<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: To a Reader from Philadelphia
Review: Dear Sir, please understand that I say this with love, but I am afraid you are somewhat mistaken about what this book is about, and what indeed Christianity is all about. You want someone to recommend a truly worthwhile book on Christianity while discounting the Bible as not much more than frivolous, when in fact the Bible is the only source of truth for the Christian faith. It is the only authoritative text that deals with who God is, what he has done, and who Jesus Christ was, and what he did for all mankind by dying on the cross so we might have eternal life. The fact is that even from a purely academic view, the Bible could not have been fabricated for too many reasons to name here, so therefore, even before theology enters the picture, we have a historically accurate document, which proves at least part of its validity. So then enter the actual doctrine the Bible teaches, and clearly no other source of truth can stack up against it. All the other religions in the world which teach relative tolerance, no absolutes, etc. etc., while at the same time proclaiming truth contradict themselves at the most fundamental level: truth, by definition, is eternal, unchanging, and certainly not relative. God would be much more a malicious God is he created relative truth than a narrow path. And, believing Jesus Christ to be the son of God, said that no one gets to the Father except first through the Son and beleiving in his power to forgive and love and mold into righteousness, and asking him into our hearts and lives so he can live in us and do a work in us to cleanse us from all unrighteousness, than yes, there is only one way to God. It is not so much a question that God is smaller than the ocean, except that only one river flows into that ocean, all others flow into the Dead Sea, if you will. Remember, God is much bigger than the ocean, but, being a holy God, only those who have accepted his Son in their lives will be with him. His Holiness, by definition, cannot have communion with unholiness. He can definetely have communication, but they are two very distinct things. Finally, to quote the author Frank Peretti, "There is no way for you to know whether what I am telling you is true, unless you know what the truth is, and there is no way for you to know what the truth is, unless there is a truth that you can know." (Again, truth by definition, being of an unrelative nature). No doctrinally sound book on Christianity is going to have the philosophical relativism you seem to be searching for, but remember, even the greatest of philosophers even conceded the superiority of theology over philosophy when, they said, "I climbed the mountain of wisdom all my life, and finally reached the plateu, only to discover the theologians had been sitting there for years." Hope this has cleared up any misconceptions you may have had about the Christian faith. God bless you as you search for truth, you seem hungry for it, which is always a first step in the right direction. Jesus is the answer. God Bless
Rating:
Summary: To a Reader from Philadelphia
Review: Dear Sir, please understand that I say this with love, but I am afraid you are somewhat mistaken about what this book is about, and what indeed Christianity is all about. You want someone to recommend a truly worthwhile book on Christianity while discounting the Bible as not much more than frivolous, when in fact the Bible is the only source of truth for the Christian faith. It is the only authoritative text that deals with who God is, what he has done, and who Jesus Christ was, and what he did for all mankind by dying on the cross so we might have eternal life. The fact is that even from a purely academic view, the Bible could not have been fabricated for too many reasons to name here, so therefore, even before theology enters the picture, we have a historically accurate document, which proves at least part of its validity. So then enter the actual doctrine the Bible teaches, and clearly no other source of truth can stack up against it. All the other religions in the world which teach relative tolerance, no absolutes, etc. etc., while at the same time proclaiming truth contradict themselves at the most fundamental level: truth, by definition, is eternal, unchanging, and certainly not relative. God would be much more a malicious God is he created relative truth than a narrow path. And, believing Jesus Christ to be the son of God, said that no one gets to the Father except first through the Son and beleiving in his power to forgive and love and mold into righteousness, and asking him into our hearts and lives so he can live in us and do a work in us to cleanse us from all unrighteousness, than yes, there is only one way to God. It is not so much a question that God is smaller than the ocean, except that only one river flows into that ocean, all others flow into the Dead Sea, if you will. Remember, God is much bigger than the ocean, but, being a holy God, only those who have accepted his Son in their lives will be with him. His Holiness, by definition, cannot have communion with unholiness. He can definetely have communication, but they are two very distinct things. Finally, to quote the author Frank Peretti, "There is no way for you to know whether what I am telling you is true, unless you know what the truth is, and there is no way for you to know what the truth is, unless there is a truth that you can know." (Again, truth by definition, being of an unrelative nature). No doctrinally sound book on Christianity is going to have the philosophical relativism you seem to be searching for, but remember, even the greatest of philosophers even conceded the superiority of theology over philosophy when, they said, "I climbed the mountain of wisdom all my life, and finally reached the plateu, only to discover the theologians had been sitting there for years." Hope this has cleared up any misconceptions you may have had about the Christian faith. God bless you as you search for truth, you seem hungry for it, which is always a first step in the right direction. Jesus is the answer. God Bless
Rating:
Summary: A Clarifying Work
Review: Erwin Lutzer has succinctly put together the reasons why Christianity differs from other major religions, and why Christ is not just another great teacher or prophet to be put on the shelf alongside Buddha, Mohammad, Vishnu, Krishna, or any other. Lutzer tells not only of Christ's claims to divinity, but illustrates how others perceived Him, as well as how others--even His enemies--could not deny Christ's miracles and resurrection. This is a very important book for these times when there is such a proclivity to lump all religions together and call them the same. I highly recommend this work for anyone who wants to strengthen their faith and discover why Christ is unique and divine.
