Can we really think about God? Can we prove Gods existence? What about faith? Are there good reasons to believe in the Christian God? What about evil? Can we really know with our finite minds anything for sure about a transcendent God? Can we avoid thinking about God? The real problem, says philosopher Gregory E. Ganssle, is not whether we can think about God, but whether we will think well or poorly about God. Admittedly there is a lot of bad thinking going around. But Ganssle, who teaches students, wants to help us think better, especially about God. He thinks philosophy can actually help. In the first part of this book Ganssle lays the groundwork for clear and careful thinking, providing us an introductory guide to doing philosophy. In the second part Ganssle then takes us through the process of thinking well about God in particular. He asks us to consider whether there are good reasons to believe that God exists. He thinks there are! In a third part Ganssle addresses the thorny issue of the existence both of God and of evil. He thinks theres a valid way through this problem. In the final part Ganssle helps us thread our way through questions like: What is God like? What can God do? What can God know? How does God communicate? He thinks that there are some clear answers to these questions, at least if youre talking about the God of Christianity. If you're looking for your first book for thinking clearly and carefully about God, then you'll appreciate the good thinking found in this book.
Thinking About God: First Steps in Philosophy
and over one million other books are available for Amazon Kindle. Learn more
| |||||||||||||||
Browse our Bookshelf Favorites store for big savings on popular fiction, nonfiction, children's books, and more. |
Book Description
Frequently Bought Together
Editorial Reviews
Review
"This is a superb introduction to philosophical thinking about God. But it is much more than that--it's a refreshingly clear, compelling and funny introduction to thinking itself, to the world of philosophy. I can't think of a better way into these subjects than with Ganssle as a guide." (David A. Horner, Associate Professor of Biblical Studies and Christian Ethics, Talbot School of Theology, Biola University, and Research Scholar and Minister, Centers for Christian Study, International)
"Thinking About God: First Steps in Philosophy is an outstanding book for those who want to learn to think philosophically about God's existence and nature. Ganssle's book uses these topics to help the reader learn to work through arguments to reasoned conclusions. Although religious beliefs are often dealt with emotionally, Ganssle shows the reader how to think carefully about them. While other philosophical texts tend to deal with technicalities which make them largely inaccessible to the inexperienced reader, Ganssle's book is aimed at helping these readers understand the underlying arguments and issues. Hence, this book provides a much-needed resource, a bridge between technical philosophical arguments and the untrained thinker that will be valuable in many churches and the lives of many Christians today. I highly recommend this book to those who wish to learn to think about the God they worship." (Dr. David Woodruff, Assistant Professor of Philosophy, Huntington College, Indiana)
"Ganssle does a masterful job of guiding readers through the fundamental philosophical questions about God. He writes with a clarity rarely found in philosophers, simplifying complex issues without descending in simplistic explanations, and does it all with a touch of humor. A great introduction to philosophy of religion." (Steve Wilkens, Ph.D., Professor of Philosophy and Ethics, Azusa Pacific University)
"Thinking About God: First Steps in Philosophy is an outstanding book for those who want to learn to think philosophically about God's existence and nature. Ganssle's book uses these topics to help the reader learn to work through arguments to reasoned conclusions. Although religious beliefs are often dealt with emotionally, Ganssle shows the reader how to think carefully about them. While other philosophical texts tend to deal with technicalities which make them largely inaccessible to the inexperienced reader, Ganssle's book is aimed at helping these readers understand the underlying arguments and issues. Hence, this book provides a much-needed resource, a bridge between technical philosophical arguments and the untrained thinker that will be valuable in many churches and the lives of many Christians today. I highly recommend this book to those who wish to learn to think about the God they worship." (Dr. David Woodruff, Assistant Professor of Philosophy, Huntington College, Indiana)
"Ganssle does a masterful job of guiding readers through the fundamental philosophical questions about God. He writes with a clarity rarely found in philosophers, simplifying complex issues without descending in simplistic explanations, and does it all with a touch of humor. A great introduction to philosophy of religion." (Steve Wilkens, Ph.D., Professor of Philosophy and Ethics, Azusa Pacific University)
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images? |
More About the Author
Gregory E. Ganssle
Greg graduated from the University of Maryland in 1978. He earned a Masters of Arts in Philosophy from the University of Rhode Island (1990) and a PhD. in Philosophy (1995) from Syracuse University where his dissertation on God's relation to time won a Syracuse University Dissertation Award.
