Skeptics Books

This book is about the author's time spent in a Southern Baptist theological seminary. The author, an agnostic, discusses the lives and personalities of Baptists who passionately believe in their strict and literal brand of Christianity. The book is a fair account of the daily life and politics of a theological college.

Mike Bryan, enrolled in Criswell College, a bible college, this book tells of his learnings while there. And the works thereof. I am so glad I purchased this book. All should read this. K. Foster, Oklahoma.

a short while ago i happened to see this book among the remainders. it sounded interesting so i bought it and read it. what a bargain. this is an excellent book i would think from most anyones view point. i can't understand why it did not become better known. i highly recommend it. dave nelson

Mike Bryan's sincerity is evident in almost every word of this heartfelt account of the author's term spent at the evangelical-fundamentalist seminary Criswell College in Texas. With no detectable trace of ulterior motive, guile or superiority, he became a part of the life of this small (about 350 students) Christian college in the heart of the Bible Belt. The book takes us through his many experiences, including conversations with college faculty and students, chapel services, a trip to the Southern Baptist Convention and a mission to El Salvador. Interspersed with these recollections are his own reflections on faith.

He is disarmingly honest, and one would be unusually hard-pressed to rake up evidence that he had any particular axe to grind, or that he set out to do an expose of Protestant fundamentalism: Indeed, he is candid about the inadequacies of his own particular agnosticism, and does not try to set them against the often seemingly naive and foolish world of fundamentalism. What he discovers are real people who don't fit the stereotype, and his genuine intentions towards these people (who became real friends during his time at Criswell) are clearly visible.

His most interesting observation is that the apparent distance between these fundamentalists and unbelievers - the former are heavenbound, while the latter are wicked sinners destined for hell unless they repent - is only intellectual; on a deeper, more human and heartfelt level the author finds that most of his evangelical friends and acquaintances are accepting, and there is little sign of any real distance in their relations.

Bryan is gifted in that, although he is no Christian, and remained unconvinced by the arguments and claims he was faced with at Criswell, he can see others first and foremost as human beings. Thus, Chapter and Verse is no anti-fundamentalist polemic; rather it is one man's account of what he really found - minus all the trappings of labels and stereotypes - when he got to know a group of fundamentalists for themselves.

As is common with books written about theological, biblical or ecclesiastical issues by people who are foremost journalists (I am reminded of Bruce Bawer's far less charitable Stealing Jesus: How Fundamentalism Betrays Christianity), the author reveals himself as something of a dilettante on some religious matters. He makes a number of elementary mistakes: His definition of the Chalcedonian formulation of the two natures in Christ is misleading; He wrongly includes premillennialism as one of the five fundamentals published by the earliest fundamentalists; there were a few others.

He also draws one or two puzzling conclusions, such as that fundamentalists (apparently) are uniquely representative of "biblical" Christianity; that non-evangelicals cannot lay claim to following the Bible as closely and consistently as evangelicals. Such an inference is only true within the fundamentalist scheme of interpretation; nevertheless, Bryan is so transparent and genuine that one can overlook a few errors made in good faith. Chapter and Verse is one of the more nuanced portrayals of fundamentalist Christianity in recent years, and Bryan's compelling manner had me hooked from start to finish.

This is an entertaining account of a skeptical journalist who spent a semester as a student at the staunchly evangelical/fundamentalist Criswell College. Bryan tells of his encounters with: - Paige Patterson, now president of Southwestern Seminary but then the head of Criswell, various `Green Berets' - very evangelistic students - who did their darnedest to win him to Christ

- Jim Parker, the philosophical ethics prof, who presented the intellectual case for Christianity

- Danny Akin, now president at Southeastern Seminary, then theology prof at Criswell, who taught Bryan the evangelical view of the Bible and Biblical doctrine

In the process, Bryan sat through numerous chapels and evangelistic meetings, met hundreds of believers and heard their stories, attended a preaching conference in Florida, and tagged along on a missionary trip to civil war-torn El Salvador.

