109 of 125 people found the following review helpful
on March 13, 2001
Lee Strobel has written several good books that could be especially valuable to someone new in the Christian faith. In fact, even older Christians will appreciate the information offered in The Case for Christ and The Case for Faith, both of which nicely complement each other in their easy-to-read style. In The Case for Faith, Strobel--who is a former skeptic--continues where he left off with The Case for Christ. He interviews scholars all over the country, picking their brains for answers to some of the toughest questions out there, including evil, miracles, and "oppressive" church history. Read sort of like a novel, Strobel introduces each chapter by mixing in interesting crime/court stories he gathered during his investigative reporter days for a Chicago newspaper. Sometimes, though, his writing is a little melodramatic, as there were several times I became annoyed with his overuse of neon yellow adjectives. Otherwise, I thought the novelistic style helped make the book a quick read. While the average reader should not need more than 6-8 hours with this book, if he/she reads carefully, much can be learned about answers to some pretty difficult questions. Overall I recommend The Case for Faith for its apologetic value. Deeper material can certainly be gathered in other places, including the little more detailed "When Skeptics Ask" (Geisler) and the much more detailed "Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics" (Geisler). As a beginning book, though, The Case for Faith works well.
107 of 126 people found the following review helpful
on July 5, 2001
The Case for Faith is a simple and readable book based on a good idea: interview top Christian thinkers about questions that many people see as roadblocks to faith. Strobel begins with just the right tone, an empathetic and poignant interview with elderly skeptic and one-time evangelist, Charles Templeton.
Some of the interviews are pretty good, and all of them have something of value, for those who are looking for it. I doubt most of the interviewees would call themselves "fundamentalists," as one reviewer describes them; certainly not Catholic philosopher, Peter Kreeft! Kreeft is generally good on the Problem of Pain, though some of his solutions may seem a bit post hoc to those who do not share Christian assumptions. Sometimes the honest bewilderment of Job seems preferable to clever philosophical answers. Not that Kreeft's answers are merely clever; it's a tough question, and there is a lot to what he says. William Craig is, as always, sharp (on miracles, here) informed about contrary positions, and accustomed to fielding questions in the environment of debates with top skeptics, not just Christian pep rallies, qualifies himself appropriately. Walter Bradley's discussion of the difficulty of life emerging from non-life was excellent. I only noticed one lapse. But it was a major one: he didn't mention the idea of molecular evolution, and Strobel didn't ask. I'm not sure that's a very good solution, and Bradley's arguments may largely answer it anyway, but not bringing the question up I found rather gauling. Ravi Zacharius did better than I expected on Jesus being the only way to God. But while Zacharius gave good general theological answers, and he seems to know Western philosophy fairly well, I didn't see much evidence of deep and sympathetic knowledge of non-Christian religions.
The chapter on church history was, in my opinion, weaker than it should have been, though for a different reason. John Woodbridge may be an excellent historian, but he doesn't appear to be an apologist. He relates the conventional version of what happened, rather than putting events in philosophical and spiritual context. For example, he mentions the Crusades without explaining the background of Muslim conquests or the reality of Turkic rule, the makeup of the "Christian" troops sent to the Middle East, or contextual facts such as that Pope Innocent's promise of salvation to fallen warriors was an echo of the Muslim promise, half a millenia earlier, that "the way to Paradise is lit by the flash of swords!" The "Christianity" of the era, in other words, had itself become partly Muslim.
I found Geisler quite disappointing. His argument that God was being nice when he ordered genocide on the Palestinians was unsatisfactory, to put it mildly. Better to say you don't understand, and admit perplexity, than to give lame explanations like that. At least say "maybe" or "the way I see it." (Richard Wurmbrand, a Christian pastor who was tortured by the communists, writes briefly on the subject with more authority, and empathy. See In God's Underground.) Then Geisler claimed that the Fall of man was responsible for animal suffering. Strobel didn't even ask, "What about the millions of fossils of animals we find in layers of rock untroubled by any footprint of man? Were the effects of the Fall retroactive?" The question glares from the text like a flare. These lapses were unfortunate, because other things Geisler said could be helpful, if the whole were packaged a little more carefully, and critiqued more thoroughly.
