How can a person who admits to being "nearly atheistic" become an authority on a specific church and, indeed, on whether people who believe in God are even right to believe in God? He tries to couch his disdain for religion in "exposing the underbelly" of a religion that I have found to be quite "normal" and far from intrusive. His sensationalism for describing the horrible acts of these two brothers may be accurate, but his willingness to associate freaks with the mainstream body of this church is irresponsible. I heard a NPR interview with the author and found myself becoming angry with his hipocrisy. One moment he was a detached, yet educated scholar. The next, he was criticizing a religion and people he really does not understand. It is a disappointment that this book has become a big seller....but sensationalism sells books, I guess.
Based purely on the language used, I found this to be a compelling "read." We listened on a very long road trip and the story and characters were mostly compelling. You can't help but feel angst of Macbeth's stupid decisions but those are nothing new compared to the original story and language. Great story overall.
Report Inappropriate Content