Rating:
Summary: The God, No Other
Review: Erwin Lutzer's book titled Christ Among Many gods is similar to Ravi Zacharias' book titled Jesus Among Other Gods. Both are attacks on religious relativeness. My preference is Lutzer's work. Ravi Zacharias starts his book talking his life's journey before accepting Jesus as His own Savior. His approach is less analytical and more anecdotal. Lutzer does use his own fairly recent encounters with those who believe in religious relativeness and his response to those who hold this contrary view. Lutzer's work is more scholarly.
How does one want to perceive Jesus: mere man or God? To believe scripture or to cast Him differently? Does one want to incorporate Jesus into other belief systems? Those who preach relativeness seek to portray Jesus as mere man or to portray him as one of many gods. Scripture depicts a different Jesus. Jesus is the Christ because He is God who became man while staying God. Not a god but the only God; Lutzer argues that Jesus Christ cannot be incorporated into another belief system.
Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son. (1 John 2:22 RSV)
Lutzer talks about the activity of some to fuse different religious beliefs together. They want to create a global village where those from different "religious traditions" can get along. To believe one has a choice in determining who his god is. Four rules in such a thought process [a] Traditions (no doctrines of truth)[b] spirituality ( may retain one's particular religion, move "beyond into a spirituality inclusive of other religions. [c] No religion is superior [d]no evangelism or proselytizing.
Lutzer argues that Tolerance is the idol. He argues Christians should have a Legal Tolerance ( no coercion into making others believe as we do) and Social Tolerance ( A commitment to respecting all men even when one vigorously disagree with their religion and ideas) . But Christians should never have Uncritical Tolerance ( avoiding vigorous debate, because one does not believe he has no right to defend morality, religion, or respect for human life). Thus Tolerance becomes the faith (religion). Only through uncritical thought can the 'peaceful' 'co-existance' of religion and syncretism (beliefs can mindlessly be combined)
Jesus then said to the Jews who had believed in him, "If you continue in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free." (John 8:31-32 RSV)
Lutzer argues Jesus is the one who provided us the truth. The truth is available through the Bible. Truth is independent on what an individual may perceive, believe or want. Truth is universal. God is not capable of self contradiction. God cannot deny and affirm the same thing in the same way and at the same time. There are many ways to be wrong but there is only one way to be right.
He further argues all false teaching agree with the doctrines of the anti-Christ; Namely the perfectibility of human nature, capability to reach a vision of a utopia through collective effort. Let us just come together , minimizing our differences and accentuating our similarities. Thus they would argue a future prosperity and peace awaits us.
"Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. (Matthew 10:34 RSV)
Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you; not as the world gives do I give to you. Let not your hearts be troubled, neither let them be afraid.
(John 14:27 RSV)
I have said this to you, that in me you may have peace. In the world you have tribulation; but be of good cheer, I have overcome the world." (John 16:33 RSV)
One must reject the word of God and Christ's teachings to participate in the movement of uncritical tolerance. To 'believe' all religion is essentially the same, one must reject scripture. Jesus claimed preeminence, He claimed to be God and there to be no other god.
Lutzer argues that faith in it of itself is not a meritorious act; the merit is in the One to whom the faith is directed to. For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God--not because of works, lest any man should boast. (Ephesians 2:8-9 RSV)
for although they knew God they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking and their senseless minds were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man or birds or animals or reptiles. (Romans 1:21-23 RSV)
Lutzer argues other religions resulted from man's rebellion against God, so they attempt to seek another way.
No, I imply that what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God. I do not want you to be partners with demons. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons. (1 Corinthians 10:20-21 RSV)
Lutzer argues that 'pagans' (those who choose another message) are not worshipping God in their own way but demons. The two should not be mixed together. In the book is an extensive arguments against 'Christian' theologians who make arguments to the contrary.
Rating:
Summary: Awesome!
