely, imagine if every person on this planet were a serious, committed Christian (not a nominal believer or cultural Christian). Although the world would still not be perfect, can there be the slightest doubt there would be tons less suffering?

But the devastating natural disasters of which Ehrman makes repeated mention cannot be explained by the exercise of free will -- can they? While Ehrman believes they cannot, the Bible indicates otherwise. When God created Adam and Eve he gave them dominion over the entire earth (Genesis 1:26-28). When they used their free will to rebel against God, the end result was the corruption of every facet of humanity, including the physical world in which we reside. "Natural disaster is a direct result of the curse on creation because of the fall of humankind (Genesis 3; Romans 8). It will not be removed until Christ returns (Revelation 21-22)" (Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics). Prior to Adam and Eve, Satan had rebelled against God, and today he and his host of demon angels inflict enormous pain and suffering on human beings, in some cases using the destructive forces of nature to do so. But of course Ehrman does not believe in the historical reality of Adam and Eve, nor does he believe in supernatural spiritual forces.

In order for God to wipe out all pain and suffering, he would need to wipe out all sinful people. And since every human being is sinful, the painfully obvious conclusion is that God could instantly eliminate all pain and suffering in the world only by removing all people from it. But of course since the world itself is corrupt, and since supernatural evil forces would still be here, God would have to go further still and both wipe out the world and permanently lock away Satan and his minions. Which is precisely what the Bible says he will do -- one day (Revelation 20:10; 20:15; 21:1). But that is not the end of the story, as God has "a new heaven and a new earth" in store for all those who have been declared righteous through personal, saving faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.

*** God's love.*** While Ehrman devotes quite a bit of space to the topic of God's wrath, particularly within the context of suffering as punishment from God, he makes scant mention of God's love and then only very near the end of his book (on page 272 of 278 pages).

Love is, of course, an absolutely indispensable part of Scripture. God's loving-kindness "is one of the most important [concepts] in the OT and lies at the center of the Lord's self-revelation of his attitude toward his people," encompassing "the ideas of love, commitment, duty, and care" (The New International Dictionary of the Bible). In the New Testament, love describes the very nature of God himself (1 John 4:8, 16). It is the greatest Christian virtue (1 Corinthians 13:13), and love for God and for one's neighbor are seen as the two greatest commandments (Matthew 22:37-40). Love for fellow believers is an identifying mark of true Christianity (John 13:34-35). And love's ultimate meaning and expression are to be found in God's giving of his Son as an atoning sacrifice (John 3:16; 1 John 4:10) (The New International Dictionary of the Bible).

*** Concern for others.*** Not only is Ehrman very concerned about the suffering of others, he assumes everyone else is, or should be, when he writes of our need to intervene "and do what we can to stop the oppression, torture, and murder" of people both in America and around the world (page 123). If there is no transcendent moral law, then Ehrman is doing nothing more than attempting to impose his personal values upon others. If, however, people really should be concerned about the suffering of others, then what we have is indirect evidence for the existence of God. How so? Because the existence of a transcendent moral law -- including the fact that certain behaviors are wrong regardless of who does them or where they occur in the world -- very strongly implies the existence of a moral law giver, i.e., God.

Ehrman begins his book with a review of the atrocities committed against the Jews and others under Hitler's regime (= the Holocaust), which he describes as nothing less than "the most heinous crime against humanity in the known history of the human race" (page 21). However, as one Christian apologist points out: "Such statements as 'Hitler was wrong' have no force if this is merely an opinion or Hitler's moral judgments are right or wrong depending on the cultural norms. If he was objectively wrong, then there must be a moral law beyond all of us by which we are all bound. But if there is such a universal, objective moral law, then there must be a universal Moral Law Giver (God)" (Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics).

If there were no transcendent moral law, then no one would even care that people living on the other side of the world are suffering, much less desire to do anything about it. What's more, if there were no God and all we had is what we can extract from this life, then there would be no afterlife and no ultimate, final judgment, and each person would be justified in doing whatever he/she can -- including exploiting and oppressing other people -- in order to achieve as much personal happiness as possible.