He has taught philosophy at Syracuse and is currently a part time lecturer in the philosophy department at Yale University. Greg is also a senior fellow at the Rivendell Institute. The Rivendell Institute combines ministry to Graduate Students and Faculty with Academic Research.
Greg has spoken on over fifty campuses throughout the USA. Greg's main interests are in philosophy of religion. He also thinks about the integration of faith and the academic enterprise.
Greg has been married to Jeanie since 1985. They have three children: David, Nick, and Elizabeth.
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
20 of 21 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars
Excellent, very basic introduction to philosophical issues about God
October 19, 2006
By Parableman
Format:Paperback
Greg Ganssle has produced the most fun and readable introduction to philosophy of religion I have ever encountered. His target audience runs from high school seniors to introductory college students, and I can say that I have enjoyed teaching an introductory philosophy course using this book. He presents the issues in a clear-headed way while drawing readers in with fun examples and humor.
After arguing for the value of thinking through philosophical questions in a reasonable way, Ganssle argues for open-mindedness in the sense of not being so sure of your views that you are not open to reason, but he also dismisses the idea that we must be neutral or that we must not make exclusive truth claims. Open-mindedness does not require having no views in those ways. I especially like seeing this in a book designed for younger students unfamiliar enough with philosophy to need some kind of way of heading off the simplistic kind of relativism that many students of philosophy find themselves stumbling over.
The main body of the work considers philosophical arguments for and against the existence of God. His presentation of the cosmological argument is the clearest I have ever seen, avoiding technical terminology when it is not needed but making the concepts as clear as can be done without such terms. His treatment of the design argument focuses on the fine-tuning argument after showing why very few are today convinced of biological design arguments, a choice perhaps reflecting a desire to stay out of intelligent design controversies in the political realm but nonetheless reflecting the philosophical consensus among believing philosophers today. His moral argument discussion helpfully begins by showing the difficulties in naturalistic accounts of morality, thus showing reasons why someone would turn to God as an explanation. I wish he had treated some naturalistic accounts of morality that are not relativist or eliminativist, and I really wished for a discussion of Euthyphro objections, but I do think his treatment of this argument is among the best I have read at this level.
On the problem of evil, he presents a quick summary of the logical problem and why Plantinga's free will defense has convinced most atheistic philosophers that the logical problem does not in fact lead to a contradiction. After an excursus defending libertarian free will, he proceeds to the evidential problem of evil and very briefly suggests why we might not think we are the sort of beings who should know all the explanations for why God might allow evil. I thought some of the explanations that we can arrive at might have been nice, but the point he does make is probably the most important one available to a theist.
Ganssle ends the book with some philosophical theology. He deals with the problem of defining omnipotence as the ability to do anything, arguing with the majority of philosophers on this question that omnipotence does contain the limits of being able to do only what is possible. He treats the problem of an atemporal God knowing what time it is and the foreknowledge and freedom problem. It is difficult to say a lot about some of the most important views on those topics if you need to avoid getting too technical, so sometimes Ganssle just reports that there are responses to certain objections or views that try to avoid certain problems. This is one place I wanted more where it was hard for me to figure out myself how more would have fit the way he was writing the book. Finally, he argues that if a being something like the traditional monotheistic God exists, we should expect such a being to want to communicate with us, arguing in the process that such communication would be best if it were written language, thus something like the kind of revelation most monotheistic religions think God has given.
Overall, I highly recommend the book for introducing students at the intended level to philosophical issues about God. Despite where I would have written things differently, I have never seen a book that does what this book does as well as it does it.
