Customer Reviews

God Is Great, God Is Good: Why Believing in God Is Reasonable and Responsible

5 star:		(14)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

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.

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.

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 Christianity
or 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
------

I have bought dozens of these to give away to others. People love this book. The essay format makes the book approachable. The writing is clear, concise, accessible, and powerful. The selected topics are on issues that students and adults are wrestling with and trying to figure out. The authors are well-respected experts in their fields. Overall, an absolutely fantastic book.

As someone who is continually on the hunt for good resources on Christian apologetics, God is Great, God is Good is a helpful volume. The essays contained in these pages address a number of questions raised by the New Atheists, most frequently engaging the work of Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and Sam Harris. Among the questions addressed in these essays are, "Has the existence of God been disproved by science?", "Is belief in evolution and theism incompatible?", "Is intelligent design reasonable and defensible?", "Is biblical religion evil?", "Why would a loving God create hell?", and "Why is the person of Jesus and belief in him important?" Two additions to this book that I found incredibly helpful are placed at the conclusion, the first being an exchange between Gary Habermas and Anthony Flew regarding Flew's movement toward theism (not a belief in the Christian God), and the second being a critical review of Richard Dawkins' highly publicized work The God Delusion, written by Alvin Plantinga.

The book is divided into four sections, the first arguing for the existence of God, the second addressing theism and science, the third concerns God and morality, and the fourth and final section argues cogently for why faith in the Christian God matters. The essays under each heading are composed by Christian theologians, philosophers, and other scholars from a variety of disciplines, and while each can be read independently (allowing the reader to pick and choose chapters that directly address specific concerns), the collection fits well together as a whole. Many of the essays are readable, even for someone who is a nonspecialist, especially those by Chad Meister (God, Evil, and Morality), Alister McGrath (Is Religion Evil?), Paul Copan (Are Old Testament Laws Evil?), and Jerry Walls (How Could God Create Hell?). My primary philosophical interest is ethics, therefore these essays pertain especially to my field.

The reader should be cautioned that some essays within this book are a bit more difficult, particular those that present philosophical arguments for the existence of God (such as the opening essay by William Lane Craig, "Richard Dawkins On Arguments for God'), as well as John Polkinghorne, Michael Behe, and Michael Murray's essays that address technical scientific issues. In reading these essays I believe I was helped immensely by my background in studying these questions and by my familiarity with other work from these scholars. If this book is being used as a resource to formulate philosophical arguments for use in pastoral or other ecclesial ministry, some translation work will be in order.

All in all, this is a book I'd recommend, for the essays contained therein are cogent, well argued, and extremely helpful. They engage the arguments against the existence of God I have found most prevalent in pastoral ministry and in everyday conversation, and offer some incredibly helpful critiques of the New Atheists. God is Great, God is Good provides a needed injection of rationality into Christian discourse, and for that reason, pick it up.

This is book is well written with thoughtful chapters from authorities in their fields. However, without some background knowledge of apologetics some of the chapters are hard to follow. If you're new to apologetics or looking for something more group friendly I suggest "On Guard" by William Lane Craig.

This book is a collection of essays by some of the world's best Christian scholars. The aim of the book is to answer the "new atheists" like Dawkins, Dennett, hitchens, and others. While some essays deal directly with the arguments put forth by the new atheists, other essays are focused on a particular topic and does not directly interact with the new atheists. Other than that, the book is excellent. The authors point out many of the problems in thinking and faulty logic put forth by the new atheists while avoiding name-calling (save the comment about Dawkins at the end of Craig's essay) and verbal rhetoric. Topics include arguments for the existence of God, arguments for the the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus, and questions of morality. This last point is something that the new atheists are continually harping upon, and there are several essays devoted to the topic, including answering questions about the morality of the "God of the Old Testament." One very subtle aspect I appreciated in that chapter is that the author was careful to say that while Michael Ruse was an atheist, he is NOT a new atheist i.e. he is an atheist who is able to think and put forth rational arguments. I appreciate this honesty and distinction.

