Which book compares more than favourably with the ilk of Shakespeare and Milton, regarded by experts as two of the world's greatest poets. Yes, it is the Bible!

Although it has lost much of its importance in a secular post-modern world, it remains "the most influential book in history." (World Book Encyclopedia, volume 2, p 219, 1989 edition.) It is said that, "The Bible in Latin shaped the thought and life of western people for a 1,000 years." (Encyclopedia Britannica Macropedia, volume two, 1991 edition, p 756,1 15th edition.)

Appraising Scripture purely from a literary viewpoint, it is one of the world's finest examples of excellence in fine literature. World Book Encyclopedia comments that, "Scholars value the books of the Bible not only as important religious writings but also as great literary works." (World Book Encyclopedia, volume two, p 279, 2000 edition.)

What can account for the universal appeal and popularity of the Scripture that its influence should extend over barriers of race, culture, and language? The answer must be due, in part, to its timeless nature. The Word of God offers answers to life's greatest questions, questions that have plagued humanity for 1,000s of years. Questions like where do we come from? What is the meaning of life? Why does evil exist? How will the world end?

Within the Bible is a rich variety of genres of literature that includes history, biography, narrative, hymns, riddles, essays, fiction, law, salty wise sayings, letters, philosophy, proverbs, prophecy, parables, poetry, prayers, stories, and some science.

The authors were sages, fishermen, shepherds, prophets, priests, kings, and poets. They display a wide diversity of literary talents, expressing some of the loftiest thoughts and sentiments ever penned. They display a virtuosity, a brilliance, and breadth of mind rarely equalled. The poetry and prose of Scripture contain some beautiful, grand, and majestic thoughts that have never been excelled.

The King James Version, (1611) was largely the craftsmanship of William Tyndale, who was a master wordsmith of the English language. It is a masterpiece of English prose with an old world beauty, charm, and grace. It is said to be "one of the worlds great treasures of the English language." (World Book Encyclopedia, volume two, p 286, 1989 edition.)

Although the idiom of the King James Version is archaic and dated, re-examined in the newer translations it never need be difficult or incomprehensible. In the newer versions like the New International Version, we find it a literary treasure trove.

The Bible contains the wisdom of the ages, yet it is not hoary with age. Although it is a spiritual book that must be spiritually discerned, it will unfold its treasures to all who apply themselves to it with education and application.

The Scriptures are more than a relic of antiquity; more than a repository of the history of man; more than a source of delightful human-interest stories; and more than a religious manuscript.

The Bible is a source of delightful literature that has educated, enthused, and enlightened generations. Men of literature, historians, scientists, philosophers, scholars, archeologists, thespians, atheists, and skeptics have read its pages with profit.

'Literary critics have praised it for its beautiful poetry and stirring calls for faith.' World Book Encyclopedia, volume two, p 239, 2000 edition.

What has the mighty cleaver of truth achieved in its 3,500 year history?

No one could deny that the Holy Bible has had an imponderable moral, legal, and spiritual power throughout its history. The influence of the Ten Commandments permeates the common law of England and other English nations.

The Bible, through the vivifying influence of the Holy Spirit and holy men of God; men like John Wesley and George Whitefield who helped redeem 17th century England from the deleterious effects of the Gin era, and the Industrial Revolution. Historians readily admit that these forces could have spawned another bloody revolution for England, just as France experienced in the opening of the eighteenth century. The Bible's influence led to the freeing of the slaves through men like William Wilberforce in 18th century England, and Abraham Lincoln in 19th century America.

Scripture has been a preserver of society, law, freedom, liberty, justice, and the equality of man. It has inspired a countless quantity and quality of high literature, ennobling music, and fine arts.

It has inspired millions of lives with faith, hope and love in some of life's darkest hours. It has engendered countless good deeds which has ennobled the human race. It has helped redeem millions of lost, hopeless, and soul blighted lives. It has provided the life purpose and life direction that a ruined humanity lost in Eden.

John Wycliffe, who in the late 14th century rendered the Bible into the vernacular, made it available to the peoples of Europe. The Bible in their language made the English the most literate people in Europe. From the 16th century onward, it fostered reading habits and reflection. Its study led to freedoms of thought, interpretation, and study that are indispensable to democratic freedom.

With the resurgence of the Christian faith in formerly strong Communist lands like Russia in 1989, and later in China, there is a new emphasis on the Bible. There has been a resurgence of Christian faith in reaction to the spiritual poverty of soul induced by a state enforced religion of atheism. India, with its millions of gods is craving the good news of the Bible.

What can account for the rising interest in the New Age movement and angels? Mankind has lost his spirituality, which only God and the Bible can restore. Augustine, the fifth century Bishop of Hippo, wrote "Thou hast created us for Thyself and our hearts are restless until they repose in Thee." This original thinker also wrote that man has a "God shaped hole" that only God can satisfy. The Bible can help you fill that void.

America's most prolific female religious author wrote that, “As a means of intellectual training, the Bible is more effective than any other book. No other study can impact such mental power…The mind thus brought into contact with the Infinite cannot but expand and strengthen.” (Education, Ellen G White, 1901, p 124.)

In its pages we may soar on eagles wings to the eternal heights, for God's ways are higher than mans ways, and God's thoughts are higher than mans thoughts: even as high as the heavens are above the earth. See Isaiah 55:8-9.

“As an educator, the Holy Scriptures are without a rival. The Bible is the most ancient and the most comprehensive history that men possess. It came fresh from the Fountain of eternal truth; and that throughout the ages a divine hand has preserved its purity…in the Word of God the mind finds subjects for the deepest thought, the loftiest aspirations. Here we may…listen to the voice of the eternal.” (Education, Ellen G White, 1901, p 263.)

In the Bible, there are rich fields of thought to inspire the mind, stimulate the intellect, and quicken the faculties. It has conveyed a wealth of reading pleasure and enlightenment.

It is not some relic of antiquity, or a dry dusty tome. Those who search its sacred pages as for hid treasures, find it of more worth than all the world's silver and gold. It is most interesting to intellects trained in the study of it. There is spiritual power in feeding upon the word.

In its pages, we read of a God of love who has an infinite pity for those who need Him most. He yearns over mankind as the lover of their souls. Christ left a paradise of glory to win back the pearl of great price, the salvation of a ruined world. He gave His all to win back a planet locked in rebellion against the legitimate government of heaven.

The Christian is advised, "Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." 2 Tim 2:15. The truth of God lies not always on the surface, we need to be earnest in the study of it, it not enough to read the Scriptures.

Read the sensuous love poetry of the Song of Solomon, or discover the beauty and comfort of the 23rd psalm. You can read the inspiring story of Joseph in Genesis, or the beauty and majesty of Isaiah, the gospel prophet's vivid page. Open the book that elevates the mind to the eternal and to the divine.

The Bible illumines the pathway to the Fathers glorious kingdom. The psalmist says, "Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path." Ps 119:105. Jesus said "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth from the mouth of God." Mt 4.4.

There was little time for formal education for Abraham Lincoln, textbooks were scarce; but with a thirst for knowledge, he read from his first textbook, the Bible; and from it, he produced a learning that not only changed his nations life, and affected the thinking of his day. If the Bible can do this for all them, what can it do for you?