After arguing for the value of thinking through philosophical questions in a reasonable way, Ganssle argues for open-mindedness in the sense of not being so sure of your views that you are not open to reason, but he also dismisses the idea that we must be neutral or that we must not make exclusive truth claims. Open-mindedness does not require having no views in those ways. I especially like seeing this in a book designed for younger students unfamiliar enough with philosophy to need some kind of way of heading off the simplistic kind of relativism that many students of philosophy find themselves stumbling over.
The main body of the work considers philosophical arguments for and against the existence of God. His presentation of the cosmological argument is the clearest I have ever seen, avoiding technical terminology when it is not needed but making the concepts as clear as can be done without such terms. His treatment of the design argument focuses on the fine-tuning argument after showing why very few are today convinced of biological design arguments, a choice perhaps reflecting a desire to stay out of intelligent design controversies in the political realm but nonetheless reflecting the philosophical consensus among believing philosophers today. His moral argument discussion helpfully begins by showing the difficulties in naturalistic accounts of morality, thus showing reasons why someone would turn to God as an explanation. I wish he had treated some naturalistic accounts of morality that are not relativist or eliminativist, and I really wished for a discussion of Euthyphro objections, but I do think his treatment of this argument is among the best I have read at this level.
On the problem of evil, he presents a quick summary of the logical problem and why Plantinga's free will defense has convinced most atheistic philosophers that the logical problem does not in fact lead to a contradiction. After an excursus defending libertarian free will, he proceeds to the evidential problem of evil and very briefly suggests why we might not think we are the sort of beings who should know all the explanations for why God might allow evil. I thought some of the explanations that we can arrive at might have been nice, but the point he does make is probably the most important one available to a theist.
Ganssle ends the book with some philosophical theology. He deals with the problem of defining omnipotence as the ability to do anything, arguing with the majority of philosophers on this question that omnipotence does contain the limits of being able to do only what is possible. He treats the problem of an atemporal God knowing what time it is and the foreknowledge and freedom problem. It is difficult to say a lot about some of the most important views on those topics if you need to avoid getting too technical, so sometimes Ganssle just reports that there are responses to certain objections or views that try to avoid certain problems. This is one place I wanted more where it was hard for me to figure out myself how more would have fit the way he was writing the book. Finally, he argues that if a being something like the traditional monotheistic God exists, we should expect such a being to want to communicate with us, arguing in the process that such communication would be best if it were written language, thus something like the kind of revelation most monotheistic religions think God has given.
Overall, I highly recommend the book for introducing students at the intended level to philosophical issues about God. Despite where I would have written things differently, I have never seen a book that does what this book does as well as it does it.
8 of 8 people found the following review helpful
By pbrane
Format:Paperback|Amazon Verified Purchase
Gregory Ganssle's Thinking About God: First steps in Philosophy is an excellent introduction to the philosophy of religion and, more specifically, to the question of God's existence. It's written in a simple, lucid style, and it is intelligent and substantial. The book reads as if a kind, wise uncle took his young nephew or niece along for a gentle walk in the park and tried to explain to him or her how philosophy works, which he then applies to the existence of God. It'd be suitable and beneficial for anyone who would like an introduction to philosophy.
Thinking About God is divided into four main sections:
1. Introduction. Here Ganssle introduces readers to what philosophy is and how it works. This section props up the rest of the book inasmuch as it applies its lesson in logic, critical thinking, etc. to the question of God's existence.
He makes other valuable points such as the following (p. 26):
"I agree that I cannot provide an argument for God's existence that will convince all thinking people. But what does this tell me? Does this tell me anything about God? No. Does this tell me whether or not it is reasonable to believe in God? No. This tells me a lot about the nature of proof but very little about whether God exists. I cannot provide an argument that will convince everyone, without a possibility of reasonable doubt, that God exists. That is no problem. You see, I cannot provide an argument for any interesting philosophical conclusion that will be accepted by everyone without the possibility of reasonable doubt. For exaxmple, I cannot prove beyond the possibility of doubt - in a way that will convince all philosophers - that the Rocky Mountains are really there. . . . I cannot prove that the entire universe did not pop into existence five minutes ago and that all of our apparent memories are not illusions. I cannot prove that the other people you see in school have minds. Perhaps they are very clever robots. (How do you know that they are not?)"
