The Resurrection of Theism: Prolegomena to Christian Apology (Twin Brooks [Paperback]

Stuart C. Hackett (Author)

Product Details

• Paperback: 381 pages
• Publisher: Baker Publishing Group (MI); 2nd edition (1982)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0801042631
• ISBN-13: 978-0801042638
• Product Dimensions: 8.4 x 5.4 x 0.9 inches
• Shipping Weight: 15.2 ounces
• Average Customer Review: 5.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (2 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #2,231,369 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

10 of 12 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Stuart Hackett Rides Again, February 24, 2004

By 

Rick James (AUSTIN, TX USA) - See all my reviews

This review is from: The Resurrection of Theism: Prolegomena to Christian Apology (Twin Brooks (Paperback)

This is the 2nd Edition of an epochal treatise in rationalistic theism. The 1st Edition is extremely rare, having been printed in hardbound by Moody Press in 1957 in a printing of only 2,000. Unfortunately, the plates were destroyed.

The bottom line of this book is to show how to self-referentially analyze statements to eliminate the possibility of opposing views, and to prove the impossibility of an actually infinite temporal sequence or an actually infinite set of discrete extra-mental objects.

Hence, believing that God exists is the end of a long metatheoretic journey, an intellectual cul-de-sac from which there is no logical escape, only a chosen one.

Analyzing statements that refer to themselves dominates the entire work, even in relation to self-referential analysis itself and the prior structures of conceptionalization.

But the refutation of an infinite series, which is decisive for his cosmological argument, is extremely brief and cursory, so you'll have to check out other sources for a development of that refutation (Hint: using a principle of construction with no assigned limit does not imply an actual or actualizable infinite series.)

The whole point for the common person exposed to general universal statements about knowledge, truth, or reality---"Everything is X (determined, person-relative, illusion, maya, false, subjective, biased, hopeless, meaningless, futile, BS, etc.), is to ask: What about that statement ITSELF?

With relativism, for example, how can relativism mean the same thing to any mind from one moment to the next, as well as from one person to another?

Once you ask that question, you realize that those statements are always stated as if *they* get a free ride.

The next time you hear someone throwing around universals, try asking that question. The lights will go on, and you'll get to where you can recognize self-referring statements rather quickly.

Most of the time, you'll find that this boils down to someone not wanting anyone to do any thinking, while criticizing other views without any self-questioning or examination of background assumptions. Sound familiar?

"You're so bigoted and I'm so objective about subjectivity." Got it?

And of course you'll hear no real mention of this convenient little self-exemption.

Fortunately, very common non-intellectual people are becoming street-wise about these kinds of remarks, simply by learning to ask that one simple question.

What about that statement itself?

Drives the loud champions of intellectual humility absolutely crazy.

Unfortunately, there is still no single work that contains virtually every argument and counterargument that has ever been put forth concerning the existence of God. You'll find very little in print concerning metaphilosophical mind-commandments, mind-principle relations and obligation, value assumptions of reason, performative inconsistency, self-referential analysis, starting points and the burden of proof, and whether the nature of a deistic or theistic God implies any obligation to save the world.

For further investigation, see anything by William Craig, Norman Geisler (The Terminator of christian apologetics, in print but especially his many debates), or Germain Grisez; Joseph Boyle's 1975 dissertation, "Self-Referential Analysis: The Current Discussion"; Against Relativism by James Harris (possibly the finest refutation of relativism of all time); "Atheological Apologetics" (one of the most difficult but clever articles ever written against atheism) by Scott Shalkowski (American Philosophical Quarterly 26 {1989}, pp. 1-17).

I strongly recommend, for analytic background: The Nature of Thought (2 vols) by Brand Blandshard, Language and Reality by Wilbur Marshal Urban, Critique of Pure Reason, Monadology by Leibniz, anything by Alvin Plantinga, Nietzsche, Schopenhauer.

6 of 8 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Top 3 Christian Apologetic Book, February 21, 2002

By 

Justin White (Fullerton, CA United States) - See all my reviews

This review is from: The Resurrection of Theism: Prolegomena to Christian Apology (Twin Brooks (Paperback)

On January 6, 2002 on Stand To Reason radio (rebroadcast on strradio.org), Dr. William Lane Craig, a prolific Christian philospher and theologian, was asked about his favorite apologetic books. This book was high on the list as one that has affected him deeply.