Customer Reviews

Answers to Tough Questions

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

This book is a simpler version of many other Josh McDowell books, like "Evidence that Demands a Verdict." I first read this book after going to church for ten years, but finding myself wanting the have faith in my heart but not in my mind. This book did a nice job of convincing me to open my eyes and look further. Certainly, Mr. McDowell does a nice job of presenting his arguments clearly and concisely, but overall the book lacks depth and completeness. He tends to justify faith through the use of the Bible, which could be a problem to a skeptic looking for persuasive arguments. A beginning Christian will find a lot of interesting material to support and extend their faith, but a strong skeptic will at best only be persuaded to look at more evidence. This book might be ideal for a younger Christian or skeptic, who wants to understand the basis for certain beliefs. Overall, I would recommend this because it is a quick read, but don't expect it to be a complete reference guide.

Looking for a powerful yet 'readable in one sitting' answer to many of your Bible questions? Need an inexpensive witnessing tool for your church or personal outreach? There is no finer resource at this price to get into the hands of people you meet who have sincere questions about Christianity. Not intended to be exhaustive, but a great door opener for the serious seeker. If every church in America could order a case of these for its members to first read then pass along to a friend, imagine the impact for eternity! Every church member should be acquainted with the issues covered in this book to be better equipped to handle the questions they are too often asked. Must reading!

This is an easy book written for Christians who are not "intellectual". This is not a scholarly book, but given the "simple" audience it targets, this book is most of the time well argued and accurate. Its very broad coverage will provide a lot of various information. It has 5 main sections:
Tthe authority of the Bible, by Prof. P. Comfort (Professor of New Testament
Creation and evolution, by Prof. president H M Morris & prof. W Bradley (Professor of Physics)
Israel, the choosen people, by Prof. Hildebrandt (Professor of Old Testament)
The church of Jesus Christ by Prof. P. Comfort (Professor of New Testament)
The end times, by P R Fink (Professor of Pastoral ministry)

The only weak part in the book is about about creation, (written by Morris). Although Morris has a good critic of evolution, I do not think that he is right in asserting a young age for the earth or the origin of fossils and mountains through a global cataclysm. (see the books of Ross, Hugh). Better critics of evolution can be found in "Evolution: a theory in crisis" by Denton, Michael; "Darwin on trial" by Johnson, Phillip E; "Darwin's black box" by Behe, Michael.
Some Atheists (called "Internet infidels") are immorally writing are trying to degrade the books of McDowell by using lying arguemtn son their site. Theri lies and ignorance of the matter is laid bare by the J P Holding at:
http://www.bookshelf.jwmnet.com/arguments/toc_frame.html
The New Testament was composed in the 1st century, with the books that were written under the authority of the apostles. As a few centuries later some would doubt some books (such as Jude, Hebrews, Revelation), the churches had to gather and defend their appartenance to the Canon.

I am a Christian myself, but this book didn't offer me much in the way of logical arguments. Serious topics are skimmed over simplistically and unconvincingly, and it is occasionally embarrassing, with them insisting that evolution must be wrong because it violates the second law of thermodynamics! <Sigh>! I also disagree with many of their views, and found that the answers they gave would hardly convince many skeptics. It would be quite useful as a first apologetics book for people who aren't well-versed in philosophy or deeper dealings with subjects, though I don't recommend it.

This book may not have all of the answers but it is a great starting point for some of the tough questions that we all wonder about. I would highly recommend this for any new Christians or people searching for more perspectives about the Christian faith. I think it is important to keep in mind that this is a limited perspective on questions facing the Christian faith. Nevertheless this makes for a good book for beginners to the Christian faith or for young adults who are starting to question their beliefs.

This book is an excellent source of abbreviated answers to questions that weak Christians may have at times with regards to issues in the Christian faith. What it is NOT is an in-depth study. It is also NOT recommended for non-believers because no amount of apologetics will convince them of anything. The answers to the questions are only a page and a half or less in length, so if you are looking for a more complete apologetic, take a look at "Evidence that Demands a Verdict" by McDowell or "The Lie: Evolution" by Ken Ham. Some websites such as www.answersingenesis.org or www.christiananswers.net or www.gotquestions.org are useful too. They all have much more to offer. Still, I would never discourage anyone from buying this book. It is clear, consise, and was useful to me during my earlier times of questioning the faith. If you are struggling, go ahead and buy this and have your doubts put to rest.