I commend to you dear reader Holy Writ, for Jesus says, "Search the Scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me." Jn 5:39. If we would know Jesus, we must know that old black Book. It is chart and compass to the travelling pilgrim who would walk at last into the city of lights beyond the stars and spend an eternity with Him in paradise. It is an unerring guide that cannot fail.

The central plot episode occurs when Hester visits Governor Bellingham's mansion to plead for the right to retain custody of her daughter, Pearl. She is a young woman entering the lavish residence of a powerful man, and she does not know whether her sojourn will be for good or ill. In the same way, Esther enters the palace of King Ahasuerus uncertain if her visit will bring tragedy or fortune. Her visit brings fortune; she is named queen, and, later in the story, she pleads with the king for the safety of her people, the Jews, just as Hester pleads for Pearl. “Esther receives the clemency of the king, who promises to grant any request she makes…Hester, appealing to Bellingham as to a king…also has her request granted” (Gartner). Adding imagery to the plotline, Bellingham's mansion is described as “Aladdin's palace” (Hawthorne), and lends a Middle Eastern semblance to the vision of the mansion; in the imagination it resembles the palace of a Middle Eastern ruler such as King Ahasuerus who ruled “from India to Ethiopia” (Esther 1:1). This scene of Hester visiting the governor's mansion demonstrates one of the connections between the two books.

Striking similarities between Esther and Hester also serve to link The Scarlet Letter and the Book of Esther. Perhaps the most obvious connection is the similarity in name. Hester is Esther with the “H” relocated to the beginning of the appellation. Gartner also emphasizes the similarities between the marital relationships of both women. Hester is married to Chillingworth, whom she does not love. In the prison, Chillingworth says to Hester, “I betrayed thy budding youth into a false and unnatural relation with my decay” (Hawthorne). In this passage, Chillingworth indicates that he is a great deal older than Hester. “Esther too has been brought into a "false and unnatural relation" with the much older Ahasuerus; she is first brought into his harem and then made his wife” (Gartner). While Hester clearly shows the greatest resemblance to Queen Esther, her public disgrace at the beginning of The Scarlet Letter reveals a parallelism to Esther's predecessor, Queen Vashti:

[L]et an irrevocable decree be issued by [King Ahasuerus] and inscribed among the laws of the Persians and Medes, forbidding Vashti to come into the presence of King Ahasuerus and authorizing the king to give her royal dignity to one more worthy than she….[T]he decree which the king will issue [will be] published throughout the land. (Esther 1:19-20).

In this way, Vashti is publicly humiliated and deposed; all peoples in the land learn of her disgrace. Hester stands on the scaffold for three hours and endures the malevolent gaze of the townspeople as a collective whole; everyone knows her disgrace as well.

Mordecai is Esther's cousin; he is reincarnated as Mr. Dimmesdale in The Scarlet Letter. Gartner depicts Mordecai as “the timid man of God.” Dimmesdale, as a minister, is also a “man of God”; he is also frail and weak, traits Hawthorne ascribes to Dimmesdale in several places: “[T]he health of Mr. Dimmesdale had evidently begun to fail…with every successive Sabbath, his cheek was paler and thinner, and his voice more tremulous than before…thus suffering under bodily disease and tortured by some black trouble of the soul….” Insofar as Mordecai is represented by Dimmesdale, “Hawthorne seems to imagine Mordecai as a weak figure who looks helplessly on as the woman he cares for is made to endure a long ordeal of shame, solitude, and isolation” (Gartner). Mordecai observes Esther in Ahasuelus's harem, but is unable to intervene on her behalf. In contrast, Dimmesdale has the ability to join Hester and alleviate some of her suffering by offering companionship, but out of cowardice is unable to do so for seven years. Gartner's comparison of Mordecai and Dimmesdale is solid except for one discrepancy: Gartner maintains that Esther and Mordecai are lovers. This would match the relationship between Hester and Dimmesdale; however, the Bible states that Mordecai takes Esther as his daughter and has no sexual relationship with her. Considering the Bible as an historical text, it is safe to say that Gartner is wrong in this area.

In The Scarlet Letter, Roger Chillingworth strives to avenge the wrong Dimmesdale inadvertently does to him. To Hester, Chillingworth says, “I shall see him tremble….Sooner or later he must needs be mine!” (Hawthorne). The Book of Esther also casts a character bent on revenge. Haman a man revered by the king, seeks revenge on Mordecai: “Haman…sought to harm Mordecai and his people…” (Esther A:17). The difference between Haman and Chillingworth is their modus operandi. In fact, their methods of executing their revenge are the exact opposite of each other. Haman seeks to kill Mordecai while Chillingworth seeks to keep Dimmesdale alive in order to prolong his suffering. In the end, however, both men are foiled, and “[t]he mechanics of vengeance…break down” (Gartner). Dimmesdale's secret is revealed; Chillingworth no longer has any leverage over him with which to extract revenge. As for Haman, King Ahasuelus finds fault with him and hangs him on the gallows he had constructed for Mordecai. Both men meet their undoing on a scaffold.

One of the major themes in both the Book of Esther and The Scarlet Letter is secrecy. “Queen Esther and Hester Prynn must both keep, and must finally disclose, a secret” (Gartner). Hester hides the identity of her daughter's father. Esther conceals her own identity as a Jew. Both secrets cause harm to the men closest to the women; Chillingworth is able to slowly torture Dimmesdale, and Haman begins a systematic killing of the Jews to hurt Mordecai. Had the secrets been revealed, Haman and Chillingworth would have had no hold over Dimmesdale and Mordecai. “The turning point of both texts may thus be the heroine's revelation of her secret…” (Gartner).

Gartner brings up one more interesting phenomenon included in both books: “The Book of Esther is the only book in the Hebrew Bible not to include the word God; The Scarlet Letter also has at its center…the absence of the word "adultery," for which the letter A patently stands.” This lack of direct reference to an integral part of the story adds one more tiny filament to a shining web of connections.

The Book of Esther and The Scarlet Letter have so much in common that it is astonishing that they should not be analyzed together more thoroughly; an entirely separate book could be written about their similarities. The basic plot line of each story is nearly identical, as are the main characters. Both stories demonstrate the triumph of good over evil with the defeat of Haman and Chillingworth. Both stories place a woman in an adverse situation. Both stories see her turn that situation to her advantage. And both stories end on a scaffold; a symbol of pain and death transformed into a symbol of triumph and love.

Ramsay's no slouch when it comes to the theology or the comedy. He may not be a household name, but he's certainly successful in the comedy world. He's not likely to be a household name in the (generally stuffy) theology world either, but he's done his homework. (Check out the footnotes that range from real citations to absurd throwaway lines.) He admits some readers will find him too fundamentalist for their liking, but he makes no apology for that. He wants his readers to stop waffling around and think seriously about God, Christ, life, good and evil. And sin. And Muslims.

