Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read.
Start by marking “Oh, Your god!: The Evil Idea That is Religion” as Want to Read:
Oh, Your god!: The Evil Idea That is Religion
Enlarge cover
Rate this book
Clear rating
Open Preview

Oh, Your god!: The Evil Idea That is Religion

3.98  ·  Rating Details ·  43 Ratings  ·  7 Reviews
From the New Atheist arguments of Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins to the material observations of Lucretius, Epicurus, and Democritus, the discussion of what religion is and the role it plays in our lives is the single greatest dialogue we can have.

Oh, Your god! is a compelling assertion that the entire enterprise of organized religion is a thing for which the wor
Kindle Edition, 174 pages
Published July 25th 2013 by Dangerous Little Books (first published July 4th 2013)
More Details... edit details

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about Oh, Your god!, please sign up.

Be the first to ask a question about Oh, Your god!

This book is not yet featured on Listopia. Add this book to your favorite list »

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30)
filter  |  sort: default (?)  |  Rating Details
Aug 03, 2016 Mark rated it it was amazing
This is the book that I would have liked to have written. Kelly holds nothing back here and presents example after example [after example] of passages, beliefs, doctrine, dogma and religious diatribes that make religion and even the idea of religion evil. Kelly is a student with no real academic or literary credentials to fog his writing, which is openly non-philosophical and literally clean and to the point. The book is a tirade against religion, but in reality it is a unabashed lashing out at ...more
John J
Jul 20, 2015 John J rated it really liked it
Some things just need to be said...

Joshua Kelly put a disclaimer in the beginning of the book to the effect that he isn't a scholar or an expert on any particular subject, but just a human being with some things he needs to get off his chest. I respect that, and I think he did a pretty good job of demolishing theism. But I think he came a little too close in engaging in ad hominem attacks and using an appeal to outrage in trying to prove his points, and may have crossed those lines a few times a
Jun 08, 2014 Kerry rated it really liked it
I have read a lot of this type of literature, but I think that this is one of the best. Despite taking on a very strong tone in parts, he doesn't become as ranting as some of the others I have read. I also like the fact that it is methodical and well-referenced. It is a good summary of much of the so-called "New Atheist" writing with good personal touches as well. It won't deter the blindly faithful, but nothing will and it wasn't written for them anyway. However, the more arguments documenting ...more
Feb 23, 2016 Eric rated it did not like it
Shelves: dropped
OK book, horrible writing. The sentences are so rambling and unreadable and he uses so much random obscure vocabulary to try to sound smart that I gave up before I finished the first chapter. In the forward he says he originally wrote the book when he was 22, and it showed. In the new edition, he's revised all the bad prose... but if this is how bad it is now, I'd hate to see the first edition.

For a good book, read Dawkins or Hitchens... this book is about the same thing, just without the good
Alizaheer Ali
Feb 01, 2016 Alizaheer Ali rated it really liked it
Good Book with good references, if you would like your mind dazzled about the fact with cross referencing and make you think twice about religion then this is the book to read - especially when it is written by a kid who is just 21 years old... Now you can understand a young mind has too many questions and ideas about religion....

Brian Lawrence
Apr 21, 2014 Brian Lawrence rated it it was amazing
I absolutely loved this book! A point by point repudiation of religion! Just because a billion people believe something doesn't make it right! Great piece of work, Mr Kelly
Eric Johnson
Eric Johnson rated it really liked it
Jan 10, 2015
Bronwyn Thurling
Bronwyn Thurling rated it really liked it
Apr 21, 2015
William Burford
William Burford rated it really liked it
Dec 02, 2014
unknown rated it did not like it
Aug 25, 2014
Jithin James
Aug 19, 2016 Jithin James rated it it was amazing
A must-read glimpse on the inconsistencies surrounding religiosity and its institutions.
David P. Rush
David P. Rush rated it it was amazing
Jul 21, 2015
Andrew rated it liked it
Sep 13, 2016
Cori rated it really liked it
Sep 12, 2016
Joshua Bedard
Joshua Bedard rated it really liked it
Dec 23, 2015
Peter Kempenich
Peter Kempenich rated it really liked it
Dec 07, 2013
Joe rated it really liked it
Dec 31, 2013
mike polk
mike polk rated it it was amazing
Jul 22, 2015
Shana Fuqua
Shana Fuqua rated it liked it
Nov 21, 2014
Jovi rated it liked it
Feb 25, 2015
Berry rated it really liked it
Nov 24, 2014
Steve Poulson
Steve Poulson rated it really liked it
Jul 07, 2014
Euan R Boyd
Euan R Boyd rated it it was amazing
Feb 24, 2016
NormaCenva rated it it was amazing
Mar 07, 2015
Rick Brown
Rick Brown rated it it was amazing
Sep 30, 2014
michael L. alexander
michael L. alexander rated it really liked it
Jan 20, 2014
Guilherme rated it liked it
Dec 24, 2013
Aidan Fortner
Aidan Fortner rated it really liked it
Nov 17, 2013
kent slater
kent slater rated it really liked it
Oct 05, 2014
Brandon Cinquepalmi
Brandon Cinquepalmi rated it it was amazing
Aug 03, 2015
« previous 1 next »
There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »

