Rating: 
Summary: Praise from an Atheist
Review: I'm a rationalist, empiricist, atheist unbeliever, but I'm here to tell you Craig is good. He knows the New Testament very well and applies common sense far more often than many overly sophisticated academics. Craig is a Man of Reason who runs circles around implausible, irrational, dissembling, postmodern skeptics. What makes Craig so persuasive is not only that he hews to reason as best he can, but also that he has more evidence on his side. The only trouble is that he can't persuade so-called "swoon theorists" like me, who agree there probably WAS an empty tomb and a doubting Thomas and the whole nine yards. Look, when Matthew says even some of the Eleven "doubted," after seeing Jesus alive, you have to ask: what exactly did they doubt? That he was there, solid and alive in front of their eyes, or that he was really completely dead on Friday? Obviously, it must have been the latter. Joseph of Arimathea was a good friend, and man of means, but no naive fisherman. Think: when they see the "risen" Jesus, he's solid, wounded, and----the clincher----hungry. He wants something to eat! He survived. He was young. Fluid barely oozes, and doesn't gush, from a corpse when poked, though it does gush from a living body. Besides, people have been known to survive multiple stab wounds. The differential treatment between Jesus and the two theives raises a lot of questions. Did Joseph bribe the Roman soldiers not to break His legs? The essenes, who may have liked to dress in white, had a reputation as good medics. Why 100 pounds of "spices" for a corpse? Roman historian Josephus knew guys who had survived crucifixion. Jesus was only up there for hours, not the usual several days it takes. People in the Phillipines survive crucifixion too. The non-canonicals even speak of someone witnessing a guy being helped to limp away from the tomb, supported by two friends. If Jesus was God then he was God. But if he was a man, he was a bit of a...can we say charismatic "magician"? So I believe the disciples were honest, if gullible, men, and the Gospels got it mostly right. But where's the "miracle"? Can there be any doubt, which of two scenarios is the more likely, plausible, probable, or believable----when one of them requires the magical intervention of supernatural forces, and the other requires little out of the ordinary? It's hardly sane, or even possible, to believe the former over the latter, once clearly confronted with such a choice. Craig himself admits as much.
Rating: 
Summary: Great philosophical apology
Review: In his introduction, William Lane Craig explains that apologetics is the branch of Christian theology which tries to rationally justify the claims of Christian faith. Craig does this in an easy-to-grasp manner, concentrating on the philosophical issues rather than the hard evidence (for an apology with hard evidence, check out Josh McDowell's "The New Evidence"). The book is broken down into eight parts: --How do I know Christianity is true? --The absurdity of life without God --The existence of God --The problem of miracles --The problem of historical knowledge --The historical reliability of the New Testament (by noted scholar Craig Blomberg --The self-understanding of Jesus --The resurrection of Jesus My favorite two sections were "The absurdity of life without God" and "The existence of God." In these sections Craig tackles many of the philosophical questions about God, and he does it in a simple and succinct manner. Another thing that I really liked about this book are the sections at the end of each chapter called "Practical Application." In these sections, Craig supplies ways you can use the information in the chapter to share in an evangelistic contact. Simple and specific dialogue is provided for the reader to use in spreading Christianity. I would recommend this book to anyone that is looking to build his faith. Craig's final words, the "Ultimate Apologetic," challenge Christians to use their own life as an example of the best apology. To do this, follow the two great commandments: "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the great first commandment. And a second is like it, You shall love your neighbor as yourself." --Matthew 22:35-40 The ultimate apologetic is: your life.
Rating:
Summary: You must read this book!
Review: In the Reasonable Faith, Dr. Craig has provided us with an impressive, up-to-date and scholary treatment of Christian apologetics to equip true believers in proclamation of the Gospel. His work is careful, acurate and fair.It clarifies many different issues from a biblical point of view. You must read that book.
Rating:
Summary: An effective and HONEST presentation of Christian evidence..
Review: Mr. Craig does an excellent job at honestly assessing the current state-of-the-play of Christian apologetics. Many authors who try to *replace* faith with reason in order to arrive at their desired conclusions commit a logical fallacy in doing so. Craig avoids this, and I found his assessments accurate and honest without losing poignancy. As Mr. Craig rightly indicates, reason ALONE will not 'close the sale' in terms of coming to faith, however, one should have every right to expect that reason would not *contradict* coming to faith if a religion's claims are to be taken as objectively true. I found that he effectively demonstrated that reason will be found supporting the Christian faith in many ways, without erroneously overstating his case.