While this book is entitled "The Case For Faith," in fact it does not mention a lot of the best evidence for the Christian faith, and is largely defensive in nature. (Answering objections as much as giving positive arguments.) While I disagree with some arguments, I think it may be helpful to many people. As other readers said, it is a generally good introduction to the subject.
24 of 27 people found the following review helpful
Like many American Christians, I was brought to church most Sundays and endured countless sermons and lessons. Despite this seemingly rich education on Christian principles, I never was exposed to a lesson or class on the existence of God; God's existence was assumed as fact. As I matured into my twenties and went to college, the existance of God was no longer taken for granted. I encountered many agnostics and atheists among my many college professors. The net result of their influence was to question my faith. I never lost my faith, but I found it was a faith that could not withstand scrutiny.
Reading Lee Stobel's "The Case For Faith" continued in me my search for the certainty of my faith. Strobel's book is an excellent place to start investigating the issues that question one's faith. Like in his previous book, "The Case for Christ", Strobel presents interviews with several Christian apologetics that involve issues related to the veracity of the Christian faith.
The issues are as follows:
Can a real living caring God exist in a world filled with evil?
Are the Biblical miracles really true?
Is evolutionary theory enough to explain life on earth?
Is there only one way to GOd - through Jesus?
How can a loving God throw his created people in hell?
Is the church's history, with it's abuses, crusades, and inquistions, a reason not to believe in Christianity?
If I am filled with doubts, can I still be a believer?
Mr. Strobel investigates each issue thoroughly. He approaches the issues as a skeptic who wants to be convinced of the truth. Strobel was once a skeptic himself and his investigative journalism convinced him of the truth of his Christian faith.
If you have questions about your faith, then this is a good starting point for your investigation. There are other books that go into more detail on all the issues raised here, and you may want to purchase these as well for further study. But this is a very good starting point for answering those nagging doubts about your faith in Christianity and one's faith in the person of Jesus.
Most highly recommended.
Jim "Konedog" Koenig
62 of 75 people found the following review helpful
on October 6, 2000
This excellent resource provides persuasive answers to the "Big 8" objections to Christianity. As a former skeptic myself, I consider this book to be the very best of its type in terms of readability, cogent analysis, and honest engagement with the most difficult issues involving Christianity. Like the author's previous best-seller, "The Case for Christ," this book is sure to garner a huge number of strong supporters as well as a small group of vociferous critics. That's because some people simply won't like the author's conclusions and will do anything to discourage people from reading the book. However, read the negative reviews yourself and you'll see their logical holes or their blatant misunderstanding of the author's points. Incredibly, one reviewer accuses the author of not disclosing he's a minister -- when that very fact is emblazoned across the back of the book! So the credibility belongs to the author, and anyone who is sincerely seeking answers to their tough questions about faith will find this book to be thorough, engaging, and potentially life-changing!
44 of 53 people found the following review helpful
on November 16, 2007
Strobel tries, but does not ultimately succeed, in his goal of making the case for faith.
PRELIMINARY EPISTEMOLOGICAL PROBLEMS.
1. We simply cannot think like God. Any absolute truth, even direct revelation, is filtered through our imperfect senses and memories, the Kantian phenomenon vs. "noumenon" problem. Therefore we cannot say "God's view is X" because by our imperfect nature we cannot determine God's true view.
2. You cannot bootstrap the supernatural off of the physical (p 251). If I told you God appeared at Solomon's Temple, and showed you the Temple Mount as "proof" of such appearance, would you find that sufficient? Non-contradiction of the physical is necessary, but not sufficient, for proof of the supernatural.
