|
When Skeptics Ask: A Handbook on Christian Evidences | 
 enlarge | Authors: Norman Geisler, Ronald M. Brooks
Publisher: Baker Books
Category: Book
List Price: $17.99
Buy New: $10.55
You Save: $7.44 (41%)
New (23) Used (4) from $10.55
Avg. Customer Rating:  21 reviews
Sales Rank: 158184
Media: Paperback
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 352
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1.1
Dimensions (in): 9 x 6 x 1.1
ISBN: 080107164X
Dewey Decimal Number: 239
EAN: 9780801071645
ASIN: 080107164X
Publication Date: June 1, 2008
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Condition: Brand new. No remainder marks. Ships in one business day.
|
| Also Available In:
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
Does God exist? What if he is not all-powerful? Where did evil come from? Are miracles mythological? Why is Jesus better than other teachers? When skeptics ask questions like these, believers can turn to this helpful, user-friendly guide for thoughtful answers and clear explanations. In When Skeptics Ask, apologetics experts Geisler and Brooks explain how to defend the authority and inspiration of the Scripture. Readers will discover answers for objections to classic Christianity and learn to identify and respond to the misuse of Scripture by nonbelievers.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 16 more reviews...
 A Superficial Defense May 27, 2008
0 out of 3 found this review helpful
"How do we know that the Bible came from God?: Jesus told us so." If that's not circular logic, then no human can grasp what is. It's stuff like this that makes me feel bad for the apologetics field of Christianity. It's sad that they even have to have such a field in the first place.
Evidence:
1.) If God wants us to find Him, then He should CLEARLY make Himself known to us. And no, the Bible is a poor excuse for His existence, so that can't be an alleged proof. He should've written it Himself rather than relying on imperfect scribes and translators to try and get it right. I've come across several examples of poor translations in the King James Version. This is by admission of Christian apologists, so don't take my word for it.
2.) I found the authors' arguments for miracles quite pathetic. He failed to show any modern examples of miracles and resorted to made up ones from the Bible. They failed to mention that Jesus said roughly, "If you have but a mustard seed of faith, you can move mountains." What does that mean? Most Christians try to get around this by saying he meant it non-literally. Okay, well, what about: "By His stripes we are healed"? For those that like to cite overcoming cancer as an example of healing, what do they have to say about Lance Armstrong? Here's a guy who clearly doesn't profess faith in God but was miraculously healed of a massive amount of cancer! The answer is that living tissue is capable of amazing recoveries given enough time and proper treatment; that's all. It's NOT proof of God. [...] Face it, miracles do not occur of the sort that are recorded in the Bible.
Creation:
1.) The authors try to pathetically show biblical evidence for an old earth view of creation since there is undeniable evidence that the universe is ~15 billion-years-old. We know that our solar system was formed ~5 billion years ago because we can measure how old our sun is, including other corroborating evidence like plate tectonics, etc. Sadly, there is very little, if anything, to suggest an old earth view from the Bible. If the 7th day of Creation is still occurring for God, as the authors argue, then when we observe the sabbath, why does it not continue forever (Hebrews 4:4-5)? The authors don't even cite the passage for fear of showing the weakness of their argument. It says, "For He has said somewhere concerning the seventh day: 'And God rested on the seventh day from ALL His works.'; and again in this passage, 'They shall not enter My rest.'" I think what Hebrews is saying is that since there's no more creating to do, then God has rested since but those who do not believe will not have that rest in eternity. They offer no reasons to support why we should accept that the Sixth Day of Creation must've taken longer than a day. Hello! If God is God, then He can do however much work He wants in one day! What a horrible argument!
2.) They offer no evidence for us to believe that the genealogies of Genesis chapters 5 & 10 should be considered open. (open here meaning not all inclusive) I think there's strong evidence to say that it was all inclusive. Clearly, before we had evidence that the universe was such an age, nearly all believers would've argued for the young earth "model." I still remember learning about the young earth view when I was home-schooled back in the 80's. Give it up, guys.
Evolution:
1.) How do the authors explain the thousands of species of ants or similar termites? What about the bacteria that can break down a man-made substance, nylon? The bacteria developed an enzyme called nylonase to break the substance down for energy. They created an entirely new gene!