He calls himself a nuevo fundamentalist, and reactionary, and even more insulting things, and he struggles a great deal with the loose (postmodern) theology propounded by what's known broadly as the emerging or emergent Church, even tackling such high priests of that movement as Brian McLaren. Not that he throws them out completely - he just wants you to throw Brian's books at something your mother-in-law insisted on giving you.

Ramsay is the jester in the King's Court. By appearing to be making jokes and only jokes, he can stab you in the back with a serious point while you're not looking. Well, you wouldn't be looking - you'd have your back turned. As he writes at the beginning of chapter 8: “It's a comedian's job to say what everyone else is thinking but is afraid to say. Comedy should have some guts.”

In case you think this will be one of those books where the comedian has just written down his stage act - it isn't. It reads very well on the page, even if the jokes sometimes come so thick and fast you have to stop to breathe. Theology can be a dull subject in the hands of (non-comedic) theologians. It's refreshing to read a book on theology where you have to go in the other room so that your bursts of laughter don't keep making the dog bark.

Yinger states that it is plain to see the universality of religion, though it has a wide variety in forms of expression. While societies were in relatively infrequent contact with each other the facts of universality and variety were insignificant, but when contact became extensive, with mobility and change creating situations of religious diversity within societies, these facts became more important. Though religions share many things in common, their values and effects can be differentiated, and informed value choices are still needed. The sociologist and the scientific study of religion makes certain assumptions that the methods of objective science can be applied to religious phenomenon and that religion, when it is being examined within the framework of science, is dealt with as a part of the natural world, subject to the laws of cause and effect and the rules of logic. Yinger believes his tentative efforts to state how religion and society interact under certain conditions are valuable not only to other sciences, but to the religious quest itself. The intricate ways in which religion is involved in the life of society are revealed by exploring religious movements in their social settings. Yinger's interpretive essays explore some of the religious consequences of the growth of cities, of minority status, of the decline of ethnic groups, of prosperity, and of rapid social change. He looks at religion from the perspectives of sociology, anthropology, and social psychology seeing it as one of the processes of social life while recognizing the limitations of these views.

The sociologist begins with the basic proposition that religion cannot be understood in isolation from the rest of society. Religion is part of a system, interacting with the economic and political aspects of society, the family patterns, the technology, and the nature of the communities. If one part of a system changes, the other parts are influenced in various ways. Yinger proposes that if literacy, mobility, and science develop in a community, its religions will undergo important changes, not just superficially, but fundamentally. If a new religion moves into a society, the whole social structure feels the impact, while at the same time modifying the religion it absorbs.

Every society has some pattern of belief and action by means of which it performs certain vital functions; in essence every society has a religion, even if it is an anti-religion. The ultimate question of many religions is how man spends eternal life, but Yinger claims that most people today are more likely to ask of their religion that it helps them to understand the suffering, loneliness, and meaninglessness of life. He says that religion can be defined as a group-supported road to salvation, but asks salvation from what?

Yinger claims the major religions of the world developed in rural settings, and says even today religion is tied to rural societies. The growth of cities with the development of urbanization has posed new problems for religious institutions as well as for political, economic, and familial institutions. Urban societies create a situation for the first time in human history where individuals interact daily with strangers whose values and goals are different from their own. Literacy and mobility expand horizons of contact, and with contact, disenchantment and secularization come into play. In the urban setting, kinship units lose some solidarity and functions, but despite this loss, the family remains a vital part of urban life. These urban societies are characterized by increased normlessness, witnessing a reduction in the value consensus of the majority of people who have been influenced by mass media and mass production. Although agreement on norms and values decrease, functional interdependence and tolerance tend to increase. The profound changes in the nature of life in urban societies, Yinger says, has enormous consequences for religion. Most of the religious movements in cities reflect the efforts of various groups to come to terms with urban life, while searching for some stability in this ever-changing setting. The revival of interest in religion is a manifestation of these conflicts and anxieties of contemporary life.

Religion is believed to be good for society in that it softens some of the harsher consequences of the pursuit of secular values and that it makes it easier for diverse groups to live with one another without sharp conflict, emphasizing a common humanity. In the search for some ultimate meaning to existence, some system of beliefs that lends dignity to life and makes suffering less severe, few are likely to be persuaded by a religion that disregards the conflicts and the institutions that make life harsh and meaningless to many. With the central areas of most of our metropolitan districts deteriorating, the consequences are well recognized. Physical decay is followed by disease, delinquency, crime, racial conflict, political corruption, and value confusion, while gangs, narcotics, or alcohol might be used in a desperate effort to find a sense of well-being in the midst of a society that crushes the sense of self-worth. These religious substitutes derive from the botched efforts of conquered individuals to find a road to salvation. If established churches pass them by, moving out to the suburbs and resisting those lower in status, and often different in race or ethnic group, then they will inevitably accept these substitutions. Just when the stabilizing efforts of the churches are needed, its members tend to look for more comfortable circumstances, turning their back on the harshness of the inner-city and its inhabitants. .

In functional analysis, emphasis is placed on both the possible contribution of religion to society and its contribution to individuals, in lending dignity and significance to their lives, even in the face of crushing difficulties. It is not enough today for religion to give vitality and support to a shared system of values, but it must also negotiate among groups who have different values in an effort to maintain in them a sense of common humanity. Modern societies are held together by political and functional interdependence despite the lack of kinship identity and in the face of cultural differences. Urban man has responded by inventing religious tolerance, though it is safe to say we are never tolerant about our basic values. Yinger believes that if there is a return to religion, it is to an organization that makes few creedal demands and rouses in us few fundamental values, but many people continue to use religion as the final judge of life's values, and are likely to be intolerant when basic issues arise. Some kind of religious conflict is likely in a complex society consisting of a variety of religious traditions. We tend to minimize these problems by counting them as the inevitable fruits of religious freedom. In a period of such repeated crises as we have known, renewed attention to man's capacity for evil comes into the Theologian's mind, while sociologists try to relate their work to the whole series of forces that influence man in modern society. Theological approaches are highly abstract, seeking to reduce religion to a few fundamental propositions, free from the distortions of particular times and places, but the people flock to popular interpreters, largely unaware of the work of intellectual leaders. If these religious leaders continue to insist that only their own tradition contains fundamental truths, Yinger says we will find folk religion and religious substitutes performing the integrating function of the churches. The universalism of world religions is ready to declare that all men are brothers; but man's salvation depends on his acceptance of the particular religions own temporally and culturally bound revelations and traditions.

