Most Helpful Customer Reviews
32 of 38 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
An Excellent Survey of Christian Respones to the New Atheists, December 16, 2009
This review is from: God Is Great, God Is Good: Why Believing in God Is Reasonable and Responsible (Paperback)
The essays that I enjoyed most from this book were the ones by Moser, Polkinghorne, McGrath, and Copan. Paul Moser's article makes the important point that the moral dimension of God has important bearing on what we should expect to find as evidence for God's existence. By looking for the "God of the Philosophers" as a first cause, unmoved mover, etc., Moser argues that we have acted as if the question of God being good, amoral, or malevolent has no bearing on whether or not God exists. He makes an interesting case for highlighting the moral nature of God, particularly the belief that God is love, should be central to the question of God's existence. Polkinghorne's chapter, entitled "God and Physics," shows how a Christian viewpoint not only accommodates but illuminates the understanding of physics that has developed in the twentieth and early twenty-first century. Alister McGrath does an excellent job of taking to task the view that religion is inherently violent, pointing out that the all of the dangers that are identified in religion are inherent to political movements. The use of religion to motivate violence points to features of human nature and not of religion. Thus, atheism, religion, politics, or any system or ideology is vulnerable to being co-opted for violent purposes, a point that is often lost or ignored by Christians and atheists alike. Paul Copan offers a thoughtful analysis of Old Testament law and ethics, which is always a hot-button topic in atheist-Christian debates. There were a few essays that I found to be somewhat lacking, either in quality of argument or in organization. While Craig is a clear writer, no matter how many times he formulates the ontological argument I still think it looks like witchcraft. Some people think its a powerful argument, but I think it is riddled with (probably insurmountable) problems. The same goes for Michael Behe's essay. I am not terribly impressed with the whole Intelligent Design movement, and Discovery Institute protestations aside, I still think its an example of a god-of-the-gaps defense. I do give Behe credit for helping me to better understand the project of ID, which is usually mischaracterized. For Behe at least, the question is not whether evolution is an adequate explanation, but whether the most widely supported mechanisms for evolution are able to account for the biological and genetic diversity we see. I'm not so sure that this distinction helps his project any more, but it at least shows that it does not reject things like fossil and DNA evidence for evolution. I was also disappointed with Michael Murray's essay on evolutionary explanations for religion. Murray had a number of excellent points, but the essay was poorly organized and frequently involved raising a number of points and then declaring that he did not have the space to address them here (of course followed by a footnote pointing to other works of his). I am interested in reading more of Murray's work, particularly The Believing Primate, but this particular essay was poorly executed. The choice to give the last chapter to Mark Mittelberg also didn't sit so well with me. I was not familiar with Mittelberg so I had to look him up. Apparently he is a popular speaker and writer, but as far as I can tell isn't an academic by training. His chapter was essentially an altar call to the end the book, which is all good and well, but its lack of philosophical sophistication by comparison to the rest of the essays in the book was noticeable (references to non-scholars like Josh McDowell and Lee Strobel seem out of place by comparison to the sources referenced by the other contributors). It was frustrating to see the lack of theological precision in the article. For example, Mittelberg seems to presuppose some form of penal-substitution view of the atonement, which many of the New Atheists have (in my opinion rightly) attacked. In fact, the book would have benefited with a chapter specifically devoted to just that subject. Mittelberg doesn't explicitly defend such a position, but the language he uses seems to imply it. Again, not a terrible chapter, but in comparison with the other essays it was ending the book on a low note. Overall, I give high marks to this book. While I do not agree with all of the points and perspectives raised, I was able to find much of value that helps clarify and deepen my understanding and thoughts on a number of topics. In fact, many of the authors in this book would disagree strongly with each other (I think specifically of Polkinghorne and Behe). This is a strength of the book, in my opinion, because it shows the diversity of opinions that make up the body of Christ. There is no one uniform Christian opinion on these issues, and it is heartening to see thoughtful and intelligent Christians of different backgrounds and perspectives come together to show the unity in diversity that Christianity represents. While the book is aimed at a broad audience so many of the essays reflect the strains of their author's attempt to cram a lifetime of thought and work into 15 pages (though this may not be as obvious to readers who have not read any of the other works by the contributors), there is still a good deal of philosophical and theological meat. It is a good starting point for those who may not have much of a background with Christian philosophy or the New Atheism, but also has much to offer individuals with more experience in philosophy and theolgy and provides much fodder for reflection and discussion.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
37 of 45 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Theism Fights Back, November 24, 2009
This review is from: God Is Great, God Is Good: Why Believing in God Is Reasonable and Responsible (Paperback)
