jaybatson's review against another edition
challenging
informative
inspiring
reflective
slow-paced
5.0
This is a book of incredible insight, and assessment of how the world has been for two millennia. Reading it becomes one of those "Once you see it, you can't unsee it" pivot points in your view of what's around you.
Not a read to be undertaken lightly - it takes several dozen reading hours to get through - the author knits together events you've heard of in the past, but (unless you, too, are a historian) may not have seen how they link with each other to create an integrated history.
Honestly, it's just too expansive for me to try to write something that helps you understand the content of the book. Instead, let me tell you why I read it, and who I think might be interested in doing so, too.
I read it because I've been reconstructing my Christian faith. I put my faith at-risk in the process, allowing myself the ability to say "You must be comfortable with the notion that you might end up stepping away from your faith". I thought that process in-fact gave me an opportunity to re-approach Christianity with a clean slate. I'm late in that process, and in fact it has re-built my comfort & rigor with Christianity in a surprisingly strong way. I've now read Holland's book late in that process as another step in assessing the greatness or terribleness of this faith.
Interestingly, though, Holland's book makes me admit to myself that I did not execute that rebuilding with a clean slate. Far from it, the very way I think is part of a culture that has been shaped by Christianity, and even the notions of agnosticism or atheism are defined relative to Christianity. They exist in the context of, and in contrast to it. Moral codes that live with now in the west are indeed bound to Christianity. Even Nietzsche, a man who declared God dead...
Not a read to be undertaken lightly - it takes several dozen reading hours to get through - the author knits together events you've heard of in the past, but (unless you, too, are a historian) may not have seen how they link with each other to create an integrated history.
Honestly, it's just too expansive for me to try to write something that helps you understand the content of the book. Instead, let me tell you why I read it, and who I think might be interested in doing so, too.
I read it because I've been reconstructing my Christian faith. I put my faith at-risk in the process, allowing myself the ability to say "You must be comfortable with the notion that you might end up stepping away from your faith". I thought that process in-fact gave me an opportunity to re-approach Christianity with a clean slate. I'm late in that process, and in fact it has re-built my comfort & rigor with Christianity in a surprisingly strong way. I've now read Holland's book late in that process as another step in assessing the greatness or terribleness of this faith.
Interestingly, though, Holland's book makes me admit to myself that I did not execute that rebuilding with a clean slate. Far from it, the very way I think is part of a culture that has been shaped by Christianity, and even the notions of agnosticism or atheism are defined relative to Christianity. They exist in the context of, and in contrast to it. Moral codes that live with now in the west are indeed bound to Christianity. Even Nietzsche, a man who declared God dead...
...warned what confusions would follow from the death of God. Moral codes would drift unanchored. Deeds of massive & terrible violence would be perpetrated. Even committed Nietzcheans might flinch before their discovery of what this meant in practice.
So my own rebuilding decisions were all made in the context of my origin faith, and not made without reference to it. Yet, this is actually not wrong or bad, given that the lack of the world Christianity has wrought would be nearly unfathomable. And in fact, the end result of that Christian world is profoundly good - a case Holland makes by pointing out contrary possibilities that have arisen, and fallen.
So, at a minimum, those who are in a reconstruction phase of their faith (whether or not they deconstruct first) would do well to understand what Holland lays out here.
Those who argue that Christianity has been more a problem than benefit would also do well to read how over and over those who place "What would Jesus do" as the anchor for their decisions will (more often than not) make society better. That
... God chose the weak things of this world to shame the strong.
Buckle up, plan on a time investment, and read this. You won't see the world the same afterwards.
neil_denham's review against another edition
3.0
The first part of this book is well written and engaging, even though it is a rather selective look at history to fit his overall hypothesis (but what history isn't selective?). When he gets to about the 17th Century it seems to become less tightly written, and his argument starts to fall to pieces, but he ploughs on regardless making almost hilarious statements at time to try and fit things into his overall argument. Having said this it is an interesting and thought provoking read!
davehershey's review against another edition
5.0
Tom Holland (not the guy who plays Spider Man!) has written a few of my favorite works of history, specifically on ancient Sparta and Rome. A couple years back he wrote an article explaining how he realized that, as much as he admired Leonidas or Caesar, he was nothing like them in his own morals or ethics. Whether he liked it or not, his morality was distinctly shaped by Christianity. This book is his effort to demonstrate how the Christian revolution totally shaped our modern world.
The book is divided into three parts. Part 1 begins centuries prior to the birth of Jesus and tells the story of the rise of Christianity. Part 2 takes us through Christendom with the final part being the modern world. Each chapter loosely centers around one geographical locale and time and focuses on a few themes. In general, this book tells a 2500 years history of the rise of and revolution brought by Christianity.
Holland illustrates a tension inherent in Christianity from the beginning between a call to love all people and a desire to have some sort of regulation or barrier that separates. This tension is what led to reform movements throughout history. The first reform movement, the one that created Christendom, was in the 1000s when Pope Gregory VII excommunicated the Holy Roman Emperor and saw the Emperor on his knees in the snow begging forgiveness. Gregory also reformed the church. Gregory's reforms were so successful that the Church totally changed and when Luther came along, he may have sought a reform akin to what Gregory had brought but he ended up starting the Reformation. Holland tells stories of many other reform movements within Christendom.