Likewise, as Steve Hays put it in his article "Why I Believe":
"When the average Christian is asked why he believes in God, he may be stumped. It seems like a natural enough question, so why is it so hard to offer a simple and straightforward reply? One problem is that to pose such a question is to plunge into the river at midstream, rather than crossing at the riverbank.
"You see, we prove or disprove the existence or the truth of one thing by assuming the existence or truth of something else. Suppose, for example, someone asked you why you believe in time or space? Wouldn't you be taken aback by such a question? Ordinarily, questions of fact are not nearly that large. If you ask me whether I believe in the lunar landings or the Loch Ness monster, such things and events, if they happen to exist or ever happen, take place within space and time. The spatio-temporal framework is taken for granted. But if you ask me to justify the framework itself, then I may be at a loss in even knowing how to broach an answer, for the question is so big and broad that it leaves me without a point of reference.
"So we normally ask whether something exists in space, but not whether space exists. We ask whether something occurred in time, but not whether time occurs. The reason we usually don't give a reason for believing in space and time is that space and time supply the background conditions for reasoning about most other things and events.
"And it's that way with God. We don't prove the existence of a Creator in the same way we prove the existence of a creature. For God, if there is a God, is not merely an object of truth, but the origin of truth; not just another being, but the ground of being and wellbeing. God is the author of time and space, and the ground of goodness and truthfulness, necessity and possibility."
2. Reasons to Believe in God. Here Ganssle explicates three main arguments for the existence of God: the cosmological (or first cause) argument; the teleological (or design) argument; and the (formal) moral argument. In explicating these three arguments, Ganssle provides some very brief historical background before offering his version of the argument (e.g. Aristotle and Aquinas' formulations of the cosmological argument, Paley's formulation of the teleological argument). Likewise he deals with possible objections to these arguments.
I'll offer a quick summary of the three arguments presented in the book. However, I'm a bit hesitant to do so because the arguments are in a naked form, lacking Ganssle's own explanations for why he formulated them in the way he did, for example. So please keep this in mind.
The cosmological argument per Ganssle (p. 52):
"(i) Whatever comes into existence is caused to exist by something else.
(ii) If the series of past causes is not infinite, then the series of past causes came into existence.
(iii) There cannot be an infinite series of past causes.
(iv) Therefore, the series of past causes came into existence.
(v) Therefore, there exists a cause for the series of past causes, and this cause did not itself come into existence."
The teleological argument per Ganssle (p. 73):
"(i) If some thing or system of things that is not made by human beings shows strongly the marks of being designed and we have no fairly good story to tell about how it shows the marks of design without really being designed, then it was probably designed.
(ii) Many things not made by human beings show strongly the marks of being designed and we have no fairly good story to tell about how they show the marks of design without their really being designed.
(iii) Therefore, they were probably designed.
(iv) Therefore, a designer who is not a human being probably exists."
The moral argument per Ganssle (p. 103):
"Moral facts involve unconditional or categorical imperatives. These imperatives are not invented by people or by society. One very plausible way to understand imperatives is in terms of purpose. Unconditional imperatives require an unconditional purpose. So the nature of morality is good reason to think that there is a purpose for human beings and that this purpose is not invented by people or society, nor is it optional. The final step in this chapter is to point out that the existence of this kind of purpose for human beings is pretty surprising if there is no God and human beings are, in the end, accidental byproducts of accidental processes. Yet such a purpose is not at all surprising if God exists and created human beings."
Of course, Ganssle points out that these aren't the only lines of argument for God's existence. But these are popularly known arguments and they also help illustrate how philosophy works. What's more, these three arguments collectively make a stronger case for belief in God than they might do individually.