Throughout this fascinating book, a journal of sorts, really, Bryan gives a sketchy autobiography of his disbelief. In the end, Bryan, though challenged mightily by the witness of the sold-out Criswellians, chooses to remain in his comfortable `soft agnosticism.' He makes this decision ultimately not because of intellectual difficulties - indeed, he couldn't come close to answering Dr. Parker's attacks on atheism/naturalism - but because he cherishes his current lifestyle -- what he calls the lifestyle of "frozen margaritas and R-rated movies."

Bryan is surprisingly objective and very generous in his portrayal of Criswell and the Christianity represented by its students and faculty. It is obvious to any reader that he enjoyed his time there and learned quite a bit as well.

Altogether, a good read.

This review was written by my son, Brian Jennings, a 33-year-old minister in Tulsa, OK. and posted on his VIRB (blog) site.

The book is mostly a narrative. Vines was at a hotel when the hotel manager found out that he was a Christian speaker. She invited him to dinner with her staff and he accepted. What he didn't know was that the whole thing was a set-up. Within the first few moments of dinner it became apparent that the staff's plan was to ridicule him for believing in God. But Vines did not flinch and did not become defensive. He simply asked if they could engage in an intellectual conversation. What followed was a conversation that went way past midnight. The conversation included anger, humor, mocking and tears. But in the end... well, I won't tell you. But you should read it.

I've read lots of "apologetic" books (books that defend the Bible, God or Christianity), but typically their approach is to offer logic and proof in the form of "Here's why you should believe." Dinner with Skeptics was refreshing because it actually lets us read how the conversation played out. It made the book very engaging (I typically don't read books like this in 2 days).

There are "asides" in the book where Vines takes a time-out from the story to explain why he chose to say what he did, or to expound on the topic. These were helpful breaks from the story.

I would suggest this book for anyone who is struggling with understanding why there is pain, evil and suffering in this world. Vines' insights were helpful to me personally and I have already had opportunity to use some of what I've learned when talking with others.

Christian Apologetics covers a wide variety of subjects and depending upon the audience can range from simple treatments of common questions to very detailed erudite examinations of specific points of an argument. This book is clearly aimed at the general public and offers easy to understand answers to the common objections raised by skeptics to a good and omnipotent God existing because of all the evil in the world. It deals with the various manifestations of these criticisms and provides reasonable answers to each objection.

My first encounter with the writing of Jeff Vines came via an abbreviated version of this same story published in The Christian Standard as a 3 part series on August 13th, 20th & 27th of 2006. The story was compelling then and is even more compelling in the fuller format of the book.

I'm not sure if the dinner and conversations recounted in this book are factual events or fictitious characters invented to allow Jeff to make his points. They are presented in a manner that makes me think they are real events but there are parts of this story that seem almost too incredible. One of the people at this dinner reportedly was in a distraught emotional state, even crying for the 6+ hours this dinner and conversation lasted yet not one person at the dinner raised a question about her emotional state before Jeff approached her almost 6 hours into the meal and discussion. Imagining a scenario where this could occur is difficult. A boss and her employees making a practice of regularly eating dinner together after work is also a management-employee relationship that is at minimum very unusual. The order in which the skeptic's questions come and their willingness to accept the answers given is tailor made for the Apologist to make his argument. This situation is almost too good to be true but life is often stranger than fiction.