The controversial part of Holland's story will be part three, where he draws it all together to demonstrate how Christianity has totally permeated our culture. Even those who reject Christianity do so from Christian presuppositions and cannot get away from Christian assumptions. So we see Voltaire attacking the church with many criticisms echoing Luther, for example. The idea that all humans have rights is rooted not in the evidence of nature but in the teaching of Christianity. When Muslim countries join the United Nations they had to leave behind, or at least reinterpret, their religion to bring it in line with Western values which, again, were rooted in Christianity. The very idea that there is a "secular sphere" grew up in Christendom. The idea there is something called "religion" apart from this was transported by Westerners to India (where Hinduism became a religion for the first time, as opposed to just the Indian way of life).
Some of Christianity's enemies recognize this, and Holland cites the likes of Nietzsche and the Marquis de Sade. Others of Christianity's enemies rebel against Christianity by using the very tools given by Christianity. As Holland points out, even when John Lennon sings "All You Need is Love" he is building that song on Christian assumptions.
One of Holland's starkest points comes in views of sexuality. Christianity has come to be seen as too puritanical and confining in many places in the west. Some want to return to a Greek or Roman view of sex. Holland would quickly warn, no you do not. He talks about how the only people who had freedom in who they had sex with in the Roman were were free men. And such free men could have sex with basically whomever they wanted whenever they wanted. It was Christianity's view that all humans are created in God's image and have rights that changed the world. It was also Christianity, the apostle Paul specifically, who first argued that humans have a nature or orientation (so homosexuality, as an orientation, was a Christian invention). All of this to say that in the final chapter he argues that even the #metoo movement's call for men to control themselves and treat women correctly and that women ought not be abused is rooted in Christian assumptions much more than any Greco-Roman ones.
As far as we believe in freedom of choice and universal human rights we are showing that we are still a decidedly Christian culture.
For the record, Holland is not a practicing Christian. The only time he gets personal is near the end when he shares the impact of his faithful godmother on his life, with his skepticism there is any afterlife when he will see her again. Holland is no Christian apologist trying to win converts. Instead, he is someone who, whatever beliefs about God he may have, realizes he too is an heir of the Christian revolution.
The book is divided into three parts. Part 1 begins centuries prior to the birth of Jesus and tells the story of the rise of Christianity. Part 2 takes us through Christendom with the final part being the modern world. Each chapter loosely centers around one geographical locale and time and focuses on a few themes. In general, this book tells a 2500 years history of the rise of and revolution brought by Christianity.
Holland illustrates a tension inherent in Christianity from the beginning between a call to love all people and a desire to have some sort of regulation or barrier that separates. This tension is what led to reform movements throughout history. The first reform movement, the one that created Christendom, was in the 1000s when Pope Gregory VII excommunicated the Holy Roman Emperor and saw the Emperor on his knees in the snow begging forgiveness. Gregory also reformed the church. Gregory's reforms were so successful that the Church totally changed and when Luther came along, he may have sought a reform akin to what Gregory had brought but he ended up starting the Reformation. Holland tells stories of many other reform movements within Christendom.
The controversial part of Holland's story will be part three, where he draws it all together to demonstrate how Christianity has totally permeated our culture. Even those who reject Christianity do so from Christian presuppositions and cannot get away from Christian assumptions. So we see Voltaire attacking the church with many criticisms echoing Luther, for example. The idea that all humans have rights is rooted not in the evidence of nature but in the teaching of Christianity. When Muslim countries join the United Nations they had to leave behind, or at least reinterpret, their religion to bring it in line with Western values which, again, were rooted in Christianity. The very idea that there is a "secular sphere" grew up in Christendom. The idea there is something called "religion" apart from this was transported by Westerners to India (where Hinduism became a religion for the first time, as opposed to just the Indian way of life).
Some of Christianity's enemies recognize this, and Holland cites the likes of Nietzsche and the Marquis de Sade. Others of Christianity's enemies rebel against Christianity by using the very tools given by Christianity. As Holland points out, even when John Lennon sings "All You Need is Love" he is building that song on Christian assumptions.
One of Holland's starkest points comes in views of sexuality. Christianity has come to be seen as too puritanical and confining in many places in the west. Some want to return to a Greek or Roman view of sex. Holland would quickly warn, no you do not. He talks about how the only people who had freedom in who they had sex with in the Roman were were free men. And such free men could have sex with basically whomever they wanted whenever they wanted. It was Christianity's view that all humans are created in God's image and have rights that changed the world. It was also Christianity, the apostle Paul specifically, who first argued that humans have a nature or orientation (so homosexuality, as an orientation, was a Christian invention). All of this to say that in the final chapter he argues that even the #metoo movement's call for men to control themselves and treat women correctly and that women ought not be abused is rooted in Christian assumptions much more than any Greco-Roman ones.
As far as we believe in freedom of choice and universal human rights we are showing that we are still a decidedly Christian culture.
For the record, Holland is not a practicing Christian. The only time he gets personal is near the end when he shares the impact of his faithful godmother on his life, with his skepticism there is any afterlife when he will see her again. Holland is no Christian apologist trying to win converts. Instead, he is someone who, whatever beliefs about God he may have, realizes he too is an heir of the Christian revolution.
straight_no_chaser's review against another edition
challenging
informative
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
5.0