What do you think?
Rate this book
The Deadliest Monster: A Christian Introduction to Worldviews
In an exciting journey that begins with our assumptions about the nature of man, The Deadliest Monster explores the impact that such assumptions have on our beliefs about God, truth, morality, psychology and politics. Not surprisingly, the initial assumption colors all other beliefs, so that the book becomes a fascinating catalogue of the ways in which the Christian perspective better matches reality.
272 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2001
30 people are currently reading
302 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 62 reviews
July 26, 2018
This book would be better titled “The Deadliest Monster: An Introduction to Straw Men.” I’m an atheist, so I may not exactly be popular around here, but I feel obligated to call this book out on some of the damage it’s causing when read by impressionable students, as my sister was made to do in her Fundamentalist Christian School. Never in one place have I seen a greater number of falsehoods and misconceptions about various worldviews than I have here. The untrue things J.F. Baldwin states about atheism alone are too numerous for me to address in this review, but I need to clarify some things for those who’ve had little experience with my worldview. Before I do that, though, I want to briefly mention the backbone of Baldwin’s book: the distinction between Christianity and other worldviews.
Are people basically good, or basically bad? According to Baldwin, people are essentially bad, and only God can do good things. People are, at best, simply tools that God uses when he chooses to make good things happen in the world. This book would have you believe that this notion-that all men are bad-separates Christianity from all other belief systems. Assigning this level of uniqueness and exclusive insight to Christianity might make Christians feel good, but it’s simply contrary to reality. Does Mr. Baldwin really think that his group is the only one who sees humanity as fundamentally bad? Within any belief system, you will find a whole spectrum of answers to this question. Some people will point out the good deeds of various individuals they know, mention the international disaster relief efforts of westernized countries, or refer to their local soup kitchen. They might talk about the free community programs for their autistic nephew, and the march for cancer that they will be participating in next week. They will admit that, while there are bad people, we are, at our core, good, as they have seen good in countless others. Another in the same group might mention the propensity of some people in positions of absolute power to consistently terrorize their underlings, and callously regard others as expendable. They might mention a neighbor down the street who beats his dog, or the corruption that has, without fail, infested every large organization of people that has ever been assembled. They’d conclude by saying that while there is indeed good in the world, it is scarce and requires considerable effort for people to perform. As it happens, these are arguments commonly found in philosophical circles of every culture and religion, as well as those with no religion. The debate has been going on for centuries and continues to this day. The assertion that all non-Christians believe that man is basically good is preposterous and betrays just how far one can remove himself from reality when living in a religious bubble. Where did J. F. Baldwin get his information? How did he reach these conclusions? Unfortunately, he presents no comprehensive arguments; only assertions, so we’ll never know. I also find his premise a blatant example of a false dichotomy. Is man good, or bad? Simplifying my opinions about morals and their nature for expediency’s sake, I believe that man is neither wholly good, nor wholly bad. He is capable of extreme acts of benevolence, but also of extreme cruelty. To paint man as either black or white is to trivialize the complexity we find within ourselves. I think that people are selfish, shortsighted, ignorant, prejudiced, self-important creatures. But I would never be so cavalier as to pigeonhole our species as wholly bad. I also think the premise that people are basically good is flawed as well. I also know that I am not alone on these points, even within my family; and I am the only atheist in the bunch.
I also need to dispel the image of atheists as despotic, moral-deprived nihilists who see people only as synapses and neurons. First, atheists are not a self-governing, organized group. When Mr. Baldwin tells the reader “what atheists believe,” he actually betrays his own lack of familiarity with them by speaking about atheists as if they were a homogeneous group. An atheist is, simply, one who does not believe in a god or gods. There are atheists all over the world, and some wouldn’t even describe themselves as such, as they haven’t thought about “the god question.” There could conceivably be an atheist who doesn’t believe in gods, but does believe in ghosts or spirits, or even angels. There are, however, patterns that one finds when dealing with atheists, and it is from these that I draw when I talk about atheists’ positions. I do not pretend to speak for all atheists here, as the diversity among this “group” is immense. That being said, atheists typically have a high regard for science. They place their beliefs in things that are demonstrable. When forming their beliefs, they seek evidence and integrity. Yes, essentially all atheists subscribe to the theory of evolution. Why? It is absolutely not because it is our “faith” or “religion;” it is because there is ample, consistent, scientifically ubiquitous evidence that evolution is a process that has been happening in the world and continues today. If significant, provable evidence to the contrary were to appear, then we would no longer believe that evolution happens. Period. Many scientists and atheists declare that they would excitedly welcome such a revolution, because it would open up new fields of study and reveal new mysteries to solve. A great advantage of atheism is that I am free to change my beliefs and not face a personality crisis, as would be the case for many theists trying to reconcile modern science with their religion.