Here's a review of Strobel's reasoning by chapters.
CHAPTER 1 (the problem of evil and suffering; philosophic arguments for God's existence). This is Strobel's second-weakest chapter. Here are its major problems:
* Strobel ducks the question of human suffering that has no obvious moral lesson, caused by non-human acts, e.g., the 2004 tsunami, particularly as this type of suffering is experienced by children.
* You cannot use the idea of God saying "trust me" (pp 32, 39, 43, 48, 252) as a basis for faith. First off, God is not saying "trust me" but rather a person, either ourselves or another, is saying God says to trust him. Even a direct revelation is filtered through our imperfect understanding. That puts you in that epistemological box described above. Second, you're bootstrapping the case for faith by saying that a reason you should have faith is that you should trust God. Such a trust would occur at the *conclusion* of an attempt to acquire faith, and is not a part of the *process* of acquiring (i.e., making the case for) faith.
* It is inappropriate to analogize God to humans because the analogy nearly always breaks down upon closer examination. Strobel's interviewee analogizes God to a hunter rescuing a bear from a trap and temporarily causing the bear to feel more pain (pp 32, 43). A better fit using this analogy is God setting the trap in the first place and making the bear feel pain (omnipotence), knowing the bear would get caught in it (all-knowing).
* Why should my notion of the Good mean God exists (p 34)? Why can't I acquire it the Lockean way, through sense impressions?
* If atheism is acting "snobbishly" by saying 9 out of 10 people are wrong about God (p 35), then aren't Christians "snobbish" by saying the 4 out of 5 people who aren't Christians are wrong?
* "How is it possible that over ninety percent of all human beings who have ever lived...could believe in God?" (p 35). That's an argument for God? That's a classic logical fallacy, the argumentum ad populum.
* It may be true that the day is coming when God will "settle accounts and people will be held responsible" for their evil (p 43), but you must already have faith in that day of reckoning. Once again, Strobel makes an argument from a conclusion already made, not an argument to help reach that conclusion.
* Good people don't suffer because "there are no good people" (p 44)? Children aren't good? They aren't the "kingdom of heaven" (Mark 10:14)?
* What difference does it make that Jesus suffered (pp 51-52)? This is a non sequitur vis à vis our own suffering. What's the necessary inference? Jesus' suffering may help him empathize with us, but it's not relevant to *why* we suffer.
CHAPTER 2 (Miracles; arguments for God). I actually have no difficulties with miracles per se. If God exists, certainly he can perform miracles. However, Strobel has some problems with his arguments for God.
* The fact that there have been no other resurrections *is* evidence that Jesus did not resurrect (p 65). Granted, it's not definitive, but it is evidence. If someone tells me he has made a perpetual motion machine, but no other one exists, doesn't that provide some justification for my skepticism?
* If multiple, non-contradictory accounts of biblical acts such as feeding 5,000 people are evidence of biblical truth (p 68), then would multiple, contradictory accounts of biblical acts, such as the four varying accounts of what the sign above Jesus on the cross said (Mat. 27:37, Mark 15:26, Luke 23:38, John 19:19) be evidence of biblical falsity?
* If "something cannot just come out of nothing" (p 75) then where did God come from? If he always existed, then aren't you just pushing back the question of existence by one step? How can something always have existed? If the answer is "I can't explain it" then how about using that as the answer to the question "how can something just come out of nothing?"
* If everything must have a cause (pp 75, 250) then what caused God? If God has no cause, then haven't you just pushed the question of causation back a step - and violated Ockham's Razor in the process? Also, if A causes B, which causes C, which causes A, doesn't that explain a "caused" universe without reference to an uncaused causer?
* "'If God does not exist, do objective moral values exist?' And the answer is `No.'" (p 80). This is a non sequitur. Who says objective moral values must exist?
* The empty-tomb story *does* bear signs of embellishment (pp 82, 267). Mark's gospel has one angel outside the tomb while the later gospel of Luke has two (Mark 16:5; Luke 24:4-5).