*** The desire for God.*** A similar point can be made regarding Ehrman's profound sense of gratitude for his "fantastic life," the only problem being that he has no one to express his gratitude to. In his own words: "This is a void deep inside me, a void of wanting someone to thank, and I don't see any plausible way of filling it" (page 128). Again, Ehrman offers inadvertent testimony, this time in regards to our inherent religious need. Our common religious need is yet another indirect proof for God's existence since it is irrational to believe that a genuine, universal need is unfulfillable (Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics). Even atheists and secularists yearn to believe in God, and like everyone else they have an inherent need to worship, which finds expression in devotion to either a person or a cause. Ehrman's cause is to make life as good as possible, first for himself and then for others: "By all means, and most emphatically, I think we should work hard to make the world -- the one we live in -- the most pleasing place it can be FOR OURSELVES. ... But we should also work hard to make our world the most pleasing place it can be FOR OTHERS ... " (pages 277-78, all-caps represent italics in original).

*** Jesus Christ. *** Like most liberal scholars, Ehrman sees Jesus as merely "a first-century apocalyptic Jew," claiming that his divinity was a later invention of the Christian Church. "But the view that Jesus was himself God is not a view shared by most of the writers of the New Testament. It is, in fact, a theological view that developed rather later in the early Christian movement: it is not to be found, for example, in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, or Luke -- let alone in the teachings of the historical man Jesus" (page 273). This, of course, reflects the ultra-liberal treatment of Scripture in which large segments of the New Testament are dismissed as inauthentic later additions to, or modifications of, what Jesus said and did.

In truth, there is a staggering amount of evidence that Jesus both saw himself as, and proclaimed himself to be, the divine Son of God. (For more information, please see "The Deity of Jesus Christ" at http://AC21DOJ.org/TheDeityOfJesusChrist.html.)

*** Heaven and Hell. *** According to Ehrman, heaven and hell were concocted by apocalyptic-minded Christians following a delay in the arrival of God's promised kingdom on earth. "When the end did not come as expected, some of Jesus' followers transformed this temporal dualism (this age versus the age to come) into a spatial dualism, between the world below and the world above. ... In other words, out of the ashes of failed apocalyptic expectation there arose the Christian doctrine of heaven and hell" (page 256).

Since it is impossible here to do justice to the Bible's teaching regarding God's kingdom, heaven, and hell, a few words must suffice. The kingdom of God can be defined as "The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ's earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15)" (Tyndale Bible Dictionary). Today God's kingdom is primarily spiritual in nature as God rules in the hearts of those who have placed their faith in Jesus Christ. As depicted in the arrival of the New Jerusalem (Revelation 21), one day the spiritual and material will be fully integrated, and God's kingdom will encompass the entire earth.

The truths regarding heaven and hell were revealed progressively in the Bible, with later revelation (in the New Testament) being built on that which came earlier (in the Old Testament). The most important truth regarding heaven is that it is the place where God lives. Heaven is the hope of all believers and will be their home forever. As the opposite of heaven, hell is a place of everlasting punishment reserved for the Devil and his minions, as well as those human beings who have rejected God's free gift of salvation through Jesus Christ (Nelson's New Christian Dictionary).

In response to the oft heard assertion that a loving God would not send anyone to hell, one theologian insightfully notes: "[S]in consists in the human's choosing to go his or her own way rather than follow God. Throughout life, a person says to God, in effect, 'Leave me alone.' Hell, the absence of God, is God's simply giving that person at last what he or she has always asked for. It is not God, but one's own choice that sends a person to hell" (Christian Theology).