Another thing most atheists share is that we are naturalists, not behaviorists, as Baldwin claims. We do not believe that the supernatural exists, because we see no evidence for it. (On a side note, Mr. Baldwin claims that atheists don’t believe that thoughts or conscience exist. This is absolutely ridiculous, and I don’t know of a single modern atheist who has ever attempted to argue against the existence of thoughts or conscience.) Funnily enough, if some extra-psychic force were to be discovered and proven, it would then become part of what people consider to be a natural part of reality, and therefore we would continue to be called naturalists. You can think of it in the sense that we do not accept blind assertions from ghost hunters, ancient texts, psychics, priests, fortune tellers, politicians, prophets, or the like, until they can be proven. I think many Christians would hold the same skeptical standpoint that I do on at least some of the items I just listed, with a few conspicuous omissions. As for behaviorism, it has nothing to do with atheism whatsoever. It is a specific branch of psychology that has been outdated for some time, and I suspect was grafted onto atheism by Mr. Baldwin to make us look more calculating and detached. Here is a quote from Wikipedia’s “Behaviorism” page, describing how behaviorism has gone the way of Freud’s theories in psychology (i.e., become outdated). As you will see, no one has taken behaviorism seriously for almost 70 years.
“In the second half of the 20th century, behaviorism was largely eclipsed as a result of the cognitive revolution. This shift was due to methodological behaviorism being highly criticized for not examining mental processes, and this led to the development of the cognitive therapy movement.”
This point is further elaborated upon by Wikipedia if you wish to learn more. I should also take a moment to address the perplexing and absurd assertion that atheism’s most “coherent” form is Marxism. Again, Mr. Baldwin doesn’t explain his reasoning and simply asserts this. Marxists established an atheist government and considered religion to be an impediment to productivity. Marx famously said that “religion is the opium of the masses.” I still fail to see how this is the most coherent form of a lack of a belief in a god or gods, only that this was a corrupt form of government which eschewed religion as competition with its own authority. I feel confident saying that the overwhelming majority of atheists are not Marxists and would be just as perplexed as I am to be associated with Marxism in any capacity. It seems to me that Marx simply incorporated his atheist worldview into his political philosophy, a practice that Baldwin hypocritically goes on to encourage in Christians later in the book. Whatever association he was trying to make between Marxism and atheism simply isn’t there.
Finally, I just want to provide resources for those who truly want to understand atheism rather than unwittingly accept as fact the assumptions, misconceptions, and outright falsehoods Mr. Baldwin has put forth in his book. My favorite venue is YouTube, and I recommend channels such as “CosmicSkeptic,” “TheraminTrees,” and “Viced Rhino.” Watch a couple videos, and you will begin to understand the actual positions atheists hold, how they think, and their perspective on the world. I also recommend you also go to Islamic resources for Muslims, Buddhist resources for Buddhists, Jewish resources for Jewish people, and so on. I could only focus on a few of the issues that I had with how this book presents atheism and unfortunately had to leave many of them unaddressed, so I can only imagine the array of falsehoods presented as fact about other non-Christians.
Well, I’m sure we can agree that this review has gone on way too long, so if I leave you with anything, please don’t use this book as a reliable source of information about various faiths, atheism, or any worldviews other than the narrow one held by the author.