Most importantly, the authors show that one of the main objections leveled against Christianity is totally unfounded; namely, that belief in God and in particular Jesus as the Son of God is irrational. This is a tremendous (and foolish) burden of proof that the new atheists have put on themselves because not only must they show why they think arguments in this book are flawed, but they also must show that it is IRRATIONAL to hold to the arguments. Craig's Kalam cosmological argument laid out in the first chapter of the book comes to mind as simply being impossible to show as irrational to hold. Indeed, I can see people not accepting it, but claiming that it is irrational requires tremendous proof. If you have heard this "irrational" argument leveled against you or your faith, this is the book for you.

This collection of essays is a response to some of the numerous books by the 'new atheists'.

Unlike the atheists of old who primarily sought to have God closed out of public events (school prayer, etc.), the new group 'endeavors to make respect for the belief in God socially unacceptable'. They have attacked religion in general and Christianity in particular with an intense fervor. It seems a bit odd that these 'new atheists' spend so much time attacking something (God) that they do not even believe exists. As Dinesh D'Souza has commented (not in this book), he does not believe in unicorns, but he does not go around writing books about how they do not exist, how evil they are, etc. It is in this strange climate that 'God is Great, God is Good' seeks to address these missionaries of unbelief.

This volume contains articles from a wide range of experts addressing various points of the debate. The major sections include the following: 'God Is (The Existence of God)', 'God is Great', 'God is Good', and 'Why It Matters'.

Some of the various topics covered include: 'God and Evolution', 'Is Religion Evil', 'How Could God Create Hell' and several others. One particularly great chapter is 'Why Faith Matters' by Mark Mittelberg. The different sections are written with numerous styles including those that appeal to intellectuals as well as those that are more accessible by average readers.

Some of the well known writers include William Lane Craig, J.P. Moreland, Michael Behe, and Gary Habermas.

Overall, this is a strong contribution to Christian apologetics. It is very readable and worth one's time.

Sometimes books that contain a variety of essay are judged on several that are outstanding. I think there is enough outstanding in this book, subtitled "Why Believing in God is Reasonable and Responsible," to make this purchase. As the introduction explains, the so-called New Atheists are doing their best to make theism socially unacceptable. To accomplish this task, they take shots at anyone and everyone who dares to believe that there is a God. Such a person must be either uneducated or intellectually dishonest. In addition, the claim is made how dangerous religion can be. My favorite articles were Craig's chapter 1 (going after The God Delusion), If you've ever heard Craig debate an atheist, these will not be new to you. But I find it amazing how the atheist debaters have to know what Craig is basically going to say and yet choose to ignore his points for two hours. For Pete's sake, at least go ahead and take a stab at attacking a cosmological or moral argument. Dawkins' attempt in The God Delusion is more slander than scholarly.

Another excellent chapter is chapter 8 by Alister McGrath (Is Religion Evil?). When put side-by-side, give me Christianity every time over atheism. Even if there is no God, the social helps given to us by religion outweighs anything provided by atheistic systems. If so, perhaps moving to Cuba or North Korea ought to be what you're looking for.

Honestly, there were a few snoozers in this list of essays--that's the danger with these types of books--but I think there's enough here to sift through and learn more about reasonable responses to arguments made by the New Atheists.

"God is Great, God is Good" is a superb collection of apologetic essays from some of the most outstanding philosophers of religion and defenders of the Christians faith. In each essay, challenges are raised by the "new atheists" which are then courageously addressed and countered by each of the authors. The first few essays establish the ground work for the existence of God, covering the creation of the universe and the exquisitely fine tuned physical conditions that allow for our existence. Later essays focus more specifically on the Christian faith, discussing the critical necessity for an objective moral framework and defending the historicity of the life, crucifixion and resurrection of Christ. I am left with a greater capability to defend our faith, and a list of very interesting and powerful writers I would like to pursue in further reading.