*** Judging God.*** In one respect if, as Ehrman believes, this life is all there is (= no afterlife) and there is no God, then Ehrman's concern over the atrocities suffered by humans is understandable and even commendable. But using the world's atrocities to cast doubt on God's concern, let alone his very existence, is to do nothing less than judge God. Ehrman goes so far as to say that he is open to a personal visit by "God Almighty" in which God offers an explanation Ehrman finds acceptable. Then, says Ehrman, "I'd be the first to fall on my knees in humble submission and admiration. On the other hand, I don't think that's going to happen" (page 270). According to the inspired, authoritative Word of God (= the Bible), along with everyone else, one day Bart Ehrman will indeed be granted an audience with Almighty God. In that scenario, however, it will be Ehrman and not God who will have some serious explaining to do.

It is more than a little ironic that in the end Ehrman is content to settle for a sense of mystery when it comes to life, including why this world is plagued with so many problems (page 278), and yet refuses to extend the same courtesy to God and his ways in regards to human suffering. In a sense Ehrman is almost a modern Job in his demand to know why, if there is a God at all, he allows so much apparently unjust and undeserved suffering. In that respect, it is probably no coincidence that Ehrman's most stinging criticisms of God are to be found in the section of his book that addresses the Bible book of Job (chapter six).

Ehrman would do well to go all the way and imitate Job's final response:

Job Responds to the LORD
1 Then Job replied to the LORD:
2 "I know that you can do anything,
and no one can stop you.
3 You asked, 'Who is this that questions my wisdom with such ignorance?'
It is I -- and I was talking about things I knew nothing about,
things too wonderful for me.
4 You said, 'Listen and I will speak!
I have some questions for you,
and you must answer them.'
5 I have only heard about you before,
but now I have seen you with my own eyes.
6 I take back everything I said,
and I sit in dust and ashes to show my repentance." (Job 42:1-6, New Living Translation (2nd ed))

Isn't the answer to, "Why do humans suffer?", rather straight-forward? Pain and suffering (and early death) is a consequence of living in a natural world, experiencing the effects of natural phenomena, and living among other human beings some of whom are mentally ill, unstable, and unbalanced, and some of whom commit violence, even atrocities, to other human beings, not to mention violence to and neglect of animals (the non-human variety - they suffer too). Natural disasters cause much death, pain and suffering because people elect to (some might say they must) live in dangerous places, like near volcanoes, earthquake zones, tornado alley, etc. The technology humans have created when not used properly, can cause death, pain and suffering; for example, driving recklessly or being careless with a gun and accidentally shooting someone. We know why miscarriages and still-births happen; we know why genetic-based and other diseases happen; we know that medical errors happen, "plain old" accidents happen, and so on. Much of the pain and suffering in the world could be alleviated with enlightened government policies and allocation of resources, and smarter and more careful behavior by individuals (e.g., living in safer places). The question is, "Why does God allow suffering?" Ehrman explores this question and its possible answers in the Holy Bible, and why they come up short, in his opinion, when one posits a God of Judeo-Christian-Islamic traditions - an all powerful and all loving God. Finally, for Ehrman to conclude that "perhaps this is a mystery; we can't know the reason" is a reasonable explanation is a cop-out and tantamount to a "God of the gaps" type of argument: we don't know the answer, so God must exist and only God knows the answer. It accomplishes nothing, and for me, produced a "Why did I read this book? It was a waste of time" aftertaste. However, if you haven't explored this subject to any depth, then this book is a reasonable first step. It is well-written, clear, well-researched, and has copious references. It is a competent construction typical of Ehrman's other books.

Strong's is the concordance for looking up any word in the Bible. Lets put it this way, if you want to know how many times and where the word "the" or "A" is in the Bible, this book lists it! Incredible! Numbered Hebrew and Greek words with definitions. The only other thing you need is a Greek interlinear Bible that's numbered to the Strong's and you're set.

Great product...needed help with Bible study questions and the Strong's Exhaustive Concordance was just what I needed...

How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth
Easy to follow instructions.

This this a must have for everybody who owns a Bible! you don't have to know Greek or Hebrew to use this concordance!
I can recommend this book to everybody!

Strong's Concordance provides a way to study words Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic -- the languages of the the Bible -- without knowing these languages. It was designed for people who need this kind of help.