Are people basically good, or basically bad? According to Baldwin, people are essentially bad, and only God can do good things. People are, at best, simply tools that God uses when he chooses to make good things happen in the world. This book would have you believe that this notion-that all men are bad-separates Christianity from all other belief systems. Assigning this level of uniqueness and exclusive insight to Christianity might make Christians feel good, but it’s simply contrary to reality. Does Mr. Baldwin really think that his group is the only one who sees humanity as fundamentally bad? Within any belief system, you will find a whole spectrum of answers to this question. Some people will point out the good deeds of various individuals they know, mention the international disaster relief efforts of westernized countries, or refer to their local soup kitchen. They might talk about the free community programs for their autistic nephew, and the march for cancer that they will be participating in next week. They will admit that, while there are bad people, we are, at our core, good, as they have seen good in countless others. Another in the same group might mention the propensity of some people in positions of absolute power to consistently terrorize their underlings, and callously regard others as expendable. They might mention a neighbor down the street who beats his dog, or the corruption that has, without fail, infested every large organization of people that has ever been assembled. They’d conclude by saying that while there is indeed good in the world, it is scarce and requires considerable effort for people to perform. As it happens, these are arguments commonly found in philosophical circles of every culture and religion, as well as those with no religion. The debate has been going on for centuries and continues to this day. The assertion that all non-Christians believe that man is basically good is preposterous and betrays just how far one can remove himself from reality when living in a religious bubble. Where did J. F. Baldwin get his information? How did he reach these conclusions? Unfortunately, he presents no comprehensive arguments; only assertions, so we’ll never know. I also find his premise a blatant example of a false dichotomy. Is man good, or bad? Simplifying my opinions about morals and their nature for expediency’s sake, I believe that man is neither wholly good, nor wholly bad. He is capable of extreme acts of benevolence, but also of extreme cruelty. To paint man as either black or white is to trivialize the complexity we find within ourselves. I think that people are selfish, shortsighted, ignorant, prejudiced, self-important creatures. But I would never be so cavalier as to pigeonhole our species as wholly bad. I also think the premise that people are basically good is flawed as well. I also know that I am not alone on these points, even within my family; and I am the only atheist in the bunch.
I also need to dispel the image of atheists as despotic, moral-deprived nihilists who see people only as synapses and neurons. First, atheists are not a self-governing, organized group. When Mr. Baldwin tells the reader “what atheists believe,” he actually betrays his own lack of familiarity with them by speaking about atheists as if they were a homogeneous group. An atheist is, simply, one who does not believe in a god or gods. There are atheists all over the world, and some wouldn’t even describe themselves as such, as they haven’t thought about “the god question.” There could conceivably be an atheist who doesn’t believe in gods, but does believe in ghosts or spirits, or even angels. There are, however, patterns that one finds when dealing with atheists, and it is from these that I draw when I talk about atheists’ positions. I do not pretend to speak for all atheists here, as the diversity among this “group” is immense. That being said, atheists typically have a high regard for science. They place their beliefs in things that are demonstrable. When forming their beliefs, they seek evidence and integrity. Yes, essentially all atheists subscribe to the theory of evolution. Why? It is absolutely not because it is our “faith” or “religion;” it is because there is ample, consistent, scientifically ubiquitous evidence that evolution is a process that has been happening in the world and continues today. If significant, provable evidence to the contrary were to appear, then we would no longer believe that evolution happens. Period. Many scientists and atheists declare that they would excitedly welcome such a revolution, because it would open up new fields of study and reveal new mysteries to solve. A great advantage of atheism is that I am free to change my beliefs and not face a personality crisis, as would be the case for many theists trying to reconcile modern science with their religion.
Another thing most atheists share is that we are naturalists, not behaviorists, as Baldwin claims. We do not believe that the supernatural exists, because we see no evidence for it. (On a side note, Mr. Baldwin claims that atheists don’t believe that thoughts or conscience exist. This is absolutely ridiculous, and I don’t know of a single modern atheist who has ever attempted to argue against the existence of thoughts or conscience.) Funnily enough, if some extra-psychic force were to be discovered and proven, it would then become part of what people consider to be a natural part of reality, and therefore we would continue to be called naturalists. You can think of it in the sense that we do not accept blind assertions from ghost hunters, ancient texts, psychics, priests, fortune tellers, politicians, prophets, or the like, until they can be proven. I think many Christians would hold the same skeptical standpoint that I do on at least some of the items I just listed, with a few conspicuous omissions. As for behaviorism, it has nothing to do with atheism whatsoever. It is a specific branch of psychology that has been outdated for some time, and I suspect was grafted onto atheism by Mr. Baldwin to make us look more calculating and detached. Here is a quote from Wikipedia’s “Behaviorism” page, describing how behaviorism has gone the way of Freud’s theories in psychology (i.e., become outdated). As you will see, no one has taken behaviorism seriously for almost 70 years.