Social change begins with technology, with a population increase or decrease, with economic improvement or decline, with an increase of interaction with other societies, with the pronouncements of a prophet, or in other ways. Institutional arrangements that are taken for granted or thought of as independent are brought forcibly to attention, by rapid change as parts of a system. Religion is part of this complex system, with its developments best understood as responses to fundamental changes in their social environment which feed back into the system from which it came. The influences set in motion become, in turn, conditioning and constraining forces that affect the religion that released them. The development of religious sects and cults have appeared among groups caught in severe disprivilege, frequently being racial or cultural minorities who have been overrun by a more advanced or more powerful society. With their traditional way of life destroyed, belief in the old ways declines, values and desires are taken over from the invading force, yet full acceptance of the new way and its religion is neither possible nor permissible. The resulting religions that arise out of this context are alien from the perspectives of both the invading and the invaded cultures and often involve a strong emphasis on group conflict. These religious cults and sects have the potential to carry their members over into a new life, drastically readapting their personalities. The likelihood of these functions are not certainties, depending on the responses of the surrounding society. The phenomenon found in these cults are the product of attitudes of a culture torn between hatred of the people who had destroyed the old way of life and now dominated them by force, and the desire to obtain for themselves the possessions of their conquerors. But such malice toward the dominant society is not limited to conquered peoples. If, within a society, a group lacks an independent and successful past which can serve as the focus for its future, they can affirm that they are the true defenders of a tradition shared with their oppressors who have fallen into sinful ways. They are scarcely less critical of the existing institutions than a conquered people, attacking that society by downgrading its institutions and refusing to give it final loyalty. Even in a society where freedom of religion is the rule, there is little tolerance for those efforts to win salvation that involve direct attack on the social order and its dominant religious organizations. Almost universally, the response of those in power is suppression and curtailment of activities, making the movements relatively short-lived. But if the movement is suppressed while the basic forces that produced it remain in operation, the group will reappear in new guises time after time. Two kinds of religious groups may evolve from a revolutionary movement. If hope for restoration and independence fades, a more accommodative group will form, but if there is growth in hope, along with status improvement, the group that forms will orient toward that of the dominant members of society, with the sect to church transition likely taking place. Depending on the variables of hope and discipline, groups will differentiate into several types of religious activity, from gang membership to strictly disciplined militant and religious groups, representing the range of endeavor among disprivileged persons to wrest some dignity and meaning from life.

On the other end of the spectrum, many people in modern societies find themselves in relative comfort, with the changes affecting them quite different. With the reduction of illness, lengthening of life, an increase in mobility, more leisure time, increased education, and the extension of contact across cultures many people in these societies are concerned with loneliness in a sea of acquaintances, meaninglessness amidst conflicting values, self-alienation in context of contradictory role requirements, and tense interpersonal and intergroup relations. Two trends among these privileged members are a renewed interest in religion along side of secularization, and religious separatism in the context of ecumenicity. The decline of authentic religious content along with the rise of humanistic and nationalistic themes is usually a hidden process carried on underneath symbols of non-change. The churches of those who are comfortable in a society are usually well accommodated to that society, which does not necessarily denote secularism. The church works within the structure of the established social order, adjusting to dramatic changes in the world within which it works. We are in fact witnessing religious change, the development of new religious forms, which can be a sign of strength. The catastrophic wars of the last few generations, the vast cruelties of totalitarian governments, and the incredible threats of future war make it apparent that man has won no salvation from death, injustice or hostility. These developments support revival among the religious professionals, but these theologians seem less accustomed to dealing with the new crises of affluence, mobility, and anomie. The other aspect of religious separatism and ecumenicity is strongly affected by the social forces which continue to operate to preserve religious differentiation despite the reduction of some of the separating influences. While a few religious leaders engage in discussions concerned with the reduction of religious separation, many economic, political, and educational associations cut across religious lines, with interfaith marriages being the best index of the extent of separation or integration. The consequences for religion may reinforce ecumenicalism in the context of extensive growth of interfaith marriage. Because it is the marginal member who is most likely to intermarry, the ranks of the unchurched may swell, or could lead to new religious identities or conversions. Opposition to intermarriage is one way family and societal influence is widely assumed to promote ethnic-religious group continuation. Different classes, races, ethnic groups, and regions develop different religious values and structures, according to the variation in needs and experiences in a heterogeneous society. Although the ethnic lines which reinforced religious divisions may be fading, the religious lines of distinction remain clear. Future developments of ethnic-religious groups depend on the external situation in which the members find themselves. Yinger states that only after we have developed pluralistic patterns appropriate to the needs of modern societies can we create a system for the world, in which similarities are not coerced and differences do not divide.

Yinger concludes by saying that first physics and astronomy, then biology, and now sociology and psychology have brought into question some of the assumptions of a stable religious world-view. He observes that after centuries of presumed conflict, both science and religion continue to prosper. The religious forms that are developing in the context of science may not be meaningful and creative to some, with too much richness being lost or too much that has lost its significance being retained. But this much we know, claims Yinger, by the growth of knowledge, religion may be changed, but it will not be destroyed. The social sciences will modify contemporary religious expressions, but it cannot satisfy the needs from which religion springs. Yinger speculates that in a society where science has become a vital part of the world view of most people, either religious expressions in harmony with that fact will develop, or religious substitutes will prevail which would only marginally help us deal with the human condition. In dealing with the individual and group powers of the world, religion is working in a constantly more complicated situation. He proposes that in a world in which brotherhood has become an absolute necessity rather than an exciting vision, accepting forms of religious expression that had meaning a century or decade ago could be an utter failure.

His essays were quite convincing in some aspects, but I disagree with his assumption that accepting religious forms of the past can be seen as a failure. The faith that has been handed down to us by our forefathers is just as significant today as it was when it was first formed. The ways we express that faith may be different somewhat, but its inherent meaning will ultimately never change.

Luckmann's assumption, that individual existence and its relation to the social order is historical, produces the problem that individual existence in society has reached a critical point in the contemporary world. He maintains that the relevance of sociology for contemporary man derives primarily from its search for an understanding of the fate of the person in the structure of modern society. He states that in order for the sociologist's theory to be relevant to his fellow man, he must not fail to formulate it objectively and in a manner, which permits the inspection of evidence, which should be his most important aim.

The problem of individuality within society, according to Luckmann, can be unified in the sociological theory of religion, which he says, can be attributed to Emile Durkheim and Max Weber. He states that both were interested in the fate of the individual in modern society and recognized that the character of society had serious consequences for the individual person. Their concern for the social conditions of the individual, he claims, clearly expresses the moral engagement of their sociological theorizing. Both Durkheim and Weber sought to understand the social position of the individual in the study of religion. For Durkheim, the symbolic reality of religion is the core of the collective conscience and its internalization by man makes him into a social and moral human being. For Weber, the social conditions of individualism is more specific in the historical context of particular religions and their relation to historical societies. Both Durkheim and Weber linked the problem of the individual in modern society directly to the secularization of the contemporary world. Both recognized this as a religious problem.

The sociology of religion consists of an increasing number of studies in the demography of churches, statistics of participation in church related activities, analyses of sectarian movements, monographs of ecclesiastic organizations, and various studies of religious beliefs. But according to Luckmann, finding theoretical significance amidst all these studies is disappointing. The new sociology of religion has neglected its most significant theoretical task, which is to analyze the changing social basis of religion in modern society. The answer to this problem may be found in the cumulative findings of investigations in areas such as industrial and occupational sociology, the family, mass communications, leisure, and those few studies in the sociology of religion which go beyond the scope of traditional church religion.