* "All of the old theories like `the disciples stole the body' or `Jesus wasn't really dead' have been universally rejected by modern scholarship" (p 83). Says who? That would be revolutionary news if true, but Strobel provides no footnote or endnote to back that statement up.
CHAPTER 3 (evolution; origins of life). This is Strobel's best chapter. Strobel debunks the Stanley Miller "primordial stew" experiment (pp 96-97), assuming Strobel's giving us the straight story. I must point out though that evolution is not so much an argument against God but rather against a literal interpretation of the bible, which Strobel never addresses.
CHAPTER 4 (Murder and torture commanded by God; bible inerrancy). This is the weakest chapter of the book.
* "The bible doesn't have any cruel or tortuous executions that God commanded" (p 117). Oh? God punishes the wicked by putting them to death by fire. Gen. 19:24 (Sodom and Gomorrah), Lev. 20:14, 21:9, Num. 11:1, Josh. 7:15. That's not tortuous?
* It's ok to kill children because "nobody is truly innocent" (p 119)? Was Jesus truly innocent? Killing a child is "an act of mercy" because the dead child will "go to heaven" (p 120)? Isn't that what Andrea Yates thought?
* "If you can't create" life, then you don't have the right to take it (p 119)? Not even to defend your life or the lives of others? Why does God command people to kill then?
* I certainly agree that we can't classify God's acts in human terms, with terms like cruel, and vicious (pp 119, 158). But the flip side of that is that we also cannot classify God's acts as loving, good or kind (pp 173, 179, 181). You can't have it both ways. God's acts are what they are, and what we think of them is irrelevant. C.f. Job ch. 38. Of course, that doesn't exactly make the case for faith.
* The bible should be given the benefit of the doubt regarding its supposed contradictions (pp 137-138). Why? Is it a perfect book or not? Comparing it to science is ridiculous. Scientists never claim to be perfect. Likewise, you can't give Christianity the benefit of the doubt and simply defer answers to a later time and then not provide the same boon to science (p 252). No burden-of-proof switching *here* please.
* Strobel's interviewee takes Bertrand Russell's quote out of context. Russell was speaking of a miraculous future event Russell could actually witness, not about a supposed past event witnessed by others (p 141). Speaking of that, show me a specific future event that will occur and when exactly it will occur and I will take that as a cause for faith. Until then...
CHAPTER 5 (Exclusivity of the Christian God). This could have been better. The interviewee made elemental errors that Strobel could have easily followed up on. Specifically:
* The argument that "Christianity is not the only religion that claims exclusivity" (p 149) is just an ad hominem response and gets you nowhere as a valid argument.
* "[N]aturalists have no explanation for humanity's moral framework" (p 152). Nonsense. They argue that a moral framework, among other things, permits a greater degree of human propagation and health.
* Despite what Strobel's interviewee says, the parable of the laborers in the vineyard (p 160; Mat. 20:1-16) does not refer to the reward of salvation. If it did, then the first laborers, who knew what their reward would be, would be able to earn their way into heaven. The parable refers to the receipt of the gospel message.
* Regardless where a person lives in the world, God will send the salvation message to him (p 162)? Come on. What about a kid living in the Amazon in the year 662 A.D.? And the interviewee is glossing over the belief of most Christians that a person must specifically recognize Jesus as Lord and Savior to be saved.
* Is it true that you can be Christian and not share a creed with other Christians (p 163)? How can Strobel's interviewee square that with his implication that Mormons aren't Christian (p 156)?
CHAPTER 6 (Hell). Another weak chapter:
* Strobel's interviewee claims hell is separation from God (pp 173-174), but the bible says God's presence is found even in hell. Ps. 139:8, 1 Pet. 3:18-20.
