realiz wrote:He does have a lot of passion and energy that he bring to his work of winning souls and convincing other that the way he sees the truth is the way they should see it. Then he does this 180 and again is convinced that he needs to win 'minds' for atheism. He's got to prove once again how right he is.
And to do this he walks away from a wife and four kids...an easy divorce, right, because they didn't have many assets...what about those four kids?

Granted, we don't know the back story, but it is odd how little treatment Barker gives his own failed marriage. He does explain it somewhat by saying that Carol didn't want him to say anything about her, which sounds kind of lame to me. What I want to know is, was the rift in their marriage caused by his move away from Christianity? Or was it financial difficulties? Adulterous affair? Who knows.

Barker says only this:

I could no longer imagine a marriage in which the man is the "head" of the wife, as the bible sets it up. Divorce is always painful, but we were fortunate that it was not too messy. We did not have much property to fight about, and neither of us wanted to fight anyway.

So yes, I'd say he gives the subject rather short shrift.

Did anyone else find it odd that Barker sent out letters announcing that he no longer considered himself a Christian? I know he was a preacher and all, and that some of his business dealings were predicated on the assumption of Christian faith. Still, there seems something rather odd about sending a letter out. As a lapsed Catholic myself, I never really got religion, so it's very difficult for me to imagine such a dramatic turnabout. For Barker, though, this dramatic reversal is his claim to fame, and the book's raison d'etre. I have to say (again) that this is where this book falls really short, in my opinion. Barker just doesn't convincingly portray how this dramatic switch has taken place. I'm still only halfway through, so I'll reserve final judgment.

I'm sorry for being so negative, but I have to pick on one more thing, which is Barker's editorial decision to use small case for the Bible (thus, the bible). I'm sorry, but this is simply grammatically incorrect. The Bible should be capitalized, same as the Koran, Larry, Mexico, the Boston Red Sox, and the Golden Gate Bridge. It doesn't mean anything except that it's a proper noun. I see he's trying to make a point, but it's a cheap shot at best.

Chris OConnor wrote:I remember being in Spanish II class when I was in college and the teacher played a bull fighting video for us. She was from Spain and was clearly impressed by the matadors skill. After the video was over she turned to us smiling and asked us what we thought. I let a few people share their thoughts and then I laid it on her.

I remember explaining to her that I think it is one of the most disgusting things I've ever seen in my life. Taking pleasure and making a sport out of brutally killing an innocent bull is horrible and any nation and people that engages in such barbarity ought to be embarrassed. She was shocked at what I said and tried to explain that what I saw was a very old tradition. WTF? So shoving swords down into a bulls back to pierce his heart and make him bleed to death slowly is a tradition? Well, so was slavery here in the United States and we evolved culturally. All traditions aren't good just by virtue of being a tradition. Some traditions need to die. I wouldn't let off on this no matter how she tried to defend her countries proud tradition. I even asked her, "How would you feel if someone slid long daggers down your shoulder and into your lungs and heart for fun and sport?"

Not sure why I added this to this thread. But when I hear the word "tradition" I immediately look for some sort of messed up practice. Yes, not all traditions are as disgusting as bull fighting, but many are and something should be done about these sorts of things.

Hemingway wrote an entire book about the the "sport" of bull fighting, but these days it's increasingly harder to justify blood sports. I know fox hunting is on the way out in Britain, isn't it? In my neck of the woods, they still hunt bears using dogs. The way they treat their dogs is criminal, not to mention the poor bears.

You're absolutely right that adhering to traditions simply because they're traditions is just plain stupid. My signature, "question everything" is a testament to just that. Don't do things just because your parents did them and their parents before them. That's not good enough.

Did anyone else find it odd that Barker sent out letters announcing that he no longer considered himself a Christian?

I agree. I thought this was odd too. I suppose that they were people he worked closely with and thought that they should be informed of his change of heart.

I found links on youtube to the debate between Dan Barker and Dinesh D'Souza. It is broken up into 15 parts but I was able to find them all online. I thought people might be interested.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1arsUJI0 ... re=related