Rating: 
Summary: A Handy Collection of Apologetic Fallacies
Review: Since Dr.Craig is probably one of the most philosophically literate apologists for the Christian faith, I expected this book to be leaps and bounds better than purely worthless rubbish such as Josh McDowell's "Evidence." I was quite disappointed to find that this was not the case at all. Typical is the following quote from page 48: "What, then, should be our approach in apologetics? It should be something like this: 'My friend, I know Christianity is true because God's Spirit lives in me and assures me that it is true. . . Now, to try to show you it's true, I'll share with you some arguments and evidence that I really find convincing. But should my arguments seem weak and unconvincing to you, that's my fault, not God's. It only shows that I'm a poor apologist, not that the gospel is untrue. Whatever you think of my arguments, God still loves you and holds you accountable. I'll do my best to present good arguments to you. But ultimately you have to deal, not with arguments, but with God himself." Admissions such as these, where Craig admits that REASON itself is not sufficient to establish the truth of Christian claims, shows the title of the book is a complete misnomer-- Reasonable faith does not rely on mere emotional 'wishing-to-be-true,' nor does it rely on the type of veiled threats embodied in the suggestion that you should accept God because you will be "held accountable" if you dont't. Having seen Craig in debate (albeit with someone who did not even have any philosophical background as Craig does), I expected something better.
Rating: 
Summary: Is Faith still Reasonable when you consider the alternatives
Review: The author wants to persuade his readers to believe that (a) God exists and (b) Christianity is true. That's a tall order, because Christianity has a 2,000 year old rule book that contradicts many modern ideas. The existence of demonic spirits, for example, or God sending a worldwide flood to destroy all human life because He was disappointed in our choice of a decadent after-hours lifestyle that revolved around sex. (Okay, the Holy Spirit wouldn't have the same appreciation for sex that humans do. I'll give you that much.) Craig argues that all humans can know that Christianity is true by the "self-authenticating witness of God's Holy Spirit." The Holy Spirit, as we know, is the part of the Holy Trinity that isn't the Father or the Son. Here's the mistake in his argument. Every human being spends the first years of life totally dependent on their parents for food. The newborn brain starts as a clean slate, so the first impressions of life are the strongest. Every human being forms a mental image of an outside force that feeds us and takes care of us, and then buries this image in the subconscious. When Craig says every human being can experience the Holy Spirit, he is actually talking about our earliest emotional memories of our parents. Here's the test. Cultures that have different standards for child care have different images of their God/Holy Spirit that reflect cultural differences. In the OT, God was a cranky despot who was always promising to send a Messiah to restore the Kingdom of Israel, fulfilling a promise he made to Moses. In American society, Fathers are the enforcers. They make laws and enforce the rules, and so the modern Christian God wants us to worship him and conform to his will. In yuppie households, the absentee landlord suddenly wants to be your best friend and have a personal relationship with you. If you go into Oriental cultures, where parents indulge their children more and never yell at them, God never yells at his prophets either. They have a kinder, gentler God, just like George Bush promised. When Craig says we can all "experience the Holy spirit," he never excludes those subconscious memories of our own parents. If he did, he would discover there is nothing left to his "experience." Yes, the experience is real, and yes every human being has a simlar one. If he used stricter scientific testing instead of trying to make his results conform to a 2,000 year-old text, his conclusions would be completely different.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent for Christians, esp. historical considerations
Review: The strengths of this book are: 1. its accessibility (it is easy to follow, and presented in a direct, style, Craig addresses the listener); 2. the historical approach for each topics (This is missing in most apologetics books. One can notice in particular how Craig masters the deist controversy , he did research on it); 3. its dealing with "existential" aspect of apologetics ("the human predicament"). The shortcomings are: 1. the absence of a global framework, reasoning for integrating the diverse arguments: one still need to study Geisler's Christian Apologetics for such an integration; 2. Craig's view of Christianity as basically true, his circular reasoning (based on the Bible) about the Holy Spirit, and his uncritical endorsment of Plantinga's nonsensical epistemology (see James Sennett's book ("Modality..."): this is the major shortcoming of the book, a big mistake. 3. The book is definitely intended to Christians (Craig tells how to convert non-Christians...), I would not lend to a non-Christian. Strangely, Craig addresses at the end of the album non-Christian listeners, asking them to make a commitment for Christ. But this may be a good thing for nominal Christians. 4. Craig's concentration on the Kalam argument: fine, this argument is excellent for those of us with a background in natural sciences, yet it does not give the theistic God (e. g. it could give several gods), just as the design argument. One really need to use Aquinas' 3rd way to get the full-blown theistic God (the latest exposition of it is in Yandell's "Philosophy of Religion", 1999, but this is a difficult read. An easier one can be found in Geisler's Christian Apologetics). The third way is based on abstract concepts (necessity, etc.) and is probably not fitting in a popular books, so I will not blame Craig for not using it here.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent
Review: This audio book is of excellent quality, a real pleasure to listen to! Craig's voice is modified in accordance with the parts he deals with each chapter, this avoid montony. Even much better, the audiobook is agreemented by different musics or sounds that serve as transitions between the different parts, and make the book terribly pleasant. The audio realization is professional work. A complete chapter of the paper book has been removed (Blomberg' defense of the historical reliability of the New Testament) as well as a few short passages. The rest is unabriged. The strengths of this book are its accessibility (it is easy to follow, and presented in a direct, style, Craig addresses the listener); the historical approach for each topics (This is missing in most apologetics books. One can notice in particular how Craig masters the deist controversy , he did research on it); its dealing with existential aspect of apologetics ("the human predicament") The shortcomings are the absence of a global framework, reasoning for integrating the diverse arguments; and one still need to read Geisler's Christian Apologetics for such an integration; Craig's view of Christianity as basically true, his circular reasoning (based on the Bible) about the Holy Spirit, and his uncritical endorsment of Plantinga's nonsensical epistemology ; This book is definitely intended to Christians (Craig tells how to convert non-Christians...), I would not lend to a non-Christian. Strangely, Craig addresses at the end of the album non-Christian listeners, asking them to make a commitment for Christ. But this may be a good thing for nominal Christians.
Rating:
Summary: Classical Apologetics
Review: This book is fine as an introduction to classical apologetics. However, after examining all the approaches, I would recommend a variation of Gordon Clark's approach instead, as expressed by theologian-philosopher Vincent Cheung. His books are free for download from his web site. Search the web for "vincent cheung theology," and I think you will find him. Otherwise, try a book by Greg Bahnsen.
Rating:
Summary: Mind Food
Review: This book is good, solid mind food. People perceive, and it is sad to say that they perceive with good reason, that Christianity is mere mind-fluff, and that what is holding back Christianity is the Christians. This book is a discussion of what is behind Christianity, and provides a philosophical framework in which to defend Christianity. It is written at the college level, since it is intended to be an apologetics resource for college students. I marvel at the way that Dr. Craig brought together so many ideas from so many resources in this book. It found that I used almost every facet of my undergraduate education in understanding the ideas and evidences he used. Most helpful was my survey of philosophy and my hard science classes. This book is divided along six headings: Faith, Man, God, Creation, Sacred Scripture, and Christ. Each chapter is in turn divided along several sub-headings: the Historical Background of the question, an Assessment of the question as it currently stands, and a Practical Application, where Dr. Craig discusses how "the rubber meets the road" is discussing this issue with those curious about Christianity. This is not a bash book, nor is it a survey on "how to hate," but rather it is geared to a thoughtful and ponderous evaluation of many evidences of the truthfulness of Christianity. For example, in Chapter 2, Craig discusses the existential absurdity of life without God. He raises the question of where we get absolute values, and how life becomes meaningful if we are merely a cosmic accident or a galactic hiccup. This is the one question that the atheist, or "atheist-arguing-agnosticism" cannot answer: if there are no moral absolutes, then why not torture babies for sheer pleasure. After all, it has been done before. Then in Chapter 3, Dr. Craig discusses the existence of God as evidenced by the Big Bang. The chapter isn't physic-heavy (It doesn't even have one equation), but it does discuss the implications of having an absolute time for creation. Craig relies heavily on the "Kalam" argument by Al-Ghazali, which, simply put, is: "Everything that began had a cause. The Universe began. Therefore it had a cause." Then the question becomes a discussion of who or what is the causal agent in the universe. The prose is quite clear, so there is no pedantry or confusion with what you read. I found that this book was quite a pleasure to read, and it made me take several longer looks at my faith. The concluding chapter is a gem. Dr. Craig states that the ultimate apologetic is Christian love. Against such love, there is no argument.
|