In the absence of an organized theory, Luckmann proposes that some assumptions have developed that perform the function of theory. The main assumption consists in the identification of religion with the church, which has the most important consequences for research and theory in the sociology of religion. Religion becomes a social fact either as institutionalized ritual or doctrinal ideas. The identification of religion with the church fits into sociology as the study of social institutions. The well known thesis, that religion is a primitive stage in the evolution of human reason and would eventually be replaced by science has contributed to the misunderstood assumption that secularization is measured by the decline of the churches. This view of secularization tends to be explained by transformations in other areas of the social system, such as urbanization and industrialization, which were believed to undermine traditional institutions such as the church. The assumption that church and religion are identical is accompanied by the idea that individual religiosity is based upon psychological needs which are both defined and met by the church.

Luckmann says, this is an inadequate system for understanding the relationship between the individual, religion, and society. He believes individual religiosity cannot be understood without reference to a given historical and institutional reality of ritual and belief. These assumptions are based upon an identification of religion with its institutionalized form; therefore, the discipline of sociology accepts the ideology of the churches as valid interpretations of the range of their subject matter. The new sociology of religion is exclusively concerned with church oriented religiosity, but has failed to continue the theoretical traditions of the classical sociology of religion. It fails to concern itself with the location of the individual in society, whose position is essentially religious.

Individual religiosity, Luckmann acknowledges, is shaped by a historical church, which forms a doctrine that is codified in sacred texts, which in turn are transmitted and interpreted by an official body of experts in a binding manner for the laymen. As an historical institution, the church also develops traditions rooted in the interests of these administrative elites. The individual is socialized into the official model of religion to the intent that it constitutes his system of ultimate significance, which is incorporated into a worldview. The internalized model retains its meaning in the life of the individual by integrating and legitimizing the norms of conduct that govern the routines and crises of his existence. This model is elaborated by the experts and its various dimensions become the subjects of specialized knowledge in the form of doctrine, liturgy, and social ethics which places an emphasis on faith, good works, or ritual correctness.

The internalization of the model formulates in the individual specific norms of conduct and belief, which in turn defines role requirements. Religion may be perceived by the individual as the fulfillment of the particular role requirements. The segregation of these norms from the world, Luckmann says, could weaken the integrating function of religious representations for everyday conduct if not countered by the pervasion of religion in society. The fulfillment of these requirements becomes highly routine, threatening the ultimate significance to the individual, although the sacred quality of the norms continues to be nominally recognized. The model may still be plausible enough to motivate the fulfillment of specific norms, but could decrease to the extent that the institutionalized requirements are no longer observed by the typical members of society, unless non-religious motives are substituted for them. Since the official model is interpreted by the experts, who may become oblivious to the typical routines and crises of the laymen, this poses a danger of separation in the views of the experts and the matters of ultimate significance for the laymen. This can be countered, though, by interpretive translations of the doctrines of the theologians into the language of the laymen by a body of pastoral specialists. Combined with distinct models of church oriented religiosity and the routinization of the fulfillment of specific religious norms, this separation of views can be an important factor in the genesis of secularization.

Institutional specialization of religion transforms the relation of the individual to the worldview and in turn to the social order in general. The church enters into relationships with other specialized institutions whose primary functions are secular. The relations of the church to political and economic institutions range from mutual support to accommodation to competition to open conflict. In contexts of these relationships, the church inevitably develops secular interests of its own in addition to its doctrinal and liturgical traditions. Economic, political, and administrative practices are designed, which compromise the original intents of the church in the understanding of those who take the specific religious claims of the church literally. If the official model is taken at face value, they may question the legitimacy of these operations. In transmitting the official model to the laity the religious experts must give sacred explanations for the secular activities of the church. This pluralistic situation threatens the stability of the model. Competing institutions vie for official status habitually claiming doctrinal superiority and a higher degree of purity from secular involvements. The history of sectarian movements in Christianity provides ample support for this observation, Luckmann states.

The doctrine of the visible and invisible church in Christian theology serves as an example of the divergence of the official model of religion with the socially predominant view of ultimate significance. Institutional specialization of religion which includes standardized transmission of the official model, a doctrinal cannon and controls against deviation, decisively reinforces its textual stability, which is one of the most important vested interests of the influential body of religious experts. Under conditions of rapid social change, perspectives of consecutive generations will inevitably differ causing a serious problem for the specialized religious models. Due to its textual and organizational limitations, the official model of religion predictably changes at a slower pace than the social conditions that modify the predominant individual view of ultimate significance.

Some individuals may continue to adhere to the claims of the official model, eliminating any secular inconsistencies, which can lead to an inability to perform nonreligious roles effectively, and to a form of martyrdom resulting in a partial withdrawal from the world, accompanied by tolerable compromises with the world. But the conflicting requirements of religion and the world stimulate the individual to reflect on possible solutions. In the leap of faith solution to the problems of life, individual religiosity is reconstituted after a phase of doubt. If a plausible solution is not found, the routine of the pre-reflective attitude will continue to be followed. Another possibility is the formation of a value system in which religious roles are performed for secular reasons or wholly abandoned. Luckmann claims that at various levels of reflection, the individual tends to restrict the relevance of religious norms to areas that are not anticipated by secular institutions, making religion in essence a private affair. The institutional specialization of religion increasingly transforms it into a private reality, in which the liberation of individual consciousness from the social structure and the freedom in the private sphere provide the basis for the sense of autonomy characterized by the typical person in modern society.

The consequences of specialization and the observations on the relation between the official model and individual religiosity prepare for the analysis of religion in modern society, which cannot honestly attribute the decline of Christianity's traditional forms to the advent of secularist ideologies. The decline of traditional Christianity, Luckmann believes may be symptoms of a more revolutionary change, which could implicate the replacement of institutionalized religion by a new social form of religion. Factors that cause a growing incongruence between the official model and individual religiosity, disrupting the identity of church and religion, are present in this social form of religion. With a sense of autonomy, the individual is more likely to confront the culture of religion as a consumer, choosing from the assortment of ultimate meanings as he sees fit. Through a certain level of subjective reflection and personal choice, he constructs both his personal identity and his individual system of ultimate significance. The autonomous consumer selects certain religious themes from the available assortment and builds them into a private system of ultimate significance, making individual religiosity no longer a replica of an official model. Church religiosity can be viewed as one manifestation of an emerging, institutionally non-specialized social form of religion, which continues to occupy a special place because of its historical connections to traditional Christianity. This social form of religion emerging in modern industrialized societies is characterized by the direct accessibility of an assortment of religious representations, which makes religion essentially a phenomenon of the private sphere. This implies that there is no obligatory model of religion, but that religious themes continue to be socially mediated in some form.

Luckmann speculates that religious themes originate in the private sphere, resting primarily on emotions and sentiments that are sufficiently unstable to make their articulation difficult. These highly subjective themes are not defined by primary public institutions, but can be taken up by secondary institutions such as advice columns, inspirational literature, and popular song lyrics, which expressly cater to the private needs of the autonomous consumer. The primary institutions regulate the legal and economic frame within which the competition of the ultimate significance market occurs. The selection is based on consumer preference, Luckmann states, which is determined by the social biography of the individual, while similar biographies will result in similar choices. The autonomous individual will not only select certain themes but will likely construct a well-articulated private system of ultimate significance. The prevalent individual systems will consist of an unstable hierarchy of opinions legitimizing the priorities determined in private life.