It has other uses also. Sometimes I have a verse of scripture in mind, but I cannot remember all of it or the precise meaning. I want to recall the exact words. If I can think of a single word that is unusual, a word likely to be found in only a few specific passages, I can use the word to find the verse by looking in the concordance.

Then while I'm looking, I may want to find similar passages about the subject. All the passages are easy to find using the Strong's Concordance.

There are programs on the Internet, such as the one at Blue Letter Bible dot org, with the same capacity for locating verses; sometimes though the book is better. There are quiet study times away from the computer, and there are times when the computer screen is otherwise busy.

I have friends who never go online. The Strong's Concordance is perfect for them. A concordance is a lovely gift.

This is the famous little book that Minor White advised his pupils to read. It's an account by German professor Eugen Herrigel of several years of archery lessons with a Japanese archer in the 1950s. My review is written with photography in mind, though the principles discussed in the book can be applied to many arts.

If you have an interest in photography, should you read it?

Here are a few quotes from this little book in which I have taken the liberty of replacing archery lingo with photography lingo:

1. "...fundamentally the [photographer] aims at himself and may even succeed in hitting himself."

2. "Do you know why you cannot wait for the shot and why you get out of breath before it has come? The right shot at the right moment does not come because you do not let go of yourself. You do no wait for fulfilment, but brace yourself for failure."

3. "If [the photographer] is to fit himself self-effacingly into the creative process, the practice of the art must have the way smoothed for it. For if, in his self-immersion, he saw himself faced with a situation into which he could not leap instinctively, he would first have to bring it into consciousness."

If these ideas interest you, then this book is for you. It is a pleasing and thought-provoking little book, written in a conversational manner lacking the overcomplicated lingo and "isms" of most philosophical and spiritual texts.

This book had a real influence on my early spiritual development. I read it when I was a teenager; the impression I was left with was one of discipline, self-mastery, and the difficulty of the art of archery. I loved the author's earnestness and sincerity. For some time, I shot my own bow with what I took to be the spirit of the Zen approach. I wished I could travel to Japan and learn from a master.

From where I sit now, I'd have to acknowledge that this book is more a description or a memoir, rather than an actual guide. That is, for one determined to walk the spiritual path, this book will be more an inspiration than a manual. For some, that may lead to frustration.

For me this book is first and foremost about Zen. Students of Japanese archery can come to it to take their craft to another level but for me the archery is just a mantle for the teachings to sit on. I've been studying Zen for ten years or so, and have read many great works on the subject. This book was a gentle reminder, ushering me back onto the path. It's wisdom can be applied to almost anything. For a more in depth look at some of the discussions in this book, see Suzuki's Zen and Japanese Culture.

One reviewer, with whom I disagree, says that this book is not a valid source of Zen because the master archer in the book had never "studied" Zen. I think he came in touch with the Zen Mind through his art. The Sixth Patriarch Hui Neng had never "studied" Zen either and came by his enlightenment through living life and carrying fire wood. "Studying" Zen, in terms of following the rituals of an institution, can be formative but is not necessary. Zenmind existed long before the Zen religion.

So whether you're studying Japanese Archery or looking to deepen your awareness of your own art (I study painting, music and Tai Chi), this book can help if you're ready for it.

there's an old adage in the acting world..'don't give a performance, let the performance give you'..so what does that have to do with this book? well, I read this wonderful book a few years back when I was studying acting in NYC and I really worked hard at incorporating some Zen technique into my acting process..it wasn't easy..but I stuck with it and I feel as if I reached a different level consciousness and ability with my craft. This book is a wonderful teacher for the ways of Zen and incorporating those lessons into real life events not just archery.

This is not a book on kyudo. As Earl Hartman says in another review, Herrigel did have little contact with kyudo in Japan (3-4 years). This book could be about many interesting things (zen, misticism, ...), but I don't know of them. But it's not a book on Kyudo. It seems more a book on Herrigel himself.
I don't says this is the worst book someone can read if is interested on kyudo. Last years saw apearing one or two terrible book's with kyudo in title.
Should be read with precaution and specially doesn't substitute pratice and guidance from a teacher or a master. Many persons come to kyudo allready knowing this book but after a few sessions they give up. and many of them continue to claim that they know about kyudo only by reading this book.