3. God and Evil. Here Ganssle tackles the problem of evil. How is the existence of evil compatible with the existence of God? Or more to the point, how can a wholly good, all-powerful, and all-knowing God allow evil to exist? Among many other things, Ganssle points out that not knowing why evil exists does not logically lead to the conclusion that God does not exist. He then offers reasons why he thinks God might allow evil. Although I don't agree, the most prominent reason given here involves libertarian free will. Nevertheless, it's important to think through the argument(s) because it helps hone one's critical thinking skills and, moreover, it helps to understand opposing arguments and viewpoints.
4. What is God Like? Here Ganssle argues, if God exists, why he would be a person (a word which needs and receives some unpacking), all-good, omnipotent, and omniscient (with knowledge of the future as well).
The last point Ganssle makes is, if there is such a God as he has described, then it would be reasonable to expect him to reveal himself and communicate with us.
Ganssle notes that there are two main sources for our knowledge about God: (i) inference from the universe and/or what it contains to God, as per the three arguments in section two; and (ii) if God himself reveals himself to us. "Notice that the first way to know anything about God moves from the world to God. The second way moves in the opposite direction. It moves from God to us" (p. 179). In other words, we can know about God through what theologians have termed general as well as special revelation. Obviously, there's much more to be said. But Ganssle provides a good start.
Finally, Ganssle suggests that the method by which God would reveal himself to us, if he were to do so, would most likely be language. And that language would most likely be recorded in something like a book. Ganssle stops here, though, and notes that it'd take another book for him to argue whether God has in fact revealed himself and, if so, where it might be found.
All in all, I thought this was an excellent book for those new to philosophy and/or the philosophy of religion in particular. Of course, I'd recommend reading further philosophical works after reading this book. There's a surprising amount of philosophical material freely available online. And one can follow philosophy of religion weblogs like Prosblogion. As far as philosophy books, since I'm a Reformed and evangelical Christian, I'd recommend philosophers such as Paul Helm, Oliver Crisp, and James Anderson as well as theologians like John Frame (Frame has had significant philosophical training; he's ABD [All But Dissertation] in philosophy at Yale). An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion by Brian Davies, who is a Catholic philosopher, is a standard textbook at many universities. Read more ›
Thinking About God is divided into four main sections:
1. Introduction. Here Ganssle introduces readers to what philosophy is and how it works. This section props up the rest of the book inasmuch as it applies its lesson in logic, critical thinking, etc. to the question of God's existence.
He makes other valuable points such as the following (p. 26):
"I agree that I cannot provide an argument for God's existence that will convince all thinking people. But what does this tell me? Does this tell me anything about God? No. Does this tell me whether or not it is reasonable to believe in God? No. This tells me a lot about the nature of proof but very little about whether God exists. I cannot provide an argument that will convince everyone, without a possibility of reasonable doubt, that God exists. That is no problem. You see, I cannot provide an argument for any interesting philosophical conclusion that will be accepted by everyone without the possibility of reasonable doubt. For exaxmple, I cannot prove beyond the possibility of doubt - in a way that will convince all philosophers - that the Rocky Mountains are really there. . . . I cannot prove that the entire universe did not pop into existence five minutes ago and that all of our apparent memories are not illusions. I cannot prove that the other people you see in school have minds. Perhaps they are very clever robots. (How do you know that they are not?)"
Likewise, as Steve Hays put it in his article "Why I Believe":
"When the average Christian is asked why he believes in God, he may be stumped. It seems like a natural enough question, so why is it so hard to offer a simple and straightforward reply? One problem is that to pose such a question is to plunge into the river at midstream, rather than crossing at the riverbank.
"You see, we prove or disprove the existence or the truth of one thing by assuming the existence or truth of something else. Suppose, for example, someone asked you why you believe in time or space? Wouldn't you be taken aback by such a question? Ordinarily, questions of fact are not nearly that large. If you ask me whether I believe in the lunar landings or the Loch Ness monster, such things and events, if they happen to exist or ever happen, take place within space and time. The spatio-temporal framework is taken for granted. But if you ask me to justify the framework itself, then I may be at a loss in even knowing how to broach an answer, for the question is so big and broad that it leaves me without a point of reference.