In the absence of external support by primary institutions, subjectively constructed religiosity with its diverse systems of ultimate significance will have an uncertain reality for the individual. While these systems are characterized by considerable variability in content, they are structurally similar and relatively flexible. These systems of individual religiosity are supported by other persons in the private sphere, partially sharing and jointly constructing their ultimate significance, with no apparent conflict with the norms of the primary institutions. Support for these subjective systems may come from family, friends, neighbors, and significant others who share in the construction and stabilization of private universes of ultimate significance, with family being the most important medium. If these private universes unite to some degree, the groups may assume sectarian qualities, developing the secondary institutions referred to earlier.

The character of religious institutions was radically transformed by their loss of monopoly in defining the sacred universe. They are forced to compete with many other sources of ultimate significance for the attention of autonomous individuals. Since they are recognized as religious and claim a connection to the Christian universe, they continue to enjoy a certain advantage in the open market. To the extent that traditional Christian conversation survives, Luckmann alleges that it provides a vocabulary that disguises some newly emerging themes. These themes are internalized in a significantly different manner in different social sections. The dominant themes in the modern sacred universe bestows an almost sacred status on the individual by articulating his autonomy, which is consistent with the finding that ultimate meaning is found by the typical individual in modern industrial societies primarily in the private sphere of his private biography. The traditional symbolic universes become increasingly irrelevant to the everyday experience of the typical individual and lose their character as a reality.

Luckmann states that man's individual autonomy represents the absence of external restraints and the traditional taboos in the private search for his identity. Since the inner man is an undefinable entity, its supposed discovery involves a lifelong quest. The individual embarks on a journey of self-realization and self-expression that is intermittent because it is immersed in the recurrent routines of everyday life. Since his conduct is controlled by the primary public institutions, he recognizes the limits of his autonomy and learns to confine his search to the private sphere. Luckmann concludes that the modern sacred universe symbolizes the social-historical phenomenon of individualism, which bestows ultimate significance on the structurally determined private sphere. The structure of the modern sacred universe and the theme of its content represent the emergence of a new social form of religion, which is determined by a radical transformation in the relationship of the individual to the social order.

The secularization of the church, therefore, is not simply a symptom of the modern industrialized society, but is in fact a metamorphosing of the church within the church. As the external church appears to be declining to the undisciplined eye, its members are in essence becoming a new creation within the cocoon of the traditional Christian Church. The autonomy of the individual is a necessary stage in the development of the true church, which will worship in spirit and in truth rather than in the ritualistic outward manifestations of the traditional church. The convictions by the Holy Spirit of the autonomic individual must take precedence over the traditional model of institutionalized practices and faith. As the metamorphosing completes its cycle, the true church will emerge in a social revolution that will change the world. The divisions between denominations will fall as Christians abandon the disguises that have so long kept us in the ritualistic garb of the cocoon, though it was necessary to protect us through the cold season of reformation. The invisible religion will emerge from its cocoon and feed on the sweet nectar of the Spirit, and rest safely in the hand of God until we fly to the heavens a new creature.

Cloud and Townsend believe that the Word of God tells us clearly what our boundaries are and how to protect them, as well as what is not within our borders of responsibility, but that our families, and other past relationships, confuse us about our property lines. “We are responsible to others and for ourselves.” Being responsible to others is doing what they cannot do for themselves. Being responsible for ourselves is carrying our own daily loads. It is when one's daily load is exceeded beyond what he is capable of carrying, that we should bear one another's burdens. Both those who cannot set boundaries for themselves and those who do not respect the limits of others have boundary problems. While we are not responsible for others feelings, attitudes, and behaviors, we do have responsibilities to each other. The inability to respond to others genuine needs is neglecting our responsibility to them. Cloud and Townsend purport that setting boundaries does not mean building walls. They propose that our boundaries need to be passable in order to allow good relationships in, yet strong enough to keep out danger.

Some examples of boundaries that Cloud and Townsend expound on are the physical body boundaries, verbal boundaries, truth boundaries, geographical distance, time management boundaries, emotional distance, other people's boundaries, and consequences of boundaries. “The most basic boundary-setting word is no.” Cloud and Townsend say the Bible is very clear about letting your yes be yes and your no be no. The word no lets others know that you are in control of yourself. Those who cannot say no to others demands passively comply, but are inwardly resentful much of the time. When we say yes, it should be a reflection of our love, not simply an expression of guilt or compulsion. Our physical self is our first and foremost boundary that separates us from others. Victims of early physical or sexual abuse often have trouble setting clear boundaries. Our verbal boundaries should clearly express who we are and who we are not to others. Honesty about who we are and who God is are truth boundaries. Distortions of this reality have disastrous consequences in our lives. If we live in the truth, we are much happier. Those who do not accept the truth of who they are and who God is, live outside of their own and God's boundaries. Living a lie is a sure path to destruction.

Cloud and Townsend suggest that “the concept of boundaries comes from the very nature of God.” God limits what he allows in His presence. “He confronts sin and allows consequences for behavior.” He guards his property and allows no evil to abide in his presence. He invites all who repent of their evil to come in, while closing the gates on those who do not. “We need to develop boundaries like God's.” Sometimes we must create geographical distance by physically removing ourselves from a situation in order to clarify and maintain boundaries. We must do this at times in order to replenish ourselves physically, emotionally, and spiritually just as Jesus often did. Other times we must remove ourselves from evil and dangerous situations. The Bible urges us to separate ourselves from those who continually hurt us in abusive relationships (Mathew18: 17,18; I Cor5: 9-13). Time apart often heals relationships, while leading those who suffer a loss of fellowship to repentance and a change of behavior. Cloud and Townsend show us that setting limits on others behavior is not really possible, but that we can limit our own exposure to people who behave poorly. God lets us behave as we choose, but He does not allow evil to come into His house. All are welcome, but only the repentant can enter in. “God limits his exposure to evil, unrepentant people, as should we,” purports Cloud and Townsend.

Cloud and Townsend truthfully state that our most basic need in life is relationship. We need to be able to both give and receive love. Many people withhold love from others and cannot accept it from others out of fear of relationship due to past hurts. The heart must be able to trust enough to feel safe enough to love. Fear of being alone keeps many of us in abusive relationships for years. God does not enable us to continue acting irresponsibly. The Bible sets consequences for certain behaviors. We reap what we sow. We must also back up our boundaries with consequences when others trespass against us. Threats must be followed through with when behaviors continue to violate in order to let people know the seriousness of the trespass and teach them to respect our boundaries.

Behaviors always have consequences because of God's law of sowing and reaping, but when someone interrupts the natural progression of this law, that person often reaps the consequence of the other person's deed. To rescue one from the natural consequences of his behavior only serves to enable him to continue in that pattern. Cloud and Townsend pose that parents often fall into this trap, but propose that “parenting with love and limits, with warmth and consequences, produces confident children who have a sense of control over their lives.” We need to take responsibility for our choices, which produces the fruit of self-control in our lives. Often we try to lay this at someone else's feet, thereby relinquishing control over our behavior to someone else and avoiding the responsibility of that behavior. But we must realize that we are in control and if we choose to live by the spirit, we will live; and if we choose to follow our sinful nature, we will die.

