Essential Reading for Theists (A book recommendation thread)

[Whateverist]

If the point is to turn them away from religion they might start with the bible.

[Metis]

It really would depend on the thiest, their background and their level of intelligence.

For a Christian of a reasonable level of understanding I might turn to something like Some Mistakes of Moses by Robert Ingersoll, as for a Mormon I might recommend any one of several biography's of Joseph Smiths life not penned by a Mormon.

There isn't one be all and end all, it has to be tailored to fit the target. If I had to pick one though? Fields of Blood by Karen Armstrong, it's not an explicitly Atheistic work, in fact it tries to defend religion against the idea that it alone is the cause of violence. What it does though very gently is detail the theory that they all draw from much older non-religious events and traditions with a wide range of evidence.

An openly atheist work tends to make the barriers rise up in defense, but a rather more ambiguous Pantheistic one makes for creating a starting point.

[Clueless Morgan]

Recommended religious material for thesist would be...other holy books.

Not to mention reading their own cover to cover at one go preferably in a respectable scholarly translation and not one geared to your own sect.  Christians really should read a good Jewish translation of the OT.   Pay close attention when you get to the parts referenced in the NT.  You might understand why the Jews don't see the prophecies the way you do.

I was going to write back that this wouldn't really work with a Mormon, but the BOM has had some pretty significant edits...   Maybe if you got them to read a first edition and do a side-by-side comparison with their personal BOM... 

If the point is to turn them away from religion they might start with the bible.

Except my OP exempts the bible - that one is so obvious that I'm interested in hearing what you might recommend besides the bible.  

It really would depend on the thiest, their background and their level of intelligence.

For a Christian of a reasonable level of understanding I might turn to something like Some Mistakes of Moses by Robert Ingersoll, as for a Mormon I might recommend any one of several biography's of Joseph Smiths life not penned by a Mormon.

There isn't one be all and end all, it has to be tailored to fit the target. If I had to pick one though? Fields of Blood by Karen Armstrong, it's not an explicitly  Atheistic work, in fact it tries to defend religion against the idea that it alone is the cause of violence. What it does though very gently is detail the theory that they all draw from much older non-religious events and traditions with a wide range of evidence.

An openly atheist work tends to make the barriers rise up in defense, but a rather more ambiguous Pantheistic one makes for creating a starting point.

I haven't heard of that particular Karen Armstrong book, I might have to add it to my own book queue...

As for JS biographies, the trick with a Mormon is getting them to actually read something directly critical of the LDS church.  I wouldn't choose a direct attack on their beliefs as the first book recommendation for a Mormon, it would be too confrontational for most of them to handle.  Of the Ex-Mos I've talked to, most have to be doubting pretty seriously to even consider reading such a book, let alone to read it while being a true believer.  I might, instead, go for a book on critical thinking first.

And I agree that the book choice needs to be tailored to the individual.  In a thread like this, though, one need assume some sort of generic believer. 

[Jenny A]

Not to mention reading their own cover to cover at one go preferably in a respectable scholarly translation and not one geared to your own sect.  Christians really should read a good Jewish translation of the OT.   Pay close attention when you get to the parts referenced in the NT.  You might understand why the Jews don't see the prophecies the way you do.

I was going to write back that this wouldn't really work with a Mormon, but the BOM has had some pretty significant edits...   Maybe if you got them to read a first edition and do a side-by-side comparison with their personal BOM... 

I don't know how available early additions of the BOM are.  For Mormons, I would suggest Standing For Something More: The Excommunication of Lyndon Lamborn by Lyndon Lambron.  He details his multi-generation Morman background, former faith, and how research for a Sunday class he was giving first caused him to question church teachings, and finally to lose his faith.  It also gives a rather clear and ugly picture of Morman leadership.   He's not the world's greatest writer, but he's intelligent, genuine, and not particularly vindictive.  It also includes why it is that after having exposed Mormonism, Christianity didn't make a good fall back.  "Fooled me once,"  and all that.

[Minimalist]

Theists should read Mother Goose.

It's just their speed.

[Clueless Morgan]

I don't know how available early additions of the BOM are.  For Mormons, I would suggest Standing For Something More: The Excommunication of Lyndon Lamborn by Lyndon Lambron.  He details his multi-generation Morman background, former faith, and how research for a Sunday class he was giving first caused him to question church teachings, and finally to lose his faith.  It also gives a rather clear and ugly picture of Morman leadership.   He's not the world's greatest writer, but he's intelligent, genuine, and not particularly vindictive.  It also includes why it is that after having exposed Mormonism, Christianity didn't make a good fall back.  "Fooled me once,"  and all that.

Screw the Mormons, I'm gonna read this one

Theists should read Mother Goose.

It's just their speed.

Hey, Min, I was wondering when you would make your rec!

And just my two cents, Mother Goose might still be a little sophisticated.  Maybe something more like this would work out?:

---

---

I'm surprised this wasn't your first thought, too...

[Anima]

I would recommend:

Summa Theologica (for the educated theists)

Summa Contra Gentiles (for the uneducated theists and atheists)

Collective works of Aristotle (for everyone!)

[Pyrrho]

I rather like The Atheist Debater's Handbook by B.C. Johnson.  One of the things I particularly liked was how it explains how the Bible tells a story, and then later indirectly tells you the story is false.  I mentioned this in an old post; Johnson tells you the story and where to find it; he does not quote it all as I did in my post:

... For example, in Luke 1:26-35, we have:

• 26 And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth,

• 27 To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary.

• 28 And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.

• 29 And when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and cast in her mind what manner of salutation this should be.

• 30 And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God.

• 31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus.

• 32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:

• 33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.

• 34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?

• 35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

But in Luke 2:41-50:

• 41 Now his parents went to Jerusalem every year at the feast of the passover.

• 42 And when he was twelve years old, they went up to Jerusalem after the custom of the feast.

• 43 And when they had fulfilled the days, as they returned, the child Jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem; and Joseph and his mother knew not of it.

• 44 But they, supposing him to have been in the company, went a day's journey; and they sought him among their kinsfolk and acquaintance.

• 45 And when they found him not, they turned back again to Jerusalem, seeking him.

• 46 And it came to pass, that after three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them, and asking them questions.

• 47 And all that heard him were astonished at his understanding and answers.

• 48 And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.

• 49 And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business?

• 50 And they understood not the saying which he spake unto them.

Now, how is it that they did not understand what Jesus was saying there?  There is no way one is going to forget an angel visiting you and telling you that your virgin fiancée has been impregnated by God, so you should go ahead and marry her anyway.  So if this later story is true, the earlier one about the virgin birth is false.  The story is not consistent with itself.

...

Obviously, this recommendation is for a Christian theist, not other kinds, though some of the arguments are more generic.

[Crossless2.0]

Theists should read Mother Goose.

It's just their speed.

Maybe for some.  But for the more sophisticated among them, in any case for those who can recognize irony when they encounter it, I recommend "The Emperor's New Clothes".