As a Christian with a deep interest in Christian Apologetics I am personally very distressed by much of what passes as scholarship in apologetics circles. There are quality books and material, available but a significant amount of the material is Apologists quoting or misquoting each other and often taking quotes out of their original context. That is why I cringed when seeing in the introduction that Jeff had added a footnote to his comparison of a tornado passing through a junkyard and assembling a fully functioning 747 as describing how one of the dinner guests viewed God's likeliness of recovering from where she perceived God had gone. The footnote referenced the original source. The tornado example originated in astronomer Fred Hoyle's 1983 book *The Intelligent Universe*. Hoyle was a proponent of a theory that life was transmitted to the Earth via microbes traveling in comets. He was arguing against the impossibility of the abiogenesis required by other evolutionists that believe life auto-organized on this planet. Hoyle wrote the following passage:
"A junkyard contains all the bits and pieces of a Boeing 747, dismembered and in disarray. A whirlwind happens to blow through the yard. What is the chance that after its passage a fully assembled 747, ready to fly, will be found standing there? So small as to be negligible, even if a tornado were to blow through enough junkyards to fill the whole Universe." (p.19)
I have no objection to the paraphrase of this example but since the quote in its original context has no connection to the context Jeff is using it in, then the footnote is not applicable. The way some Apologists quote and misquote each other I almost expect a book by another author, quoting Vines, paraphrasing Hoyle and now claiming that Hoyle was making a theological claim.

With those few minor caveats I found the book to be engaging and helpful to those people either struggling with the questions surrounding the problem of evil themselves or for lay believers that are looking for simple and practical arguments to answer these questions. The book puts in the format of a dinner conversation the questions that most believers have heard from skeptics at one time or another concerning reconciling our belief in a good and omnipotent God and various aspects of the problem of evil.

In the interest of full disclosure I should note that Jeff Vines recently became the senior pastor of my church which might lead some people to believe that I would endorse anything he wrote. However, while I like, respect and on many occasions agree with Jeff Vines, I'm am not his sycophant. He and I have numerous areas of disagreement but I don't expect to agree with any man 100% of the time. However, tackling complex theological issues in ways that are easy to understand and practical in the lives of non-theologians is something that Jeff Vines does very well. For the reader who is looking for clear answers to some tough questions concerning God and evil this book is a good start.

Steven Heighton is a poet well worth becoming acquainted with. He uses a wide variety of styles and techniques - mixing and matching as necessary to meet his purposes. Serious, playful, religious, 'scandalous' - he is equally at home. Beneath it all is a significant understanding of loss and love. These are not poems in which particular turns of phrase catch your attention; rather it is the poem as a whole that creates the strong impression. Use the "look inside" option to get a taste of his style.

The first time I became acquainted with this book, a dear friend (a pre-believer) picked it out for himself from the bookstore shelf. His life changed dramatically after reading it. I found it to be an easy but thought-provoking read - it's become a book I have purchased many times to pass on to others anxious to know God. The author has a wonderful way of explaining the nature and attributes of a holy God and the relationship that He desires to have with each and everyone of us. It also dismantles the false and lazy belief that we can live our lives fully now and eternally while ignoring our Creator. Mr. Brown oftens uses quotes by writers such as C.S. Lewis in a very helpful way. I think of this book as sort of a "junior" edition of "Mere Christianity" by C.S. Lewis or "The Attributes of God" by A.W. Tozer. I highly recommend it!

Jim Kelley has written a compelling, honest account of membership in St. Mark's Episcopal Church on Capital Hill. To disclose any bias, I have been a member of St. Mark's since 1992, though not a close acquaintance of Jim's. His portrayal shows the effect that a community's support, or lack of support, can have on an individual member, and discusses some of the ways St. Mark's develops a feeling of "community.". Persons interested in the role church plays in their lives would benefit from reading this book, including both those who go to church and are not sure why and those who have not gone to a church in a long time. This book also provides insight to St. Mark's functional education style which should be encountered by those interested in Christian education. Finally, any friends, family or acquaintances of St. Mark's members who have been puzzled by the devotion members have towards this church, or have wondered how a Sunday school class could teach anything of use when the words "God" or "Jesus" are not mentioned, will find some insights in "Sceptic in the House of God."

debunkers are losers

whats the difference between debunkers and Christian fundamentalist..there isn't one there!

there both cults!

there is an esoteric side to life that the scientist don't know much about..I have had experience with ESP,OBE and helped make 2 documentary's on UFO phenomena.The reason people believe in strange things is because TRUTH IS STRANGER THAN FICTION!

