<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Not useful for everyone
Review: A great book for Christians and non-Christians alike. The Bible is a popular target of criticisms especially alleged contradictions. Are there any intelligent Christian authors that can offer anything more than an "ad hoc" response to these accusations? Yes, and this is the one. This book is a thick reference that answers most of these allegations in a fair and systematic way. Geisler is well-respected as a theologian, philosopher, and apologist. No need to read the whole thing. Just keep it on your shelf as a resource. It is organized by book of the Bible, so it is easy to navigate.
Rating: 
Summary: A good resource
Review: Geisler/Howe provide a good resource to respond to the kind of objections that regularly surface when it comes to alleged Bible contradictions or errors. I thought the book was well laid out and logical to follow in terms of presentation. I thought that many of the explanations were adequate, some were exquisite, a few others seemed to fall a bit short. Overall, I think it's a book that can be repeatedly referred to for guidance, since objections to the inerrancy of Scripture are always swirling around even in the midst of sound and compelling rebuttals. I did not give the book 5 stars for 2 reasons. First, I thought that some (not many) of the explanations offered were a little hollow. But as I'm typing this, I can only think of 2 instances where I thought this. Secondly, there were a few verses in Scripture that were not dealt with in the book that probably deserved to be addressed due to their controversial or non crystal clear meaning. But again, on the whole, I thought this book was pretty thorough both in the verses it analyzed, and in the analysis itself. Not perfect, but a good solid resource.
Rating:
Summary: Blindsight Is Always 20/20 --- An Abstract
Review: Here is a brief abstract of Geisler's and Howe's exegetical "reasoning": 1. Encourage Christians to "reason for themselves" while denouncing Promethean non-theists for substituting their *own* Reason for God's (i.e. divine scripture conquers all).
2. Embrace the "lamp of science" only when it conforms with (or aids in understanding) a scriptural account. Reject *contrary* evidence on the grounds that science often turns out to be wrong and all non-theistic rationales might one day be proven false (dream a little dream). Condemn naturalistic critique as "anti-supernatural bias." Introduce discoveries in Syro-Palestinian archaeology *only* if they are compatible with scriptural accounts. Use scripture to "disprove" science but *never* vice-versa.(!)
3. Provide many possible "solutions" to apparent contradictions in the assumption that a *possible* solution entails that there is (or must be) *a* solution.
4. Use provisional words and phrases like "Perhaps..." "Maybe..." "It's possible..." "Scholars agree that..." but never for a moment entertain the possibility that perhaps/maybe/it's possible/other-scholars-might-agree that Geisler and Howe may be wrong. (How can they prove that an insecure God isn't using His power to *convince* Christians that He is Inerrant?)
5. Never mention the unfortunate notion that an inerrant, perfect God was unable to write a Bible without thousands of difficulties He *had* to have known would turn much of His creation against Him (e.g. couldn't an omniscient God with complete foreknowledge have anticipated "difficulties" in His Word, and edited the text accordingly?). If all else fails, blame the "fallen" state of Man for our difficulty in reaching consensus on scriptural meaning.
6. Ground the Bible's inerrancy in orthodox assertions of omniscience and omnipotence (i.e. a God with complete foreknowledge of the future), then deny that this cancels out human freedom, explaining that divine sovereignty and free will are two separate (but convergent) truths whose unification is a "mystery" beyond finite human understanding. (Here the authors fall back on the notion that where Reason cannot provide an explanation, Faith must be reenlisted to endorse Mystery.) Spin-doctor all biblical accounts implying moral responsibility and contingency with the orthodox doctrine of divine sovereignty and infallible foreknowledge (i.e. God knows and determines every detail of our futures, but we are still free to make "choices"). Teach Christians that they can eat their cake and have it too, with a little circular reasoning.
7. Qualify biblical anthropomorphisms as "symbolic" or "figures of speech," all the while attributing to God temporal, earthbound qualities such as "patience," "exhaustion," "desire," "need," and "choice." (i.e. God "desires" that *all* souls be saved, even though he has divine foreknowledge of everything that will ever happen in the universe, including those names written in the Book of Life (and those damned souls excluded from it), but somehow every potentially damned soul has the "choice" to repent and be saved -- once again, we must all accept this pretzelled formulation as Divine Mystery).