“In the second half of the 20th century, behaviorism was largely eclipsed as a result of the cognitive revolution. This shift was due to methodological behaviorism being highly criticized for not examining mental processes, and this led to the development of the cognitive therapy movement.”
This point is further elaborated upon by Wikipedia if you wish to learn more. I should also take a moment to address the perplexing and absurd assertion that atheism’s most “coherent” form is Marxism. Again, Mr. Baldwin doesn’t explain his reasoning and simply asserts this. Marxists established an atheist government and considered religion to be an impediment to productivity. Marx famously said that “religion is the opium of the masses.” I still fail to see how this is the most coherent form of a lack of a belief in a god or gods, only that this was a corrupt form of government which eschewed religion as competition with its own authority. I feel confident saying that the overwhelming majority of atheists are not Marxists and would be just as perplexed as I am to be associated with Marxism in any capacity. It seems to me that Marx simply incorporated his atheist worldview into his political philosophy, a practice that Baldwin hypocritically goes on to encourage in Christians later in the book. Whatever association he was trying to make between Marxism and atheism simply isn’t there.
Finally, I just want to provide resources for those who truly want to understand atheism rather than unwittingly accept as fact the assumptions, misconceptions, and outright falsehoods Mr. Baldwin has put forth in his book. My favorite venue is YouTube, and I recommend channels such as “CosmicSkeptic,” “TheraminTrees,” and “Viced Rhino.” Watch a couple videos, and you will begin to understand the actual positions atheists hold, how they think, and their perspective on the world. I also recommend you also go to Islamic resources for Muslims, Buddhist resources for Buddhists, Jewish resources for Jewish people, and so on. I could only focus on a few of the issues that I had with how this book presents atheism and unfortunately had to leave many of them unaddressed, so I can only imagine the array of falsehoods presented as fact about other non-Christians.
Well, I’m sure we can agree that this review has gone on way too long, so if I leave you with anything, please don’t use this book as a reliable source of information about various faiths, atheism, or any worldviews other than the narrow one held by the author.
March 11, 2019
One of the best worldview books that I have read. The premise is that worldviews can be distinguished by their view of human nature. The hook is that it uses two famous Hollywood monsters: Dr Jekyll/Mr. Hyde vs. Frankenstein. Frankenstein represents those worldviews that say that Human Nature is inherently good and any problems can be overcome, while Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde represents worldviews that sees human nature as corrupt. Christianity is the only worldview that fits the human nature is corrupt model while every other competitor fits the Frankenstein model. The majority of the book is spent fleshing out the implications of the two models. One implication is how one deals with guilt. Some non Christian worldviews believe that one is not guilty of anything, so time should be spent on convincing oneself that the feeling of guilt is irrational or imaginary. Other non-Christian worldviews address the issue by pushing good works to attempt to make up for the bad stuff done. Only Christianity puts forward the position that the guilt is justified but you cannot work enough to make up for it. Fortunately that task was done by our substitute.
January 26, 2025
had to read for school, very boring 🤧🤧
July 20, 2022
AmblesideOnline year 10 book. Another one we finished last school year. I felt like this was a great introduction to world views, especially right on the heels of reading Frankenstein and Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. The whole premise for this book is that we either view humanity as having both good and evil inside (Jekyll/Hyde), or that we’re basically good and shaped by our environment (Frankenstein). It goes through ten or so major world religions as well as Christianity and talks about their views of mankind as well as how they say you can be saved or reach nirvana or whatever their ultimate is. I read this aloud and we discussed.