(sorry in advance) anyone who isn't moved by the kindness & compassion; the hopeful sayings of HH the Dalai Lama is either too cynical or not in touch with the needs of our complex/complicated 'society'.
His wisdom-compassion for all of humanity (and others), his lack of a vested interest, speaks for itself.

Though self-consciously idealistic and at times maddeningly general, this book is profoundly insightful. What makes this palatable is that the Dalai Lama concedes his Buddhist biases, and then offers a framework for approaching to the worlds' problems (all of them!) that is independent of religion. Noting the danger of religion reinforcing self-centered notions, he references the common ground found in all religions, "overcoming suffering through the practice of ethical discipline and cultivation of love and compassion," and advocates that we learn to reconcile our faith (or atheism) with the multiplicity of other possible faiths.

In the first of three sections, The Foundation of Ethics, he highlights some of the world's problems, and questions material wealth as a solution to happiness, noting that material things may in themselves cause anxiety, frustration, and discontent. Though the humor was completely unintentional, I laughed at his recounting of visiting the home of a wealthy family and noticing the stockpile of meds in a medicine cabinet that happened to be ajar.

The second section, Ethics and the Individual, functions sort of as a self-help book, though it's pretty insightful in a ways that sound obvious only once you've thought of it in the context of a given problem. For example, he notes that most people assume "discipline" is something that you impose against your will, but points out that "ethical discipline is something that we adopt voluntarily on the basis of full recognition of its benefits." Later, he cites Shantideva and the central truism of Bodhisattva- basically, if you're confronting a problem that is solveable, then you must learn to immediately find the means to act on it; if the problem has no solution, then it's best not to worry about it.

The final section, Ethics and Society, is by far the most ambitious, but also the most inspiring. The Dalai Lama notes that children in today's society are brought up to acquire knowledge, but not to learn compassion. The negative impact of this, he says, can be aggressive competitiveness toward peers, greed, and scorn for the less fortunate. Astutely, he attributes this to the historical separation of learning compassion outside of school in church- whereas today church has declined and schools haven't picked up the slack. Realistically, he suggests that schools address this gap by offering students substantial practice in ethical debate and non-violent conflict resolution. He suggests that "On seeing his parents wrangling, a child that had understood the value of dialogue would instinctively say, "Oh, no. That's not the way. You have to talk, to discuss things properly."

The Dalai Lama's biggest challenge is that he places on each individual some level of accountability for the corrupt leadership we so often blame for our problems. "When people possess healthy values, and where they practice ethical discipline in their own lives out of concern for others, the public officials produced by that society will quite naturally respect those same values." The easiest criticism of the Dalai Lama (and my own, before reading this book), is that he is too idealistic. His answer, which unfortunately isn't that well backed up, is that ideals are "the engine of progress", that it is a mistake to always try to be realistic in politics as history is full of examples of positive changes driven by idealism.

Although I thoroughly enjoyed many parts of this book and would recommend it to many people, I would not recommend it to everyone. I have given it a 3 star rating because of two main reasons.

1) The Dalai Lama fails to provide convincing arguments to those who don't already have views similar to his (i.e. that selflessness and non-violence are essential values), which is why this book will not appeal to those who need his advice the most. Compared to the Dalai Lama, I found M.K. Gandhi could make much more compelling rational arguments to convince skeptics of the necessity of being compassionate.

2) The title is misleading. I expected that the Dalai Lama had done much thinking about the modern world and wanted to propose his solutions to its major problems. I was very interested in learning what wisdom he had come up with. Instead, most of his thinking has revolved around traditional south Asian philosophies. Although these philosophies apply perfectly to the modern world, he did not show this well. Indeed he did not make any special effort to describe how the current problems could be resolved using these philosophies.