8. Decry all sinful and non-divine qualities in the Creation as "that which is not God," all the while asserting that God is everywhere, an omnipotent "uncaused cause" who's determined our earthly fates from Beginning to End (i.e. doesn't this formulation sound a bit like divine self-hatred?).
9. Distinguish between Eisegesis and Exegesis as hermeneutic concepts. "Eisegesis" is when you project your own inbred biases and (corrupt) cultural beliefs onto a text, thus distorting its inerrant metaphysical meaning. "Exegesis," on the other hand, is when you distill a text's "true" meaning from a privileged perspective (presumably a monopoly of orthodox theologians). Geisler and Howe are blind to the fact that their entire book (indeed, Christianity itself) can be criticized as an apotheosis of Eisegetic perspectivalism.(!)
10. Denounce homosexuality as an "abomination" by making sexual orientation a matter of personal choice (or unchosen mental dysfunction). Exonerate the God of Love by making a convenient distinction between identity and behavior (on page 273, the authors state that "God...loves homosexuals. But He hates homosexuality").
11. Affirm all forms of mental illness caused by genetic defect as God's ironic and convoluted way of introducing Good into the world and as a way of bringing His Glory into relief.(!) Ignore the fact that the clinically insane are hardly in a position to make a rational choice with regards to any ethical paradigm whatsoever.
12. Affirm Old Testament war and infanticide as "righteous" if the target-population loses the crapshoot of being God's Elect, even while asserting that a God of Love could *never* punish the sons for the iniquities of the fathers. Justify the slaughter of children with the idea that young ones are not yet morally accountable for themselves, and so automatically go to Heaven (i.e. God and the Israelites are justified in killing children because He already knew they would grow up to be sinful, and so is "saving" them through slaughter).
13. Affirm Hell as a very real site of eternal anguish and torture, and consign all non-Christians to the lake of fire, since being born and raised in a different culture with non-Western belief-systems is a cardinal sin against the true Christian faith, pointing out that God (being a god of love and eternal justice) is not "culpable" for the "choice" these people have made in turning away from their one true Creator. My intention in posting this review was not to offend Christians (not strictly, anyway), but only to inform potential buyers of Geisler's and Howe's conservative evangelicalism, and the destructive impact it continues to have on our liberal society. Ironically, I agree wholeheartedly with almost all of their arguments regarding the true message of the Bible. I just think the Bible is a bad practical joke, a truly sinister science-fiction novel, an anchor around the neck of Western culture, a retrovirus for philosophical discernment and clarity of thought.... But hey, I'm damned, right?
Rating: 
Summary: More opinion than explanation.
Review: I guess one of the main(first) problems I have with this particular book is that it refers to inerrancies, inaccuracies, and contradictions in the Bible as " difficulties ". " Difficulties " are what one experiences when trying to install a home theater system when no installation instructions have been provided. Inerrancies, inaccuracies, and contradictions are just that and there's no way of getting around them via simple explanations. This book, at times, doesn't even provide simple explanations in that mostly the authors ask the reader to simply " believe what they say " without question. Another problem I have with this book is in its obvious avoidance of the book of Leviticus. There are many questions in the book of Leviticus which warrant some serious explanation and they go well beyond simple " difficulties ". These authors chose to basically ignore some of the more nasty bits concerning slavery, treatment of women and children, murder, sacrifice, and incest all of which occur in Leviticus. Any book wanting to address some of the troubling issues within the Bible must confront Leviticus head on. The avoidance of most of the troubling issues within Leviticus by these authors speaks volumes to their actual agenda. Most of what these authors " claim " to be explanations really are just their opinion. However, they don't state them as such. For example, the authors of this book will point out " difficulties " within the Bible, point out the specific "problem" concerning a passage, and then provide a " solution ". They never approach any of the solutions of said difficulties within the Bible as " possible " soluntions. Rather, they state and phrase these solutions as the " only solution " which is both arrogant and unlikely. More importantly, these authors don't back up any of their " solutions " with any real concrete support from either scientific or theological standpoints. In fact, I would go as far to say that basically these authors are asking the readers to believe their solutions to the difficulties in the Bible to be the true solutions or answers simply because the authors " say they are ". Sorry. No sale. For example, an explanation regarding the great flood, Noah, and the Ark. The obvious question of how it was possible that Noah, his wife, and there family were able to round up two(2) of every unclean creature and severn(7) of every clean creature to place upon the Ark and such is not addressed directly. The authors explain that Noah's Ark was " huge " and could easily support two of every animal plus all the food they needed for themselves and all the animals. However, the authors don't address " how " this could be possible. Even in todays' world, such a task would be near impossible. Their " solution "? " The Ark was very big and so there would have been plenty of room for everything " is basically the