I have no time for sceptic debunkers

OBTW it's possible to get 3 pairs dice correct in a row! Because I have done it (without conscious effort) "small inner voice"..it comes to when NOT thinking about it.

all I can say to debunkers..is get real..it's DIRECT EXPERIENCE!..positive people know the truth!

I feel sorry for debunkers..

Great book by Michael Shermer and a foreward by Stephen Jay Could.
I love the section on History and Pseudohistory-Holocaust- Debunking the deniers
Great book to retool our "Skepticism Radar".
Question....everything!

I got this book (an autographed copy, no less) after a debate between the author and a Christian apologist. The debate was very polite (possibly too polite; I think they were worried about how the students watching would behave if either side decisively won) and I don't think any minds were changed. Mr. Shermer spent most of his argument explaining why Theists believe what they believe, and why atheists don't. I remember wondering why he didn't simply argue against the beliefs themselves (many of which are beliefs about the world that can be proven one way or the other, such as whether God answers prayers like the Bible says he does). After reading this book, I understand it! Whether the beliefs are true is not the main deciding factor for most people; this book does an excellent job of explaining the way people's minds justify various beliefs.

Well written easy to understand book about the psychology of how people (even smart people) can fall into common logical fallacies and come to wrong conclusions if they aren't careful.

Must read.

Because they are pleasure addicts who have no evidence that the Bible is bad and in hypocrisy, attack it.

Just look at the stupid title. So whatever is "weird" and "odd" must be wrong huh? That's a childish school bully's insult: look at that guy over there, he's a weird because he doesn't dress, talk like us or agree with whatever we think is cool, so he must be inferior and let's keep insulting him.

The authors reject this over 1900 years old common sense advice:

"Stop judging by mere appearances and make a right judgment." - Jesus

"There is a way that seems right to a man but the end thereof leads to death." - Proverbs

They reject it, hence why their book, even the title, is stupid.

What's weird is believing that unimaginably complex amount of ordered life-sustaining and replicating information, a super beautiful universe with life-friendly areas; living replicating, emotional, multi-sensory, biological robots which enjoy singing, dancing, learning, and doing good and evil were created by an exploding bomb from dozens of billions of years ago with no explanation as to why it exploded which no one saw explode in the first place, and which the evidence shows did not ever happen.

Nor is there any evidence to explain why many living kinds of animals that are supposed to evolve over time (according to evolutionists) have not evolved after millions of years, but only lost some features such as the ability to defend against a certain kind of disease or digest some sort of food (like how non-animal humans have been losing the ability to digest milk or bread well). Nor is there evidence to explain why there are very high-tech ancient man-made tools in millions of years old strata when evolutionists claim man wasn't evolved enough at that time to make them or how an exploding MATERIAL bomb can create SPIRITUAL things like GOODNESS, EVIL, INFORMATION, and THOUGHTS. To believe the impossible over the evident and probable is what is "weird".

I had read an impressive review of this book, which made me consider checking it out. After all, where could you see 10 different approaches to improving your life in one place?

It was especially intriguing since I could have the advantage of the author's experience without the aggravation of going through all of the self-help options myself! And, I might even get something positive out of her revelations.

That is exactly what this book is....Beth's account of trying out the suggestions of nearly every popular guru out there. It feels as if you are speaking to a good (and funny) friend over coffee as she explains the ups & downs, ins & outs, good & bad, silly & fun, stupid & awful things she has found during this year of exploration. It is a very quick and easy read, fun and interesting.

If you are wondering what all those gurus are about and what it would be like to meet them, you will really enjoy this book. If you are looking for a real self-help book...this will not improve you but it will entertain you.