We are reluctant to set boundaries in various areas of our lives because setting them causes conflict, especially when we have neglected to do so before. Setting and maintaining boundaries teaches others to respect your needs and desires as well as their own. If you do not maintain your boundaries, you will inevitably be in bondage to others whims. People with no boundaries respond automatically to the anger of others by rescuing them, seeking their approval, or getting angry back at them. Good boundaries allow us to be separate enough to love others. You can use physical distance as well as other limits to enforce consequences for those who do not respect your boundaries. When boundaries are enforced, others are forced to use self-control rather than other-control. As long as their behavior controls you, they have no need for changing that behavior. God says he will only do what is right and that he will not participate in evil. So when people continue to go their own way, he lets them alone, and often that is just what we must do in our relationships. One should consider the consequences of setting boundaries and be willing to accept risk and sometimes loss of relationship.

Setting limits is the first step in a long process of gaining freedom from others controlling behaviors. When one is physically overpowered by a controlling person, often abusive behavior escalates. Sometimes we need outside help to enforce our limits. Remaining in an abusive relationship is not a required for forgiveness to take place. Forgiveness is the responsibility of the abused, but reconciliation is the responsibility of the abuser as well. We may not be reconciled to an abusive person if they refuse to change their behavior, though we can still forgive them. We can forgive others, while guarding our heart until we see “fruit in keeping with repentance.” They should produce the fruits of repentance, the evidence of change, before we are reconciled to them in relationship. God is reconciled to his people when they are truly repentant, just as we might be reconciled with a person who has shown himself repentant and trustworthy. Forgiveness is for past offenses, where reconciliation is about future behavior. When people deny responsibility for their own behavior, without really trying or seeking help to change their behavior, then we need not accept reconciliation at the expense of our personhood.

Dr. Henry Cloud and Dr. John Townsend's book on boundaries is one of the best self-help books I have read. The psychological perspectives of understanding differing personalities, helps you to see where you fit in to the relationships that may be controlling you and limiting your freedom and peace. Learning to have peace in your self and in your relationships is dependent on your ability to set appropriate boundaries on yourself and respecting the boundaries of others.

Father Christmas by Raymond Briggs

Father Christmas was published in 1979. The education department of Holland, Michigan, removed the text from all elementary schools after some parents made a complaint. They claimed that the book portrayed Santa Claus as having a negative attitude towards Christmas and the spirit of Christmas.

The Bible

In 1980, Columbus County Library stopped children from checking out The Bible without the permission of their parents to bring home and read adult books. The library claimed that the book is classified as adult because it is too difficult for children to read.

Encyclopedia Britannica

In 1986 Encyclopaedia Britannica was banned in Turkey because it was claimed that it contained articles which spread 'separatist propaganda'.

The Adventures of Tom Sawyer by Mark Twain

In 1985 The Adventures of Tom Sawyer was banned from school libraries in London. The educational department accused the classic of being both racist and sexist.

Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone by JK Rowling

Schools in Zeeland, Michigan, removed all Harry Potter books from their libraries after parental complaints. It was claimed that the books could lead to violence like the shooting at Columbine High School in 1998. A year later the ban was reversed and the libraries could stock them again, however, there was still a ban in place on them being read in the classroom.

These are not historical book banning sprees as they have all happened in recent years. Other famous books that were banned for varying reasons, during the 1990's, include: 'Of Mice And Men' and 'The Grapes Of Wrath' by John Steinbeck, Roald Dahl's 'James and The Giant Peach', and Shakespeare's 'Twelfth Night'.

The first chapter of the book tackles the Revelation from God. It posed some really important, thought-provoking questions to the readers. “Man on earth is placed in a paradoxical situation. Endowed with intelligence and logic, he seems intended to know the reason for his existence and the meaning of it, as well as the origin of the universe and the person of his Creator. Actually, however, he finds himself surrounded by mysteries. Left to his own devices, he is incapable of answering the questions which press in on him so closely.”

Among these questions that baffles mankind is the infallibility of the Bible. Some people accept the idea that the Bible is the inspired Word of God to some extent. To what degree is the Bible an inspiration of God's Word? Does it extend to every word?

To this question, Pache has an answer. "The doctrine of plenary inspiration holds that the original documents of the Bible were written by men, who, though permitted to exercise of their own personalities and literary talents, yet wrote Linder the control and guidance of the Spirit of God, the result being in every word of the original documents a perfect and errorless recording of the exact message which God desired to give to man." (The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible, p. 173).

Sometimes biblical writers use a specific phrase or quote or even a single word to prove their point that the Bible is completely God inspired. For instance in Galatians 3:16 the apostle Paul cites Genesis 13:15 and 17:8 when God said to Abraham, "Unto your seed (descendant) will I give this land". Paul's whole argument is due to the fact that in this particular line, God uses singular descendant rather its plural noun. Rene Pache, in The Inspiration and Authority of Scripture (p. 77), gives an explanation to this idea. He said that "very often the meaning of a whole passage rests entirely on one word, a singular or a plural number, the tense of a verb, the details of a prophecy, the precision of a promise and the silence of the text on a certain point."

The inspiration and authority of the Bible are one of the important considerations in learning the truths about God, Christ and salvation. That is why knowing the scope of inspiration in every book and every word of the Scripture is of massive. The way to getting to the heart of the matter however is contained in the pages of the document in question itself, the Bible.

The authority of the Bible then stems from the fact that the Bible is an inspired revelation from God. Pache delves on the questions of revelation and inspiration with regard to the Bible. And by doing so, as he manages to address those questions and establish the source of inspiration, then it necessarily addresses the issue of authority also. In short, by proving its inspiration, the question of authority has been settled. How one looks at the issues on revelation and inspiration will determine how he perceive the Bible's authority.

Since the written revelation contained in the Bible comes from God and has been recorded under the Spirit's guidance which makes them "the very breath of God," it naturally follows that what they contain are therefore authoritative. They gain authority by virtue of the fact that they come from the One Authority on the topic. In essence, this would lead us to conclude and give us the necessary assurance that when thumbed the pages of the Bible, we see and read the inspired Word of God.

We need to keep in mind that the authority of Scripture could not possibly be separated from the authority of God. What the Bible affirms, it follows that God affirms too. And what the Bible affirms (or denies), the affirmation (or denial) is clothe with the authority of God. Theologian Rene Pache states this in his book, as he observes that "if God entirely inspired Scripture (as we have seen that He did), then Scripture is vested with His authority."

Dante's depiction of hell complements the teachings of the Bible. One of the most oft-discussed themes in the story is the eternal justice of God. The sinner reaps what he sows during his lifetime. His punishment is intended to fit the gravity of his crime.

A vivid example of this principle is shown in the border of the 8th and 9th circles of Hell. A Count sits on his friend whose brains he rips using his teeth. It was the fault of his friend that he starved to death and was forced to eat his children to survive.

