<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: A solid overview of Christian Apologetics
Review: A am a university student who is studying religion and philosophy, and I think that this book does a good job of offering an overview of christian apologetics. The answers that it offers agree with what the Bible teaches, and answers given to topics such as evil, pain and suffering were strong philosophical arguements.
Over the past few years, I have read a number of books by both Zacharias and Geisler, and I can say without a doubt these two are among the greatest christian apologists of all time, and their works have greatly strengthened the field of christian apologetics.
Rating: 
Summary: Simplistic - looking for deep answers - look elsewhere
Review: I agree with A.Reader, this book is written for simple-minded people who already have an unshakeable faith and want to know what to tell their young children when they ask the inevitable questions. Don't get me too wrong, I'm not an atheistic. I'm just bored and tired of the endless meaningless drivel masquerading as serious writing in the religion section at the bookstore. One thing you can say positive about the book is you don't have to strain your brain cells much to try to understand it. I'd recommend it to anyone who doesn't really like expanding their mind and just wants someone to spoon feed them simplistic sunday school concepts watered down to an eigth-grade level of comprehension. However, I'm glad I read a "borrowed" copy and didn't waste any money on this substance-less waste of pulp. An equal to St. Anselm's ontological proof of God, this book isn't.
Rating: 
Summary: Should have been better
Review: I figured that a book put together by Ravi Zacharias and Norman Geisler would have been organized better. The book is very simple. It might be at a coffee shop philosophy level. I guess I was looking for a book that would give more detailed answers. I guess it might be a good introductory book on apologetics, but it may be too simple for that even. I usually love anything by Geisler or Zacharias, however this book just wasn't good enough.
Rating: 
Summary: Putting childish ways behind
Review: It's hard to believe that people take Ravi and Norm's brand of theism seriously. The book assumes a supernatural God and that the Bible is a biography of God, of Jesus, and of God's action in the world. But is this the case? But after the Enlightenment and 200 years of biblical scholarship (to say nothing of contemporary physics and biology) can we take what Ravi and Norm say seriously? Probably not. What's needed is a new understanding of God and the Bible, and that's what this book doesn't offer.If you're convinced by the old God and the old answers to "tough questions," buy this book. But if you're looking for real answers, leave it alone because the answers lay elsewhere.
Rating:
Summary: Wrong Title; Should be "Who Made God? and 100 Other Opinions
Review: This book is a poor copycat of Kenneth C. Davis's "The Bible: Everything You Need to Know About the Good Book but Never Learned." It is a collection of 10 or so authors who provide some degree of insight or logic UNTIL its Robert White's turn. His opinions regarding "Black Islam" is very disappointing. Actually he is a throw-back to the Harlem Renaissance debates between Marcus Garvey and W.E.B DuBois. At that time, the Black leaders loved DuBois and the Black masses loved Garvey. It is obvious that Robert White loves Martin Luther King but has a great dislike for Louis Farrakhan. Unfortunately the overwhelming majority of Black Americans disagree.
My biggest concern about this chapter, "Tough Questions about Islam," is that he does not address the REALLY tough questions regarding Black Seminarians and Black Theology. This is the most exciting area of Black religious thought. I was hoping that Robert White, with all of his credentials, would discuss Ham and one of his sons Canaan. I would love a discussion of Canaan's son Zidon, father of the Zidonians. Wasn't Jezabel from Zidon? Didn't she marry Ahaz, an important king of Judah? Hey, wouldn't that make her the great-great-great grandmother of Hezekiah, then Josiah?
I wish he had discussed Canaan's son Heth, father of the Hittites. Hey, wasn't Uriah a Hittite? Can we assume that his wife, Beersheba, was also a Hittite? Hey, didn't King David marry Beersheba and beget Solomon? Was Solomon a Black man because his mother was Black?
When issues of Blacks in the Bible are not discussed, it makes Christianity a "White man's religion." When a Black Christian cannot find himself in the Bible, despite over 700 references to Egypt, descendants of Mizraim, and nearly 300 references to Ethiopia, descendants of Cush, then there is a problem with Robert White's "Word of God."
I would have returned the book but I had already read it so it would not have been the Christian thing to do!