* Strobel's interviewee thinks it would be "immoral" for God to treat us as "means to an end" (pp 182-183; 191). Says who? If God wanted to treat us as means to an end, he will, and in fact, he does. We are a means to his end of self-glorification.
* "[I]f people saw the judgment seat of God after death, it would be so coercive that they would no longer have the power of free choice" (p 189). But didn't the angels who sinned (Jude 1:6; Rev. 12:7) have communion with God yet still chose to disobey him?
CHAPTER 7 (Bad Christians). Strobel and his interviewee address some of the worst aspects of Christian history and also discuss its positive role in a fair manner. What makes this chapter mostly a failure though is its willing omissions. The author and the interviewee spend plenty of time discussing the sins of the Roman Catholic Church (Crusades, Inquisition) and no time at all discussing the Wars of Reformation, internecine Protestant wars and oppression, or the mass witch killings that occurred in Protestant Europe.
CHAPTER 8 (Doubters as Christians). This was a generally good chapter, with the appropriate tone that it's OK to have some doubts and still be a good Christian. However, Strobel attempts a head fake several times by implying that intellectual objections to Christianity are frequently, or even commonly, only rationalizations for wanting to continue to live a sinful lifestyle (pp 232, 235-236, 239-239, 244, 255). If you object to Christianity intellectually therefore, your motives have just been impugned. He also does the head fake of saying if you *really* want to have faith ("search and you will find"), God will give it to you. In other words, if you don't have faith, it's because you don't want it. That sort of absolves God of providing faith at all, doesn't it?
APPENDIX A (The case for the divine Jesus). This is not the focus of my review, but I noted a few problems with the appendix.
* "The New Testament is 99.5 percent free of textual discrepancies, with no major Christian doctrines in doubt" (p 264). First off, there goes your inerrancy with that .5%. Second, the Comma Johanneum (which states, in part, in 1 John 5:8 "...the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one...") places the doctrine of the triune God in doubt. You don't get more of a major Christian doctrine than that. A diune God you can get from John 10:30; a triune God you can only really get from the Comma Johanneum. Might the Arians have been right after all? Hmmm.
* "No discovery has ever disproved a biblical reference" (p 265). Response: the science of carbon dating and the discovery of fossils disproves a literal interpretation of the creation story.
* Jesus "ultimately possessed every qualification of deity, including omniscience" (p 266). Is Strobel admitting that Jesus at some point did *not* possess all qualifications of deity (since Strobel uses the qualifier "ultimately")? If so, he's right, because during mortality Jesus did *not* possess all the qualities of deity. Luke 2:52: Jesus *increased* in wisdom as a youth, he did not have all knowledge.
* "Nobody knowingly and willingly dies for a lie" (pp 252, 268). There are several thousand suicide bombers whose examples show us otherwise.
25 of 29 people found the following review helpful
on March 15, 2004
The Case for Faith is a must-read for those who want to believe in the promise of Christianity yet feel hindered by nagging doubts. This book looks at 8 major issues that keep many people from truly accepting Christ. As a major skeptic, I read this book and found that the scholars interviewed within the pages offered convincing arguments as to why we should believe. Like many others, I had a hard time believing that a loving God could exist when there is so much pain and suffering in the world; that is one of eight issues explored within the book. Strobel does not rely on his own ponderings to answer these fundamental questions to the validity of Christianity; rather, he interviews scholars and scientists, all of whom give thoroughly researched answers, not vague dogmatic assertions.
42 of 51 people found the following review helpful
on January 24, 2005
It cannot be overstated what Lee Strobel has done for apologetics. He is truly talented and articulate. I think that his lack of fear in tackling big Christian issues is noble. This book, like "The Case for Christ", is an enjoyable and faith-building read.
That said, I would like to make my one contention. Namely, as an individual with his master's degree, and a major in biology, I cannot help but say that Strobel's chapter on evolution is misleading at best. The issue is not about that one chapter, but the fact that his lack of forwardness may encourage honestly investigating "seekers" to discredit all his work.