2.) Quite misleadingly and pungently the authors state, "The overwhelming evidence supports the Creationist view." What about ERV's in our DNA that we share with other apes but there are more mutations in more distant relatives? What about the found missing chromosome b/w apes and homo sapiens in that of human chromosome 2 where two chromosomes fused together to make one? What about the lungfish? What about the fact that there are animals like chimpanzees that look A LOT like us still alive today? And they say we don't have ANY transition fossils? Are they BLIND?!
Evil:
1.) They try to say that we wouldn't have free will unless there was evil. They forget the fact that Adam & Eve had the free will to allegedly eat the apple in Eden. They also fail to point out that God foresaw man's fall and the massive pain that would be caused to all animals on earth because of it, and yet He still created it all. I guess the angels weren't enough; I guess His allowing Lucifer to cause chaos in Heaven just wasn't enough of a screw up and He just HAD to create something else because He's this egotistical maniac that HAS to be worshiped by things that HAVE to love Him or they're cursed for eternity. I'm sorry, where's the free will in that again? The point is, we could potentially have the knowledge of good and evil without being subjected to evil; it's just a byproduct of the physical nature of our existence. That is all, nothing more.
2.) We have a limited capacity to make good decisions due to us not usually having enough information, as well as the varying ability of individuals to predict their action's outcomes. I believe this processing is done in the prefrontal cortex of the brain. (See moral calculations or books related to moral reasoning/right and wrong.) I believe moral reasoning is based on the ability of the brain, and since some of us are not as intelligent as others, God screwed us over. Thanks, God!
Need I go on?
Summary:
We evolved higher and higher cognitive abilities until we started to wonder where we came from. We didn't have the science to figure it out, so we made up stories that made sense to us and tried to explain things that way - this seems ubiquitous amongst cultures. We are capable of believing in outrageous things without clear evidence; it's inherent in our design, sadly. (Read Kluge by Gary Marcus.) We evolved; get over it.
 Prepared to give an answer??? July 10, 2007
5 out of 5 found this review helpful
The question is not, will you talk about your church, the question is, will you share the gospel message? Many Christians have a passion and desire to share their faith, but hesitate because they are afraid of the questions. Dr. Geisler begins by pointing out that non-believers have good questions and Christians are called to "Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have, but do this with gentleness and respect."
Geisler addresses many different topics ranging from, questions about God, other gods, evil, miracles, Jesus, Bible, Bible difficulties, archeology, science, afterlife, truth, and morals. With a wide range of topics and well-reasoned answers, this book will provide you a solid introduction into the world of apologetics. This is the type of book that will not just "sit on your shelf" after one read.
Thoughtful writing March 19, 2007
1 out of 4 found this review helpful
Mr. Geisler presents his information in a well-organized manner. I've always felt that if you can explain why you believe something, you can share it without offending or "cramming it down their throat".
Christians Need To Provide Answers February 25, 2007
3 out of 3 found this review helpful
The Bible tells Christians to "be ready to give an answer for the hope that is in [them]." Geisler's and Brooks' book, When Skeptics Ask, helps the Christian formulate an answer for his belief. The book is not exhaustive on every subject, but it helps in many of the critical areas that many skeptics may inquire about.
The book is laid out in an easy to read format. It can be read all the way through, or as a reference tool on a particular subject. I would recommend this book for every Believer's library.
Disappointing December 6, 2006
20 out of 30 found this review helpful
This book was given to me by my family on the request of my wife. She and my family are religious and I am not. I read this with an open mind however it simply frustrated me. The author attempts to provide reinforcement to what I consider Western Christianity (WC) views, but the use of false logic, wild assumptions, and circular arguments simply make no case at all. I have more questions now after reading this poor attempt to explain WC.
For instance, in Chapter two the author uses extremely poor logic and nothing but philisophical rant to "prove" God exists. There is no proof in the chapter. However, later in the book Geiser and Brooks build on this faulty foundation established in Ch. 2 to attempt to exlpain other mysteries of religion. I am sorry, but in my opinion that is a poor defense - weak foundations make weaker structures.
This book is clearly designed for those who are already strong beleivers in a faith, not fact-based religion. I was hoping it would provide answers to some of the questions I have about Christianity, however I was greatly disappointed.
If you are a strong Christian then this book may be of some help when people ask you the tough questions, but I doubt any skeptics will be converted with this poor defense manual.
|
|
|
Powered by Associate-O-Matic
| |
