Most Helpful Customer Reviews
7 of 9 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Pass the dominoes, please, December 17, 2002
Beckwith and Parrish use their evidentialist ideas to tackle four major philosophical world views: Mormonism, secular humanism, Baha'ism and the "New Age" movement. Philosophy is their speciality as they set up the basic mistakes made by many Christians in an attempt to show how these views are logically faulty. As they indicate, the Christian too often is left hanging as he uses improper logic--logical fallacies are named throughout the book--to prove his point. The authors show how a person could do better. The book contains many good ideas, but there are some shortcomings. For one, their ideas about Mormonism are pretty much detailed in a book co-edited by Beckwith titled The New Mormon Challenge. If you read the latter, especially William Lane Craig's chapter, you will have a much better look at what these authors try to say in their limited pages. The chapter on secular humanism is probably their best. The Bah'ai chaper...well, I'm not sure how many American evangelicals have ever even met someone from this faith, which by no means is extremely popular in the U.S. Besides Beckwith's interest in this group--he did write a book on this topic--I'm not sure why they included this chapter. Finally, the "New Age" movement--do we still call it that?--is so general as to not be very useful. This book is certainly worth a look, but there are other books I would suggest first.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
6 of 8 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Different approach to..., March 12, 2002
...non-Christian worldviews. I'm sure many Christians have used many of the same resources in combating Mormonism, secular humanism, Bahai'ism and New Age philosophies. Stick with those resources and add this book with it. It stresses more philosophical issues with these cults. Here's a sample reading (p.151): "...God is a necessary presupposition of all possible knowledge. That is to say, in order to justify knowledge, one must assume the existence of God. If this is true, then obviously atheism cannot be rationally affirmed." Although Beckwith and Parrish are evidentialist, they use presuppositionalism and evidentialism hand-in-hand. Here are the Table of Contents: Acknowledgments Introduction: Philosophical Analysis and Christianity's Rivals Chapter 1: The Importance of Critical Thinking and Philosophy Chapter 2: The Classical Christian Concept of God Chapter 3: Mormonism Chapter 4: Secular Humanism: Religion Without God Chapter 5: Baha'ism and the Unity of Religions Chapter 6: The New Age Movement Appendix A: Of Logic and Lordship: The Validity of a Categorical Syllogism Supporting Christ's Deity Appendix B: What Does Jerusalem Have to Do With Provo? Appendix C: A Critical Analysis of David Paulsen's and Black Ostler's review of The Mormon Concept of God: A Philosophical Anaylsis by Francis J. Beckwith and Stephen E. Parrish (by Dennis Monokroussos) Appendix D: Why the Classical Concept of God is Biblical Appendix E: Separation of Guru and State?: Influence of the New Age Movement in Public Education
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Critical thinking applied to four religions, March 10, 2011
This review is from: See the Gods Fall: Four Rivals to Christianity (Hardcover)
On the positive side, this book provides a concise, reasoned analysis of each of the four religions as to their basic world view and format. Concrete scenarios are given in how a typical verbal interaction would occur between a religious member and an unprepared Christian. Following each exchange is a systematic explanation of how to apply critical reasoning to defeat each religious argument against becoming a mainstream Christian. On the negative side, the arguments are bloodless, dispassionate and non-spiritual. Logic alone is used to defeat the debaters. Since most debates go overboard on the emotional side, this book goes overboard on the mental side. Maybe this book could be considered a counterbalance to the generally overheated rhetoric out there. I give it 3 stars as a limited research tool.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|