explanation the give. However, they don't go into any detail regarding specifics as to how any of it, the building of the Ark, the collecting of the animals, the sustaining of the Ark, the crew, and the animals while it was afloat would be possible. No mention of the amount of time it would take to both build such a huge boat and gather the materials needed to build it with only eight(8) people being involved. No mention of how it was possible that creatures which can live only in salt water environments and creatures which can only live in fresh water environments some how were able to both live and sustain life conjointly in a body of water which somehow " magically " allowed both types to live. How is it possible to track, capture, and contain so many animals in such a short amount of time? How it is possible to distinguish between so many different species of animals which look so much alike making sure that too many of one type of animal wasn't being gathered? I guess Noah and his family suddenly became experts in both identifying and handing wildlife as well as becoming expert ship builers? No explanation as to how it's possible that animals who today are indginous to certain parts of the gloge, such as the polar bear and koala bear, were able to be rounded up when reaching their native habitats, even by todays travel standards, would have taken enormous amounts of time. No explanantion as to how a crew of eight(8) managed to feed, keep healthy, and keep safe so many wild animals who were not accustomed to living in captivity nor living in such close proximity to other animals. To put it into perspective, the San Diego zoo takes care of over 4000 animals representing 800 species on a 100 acre property with a round-the-clock staff of hundreds. The authors basically give the explanation: " Because they could ". This is only one example. There are many, many more. What mostly bothers me about these authors is that they make too many claims and assumptions about what the actual authors of the Bible " meant " to say. How is this possible? Also, if an all-knowing Being meant to convey His word with the intention of having His words followed and to be worshiped, then why, knowing all things both past, present, and future, didn't God make sure the Bible was less confusing and without errors and contradictions? Why isn't the Bible without scientific inaccuracies (a "bat" as the Bible claims, is not a bird for example. Rabbits, as the Bible claims, do not chew their cud. You would think an all-knowing Being, who supposedly created these animals, would know this and convey as such to those who were in charge of writing the Bible) and overt contradictions. I do believe in God, I just don't believe in the accuracy of the Bible. If anything, this book will point out the flaws of both the Bible and the authors of this book who so obviously had their own agenda and are the classic definitions of the word: " zealot ".
Rating: 
Summary: Excellent Resource
Review: I use this book every day as I read my daily scriptures or prepare Sunday School lessons. It is easy to use because it it in Book-chapter-verse sequence. Norman Geisler is very well respected in his field, enough said on him. Regarding the negative reviews on Amazon.com they tend to fall in one of two categories: 1. There are those out there whose life ambition is to post negative reviews about Christian books they clearly have never read. Hmmmm... I wonder why. 2. Those that have read the book and take issue with it for their own reasons. I can't say that their reasons are valid or not but I will say that this book is no replacement doing your own homework. Of course no one should just take someone's word for anything. However, whether you agree or not it certainly gives a good starting off point. It is worth the money at any price.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent Beginning Reference Work
Review: I've used this book to teach a seeker's bible study. Most people seem to really appreciate the honesty. The cumulative effect of looking up entries is to realize how bible difficulties arise. This is as valuable as any particular entry. Some difficulties are treated more in-depth than others. Some can be thoroughly dealt with in a short entry, others solutions can only be gestured at. This book is not meant to be the end-all-be-all of bible difficulties but it is a comprehensive overview of Bible difficulties. At first, the size of the book might be discouraging: this is a big book. However, it becomes encouraging when you see how-time and time again-there are simple solutions or natural explanations for the Bible difficulties, it's just that it takes longer to explain a solution than it does to raise a problem. This should go next to his _Encyclopedia of Aplogetics_, _General Introduction to the Bible_, and _When Skeptics Ask_ on your reference shelf.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent Beginning Reference Work
Review: I've used this book to teach a seeker's bible study. Most people seem to really appreciate the honesty. The cumulative effect of looking up entries is to realize how bible difficulties arise. This is as valuable as any particular entry. Some difficulties are treated more in-depth than others. Some can be thoroughly dealt with in a short entry, others solutions can only be gestured at. This book is not meant to be the end-all-be-all of bible difficulties but it is a comprehensive overview of Bible difficulties. At first, the size of the book might be discouraging: this is a big book. However, it becomes encouraging when you see how-time and time again-there are simple solutions or natural explanations for the Bible difficulties, it's just that it takes longer to explain a solution than it does to raise a problem. This should go next to his _Encyclopedia of Aplogetics_, _General Introduction to the Bible_, and _When Skeptics Ask_ on your reference shelf.