First, he says that if evolution exists, it undermines God. Says who? He does not support this statement, but assumes it, as many uneducated about biology do. Strobel is willing to accept many non-literal interpretations of the bible (see his chapter on hell), but he is not willing to state that perhaps Genesis was written in a non-literal way.
Second, he says that any thinking person has to admit that evolution occurs, "at least somewhat". But, if evolution occurs, and it undermines God, then why is he writing this book?
Third, he talks nothing about evolution, but, rather, the origin of the first living thing. A misunderstanding about evolution is that it claims to answer where the first living thing came from. Evolution describes a pattern of change in organisms over time. It does not say where the first organism originated. There are scientists who study that, and Strobel does confront those scientists well.
The reality is, there is virtually universal consensus among biologists that evolution occurs; and among those people are Christians who see evolution as no threat to their faith whatsoever. Many would even argue that, once take slightly non-literally, Genesis takes on a surprisingly accurate description of exactly what scientists of all types are elucidating about our universe, and, as such reinforces the validity of the bible.
It seems, in this chapter, as though he is catering to a vocal demographic of Christians who wish their faith to be the result of neglected evidence, as opposed to supporting evidence. It goes without saying that there is plenty of supportive evidence as to believing in Christ, and, as such, it is disappointing to make such a flimsy argument here.
The biggest problem is not the lack of supportive evidence against evolution; it is that it undermines one's confidence in the rest of his work. The major problem is that he is in a position where people are using him to find their faith. If he becomes partial in the evidence he considers, then those reading him will begin to discount all his work, based on a few flaws, even if most of it is sound.
I am not willing to remain silent as he alienates well-educated people from Christ because he doesn't want to upset those pre-existing Christians who wish to deny the overwhelming evidence for evolution. He should not be writing things so poorly supported that people have to question the overall support of the evidence for Christ.
I would like to reiterate that I do find his work to be generally well supported, and think that he is doing great work. I simply could not leave it unsaid that this chapter could be seen as an apologetic weakness that encouraged greater skepticism in his work.
14 of 16 people found the following review helpful
on September 12, 2004
First and foremost, I am very pleased that this book has generated so many reviews - both positive and negative. I believe that Lee Strobel's intent is to get Christians, and others, talking about some of the more difficult questions that arise if we take our faith seriously. A lot has already been said about this book by other reviewers, so I will keep my comments brief.
Overall, I enjoyed the book. Three strong points drew my attention - first the eight questions covered are good ones. I read the book hoping to add more depth to my ability to answer these questions. I feel like I accomplished this goal. Secondly, the persons interviewed are some of the top Christian thinkers around today. So, for the most part, the views presented are solid. Third - the premise the book uses (and begins with) is good. Interview a man who has fallen away from God (Templeton), find out his reasons, and then try to answer his questions. The Templeton aspect of the book gives Strobel a legitimate starting point before he begins the investigative process.
There are some issues that some have raised about this book that I think are legitimate. First - the author does not take a balanced approach. Strobel is guilty as charged, he only interviews Christians. Although, I am not sure how he could have covered the wide range of issues and included opposing views without exceeding 500 pages (probably too long for most, myself included). Secondly, the author is not really an unbelieving skeptic anymore. He was at one time, but he is now a member of the Body of Christ. I think this does prevent, or limit, his ability to ask certain questions during the interviews. Lastly, the book may not convince non-believers to follow Christ, so it probably better serves those who have already made this decision than those who have not. In defense of Strobel, he is not an apologist, so I did not really expect an extremely strong defense of the Christian faith from him.
I do think this book is well worth reading, so I recommend it to anyone looking for answers to some of the more difficult questions about faith. If you are a skeptic, hopefully it will answer some of your questions. If you are a believer, hopefully it will increase your faith, and ability to provide solid answers.