Life, as Dante sees it, is a continuous test or struggle between right and wrong. If you commit sin and falls short of heaven, you reap eternal punishment. Dante believes that to be able to go to heaven, one need to experience hell first. Dante may not mean this in a literal way. Figuratively this means that in order to be purified or to receive salvation, a person needs to undergo sufferings first. This is the moral of the story.

Dante's depiction of Hell is an allegory of life, the role of religion in our lives and the need to choose right over wrong. It does not stop at depicting the fall of man but rather it help shows the way to salvation and happiness. To be able to reach the summit, you need to start at the bottom. That is the essence of Dante's depiction of Hell.

At some point in our lives, we all face difficulties, problems, temptations. These drive us to the point of desperation and commit sins. At the lowest ebb of our lives, we are often forced to look back and ask ourselves where we have gone wrong.

By going through Dante's Inferno we realize the need to ponder on our every step and choose the best way before we hit rock bottom.

Dante's journey begins as he got lost in the wood. As he tries to find his way by following the light in the mountain three beasts block his way. Dante is forced to go back to the forest as Virgil appears in his way and brings him to hell so he can enter paradise. Dante agrees and goes through the gate of hell.

The damned souls in Dante's The Inferno are grouped according to the degree of malice with which they committed sin. The symbolisms help Dante's "The Inferno" presents his ideas on the startling reality in a creative way:

Charon the Ferryman of the Dead from Canto 3 (lines 81-4, bottom of page 977). "'Woe to you depraved souls! Bury/here and forever all hope of Paradise:/I come to lead you to the other shore,/into eternal dark, into fire and ice.'" This symbolism refers to the nature of sin itself and not to any specific sins. Sin separates us from other people. Fire and ice are the effects of sin which could cause anger or being ostracized.

About line 127: “most of the souls of the damned in twilight”. "Souls of the damned in twilight" means that though they exist their souls are really empty. Being punished and doing the same thing over and over again

The lines about the Gluttons - page 988, about lines 35-8: "We made our way across the sodden mess / of souls the rain beat down, and when our steps / fell on a body, they sank through emptiness. / All those illusions of being seemed to lie / drowned in the slush." These lines pertain to the facts that people who are the “fattest” are the least substantial which means appearances can be deceiving. Substance is found within the person not on the appearance.

Canto 11, page 998: Virgil explains how one sin can be called by many different names according to what caused the sinner to sin. This is in consonance with his view of the main problem with sin. All sins corrupt the will and mind of the sinner and leads to other sins. When Dante says, "Malice is the sin most hated by God" (about line 23), he is referring not just to the souls found in this place, but to any sin at or below this level. In short, malice is the cause for violence and fraud.

Tyrants and Murderers of Canto 12 as Dante depicts them are a washed in a river of boiling blood guarded by the mythical creatures Centaurs. The souls in this place commit murder due to malice, not because of a desire for personal gain. Or, in another way, it can be said that all desire for personal gain is malice toward others.

The Harpies lines 13-15 of Canto 13 are the perfect creatures to guard and torture the suicides in the Wood of Suicides. This is because the Harpies represent the attitude that causes people to commit suicide. The physical traits of the Harpies symbolize his attitude. "Wide wings" symbolize an overpowering sense of sadness. "Clawed feet" suggest danger or a fearful grip. "Huge bellies" suggest laziness or the lack of will to do things.

The creatures of Cantos 13 & 14 -Suicides, Blasphemers, Sodomites, and Usurers-are not people condemned at all in modern society, but Dante finds them loathsome as attested by the place he assigns them.

The most famous people in Cocytus are Count Ugolino and Archbishop Ruggieri, whose gruesome story makes up Canto 33.

Historical accounts inform us that Ugolino was captured and put to death by Ruggieri. The manner with which he perished was so cruel that Dante deemed it best to tell the world the tragic story.

Ugolino was imprisoned for several months with his four young sons. One day, the doors of the tower were nailed shut. And all four of his sons died due to extreme hunger. In hell, Ugolino is eating and gnawing at Ruggeri's flesh. This punishment is in consonance with “little Anselmo's” request to his father: “Thou didst clothe us with this wretched flesh, and it would be less painful if you eat of us.” Ugolino cannot abide by his son's request and eat their flesh. As he sees each child die one by one he was quoted to have said, “Starvation did what grieving could not do.” Ugolino died. In Hell, he was punished by savagely feasting on Ruggieri's flesh for eternity.

Ugolino when he was alive betrayed his own party to Ruggieri. Hence, the punishment meted to him in hell. In hell, Ugolino was presented as the victim of Ruggieri. He is both the target of divine justice and the instrument of it, when he punishes Ruggieri.

In Canto 34, the souls of those who betrayed their masters at the bottom of hell - Judas, Brutus, Cassius are seen. They are they frozen in twisted postures to represent the sins they committed which is the ultimate sin of malice.

The image of Satan is quite a surprise. He is depicted to have three faces, which symbolizes the distortion of the Holy Trinity. Dante says that Satan looks ugly despite the fact the he was once an angel, beautiful to look at. Satan seems less powerful than the usual ideas woven about him. He is depicted as dumb and roaring, trapped in the ice, punished just like the other sinners.

Dante's Inferno is a fascinating tale of sin and redemption. It depicts the need to attain deeper spirituality in an abstract way. Hell represents not just a place for sinners but also a state of a sinner's soul. To be in hell is to be in utter agony and to be in a state far from God. This story shows us the way to heaven or eternal happiness by keeping the faith and doing what is right. It offers us a chance to re-examine our lives and change for the better.

A poor selection of a book like the poor choice of a friend leaves you with lot of disappointment and frustration. You may later think that, oh, I would have spent that time with a good friend or a fascinating book how well it would have been.

Here are some simple tips or suggestions to help you in selecting a good book:

List Top 20 Books.

Make a list of all the books you would like to read. Then following the given suggestion select from that list the 20 books you would most want to read. Please remember do not include the Bible or any other religious books in that list if you read that daily in a systematic way.

When you finish reading one of the top 20, select another from your first list to replace the read one. Always feel free to change your mind to replace one book from the already selected top 20 list. Move down some, erase some and include whatever you like according to your choice. This can be done at any time.

How do you select the top twenty from your large reserve list is a big task. Don't worry here are some suggestion to that.

Select Books That Will Help You.

You would never knowingly choose a friend who would let you down or cheat. So likewise, choose books that inspire you, encourage you, and lift you up.

Choose books that tell you things you want to know and give you something to think or ponder over and to adopt with.

Select books that generate a divine hunger for life that quite often secular books won't give.

Select Only the Books You Really Want to Read Through

The books that you are forced to read may seem like an unwanted guest at home. You may invite them just because you can't just avoid. In such cases its better to avoid such books. You only can decide what you want and what you like to read.

Select Only the Books That Have a Good Reputation.

Listen and read reviews about books what others say about it. Check up with your school, college or public librarian about the list of good books that have stood the time. Its better to avoid a “best seller” lists. Best sellers are soon forgotten and bite the dust.

Stick to Your Plan

Overcome the temptation to read books that are not in your planned list. Read a bit every day and you will notice a big difference in the days to come. Best wishes for a happy selection and a happy reading ahead.