<< 1 >>
Rating:  Summary: Creationism is merely one issue Review: According to fundamentalist reviewers like dave---f, the reasons people give for leaving the fold are nonsense. Let dave tell you the REAL reason they leave, i.e., because they "don't like being accountable to their Creator." So if you want to read dave's book it's quite short, but if you want to read this book, written by people who give their first hand accounts of why they left, then you'll have to take a bit more time and effort to understand all the reasons they left. Dave---f mentions John Woodmorappe's book "Noah's Ark: A Feasibility Study" which he claims shows how fallacious and even dishonest all attacks on Noahs ark and the Biblical Flood are. Actually, Woodmorappe's book is full of "could be's" and "might be's" as a means of propping up the Biblical Flood story. And there are numerous in-depth critiques of his book on the web from far more qualified geologists than Woodmorappe. In fact there are plenty of critiques of "Flood geology" written by some of Dan's fellow evangelical Chrisians like Dan Wonderly, Alan Hayward, Hugh Ross, Glenn Morton, not to mention the American Scientific Affiliation that consists of evangelical Christians who are scientists. ...In fact many early Christian geologists are the ones who first rejected "Flood geology" based on the plain evidence of the rocks themselves (the strict divisions in the fossil record -- right down to even fossil fragments and microfossils being carefully separated, even the chalk and coal layers in England not mixing, not to metion the tracks left by live land animals, the nests of dinosaurs with hatched eggs intact inside the nest, meaning it took time to mate, build a nest, lay an egg, gestate the egg, have it hatch, and then on a layer above that, having the same things happen again, and even paleosols [fossilized soil horizons]). The revival of "Flood geology" is a recent phenomenon, spurred on during the early 1960s by Henry Morris's The Genesis Flood, a book with so many misunderstandings of the geological record (the photos of the Lewis Overthrust in that book aren't even of the Lewis Overthrust!) that even Morris's Institute for Creation Research and the staff geologists there like Steve Austin, have backed down from continuing to defend many arguments in that book, from the debunked Paluxy "man-tracks," to the "human skull in coal," even to the Lewis Moutain Overthrust, that ICR now accepts was an overthrust and not evidence against the geologic column. Dave---f adds his view that "Christianity hangs upon Genesis," by which I suppose he means, "Genesis as I understand it." But that is a matter best taken up with his fellow Christians who are old-earth and theistic evolutionists, who disagree with dave...
Rating:  Summary: Yes Chicago, IL - we are legion. Review: After reading the reviewer from Chicago, please take the time to read Mr Babinski's full comments. I read a library copy of this book and have now placed it on my birthday list. It's greatest value is for people like me, ex born again Christians. 'Chicago, IL' can't imagine the other side of the great divide you pass through when you 'come out' of Christianity, but WE know and Mr Babinski's subjects do. If you once loved Jesus, worshipped him and shared the gospel with others but now find yourself in a wilderness, take heart! This book is a great first step to discovering 1)You're not alone in this experience and 2)A joyful and rewarding life still awaits you.
Rating:  Summary: How Evangelical Christians Rate Books "Outside the Fold" Review: The "Reviewer" who gave this book but one star has either not read it, or, not digested its contents. Like a lot of reviews written by people of an evangelical faith he rates it with only "one star" because he disagrees with its contents on apriori religious grounds and hopes to discourage others from being contaminated by its contents (not because the book was written badly or researched badly or lacked interesting information - it is in fact, written well, researched fastidiously, and contains much interesting information not found in other such works). Predictably, the reviewer suggests a "better" book that agrees with his particular evangelical faith, like "Why Christian Kids Leave the Fold." Such a "review" is both "sad" and "not surprising," and says more about the reviewer than the book he has "reviewed." To put what I said above in perspective, even having "left the fold" I, for instance, have not searched for books by Evangelical Christians to give them only "one star" and then suggest that readers would be better off reading "Leaving the Fold" instead. (Though come to think of it, what better way to try and draw attention to books you wish others to read. Though such "non-reviews" are also an annoyance to those of us seeking to gain knowledge from a book review. ... As for the naive and deprecating comments concerning "people leaving the faith" due to their pursuit of "sinful pleasures," it proves the "Reviewer" never read the book, because he ignores the rational arguments and reasons given by those who left Christianity, moreover, fully a third of the book's testimonies were written by fundamentalistic Christians who REMAINED CHRISTIANS after leaving their "fundamentalistic" beliefs and/or attitudes behind. Neither have "most of those who have fallen away" in the book ever returned to their former "fundamentalistic" ways or views. You can look up a number of them on the web and ask them for yourself. And one of the contributors in this book was Billy Graham's best friend and a former evangelist, whose book, "Farewell to God: My Reasons For Rejecting the Christian Faith" was published just this year. Lastly, I have read the book the "Reviewer" suggests, "Why Christian Kids Leave the Fold," and I'd like to say that a close friend of the person who wrote that book, whom the author knew to be one of the brightest and most enthusiastic Evangelical Christians he'd ever met, left the fold, never to return. The author's conclusion and embarrassing admission after he saw that happen to such a close dear Evangelical Christian friend was that intelligent and enthusiastic Christians who love Christ, can and do "leave the fold." (Just to keep the playing field level and "average out" the scoring of this alleged "review," I think I'll give this book five stars.)
Rating:  Summary: Emotional apostasies backed by pseudo-scientific "reasoning" Review: The essays in this book are yet more proof that people apostatize from their professed Christian faith because they don't like being accountable to their Creator. Then they find it easy to rationalize and pretend that their rejection of Christianity is because of 'evidence'. A case in point are the essays giving ... attacks on Noah's Flood and Ark as their 'reasons' for rejecting the Bible. John Woodmorappe's book "Noah's Ark: A Feasibility Study" shows how fallacious and even dishonest these attacks are. All the apostates can do is spout on about Ockham's razor (never mind that Ockham was a strong Christian) and fail to address the points or admit the many crass blunders. But a good thing to come out of this book is how Christianity hangs upon Genesis. It's significant that the many of the contributors are a virtual who's who of the amateurs active in the Internet anti-creationist world. It shows that they need to keep fighting creation to justify their rebellion against their Creator.
Rating:  Summary: A must read for anyone Review: There is probably no other book where you can tap into the vast experiences of former fundamentalists. The backgrounds and credentials of the people are very impressive. They have expanded huge amounts of effort trying to support their beliefs in fundamental Christianity only to find orthodox Christianity seriously wanting. It also exposes the many negative consequences of fundamentalism on its followers. If this book doesn't seriously challenge your "faith", your critical thinking skills need a major overhaul.
<< 1 >>
|