January 3, 2023
while i do agree with majority of what baldwin says in this, i do think it’s a bit unfair that this is entirely centered on frankenstein being the epitome of everything against Christianity and mr. hyde being everything for Christianity. i think Christians can relate to both monsters. frankenstein had choices to be evil, but mr. hyde didnt. that’s just how he was created. purely evil. and God has made it very clear to us that we have choices in our lives. so which monster does that sound like, then?
December 28, 2014
In this book, J.F. Baldwin uses two literary classics to illustrate worldviews: Frankenstein and Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. All of us, he claims, fall into one or the other worldview.
The content was often very good, and it was an easy, engaging book to read. Baldwin used many great quotes that gave me a few more books to add to my To Read shelf. But I wish the book had been more tightly edited. It was repetitious in places, tempting me to skim. The subtitle does call this an "introduction" to worldviews, and I think it is good for that. This should be good for high school students or for those who haven't thought a lot about how a Christian world view differs from those of other religions or secularism. If you've read a lot of worldview literature, you could probably skip this one. Otherwise, this may provide a good introduction.
The content was often very good, and it was an easy, engaging book to read. Baldwin used many great quotes that gave me a few more books to add to my To Read shelf. But I wish the book had been more tightly edited. It was repetitious in places, tempting me to skim. The subtitle does call this an "introduction" to worldviews, and I think it is good for that. This should be good for high school students or for those who haven't thought a lot about how a Christian world view differs from those of other religions or secularism. If you've read a lot of worldview literature, you could probably skip this one. Otherwise, this may provide a good introduction.
May 27, 2015
This book made me think. I learned alot about the different worldviews and it helped me understand my own worldview. Enjoyable read but I could only do it in small chunks - I needed time to process what I read.
August 25, 2008
What kind of monster are you? A great read, I keep this on my bookshelf.
October 8, 2019
Excellent book! However, a more accurate subtitle would have been "A Christian Introduction on the Nature of Man."
March 26, 2021
Excellent! Really opens your eyes to the poison ideologies hidden everywhere in our culture.
April 5, 2023
An amazing book that everyone must read! This book opened up a whole new world to me about worldviews and everyone should know what this book has to offer!
December 28, 2020
I really enjoyed prereading this book. On the heels of reading Post Modern Times and The Good News We Almost Forgot, this book “talked” with the others. It also dances with Charlotte Mason’s Ourselves and prompted me to rethink Mason’s 2nd educational principle. To understand the depravity of man and the Good News in Christ, having that solid theological understanding, and being able to recognize other ideologies covered in worldly glitter and sparkles is a life skill we must have and must teach our children.
January 5, 2021
Interesting worldview book. If you're planning to read this, read Dr. Jekyll and Frankenstein first, as they set the stage for his worldview discussion. I didn't completely agree with his chapter on Psychology, but otherwise a very insightful book.
November 25, 2022
Excellent! Must read. Great explanation of the difference between every other worldview and Christianity. It was very eye-opening for me and explained a lot of the differences in how I see the world versus how many non-Christians see the world.
December 10, 2019
I liked the clever way the author used two classic monsters, Frankenstein and Mr. Hyde, as springboards for teaching about worldviews from a christian perspective.
August 29, 2023
Good book, interesting perspective. Thought provoking.
June 16, 2018
3.5 Stars
This book is super difficult for me to rate and review, because while for the most part I agree with it and think that the way it discusses worldview is really good, I cannot get behind the message that turning to God will automatically 'cure your depression' or 'solve all your mental health issues'. While I definitely agree that non-Christians are looking for purpose and meaning and identity in all the wrong places, and that can lead to feeling down or depressed, since you can't find ultimate meaning in anything but God's Word, actual mental illnesses like depression or anxiety are just that: illnesses. They aren't just 'feeling down' some of the time. They are actual illnesses caused by chemicals in your brain. That certainly doesn't mean you can't do anything to fight against them, but to state that all mental illness is just the fruit of sin or living a godless life completely invalidates Christians (like myself) who struggle with these issues. And so, while I did mostly enjoy this book, and I think that it gets a lot of stuff right, I can't give it full marks because it perpetuates a very unhealthy and unhelpful view about mental health and mental illness.