35 of 44 people found the following review helpful
on October 26, 2000
This time Strobel covers some of the major claims against faith in God, and in particular, arguments against Christianity. He starts by talking to skeptic Charles Templeton, and from there proceeds to question several scholars. My criticism to "Case for Christ" still applies here; Strobel did not directly interview many sceptics, but simply mentioned some of their claims to Christian scholars, who tried to refute the problems. If the reader keeps in mind that this title clearly isn't intended to be a debate, it's not a problem. Strobel tries to defend his faith as well as he can, and that's what you probably will be reading the book for. Anyone wanting more arguments from the other side will have to read separate titles (Strobel mentions many skeptic works).
Strobel interviews Peter Kreeft (problem of evil and suffering), William Lane Craig (Miracles and science), Walter L Bradley (attacking evolution), Norman Geisler (God's violence on innocents), Ravi Zacharias (Problems on Jesus being the only way to God), J.P. Moreland (Eternal torture in Hell), John D. Woodbridge (Church History and violence) and Lynn Anderson (Belief while in doubt). My favorite expert was definitely William Lane Craig, showing once again all his knowledge while dealing with such a hard subject. I expected better from Geisler, who needs no introduction but left me feeling that the subject was not as well defended as it could have been. Woodbridge's interview was good. Strobel did focus the book on the toughest intellectual obstacles to belief, missing a few, but hitting the major ones. Unfortunately, this book will be somewhat unsatisfying for anyone looking for more depth and rigor then dealing with the most difficult questions about God and the divine. Beginners will value the brevity and plain language of the interviews, but it will limit its power to make hardcore skeptics feel in trouble; I can't blame Strobel on this however, that's the price to pay for having such complexity reduced to accessible answers, and one should keep in mind that each one of the 8 problems covered is complex enough to fill a whole fat book, or a pile of them. Anyone who finds this title interesting should also take a look at "Letters From a Skeptic" by Gregory Boyd, which covers many similar questions and supplies more satisfying answers in a few aspects. And of if you want to balance it with something from the other side, "What is Atheism?" by Krueger is a easy way to start.
While "The Case for Faith" compiles many good arguments against questions made by doubters, it doesn't have as much impact as "The Case for Christ" and will probably take more fire from skeptics, but this is still a good contribution, almost always captivating no matter if you believe or not. (Reviewer Bill Hays from Tustin did a good job showing some of the problematic issues covered, but didn't mention that the point of this book is precisely defusing some of those claims; Also, Strobel can hardly be considered dishonest for not mentioning he's a pastor, since anyone can easily see all that simply by...Reading the back cover) You might also like to know that this title is well organized, includes a nice compact Summary of his previous book (TCFC), useful for those who missed it, supplies references to both pro and against books and also a includes a good Index.
35 of 44 people found the following review helpful
on February 3, 2002
I've read several books purporting to provide answers to tough objections to Christianity, but this book succeeds like none of the others. First, it deals with the right questions -- the ones that seekers and skeptics are asking. Second, it goes to excellent sources for answers. Rather than the author merely providing his own perspective, he interviews knowledgeable scholars. They are able to offer solid yet understandable replies. Third, it's well-written. The interview at the beginning with Charles Templeton, who once was a friend of Billy Graham's but later lost his faith, is riveting! The entire book actually is the unfolding of a story -- the author reliving his own spiritual investigation from atheism to Christianity. Fourth, the book has a fine bibliography. If any reader wants more in-depth information (after all, one book can only provide an overview), good resources are offered. Will this book help Christians strengthen their faith? Undoubtedly. Will it help spiritual seekers move closer to God? I'm sure it will. Will it convince hard-core skeptics? Probably not. That doesn't mean there aren't great answers for them, merely that one book can't go in-depth enough to satisfy everyone. That's where the bibliography comes in. All in all, I give this book five stars because it accomplishes its objective of providing thoughtful answers to the Big 8 objections to Christianity. You will not be disappointed by this book!