Rating: 
Summary: Offers answers to questions on the Christian faith
Review: This book offers answers to over 100 commonly-asked questions about Christianity in an easy-to-read format. The editors bring together the world's leading Christian apologists and present their knowledge on each subject. The book is organized by topics, with several questions and answers listed under each topic. Part One of the book covers the most fundamental questions about Christianity, including the deity of God, Jesus Christ, the validity of the Bible, evolution/creationism, evil, etc. Part Two delves into more complicated topics and examines the differences between Christianity and other world religions, such as Hinduism, Islam, Mormonism, Transcendental Meditation, Buddhism, etc. Each chapter also ends with discussion questions, which are quite thought-provoking and beneficial for small-group study. This book is a good starting point for those who wish to understand more about the Christian faith. It's fairly basic, so the editors list several more books and Web sites at the end for deeper study. This is a good reference especially for people who are curious about the Christian faith or are new believers.
Rating:
Summary: Informative, good introduction to apologetics
Review: This is a good introduction to apologetics, packed with useful info, written by many experts. However, it may be just a little too short and condensed. There are better books like this out there like Samples' "Without a Doubt: Answering the 20 Toughest Faith Questions" , Strobel's "The Case for Faith" and "The Case for a Creator," etc.
I do take issue with Rhodes discussion on evil & pain. In an otherwise great discussion, he equates all of pain & death with evil, being evil or being nonexistent before evil entered the world. This is problematic in a number of ways (I quote the following from Dean's book "Is the Truth Out There?"):
Even plants "suffer" and experience "death,"...Did these plants suddenly appear after Adam's sin? According to the fossil record they did not. Science has also shown us that animal death is necessary for stable ecosystems. "No death before Adam" also violates the laws of physics. There is no life, or no work, without decay and death. In any given moment, cells are dying and food is decaying in our bodies so life may continue. Is this death and decay evil? If death was inherently evil, what of God who killed animals to clothe Adam and Eve and the deaths he caused throughout the Bible (in punishing people)? If death is inherently evil, then so is God.
Would not a caring creator prepare the world in the best possible way for man, the crown of creation? There are billions of tons of oil, coal, limestone, marble, topsoil and kerogen on Earth. All are valuable, and some necessary, for the maintaining and improvement of human life and all were created by decaying life. Would not the creator - knowing that man would sin by virtue of the fact the creator is outside of time and could see man's future - prepare the world accordingly? Was not the preparation of these materials good?
There is also the illogical claim that God did not create the laws of physics until after man sinned. Why would God create the laws after he created the universe? Those who believe death before Adam is evil explain the existence of carnivores by claiming that creation was already prepared to become meat-eaters since God knew what was coming. If this were true, the fossil record must be a deception, because it shows animals were already eating meat. Adam and Eve were not eating meat (which Genesis 1:29 and Genesis 9:3 seem to indicate) because it is healthier for people with their long life spans. With all the vegetation in Eden, meat would be unnecessary. When mankind's lifespan later decreased, he could eat reasonable amounts of meat without much worry (assuming meat is not the only food you eat, its good properties will outweigh the bad in our relatively short life spans).
When God gave man meat (Genesis 9:3) he did not say anything about changing the animals' diet. One could infer from this omission that the former guideline for animals (Genesis 1:30) was applicable only in Eden or was not completely forbidding carnivorous activity among animals. If Genesis 1:30 were forbidding all carnivorous activity, why does it only refer to the life types man would be interacting with inside Eden (land and airborne animals, see also Genesis 2:20) and not ocean dwelling creatures? To get really technical, read Genesis 1:29-30 again and notice how it is not forbidding anything, but seems to be a recommended guideline. Also, since God specifically told man he could eat meat in Genesis 9:3, here is another obvious point that the death of animals is not inherently evil.
Now consider how Genesis states Eve's childbearing pain was increased after the fall. This tells us two things: 1. There was pain before the fall; and 2. She may have had children before the fall. Also realize that pain is a defense mechanism, so it can not be a construct of evil.
People often ask why some people are taken from this world when they are. Granted, we do not have the larger perspective to see how everyone's life fits together, but consider that God may take people so they do not have to experience our corrupt and evil world anymore. On the other side of things, God limited the life spans of man so he could cause less death and destruction to each other. In other words, death serves larger purposes from a perspective beyond our own.
Once we strip away the emotion of death and look some of the realities of death, we find that the death tautology loses its strength. Not only through physical reality, but it does so through a careful reading of scripture as well.
<< 1 >>
|