Beth Lisick spent 2006 improving herself. Or at least working her way through the bestselling advice of ten renowned self-help gurus. Her book is divided into twelve chapters, one per month, including two nominal, page-long chapters for July and August, during which she essentially took a vacation from the project. In most cases Lisick read a book of advice by her current month's guru: Jack Canfield of the Chicken Soup series, John Gray's Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus, The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. In many cases, though, Lisick supplemented her reading by attending one of that author's seminars--events conducted by the spiritualist Sylvia Browne and by Deepak Chopra, for example; she has a two-hour phone consultation with an expert on organizing who is somehow associated with Julie Morgenstern, author of Organizing from the Inside Out.

Lisick's book is a light, fast, reasonably enjoyable read. It's the sort of book that one is apt to like or not depending on how much you enjoy the author's personality, because it's not just about the self-help: Lisick weaves anecdotes from her own life (which is happy enough but rather disorganized) into the narrative. I laughed aloud a few times while reading the book, twice during Lisick's chapter on organizing. Here she is describing her initial conversation with an organizing consultant:

"She listens in a way I imagine a top-notch therapist would, not even perceptibly cringing when I say that Eli parks his bike in the living room or that we need a place to store mustaches and wigs."

And during another conversation:

"When we get to the closet, I make a confession. Something I have never told anyone.

"'Our shoes are in a wine rack.' I say it breathlessly. Confessing, yes, but also hoping she'll ignore it.

"'I'm sorry. Your what?'

"'We keep most of our shoes in this wire wine rack thing that we got at a garage sale.'

"'Oh.' She sounds amused. 'And is that working for you?'

"'Well, no.'

"'Okay...'

"I feel reflective.

"'I think it's because a shoe and a bottle of wine are not really the same shape.'

"'Good.'"

But my favorite chapter is about Lisick's experiences on a Richard Simmons Carnival Cruise, which is absolutely fascinating.

"And then I see him. Actually, it's that voice I hear first. One flight below us, amid the rather pasty, confused mob, he absolutely glows. His skin doesn't look as orange in person, not as sprayed on. He simply exudes a healthy and natural-seeming bronzeness and is wearing his signature red-and-white-striped shorts with a red crystal-studded tank top. The best word for his hair is probably 'round.'

"We make eye contact. I see him spot our 'Cruise to Lose' name tags and then he rushes up the stairs. He's coming right for us. Thank God I pinned that thing on! He bounds straight to Jan, wrapping his arms around her, and plants a kiss on her cheek."

The experience is what you'd expect in a way--a mix of schmaltz and tears and preternatural pep and funny, but you come away from it thinking that Richard Simmons is simply a genius at what he does.

If Helping Me Help Myself sounds familiar, you may be thinking of a very similar title that was published not long before Lisick's, Jennifer Niesslein'sPractically Perfect in Every Way (see my review). I can't imagine that either author was very happy at the coincidence, but sometimes ideas are just in the air. Of the two, Niesslein's is probably more informative, and I think she made more of an attempt to adopt the programs she was writing about, while Lisick's interest was often only half-hearted. But both books are quite readable. I wouldn't steer readers away from either.

-- Debra Hamel

this is a laugh out loud book. I know because I read it and I laughed out loud. But it also has a lot on its mind, and it has a great big heart. ms. lisick has a fantastic, page turning style which keeps you coming back for more. It's like she's the greatest houseguest ever who keeps telling you these amazing stories, and who you hope will never leave. And if you ever get the chance to see her perform, do yourself a favor, go.

I thoroughly enjoyed & highly recommend this book. Beth is the kind of person I'd like to take out to lunch - a good heart, keen eye & irreverent wit.

Irreverent, caustic, witty, original. I loved the premise of this book and laughed out loud at many parts - something that never happens for me. Beth is a great writer, and had some very illuminating serious thoughts in here as well as some wonderfully detailed funny human observations. I have to get the other book and find out if it's just as good!