Atheism is no longer simply about `not believing' in a God or an intelligent designer. New Atheism has arrived and it has gone on the offensive. Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris and others are now not just refuting the existence of God, spirituality, heaven or hell, they are proclaiming the message that to believe in a God, or in intelligent design is irrational and dangerous. The only sure and true `truth' that can be relied upon is science. These new atheists are pro-active - almost evangelistic in their zeal. Their mission is simple - to actively turn people away from any form of theistic belief. This book is a powerful and substantial response to the claims and arguments of the new atheists. The authors take on Dawkins et-al on their turf, unafraid of tackling the toughest of subjects including `Are The Old Testament Laws Evil', `How Could God Create Hell', `God Evil and Morality'. There are also chapters on `Arguments for God', `The failure of Scientific Atheism', `God and Physics'& `God and Evolution.' What I find wonderful about this book is the breadth of the scholarship from Christians, philosophers, theologians and scientists. From Dr William Lane-Craig, a philosopher, theologian and strong apologist of the Christian faith, to Michael Behe, a top scientist in the area biochemistry and Anthony Flew a well known former atheist who have both declared that evolution is not possible without an intelligent designer. This book is by no means anti-science. Indeed, the aim of this book is to show clearly that the claims and arguments of the new atheists simply do not stand up to intellectual, scientific and philosophical scrutiny. And it succeeds. God Is Good, God Is Great provides the reader with a wealth of wonderful information that, while scholarly, is readable and most importantly encouraging. But for me, the most impressive thing about this book is that it is incredibly balanced. Each author writes carefully, clearly and logically not making any outlandish statements or rash leaps in their argument. There is now no need to worry about what Dawkins, or Hitchens or Harris says. There really is no need to be on the defensive when people raise the apparent objects to theism which is advocated by the new atheists. This book will give you the depth, understanding and confidence to respond directly and to the heart of the issues. This book is for both christians and non-christians, those interested in science, those who have no scientific background, those who simply want to be better informed and those who wish to study the arguments fully and those who want to be apologetically armed.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
17 of 22 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Reasons For Christian Theism, February 3, 2010
This review is from: God Is Great, God Is Good: Why Believing in God Is Reasonable and Responsible (Paperback)
Face it, reading philosophy isn't always merriment. (That's why it's often called obscure and arduous.) But you might enjoy studying philosophy more if the books you take up are more like "God is Good: God is Great: Why Believing in God Is Reasonable & Responsible," edited by William Lane Craig and Chad Meister. Atheists get it all wrong, according to the contributors and they make great strides in proving such. Additionally the writers within this compilation are focused on not just refuting atheism, but contending for Christian Theism (CT). Even though "atheism is on the decline worldwide" (p. 7), "God is Good" was produced to answer the New Atheists (NAs) and further the growth of CT. The editors agree with McGrath that the NAs produce "tired, weak, and recycled arguments" (p. 9). Craig begins the volume with an essay that devastates Dawkins' book as he rationally upholds the cosmological argument (14-18), the moral argument (18-19), the teleological argument (20-24), and the ontological argument, including Plantinga's contribution to the OA (28-30). Additionally Craig defends the following syllogism: 1. The fine-tuning of the universe is due to either physical necessity, chance or design. 2. It is not due to physical necessity or chance. 3. Therefore, it is due to design. Craig cogently argues that this must be the case as he attempts to justify the many presuppositions within the premises of this syllogism. "God is Good" contains many fine essays and one of the most laudable is from J.P. Moreland. He maintains: 1. If naturalism is true, there is no irreducible teleology. 2. Rational deliberation exhibits irreducible teleology. 3. Therefore naturalism is false. Within that argument Moreland contends for "unified selves" (42), "intrinsic, equal value and rights" (44), and consciousness. There are numerous excellent chapters within this readable book (upper high school or early college level) including: - God and Physics: John Polkinghorne - Evil: Chad Meister - Are OT Laws Evil?: Paul Copan - The Resurrection: Gary Habermas - The Dawkins Confusion: Plantinga's Devastating Refutation of Dawkins (he demonstrates that Dawkins and the NAs run through countless philosophical and epistemic Stop Signs; that the NAs lack even basic philosophical acumen - Plantinga's essay alone is worth the price of this volume). - And additional outstanding material. Craig adds: "The overall case for recognizing and experiencing the Bible as God's living word will depend on your overall view of nature, history, and values" (p. 186). Plantinga exposes Dawkins philosophical failings: "Now despite the fact that this book [Dawkins' book The God Delusion] is mainly philosophical, Dawkins is not a philosopher, he's a biologist. Even taking this into account, however, much of the philosophy he purveys is at best jejune. You might say that some of his forays into philosophy are at best sophomoric, but that would be unfair to sophomores; the fact is ... any of his arguments would receive a failing grade in as sophomore philosophy class. This combined with the arrogant, smarter-than-thou tone of the book, can be annoying" (Alvin Plantinga, p. 213). Habermas concerning the uniqueness of Christ: "The reports of Buddha and Krishna come hundreds of years afterward [after the Resurrection of Christ]. No other major religious founders in ancient times were ever crucified. Further, it cannot be demonstrated that there is even a single pagan resurrection account prior to Jesus, whether mythological or historical" (Gary Habermas, William Craig, Editor: God is Good, God is Great, p. 213). The penetrating analysis within this volume may not sluice from my own apologetic method or epistemic commitments, but much of this work is astute, keen, loaded with cognoscitive discernment and perspicacity. ------ See the dynamic new book on apologetics: Truth, Knowledge and the Reason for God: The Defense of the Rational Assurance of Christianityor additionally See the New Book that contends for the existence of God using moral absolutes by Mike Robinson: There Are Moral Absolutes: How to Be Absolutely Sure That Christianity Alone Supplies ------
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