This book is super difficult for me to rate and review, because while for the most part I agree with it and think that the way it discusses worldview is really good, I cannot get behind the message that turning to God will automatically 'cure your depression' or 'solve all your mental health issues'. While I definitely agree that non-Christians are looking for purpose and meaning and identity in all the wrong places, and that can lead to feeling down or depressed, since you can't find ultimate meaning in anything but God's Word, actual mental illnesses like depression or anxiety are just that: illnesses. They aren't just 'feeling down' some of the time. They are actual illnesses caused by chemicals in your brain. That certainly doesn't mean you can't do anything to fight against them, but to state that all mental illness is just the fruit of sin or living a godless life completely invalidates Christians (like myself) who struggle with these issues. And so, while I did mostly enjoy this book, and I think that it gets a lot of stuff right, I can't give it full marks because it perpetuates a very unhealthy and unhelpful view about mental health and mental illness.
September 20, 2014
"The question is not Who uses faith and who uses reason? Everyone uses both. The question should be, Who has the most reasonable faith?"
This is the question that "The Deadliest Monster" addresses. Basically, everyone either believes mankind is innately good (the Frankenstein viewpoint) or that mankind is innately sinful (the Jekyll and Hyde viewpoint). The book compares both points of view. It shows the difficulties that arise from seeing people as innately good and follows the belief to its logical conclusion - selfishness. Along the way it also looks at the support for man's sinfulness and the conclusions which flow from the Christian viewpoint - forgiveness which enables selflessness.
The book accomplishes its purpose. The chapter on psychology is especially strong. I recommended it.
This is the question that "The Deadliest Monster" addresses. Basically, everyone either believes mankind is innately good (the Frankenstein viewpoint) or that mankind is innately sinful (the Jekyll and Hyde viewpoint). The book compares both points of view. It shows the difficulties that arise from seeing people as innately good and follows the belief to its logical conclusion - selfishness. Along the way it also looks at the support for man's sinfulness and the conclusions which flow from the Christian viewpoint - forgiveness which enables selflessness.
The book accomplishes its purpose. The chapter on psychology is especially strong. I recommended it.
August 23, 2022
** IRRESPONSIBLE **
The author attacks people who are suicidal claiming they are selfish for not thinking about how their death will affect their friends and family. This is terribly insensitive, and in many cases untrue. It would be unfortunate if his extreme position pushed someone considering suicide over the brink. Irresponsible writing.
The author attacks people who are suicidal claiming they are selfish for not thinking about how their death will affect their friends and family. This is terribly insensitive, and in many cases untrue. It would be unfortunate if his extreme position pushed someone considering suicide over the brink. Irresponsible writing.
August 15, 2014
Yep. I'm Frankenstein. But I never would have known it. It's funny how over the years secular culture leeches into the soil, and the water, and suddenly, the garden is polluted.
March 22, 2017
A good book to read for an introduction to what a Christian's worldview should be.
October 2, 2016
Dated in its examples of cultural figures but the content and analysis are spot on!!!!!
July 4, 2021
Read this along with my 16 year old, after we had both read Frankenstein and Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Clear and insightful, we both found it useful as we process our own beliefs and the beliefs of others. Baldwin draws on many brilliant thinkers and writers, I loved all the wonderful quotes throughout the book.
July 4, 2024
A wonderful book to read with Robert Louis Stevenson's 'Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde' and Mary Shelley's 'Frankenstein.'
Explores the interesting and vastly different worldviews presented in each classic-one secular and one Christian.
Explores the interesting and vastly different worldviews presented in each classic-one secular and one Christian.
December 20, 2017
If I were king, I would have everyone in my kingdom read this book.
January 3, 2019
Great at first, but got repetitive.
January 18, 2019
Very good, but a boring book. I really enjoyed the first chapter. The rest of the chapters were just really repetitive and boring.
April 10, 2019
Book is absolutely amazing. So full of amazing stuff. J. F. Baldwin knows what he's talking about!
February 18, 2021
Great resource on worldviews. Very Extensive.
May 5, 2022
Excellent book, interesting and realistic.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 62 reviews