Rating:
Summary: Be Prepared to Put On Your Thinking Cap for This One!
Review: In my humble opinion, Geisler has written an excellent book concerning honest question biblical critics have for Christians. With over 800 questions, the book also has 3 indices for quick and easy reference: topical, Scriptural, and unorthodox doctrines. Thankfully, the questions are also organized by the Bible (starting with Genesis and ending with Revelation) instead of by the question. While you may not agree with all of the author's conclusions, this does not merit the low rating of some "critics". Such people have nothing better to do than to slam Christian author such as Geisler who try to help others either know more about the Bible or to think more deeply about biblical issues. What an empy existence and life these people must have! I have heard Geisler preach on occasion and have periodically referred to the book when preparing a Sunday School lesson. While I do not worship Geisler or other authors (and I believe they also do not encourage it!), I do appreciate their efforts to better explain the difficult issues mentioned in the Bible. While he does not claim to be the sole authority on the Bible, Geisler's book will certainly challenge you on what you do believe about the Bible. Read and enjoy and be challenged! Highly recommended!
Rating:
Summary: Excellent Resource for Understanding of Bible Difficulties
Review: It would be naive to think that the Bible is not difficult to read in various places, and in need of further thought and research. That is the very thing this book attempts to do, and I believe it rises to the occasion. Moreover, it would be even more naive to think that the Bible has never been under any criticism, attack, or been distorted in one way or another from skeptics, cults, and the like. Thus, Geisler and Howe cover all the apparent 'contradictions' or paradoxes that surface with just a prima facie reading of the Scriptures. They also handle criticisms that have been herald, and claims that have been made by skeptics, cults, or other aberrant groups toward or against the text of the Bible. While this text is not completely exhaustive, it is, for all intents and purposes almost completely exhaustive. The book itself is 640 pages of Biblical texts, commentary about the various paradoxes, claims, criticisms, etc. and corrections about these false claims. Thus, the book works well as an apologetics text, a biblical study aid, a theology manual, and a reference work to give an answer to various cult groups who call themselves 'Christian' but distort the Word of God in one way or another. Each of these authors is very qualified to put together a text of this nature. First, Dr. Norman Geisler is considered one of the best apologists and able defenders of the faith in this century. Second, Dr. Thomas Howe has his Ph.D. in biblical and philosophical hermeneutics, and is a professor of Greek and Hebrew at Southern Evangelical Seminary. Thus, the scholarship behind this text is excellent. The text itself begins in Genesis, ends in Revelation, and takes all the verse that have been in question in one way or another (via skeptics, cults, etc), quotes the verse, comments on the criticisms, and then gives an answer. The book is very systematically organized, easy to use, and covers the entire biblical texts. Furthermore, it contains 2 appendices, a very detailed index of unorthodox religious doctrines, a detailed topical index, and a very detailed Scripture index, all of which is quite helpful to the researcher as he is using the book. Of all the biblical difficulties texts that are out there in print, this is one of the best (including Gleason Archer's text). There are simply not enough words to describe how helpful and useful this text has been for me in my studies. I highly recommend it.
Rating: 
Summary: Okay for a beginner
Review: This is a nice simple starting point. Not a whole lot challenging in it, but a lot of information. My biggest complaint is the fact that there are several places where the authors give some different viewpoints on an issue (which in itself is often fine), but they do it over a few things that are theologically important, IMO.
<< 1 >>
|