Review: Lutzer has done a splendid job of writing what I would consider to be an introductory work on comparative religious studies. From a Christian perspective, he attempts to take on the practice of watering down Christianity (and other religions as well) by those committed to achieving a mushy religious middle in the name of universal tolerance. For the most part, I think he does a very good job here. There appear to be two main areas of emphasis in the book. Lutzer spends the first several chapters in the book analyzing the notion of tolerance and critiquing the concept of reducing all truth claims to subjective experience instead of objective evidences. I think Lutzer does a very good job of demonstrating that subjective truth is a poor substitute for objective truth that can be independently proven by independent evidences and proofs. And I think Lutzer effectively shows this desire to redefine truth by what we feel instead of what we can prove is at the heart of the efforts to establish a "tolerant" universal religion. What struck me in Lutzer's analysis is that it is quite ironic that the systematic watering down and dismissal of Christianity's UNIQUE truth claims (and therefore the religious beliefs of countless millions of people) is seen as "tolerant". Quite the contrary, this is extremely intolerant because it attempts to undermine the period documentation of the unique nature of Christianity in order to conduct a selective and revisionist history exercise that is completely subjective in nature, and then uses this method to trump the overwhelming independent evidences that have been the traditional bases for belief among Christians for two millenia. One of the strong pillars of the tolerance movement is the belief that any religion (but particularly Christianity) that makes exclusive truth claims is both intolerant and arrogant. Well, I can think of little else that is more arrogant than supplanting objective and independent evidences documented within 100 years of the events with a present day set of subjective opinions, arrived at 2000 years after the fact, that "feel good" and calling this tolerant. Because it is very intolerant of virtually all methods to arrive at the truth objectively that have been practiced forever. And it is also guilty of being self defeating. By saying that Christianity can be lumped together with all religions as being no more true or valid than anything else, the tolerance movement is erecting an exclusive truth claim of its own and therefore failing its own tolerance test. I thought Lutzer examined this very well. Lutzer then spends many of the remaining chapters specifically examining areas where Christianity is completely unique and cannot be melted into other religions with intellectual honesty. I thought it was important for Lutzer to conduct such an examination to demonstrate to the reader that the uniqueness of Christianity is not merely an academic opinion, but a real life reality that raises enormous questions and problems for those trying to find truth in all religions. I think Lutzer did a good job of showing that Christianity's uniqueness is not simply a case of putting different shingles on the same house, but is in fact a different house, on a different street, and in a different neighborhood than all other religions. After getting through most of the book, I was fully poised to give the book 5 stars. But regrettably, near the end of the book, Lutzer devotes a chapter to discussing things like suffering, injustice, and evil in the world. It was here that I was very disappointed in Lutzer's Christian response to these things. There is little doubt that humanity has long been bothered by the presence of evil and suffering and wondering how any god could allow such things to occur in the world. But I believe very strongly that Christianity has many unique and compelling answers to these legitimate questions, and these answers have been a source of comfort for many over the centuries. But unfortunately, after writing a whole book about how Christianity is unique and best fits the test of independent verifications in comparison with other religions, Lutzer responds to the question of evil and suffering by lumping Christianity together with other religions by basically asserting that as Christians, we don't really know why things happen the way they do and all we can do is trust that God will work it all out. That response is not unique to Christianity, nor is it an adequate representation of the Christian response to evil. It's true that we don't know everything, but we know a lot more than nothing, and Lutzer's response comes dangerously close to implying that Christianity doesn't have real life and practical answers to why bad things happen, when in reality, Christianity is the religion best equipped to answer such things in a practical and relevant way to those who are hurting. I considered Lutzer's section on suffering to be sufficiently weak as to demote the rating from 5 stars to 4. But with the exception of this one chapter, I think Lutzer did a very good job of affirming the unique nature of Christianity and clearly spelling out how Christianity fundamentally differs from other religions on major points that are eternal in nature. I would highly recommend this book, with the regretful note about the one chapter I disliked.
Rating: 
Summary: AWFUL
Review: This was the worst book I've ever read. Using the Bible to prove that Christianity is the one true religion is like using the Koran to prove Islam is the one true religion. In other words, you make your agruments "relative", i.e. related to whatever scripture you happen to follow. If truth is absolute why would it need the Bible, or the Koran for that matter, to make it's arguments? Wouldn't absolute truth transend them all? Is God so petty as to allow only one way to reach him? All rivers flow to the ocean, no matter in which direction they flow. Is God any smaller than the ocean? This is a great book if you're already a believer (and therefore it's worthless). But if it's goal is to convince people with doubts, this book is a total and complete failure (and therefore it's worthless). I wish someone could recommend on this site a truly worthwhile book on Christianity for me. (A book I would recommend to others: "The Perennial Philosophy" by Aldous Huxley)
<< 1 >>
|