Here's a brief synopsis of the book:

In the first of three sections, the Dalai Lama explains that ethical conduct does not require adherence to religion, so long as one realizes everyone's right to be happy and not to suffer. He also argues that everyone desires to be happy, but that only those who manage to reach an inner peace that is independent of outside circumstances (such as wealth or poverty, political repression or freedom, sickness or health, etc.) can truly increase their happiness. He also makes a good argument for how happiness is easier to attain when we're shown compassion by others and how we can also help make others happy by showing them compassion.

To show that it is in our interest to make others happy by showing them compassion, he makes a rather complex philosophical discussion on how our interests are connected to other's interests so that our happiness is connected to other's happiness. I don't know if it's just me, but I found this part very complicated and not very convincing.

In the second part, he describes how each individual can develop this caring and compassionate nature. By restraining negative emotions (anger, envy, etc.), we avoid disregarding others and we end up reducing suffering both for others and ourselves. By developing compassion for all, even for those who would harm us, we can further develop virtues like forgiveness, humility, generosity. By dealing properly with unavoidable suffering (like aging, sickness, etc.), we can even strengthen our ability to have compassion and restrain our negative emotions, so that suffering may provide a good opportunity to learn.

In the third section, he tries to apply the principle of compassion to the level of society. There isn't much new there and he doesn't provide much to convince those who don't believe what he believes, it therefore sounds more like political correctness: care for the environment, care for the poor, care for peace, etc.

If you think like the Dalai Lama you will love this book, since he teaches you how you can become a better person. If you don't think like him, this book will fail to convince you and you will not learn any of the lessons he is teaching in this book. It's up to you to choose.

I went to his gathering in Portland where he shared the contents of this book verbally in a distilled form. Much of the talk was identical to passages in the book. He recommends that the religions have tolerance and respect for each other. He shares an ethic that is fairly modern and shows how much he has changed since his earlier times. The message is very basic, many liberal philosophers have advocated the same thing. It is good that the Dalai Lama has put his voice in support of such views. I do feel that, mere ethics is not enough, we need the practice of meditation for our hearts to transform and to become sensitive enough to see where we are not compassionate with each other, so that we can let go of the three poisons of the mind and become free. I found such a transformation and its necessity was not emphasized that much in this book. Perhaps he wanted people to get this more important point from other books he had written. I also personally would like it if those ethics included animals and not eating them, a point that I feel Guatama Buddha emphasized. I would have also liked if he emphasized how important the feminist movement has been to have women included in those ethics. I gave it three stars rather than five, because although the message is good and positive, it seems to lack something for me. I do not get the feeling that such a message by itself is enough to shift the planet. I think more is needed.

Ethics for the New Millennium is explicitly a nonreligious work, though it does present several key ideas that come out of Buddhist philosophical tradition. The goal, as stated in the preface, is to present an approach to ethics based on "universal" rather than religious principles. Presumably, these are principles that persons of diverse religious and nonreligious backgrounds would agree upon. Despite the title, this is not a technical or heavily philosophical work. Much of the book has a common-sense, anecdotal quality to it. While I enjoyed the stories of the Dalai Lama's personal experiences and his unique sense of humor, I must say that some of the cases he makes would be greatly strengthened if he presented some statistical data or findings from modern sociology, psychology and science. The Dalai Lama confesses that his own knowledge of modern (Western) secular thought is still limited, so much of his teachings probably reflect the Buddhist philosophy in which he has trained. Throughout the book, he introduces us to a number of Tibetan terms which do not have simple English equivalents. Several of the key notions presented in the book will probably be unfamiliar to the average Western reader. Of course, this is part of the attraction of the book.