I found it interesting that Shermer's dedication to the book stated "For examining God, religion, and myth as Spinoza would have it: not to ridicule, not to bewail, not to scorn, but to understand." In spite of this, I failed to understand how Shermer hoped to remain neutral throughout his book when he only argued for the side of science. However, as the founding publisher of Skeptic magazine, you couldn't really expect less.

Regardless of Shermer's personal opinions, I found his book to be well written, well researched and enjoyable. He posed numerous fresh arguments in a world where the God v. Science battle constantly rages. Also, several of his arguments caused me to rethink my own beliefs and why I stand by them. While Shermer is clearly biased in favor of science, after reading his book I think that he desires to respect all types of people along with their individual beliefs. I enjoyed his writing and the many thoughts that it sparked in me.

There is an old question, "And who guards the guardians?" Or, "And who watches the watchers?" Sometimes when I read Shermer's work I think of a paraphrase of this: "And who is skeptical of the skeptics?" Let me say forthwith that I am an atheist and a skeptical empiricist, and so am NOT writing this to defend some notion of religion or "debunk" any of Shermer's arguments made here about religion and religiosity. I agree with his stance on religion. In fact, on this note this book is quite good. Shermer makes his arguments in a lucid manner and has some fascinating points to make as well. My problem, rather, comes from Shermer's self-appointed role, and now celebrity, as arbiter of what does and does not count as "science," for much of what appears in his work hardly passes muster. Unfortunately, this book is itself full of questionable methodological practices. Namely, much in the book references correlational data that Shermer keeps discussing. Shermer happens to include this data in an Appendix, which is itself, I must add, a rare and commendable thing to do. The problem is that anyone with a modicum of knowledge regarding statistics will readily see that the data is worthless. Shermer discusses the "relationship" between this and that, such as the relationship between education and religiosity, or gender and religiosity, etc. I was shocked when I looked at the actual numbers. Sure, the "p values" are well below .05, and are therefore "statistically significant." What is alarming are the other numbers. Take for instance: r = .09, p < .0001, N = 2156. What's wrong with this "relationship?" Well for starters, there's no relationship! Why are there TWO THOUSAND people in the sample? Statistical significance is sensitive to sample size. With an N that big ANYTHING ON EARTH WOULD BE SIGNIFICANT. With that many subjects significance is guaranteed and therefore moot. The only question left is the size of the relationship, which is NOT assessed by r, but rather by r squared. The problem is that all of the correlations reported (guaranteed significance by the sheer size of the samples involved) are extraordinarily small, like .09, .1, etc. The effect size of such a correlation is effectively zero! In short, there is nothing to write about here!

Shermer is a former born-again Christian, which is probably why he is more respectful of believers than, say, Richard Dawkins. I'm about half-way through this book, and I can say that it is probably the best book out there for any fence-sitting believers. He doesn't talk down to believers, he doesn't bitterly attack their belief system, and he doesn't try to be partisan. Instead, he gives a well-written, respectful critique of religion. I'd be willing to say that even Pat Robertson couldn't get offended by this book. Shermer's rhetoric is far too respectful and reasonable to draw lines between theists and atheists. He tries to unite both sides instead.

This was one of the most fascinating books I have read, everyday I looked forward to it. I was most impressed with Shermer's mastery of multiple and diverse disciplines, my IQ must have gone up a few points from reading such a well written and elegant tome. Its comprehensive style reminded me of Carl Sagan's "Cosmos" because it opened my mind to things I never considered and made me think. I find it difficult to point out what I liked about the book because it has so much to offer however I was moved as Shermer touchingly explained how he has found meaning in a world without god. I too was a Christian once and have gone though the same existential and philosophical struggles. I felt an intellectual and emotion freedom as I read of his appreciation in the awe of the natural world and his coming to understand his place in it as a "homo sapiens" or "wise man". Such considerate expression gave me a new understanding of what it means to be a freethinker.