"So we normally ask whether something exists in space, but not whether space exists. We ask whether something occurred in time, but not whether time occurs. The reason we usually don't give a reason for believing in space and time is that space and time supply the background conditions for reasoning about most other things and events.
"And it's that way with God. We don't prove the existence of a Creator in the same way we prove the existence of a creature. For God, if there is a God, is not merely an object of truth, but the origin of truth; not just another being, but the ground of being and wellbeing. God is the author of time and space, and the ground of goodness and truthfulness, necessity and possibility."
2. Reasons to Believe in God. Here Ganssle explicates three main arguments for the existence of God: the cosmological (or first cause) argument; the teleological (or design) argument; and the (formal) moral argument. In explicating these three arguments, Ganssle provides some very brief historical background before offering his version of the argument (e.g. Aristotle and Aquinas' formulations of the cosmological argument, Paley's formulation of the teleological argument). Likewise he deals with possible objections to these arguments.
I'll offer a quick summary of the three arguments presented in the book. However, I'm a bit hesitant to do so because the arguments are in a naked form, lacking Ganssle's own explanations for why he formulated them in the way he did, for example. So please keep this in mind.
The cosmological argument per Ganssle (p. 52):
"(i) Whatever comes into existence is caused to exist by something else.
(ii) If the series of past causes is not infinite, then the series of past causes came into existence.
(iii) There cannot be an infinite series of past causes.
(iv) Therefore, the series of past causes came into existence.
(v) Therefore, there exists a cause for the series of past causes, and this cause did not itself come into existence."
The teleological argument per Ganssle (p. 73):
"(i) If some thing or system of things that is not made by human beings shows strongly the marks of being designed and we have no fairly good story to tell about how it shows the marks of design without really being designed, then it was probably designed.
(ii) Many things not made by human beings show strongly the marks of being designed and we have no fairly good story to tell about how they show the marks of design without their really being designed.
(iii) Therefore, they were probably designed.
(iv) Therefore, a designer who is not a human being probably exists."
The moral argument per Ganssle (p. 103):
"Moral facts involve unconditional or categorical imperatives. These imperatives are not invented by people or by society. One very plausible way to understand imperatives is in terms of purpose. Unconditional imperatives require an unconditional purpose. So the nature of morality is good reason to think that there is a purpose for human beings and that this purpose is not invented by people or society, nor is it optional. The final step in this chapter is to point out that the existence of this kind of purpose for human beings is pretty surprising if there is no God and human beings are, in the end, accidental byproducts of accidental processes. Yet such a purpose is not at all surprising if God exists and created human beings."
Of course, Ganssle points out that these aren't the only lines of argument for God's existence. But these are popularly known arguments and they also help illustrate how philosophy works. What's more, these three arguments collectively make a stronger case for belief in God than they might do individually.
3. God and Evil. Here Ganssle tackles the problem of evil. How is the existence of evil compatible with the existence of God? Or more to the point, how can a wholly good, all-powerful, and all-knowing God allow evil to exist? Among many other things, Ganssle points out that not knowing why evil exists does not logically lead to the conclusion that God does not exist. He then offers reasons why he thinks God might allow evil. Although I don't agree, the most prominent reason given here involves libertarian free will. Nevertheless, it's important to think through the argument(s) because it helps hone one's critical thinking skills and, moreover, it helps to understand opposing arguments and viewpoints.
4. What is God Like? Here Ganssle argues, if God exists, why he would be a person (a word which needs and receives some unpacking), all-good, omnipotent, and omniscient (with knowledge of the future as well).
The last point Ganssle makes is, if there is such a God as he has described, then it would be reasonable to expect him to reveal himself and communicate with us.
Ganssle notes that there are two main sources for our knowledge about God: (i) inference from the universe and/or what it contains to God, as per the three arguments in section two; and (ii) if God himself reveals himself to us. "Notice that the first way to know anything about God moves from the world to God. The second way moves in the opposite direction. It moves from God to us" (p. 179). In other words, we can know about God through what theologians have termed general as well as special revelation. Obviously, there's much more to be said. But Ganssle provides a good start.