Share This Book

“This, of course, gives rise to the argument of the invalidation of the Old Testament with the coming of the New, the idea being that the actions of Jesus were so antithesis to the “laws” prescribed in Exodus and Leviticus that the modern Christian should base the standards of his doctrine on the teaching of the son of their god instead. There are several large flaws with this reasoning, my favorite being the most obvious: no one does it, and if they did, what would be the point of keeping the Old Testament? How many Christian sermons have been arched around Old Testament verses, or signs waved at protests and marches bearing Leviticus 18:22, etc? Where stands the basis for the need to splash the Decalogue of Exodus in public parks and in school rooms, or the continuous reference of original sin and the holiness of the sabbath (which actually has two distinctly different definitions in the Old Testament)? A group of people as large as the Christian nation cannot possibly hope to avoid the negative reaction of Old Testament nightmares (e.g. genocide, rape, and infanticide, amongst others) by claiming it shares no part of their modern doctrine when, in actuality, it overflows with it. Secondly, one must always remember that the New Testament is in constant coherence with proving the prophecy of the Old Testament, continuously referring to: “in accordance with the prophet”, etc., etc., ad nauseum—the most important of which coming from the words of Jesus himself: “Do not think I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have not come to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place.” (Matthew 5:17) And even this is hypocritical, considering how many times Jesus himself stood in the way of Mosaic law, most notably against the stoning of the woman taken by the Pharisees for adultery, the punishment of which should have resulted in her death by prophetic mandate of the Old Testament despite the guilt that Jesus inflicted upon her attackers (a story of which decent evidence has been discovered by Bart Ehrman and others suggesting that it wasn’t originally in the Gospel of John in the first place [7]). All of this, of course, is without taking into account the overwhelming pile of discrepancies that is the New Testament in whole, including the motivation for the holy family to have been in Bethlehem versus Nazareth in the first place (the census that put them there or the dream that came to Joseph urging him to flee); the first three Gospels claim that the Eucharist was invented during Passover, but the Fourth says it was well before, and his divinity is only seriously discussed in the Fourth; the fact that Herod died four years before the Current Era; the genealogy of Jesus in the line of David differs in two Gospels as does the minutiae of the Resurrection, Crucifixion, and the Anointment—on top of the fact that the Gospels were written decades after the historical Jesus died, if he lived at all.” 0 likes
“First, because it’s based on a fantastic illusion. Let’s say that the consensus is that our species, we being the higher primates, Homo sapiens, has been on the planet for at least 100,000 years, maybe more. Francis Collins says it may be 100,000; Richard Dawkins thinks maybe quarter of a million. I’ll take 100,000. In order to be Christian you have to believe that for 98,000 years our species suffered and died, most of its children dying in childbirth, most other people having a life expectancy of about 25, dying of their teeth, famine, struggle, indigenous war, suffering, misery, all of that. For 98,000 heaven watches it with complete indifference and then 2,000 years ago thinks, “That’s enough of that—it’s time to intervene. The best way to do this would be by condemning someone to a human sacrifice somewhere in the less literate parts of the Middle East. Don’t let’s appear to the Chinese, for example, where people can read and study evidence and have a civilization, let’s go the desert and have another revelation there.” This is nonsense. It can’t be believed by a thinking person.”                                  —Christopher Hitchens” 0 likes
More quotes…