How We Believe is a nice read--very informative, often fascinating, and very timely. Written in a straightforward style somewhere between Dawkins and Sam Harris, How We Believe should be read right along with The God Delusion and Letter to a Christian Nation. Mr. Shermer publishes some very interesting information about the general characteristics of "believers" in the U.S. and who are those most likely to have no god belief. He does a nice job of succinctly describing messiah myths and the endemic nature of "end-times" thinking in cultures throughout the world.

There are a few small problems with this book, however. The first is its lack of cohesion. Is Mr. Shermer writing a general interest nonfiction book about god belief in the U.S. or is he addressing specific pet peeves that he's come across in his research? For example; in chapter 6, we are subjected to long quotations from Pope John Paul II and Shermer's feelings about these excerpts. I really didn't care much for this, and I didn't think it was that relevant to the book's theme. The second main problem is similar--Shermer finishes the book discussing contingency theory, and this is as good a way to end the book as any. Unfortunately, this segment is overlong and too focused on responding to Daniel Dennett's response to Stephen Jay Gould.

Mr. Shermer could have even left these ideas in his book, but he should have trimmed them down considerably. Keeping all this in mind, How We Believe is a vital and needed addition to the nontheist library. I highlighted (highlit?) many passages as very pertinent to our society's blanket acceptance of patently ridiculous mythology and the reasons behind its folly. Put this one high on your list!

This book has a lot of information. It will make you doubt the legitimacy of the bible if you don't already. You can open it to any random page pretty much and start reading it. I am an atheist and have a co-worker who continually tries to convert me(and anyone else he can). He would give me religious literature to read to aid in his efforts. Since i like reading i would take it. One day i let him read this. He has not tried to convert anyone or talked about his faith since.

If you read the Bible and aren't a thumper you may be intrigued by this book. It analyzes what the Bible says from the point of view of the skeptic. A very satisfying read.

This book does not deserve more than one star, maybe this rating will upset may people especially who review it and give it 5 star, all the author points Criticizing some parts from the bible Christians fundaments have more convincing idea than his, it is true that I'm Christian but I'm a reader too, and I'm not convince with his thoughts and his ideas, my advice to him before you attack and criticize the bible go deeply study it first.

In the prologue to The Born Again Skeptic's Guide to the Bible, Green states that she is not a Bible scholar--and she spends the next 300 pages proving it.

There are some scholarly, well written books by skeptics who present a thoughtful argument against the Bible, but this is not one of them.

It is apparent, however, that Green did spend many hours studying the Bible in her research. The question it, did she read the Bible with an open mind, willing to learn something, or did she open it with preconceived notions, which she then set out to prove by twisting Scripture, taking Bible verses out of context, and treating the Bible in a shallow manner, without objectively looking for the true meaning of the text?

Her arguments against the Bible might have been more believable if she had treated the Book, and those who live by it, with more respect instead of taking every opportunity to ridicule and mock the Bible and Christians. The Bible is the most widely printed book since Gutenberg, and the most widely quoted book, but Ms. Green could find virtually nothing positive to say about it.

Green does, to be sure, bring up a lot of difficulties found in the Bible, including the fact that the God of the Old Testament seems to be cruel and violent, contrasting with the compassionate God of the New Testament. If she had bothered to look, though, she would have found that this, as well as the other Bible difficulties she mentions, have been addressed and resolved by real Bible scholars.

And am I the only reader who found her sense of humor lame and unfunny?

Another thing that I found annoying about Green is that she's constantly instructing the reader on how they should react, what they should conclude, and what they should believe. This reader, Ms Green, is quite capable of making those decisions for himself.