Finally, Ganssle suggests that the method by which God would reveal himself to us, if he were to do so, would most likely be language. And that language would most likely be recorded in something like a book. Ganssle stops here, though, and notes that it'd take another book for him to argue whether God has in fact revealed himself and, if so, where it might be found.
All in all, I thought this was an excellent book for those new to philosophy and/or the philosophy of religion in particular. Of course, I'd recommend reading further philosophical works after reading this book. There's a surprising amount of philosophical material freely available online. And one can follow philosophy of religion weblogs like Prosblogion. As far as philosophy books, since I'm a Reformed and evangelical Christian, I'd recommend philosophers such as Paul Helm, Oliver Crisp, and James Anderson as well as theologians like John Frame (Frame has had significant philosophical training; he's ABD [All But Dissertation] in philosophy at Yale). An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion by Brian Davies, who is a Catholic philosopher, is a standard textbook at many universities. Read more ›
4 of 5 people found the following review helpful
By Ryan Mullins
Format:Paperback|Amazon Verified Purchase
Ganssle says that, "One of the virtues to which a philosopher aspires is clarity." That is exactly what he has done in this book. He provides a clear and concise introduction to philosophy of religion. He presents his arguments in an understandable way without sacrificing their strength. The discussions are solid and entertaining.
I am a full time student and a part time youth minister. I had my high school group read the chapter on faith, and they understood it and enjoyed it. This book simply does an outstanding job at presenting the material in an easy way without watering down the content. Anyone interested in this subject should start here with Ganssle's book.
I am a full time student and a part time youth minister. I had my high school group read the chapter on faith, and they understood it and enjoyed it. This book simply does an outstanding job at presenting the material in an easy way without watering down the content. Anyone interested in this subject should start here with Ganssle's book.
Most Recent Customer Reviews
4.0 out of 5 stars
A Good Primer for Philisophy of Religion
I found this book to be a very good intro/primer for someone wanting to dip their toes into the waters of religious philiosophy. Read more
Published 4 days ago by Joel Dison
4.0 out of 5 stars
Very insightful
Philosophy is more interesting to me than I thought. I will read more about philosophy and God.
Please read this book. Read more
Please read this book. Read more
Published 3 months ago by Falcone
5.0 out of 5 stars
Great book!
This book is a great introduction into what the title says: thinking about God.
If you're interested not just in philosophy but also apologetics and sharing your faith with... Read more
If you're interested not just in philosophy but also apologetics and sharing your faith with... Read more
Published 9 months ago by Patrick S
4.0 out of 5 stars
Great!
I was impressed with Ganssle's plain language approach to this topic. I feel confident in saying that a "new comer" to this material will walk away more knowledgeable than before... Read more
Published 11 months ago by Daniel Christoffers
5.0 out of 5 stars
It helps you to think about God
I first heard of Greg Ganssle's Thinking About God: First Steps in Philosophy (2004) on Stand to Reason several months ago. Read more
Published 12 months ago by Jason Kanz
5.0 out of 5 stars
An Excellent, Easily Accessible Primer
Lucidly written, easily understood, and one of the best entry level books regarding the Philosophy of Theism. Read more
Published on August 21, 2009 by Melissa D. Wesley
5.0 out of 5 stars
Greg thinks and writes a Good Book!!!
I have to say out of all the books I've read on philosophy, whether it's goes in-depth or not, I think that this is the best book I have ever read. Read more
Published on August 13, 2007 by J. Trieglaff
Citations (learn more)
This book cites 9
books:
See all 9 books this book cites
- The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy (Oxford Paperback Reference) by Simon Blackburn in Front Matter, and page 84
- On the Origin of Species (Penguin Classics) by Charles Darwin on page 74
- Reason for the Hope Within by Michael J. Murray in Back Matter
- God and Time: Essays on the Divine Nature by Gregory E. Ganssle in Back Matter
- The Rationality of Theism by Paul Copan in Back Matter
See all 9 books this book cites
Books on Related Topics
(learn more)
|
|