To explain his motivation, the Dalai Lama begins by making the personal observation that, while the poor living in less developed countries with traditional cultures may be suffering physically, they often seem to be happier than those with greater material wealth living in more developed countries. His Holiness is careful not to romanticize "old ways of life" and he does not advocate primitivism or rejection of science and technology as a solution to the world's problems, but rather a "spiritual revolution." By this he means the adoption of the emotional disciplines and alternative worldview laid out in this book as a means of addressing disharmony in modern life. He says "My call for a spiritual revolution is thus not a call for a religious revolution. Nor is it a reference to a way of life that is somehow otherworldly, still less to something magical or mysterious. Rather, it is a call for a radical reorientation away from our habitual preoccupation with self" (p23). The Dalai Lama does a remarkable job of presenting this ethical system in simple language.

Christian readers may interested in the brief allusion to the "Fruits of the Spirit" (pp 22-23) which are discussed in a non-religious context. His Holiness acknowledges an admiration for Christian teachings developed in part through his friendship with a Cistercian monk some time ago. Even more interesting might be the chapter entitled "Ethics and Suffering" for those who wonder how persons with a non-theistic viewpoint cope with suffering and loss. An important clarification of the notion of karma is given as well. It is one of the best chapters in my opinion, though too short.

This is a very tolerant and pluralistic work with regard to religion. Polemics against religiously motivated bigotry, violence, and dogma seem to be entirely absent. The final chapter "The Role of Religion" is very insightful, but adroitly steers clear of controversy. The Dalai Lama acknowledges that people can lead happy ethical lives without recourse to religion, but is concerned that, with the rise of science and secularism worldwide, there may also be a rise in moral relativism. This book is intended to provide an alternative. My favorite quote: "These may seem unusual statements, coming as they do from a religious figure. I am, however, Tibetan before I am Dalai Lama, and I am human before I am Tibetan."

The more philosophical part of the book, entitled "The Nature of Reality", introduces the idea of dependent origination. This sort of organismic, interconnected view of the universe may require several readings to grasp, but leads naturally to the doctrine of "no self." This is the clearest and simplest explanation of this doctrine I have found so far.

The recurring theme of the book is this: our happiness depends upon the happiness of others. Here is another interesting quote: "As we have seen, given the complex nature of reality, it is very difficult to say that a particular act or type of act is right or wrong in itself. Ethical conduct is thus not something we engage in because it is somehow right in itself. We do so because we recognize that just as I desire to be happy and to avoid suffering so do all others." Afflictive emotions (anger, greed, hatred, pride, etc.) destroy our ability to make rational decisions, so we should practice restraint. Emotional responses can be shaped by worldview, and practice. The same is true for cultivating virtues. Anxiety and stress are often a result of lack of perspective. This is a very practical book that offers guidelines for changing how we react and how we feel.

I am a little concerned, however, with some statements made about science throughout the book, though these are not by any means central issues. The Dalai Lama tends to refer to "radical materialism" when talking about science from time to time, and I find this an unfortunate choice of words given the common connotations of the words "radical" and "materialism." Philosophical naturalism would have been better. He also says "my concern is rather that we are apt to overlook the limitations of science. In replacing religion as the final source of knowledge in popular estimation, science begins to look a bit like another religion itself" (p 11). It is not clear, just what, if anything, His Holiness suggests should be the final source of knowledge. The book is not heavily philosophical and so does not discuss epistemology (theories of knowledge). A recurring theme is the important role of practice and discipline; so perhaps in this sense, knowledge alone is insufficient to create the kind of disposition advocated in the book.

Little is said about economics, but readers may well wonder if the compassion and altruism advocated here are compatible with the workings of free-market economy which is based on competition. His Holiness again admits that his knowledge of economics is limited (p195), but he suggests "the relationship between empathy and profit is necessarily fragile. Still, I do not see why it should not be possible to have constructive competition. The key factor is the motivation of those engaged in it. ... But when competition is conducted with a spirit of generosity and good intention, the outcome, although it must entail a degree of suffering for those who lose, will at least not be too harmful." It is not pure altruism, of course, that he is suggesting, but rather a form of enlightened self interest (p127).

On the whole, this is a positive, feel-good book that I enjoyed reading, with lots of practical suggestions for ethical living that are phased in clear, simple language. It forms an interesting contrast with other more confrontational bestsellers I've read recently that also seek to create change.