The book came unblemished, so I feel good about actually giving it as a gift. Josh McDowell is a wonderful Christian man, and author.

Brief (a few pages) responses to all your questions about the Christian faith. Don't be a skeptic, get the facts!

I am puzzled by this book. Is it a sincere work, faulted by the fact that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, with McDowell showing only a little knowledge? The other possibility is that the work is a knowingly devious, lying production, of the "anything for the greater glory of God" variety. In either case, anyone with more than a rudimentary knowledge of logic, reasoning, history, science, and the Bible can make mincemeat of this book. It is full of half-truths, faulty and incomplete research, logical non-sequitors, faulty reasoning and outright misinterpretation of history and science.

I suppose that some examples are needed. The very first answer betrays the shallow thinking of the authors. The question is "What makes the Bible so special?" In other words, why treat it with any special respect? The answer is that 1) the Bible claims to be God's word, 2) We have proof of this because, first the Bible says its God's word, and, second, because there is a unity to the Bible which could not occur among its 40 authors and 1,000 year period of composition unless God were supervising it. In reply, we can point out, first, the fact that something claims to be something is absolutely nothing in the way of proof of that claim. Secondly, the Bible is not a unity. There are many places which contradict each other. Thirdly, any appearance of unity comes from the fact that men selected which books should be included in the canon of the Old Testament, and New Testament. They left out as uninspired all of those books which contradicted the majority of other books. In other words, the Bible was edited by men to make it appear to have a unity. Why doesn't McDowell read some of the books which were left out of the Old and New Testament, to see if they also appear to give unity. Those left-out books appear in the Apocrypha and Pseudo-epigrapha of the Bible. They are available in any large library.

There are errors in almost every question's answer. The date of Luke's composition is erroneously stated to be before Acts, and it is placed at about 50-60 A.D. This is a good forty years too early, and it was not written before Acts. The statement is made in the same answer that "The life of Jesus was written by eyewitnesses or people who recorded firsthand testimony." The first of these statements is absolutely false. There is not one single part of the N.T. which was written about Jesus by an eyewitness. The earliest part of the N.T. is the Epistles of Paul, written about 60 A.D. Paul never saw Jesus while he was alive. We have no idea who Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were, except that they were not disciples of Jesus'. No one can prove that there is any firsthand testimony either. Testimony which is told to one person by another becomes secondhand testimony by definition. The false statement is made that Matthew was an eyewitness (p 10), although not a scrap of evidence is offered to back up this statement.

This book is also a giant step backwards in biblical scholarship. Most of the knowledge gained during the past 100 years is dismissed as erroneous. The existence of the "Q" document, the idea that Moses could not have written the Pentateuch, the dates of the N.T., the passage in Josephus (now almost unanimously agreed to be a forgery about Jesus), etc. are all dismissed as errors, or held to be genuine, whichever is the direct opposite of scholarly opinion.

The answer to the question about whether Jesus was an historical person or not is a masterpiece of lies, half-truths and outright errors. I don't think I have ever seen so much deception packed into two pages. The Josephus forgery is accepted as genuine, with the nonsensical statement that even if it isn't genuine, it still refers to Jesus as historical. Damn it, if the passage is a forgery, then anything it says about Jesus is worthless! I guess that fundamentalists have no brains at all. The skimpy (probably forged) references in three other non-biblical writings (which are usually used as evidence that Jesus was not historical) are presented as ample evidence that he was historical. What a travesty of scholarship! The only sources that McDowell quotes at the end of his chapters are mostly worthless fundamentalist works, including his own _Evidence That Demands a Verdict_ [see http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jeff_lowder/jury/].

I could go on and on, but the task is both boring and unprofitable. There is only one chapter in the book which is at all reasonable. That is the one on the Shroud of Turin. Although a weak case is presented against the authenticity of the Shroud (a much stronger one could be presented if McDowell were familiar with the literature on the subject), at least he seems to be on the same side as the evidence this time. When Christians have to stoop to lying, deception and outright ignorance of the sources to present their case, they are only fooling the fools. The more intelligent among the readers are only driven further away from this "pack of lies" that calls itself a religion.

Gordon Stein, Ph.D, July/August 1982.