After reading the book, I had to ask myself why she wrote it in the first place. Here is a woman who doesn't believe in God, any God, and she's writing a book about another book that claims to be the inspired word of a being she doesn't even believe in. She tells us what's wrong with the book, and how she would have written it if she'd been the Almighty. Wouldn't it have made more sense if she'd written a book explaining why she doesn't believe God exists?

I as a Christian did not find her book offensive, as other critics have said. I did, however, find it poorly written, biased, sarcastic, unpersuasive and humorless (but trying very hard to be funny).

There is no part of the Bible that I would avoid discussing with skeptics and critics. If I were to discuss a particular Bible topic, I would not, however, gloss over the subject and quote Bible verses out of context in order to prove my preconceived ideas.

But I must say, thank you, Ms Green, wherever your soul is resting, for writing your book. It has given me a better appreciation for that Book you so hated.

You get your money's worth with this book it is thorough but I didn't find it too tedious, Ruth put alittle humor here and there to keep it interesting. I was a very avid Bible student I read all of the Bible not just the stuff people hear at church. Alot of it bothered me I had alot apologetic books and something still just didn't seem right. There was glaring violence and contradictions that just kept bothering me so I embarked on a quest to see if anyone else felt the same way. I have read several books written by people who used to be Christians I like this one the best but I would also recommend " Losing Faith in Faith"by Dan Barker and for some easy reading "Like rolling up hill" by Dianna Narciso.There are some websites in these books that may be helpful also.

This book written by Josh McDowell, a christian believer, answers many questions that none believers ask, or even believers. The answers are very comprehensive and honest. Leaving the reader more informed, able to work through in their own mind the truth of the answers. I believe a book that should always be recommended to all who ask such questions.Suitable for church groups, young people, people who want to reach their unbelieving family members and friends. Josh Mcdowell himself asked these questions before and after his conversion I understand.

This book was just OK to me. A "mini" pocket book with questions that the author finds answers to in the Bible to fit his belief, not necessarily with anything else to back it up. Don't get me wrong, I'm a Christian, I love many of his other books but this one, unlike his others that give Biblical as well as scientific answers, this one skips the scientific back up.
I'd pass on this one unless you can check it out of the library.

This book has been in my Chrisitan library since its original publication. A helpful tool for believers, in an increasingly corrupt world of doubters and mockers of God's Word.

As a 22 year old College Student it may not be fair to be reviewing this book 28 years after it was published. I am sure that for its time this was a very valuable resource. However, that being said this book is no longer one of the books I would recommend as a must read even for beginners in apologetics. Books such as Lee Strobels Case for Christ and Case for Faith have more up to date information dealing with some of the same questions.
In this book Josh McDowell and Don Stewart try to answer 61 of the most asked questions about the Christian faith. This is the first book that I have read that tries to tackle such a broad category of questions. They discuss reliability of the scriptures, archaeological evidence, creation and evolution, Miracles, world religions, and the list goes on and on. Its very hard to answer so many questions on so many topics well.
Some of the good things that this book does have is that many times as Christians we have a lot of questions we would like to have better answers to. Even those of us who hope to make the defense of the faith our profession, tend to have to focus on one area of study. This book does provide some decent answers to a few of the questions that one may not want to devote a lot of time researching. However, the age of this book makes me hesitant to rely on it too hevily because some of the information is outdated. Over all 3 stars. Not terrible and not great.

I enjoyed the book. It addressed a lot of things I had never considered- or noticed, and a lot of the things I had wondered about - for example. Jesus died on a Friday and rose again on Sunday, how is that three days! It's an issue that many Christians/churches have.

I think this book was a very good read. Not something I'll read over and over again, but something I will return to from time to time. It talked about "inconsistencies" in the Bible, that a non-believer or a new believer might throw at you.

I do believe the best way to understand the Bible is to read it yourself, as another reviewer said, and Josh helps with that by giving LOTS of scriptual basis for his answers.
I would probably recommend it more to a non-beliver or a new beliver, while many strong Christinas might find it useful - they might also know the answers to many of the questions.