In the aftermath of the slew of books by the so-called new atheists there has been a wealth of material in book-form in reply. Of the several books I have read they have all provided good material in answering atheism.
The main weakness of the majority of the books I have read regarding atheism in apologetics is that I also found that these books were not ones that I would really suggest an atheist to read. While reading them I reflected that if I was still an atheist that I would have found the tone to be too condescending or confrontational. My only previous exception to this I found was New Proofs for the Existence of God: Contributions of Contemporary Physics and Philosophy
When I first heard that Trent Horn from Catholic Answers was putting out a book on atheism I had high hopes that maybe here would be a book that I could recommend to atheists who were interested in hearing arguments against atheism. I have greatly enjoyed Trent Horn’s answers on Catholic Answers especially when they spend a whole show dialoging with atheists. I am very happy to report that Answering Atheism: How to Make the Case for God with Logic and Charity
I liked almost just about everything about this book and the serious effort it makes to take atheist objections seriously. You can certainly see the St. Thomas Aquinas approach here where objections are put forth accurately before the “on the contrary” reply to the objection. There are always going to be tensions between writing an apologetics book for a popular audience while addressing technical philosophical and scientific questions. Trent Horn has navigated these tensions rather well and solved part of this problem by moving some more technical discussions to appendixes without leaving out meat in the main chapters. I also really enjoyed some of the arguments employed and some of the nuances that he used that I had not encountered before.
So as the subtitle of this book focused on using logic and charity I think the really hit this out of the park. This is a great book for anybody that wants to brush up on or explore the arguments/ways of knowing that God exists.
This is also a book that can be easily recommended to atheists and not have them just dismiss it in frustration. At one time I was naive enough to believe that a solid book of this type would of its own be a great conversion tool. I have since learned that grace, disposition, and timing is even a more necessary requirement before logic. Yet this book at least will help towards fertilizing that rocky soil.
3 comments
As an atheist I continue to keep an open mind about the possibility of a supernatural world. Current evidence of a verifiable nature is scant as to the existence of invisible beings. But if I was to convert from atheist to theist there remains an insurmountable problem: choosing a specific religion from the plethora of available choices. If they all are not valid then what is the criteria to make that determination? Here is where that intangible quality of ‘faith’ rises to the occasion. In the end it seems horrifically implausible that billions of the religious are doomed to damnation for reason of worshiping the wrong god.
I admire your earnest efforts to approach the issue with an open mind. In my own journey, it worked best to take the “one step at a time” approach, focusing on what seemed to be the next thing. Visiting questions prematurely led me to confusion instead of increased clarity, so I figuratively pinned issues to a bulletin board to revisit later.That worked pretty well.
In any case, Edward, at least the Catholic Church (and, I believe, God) don’t adopt the “guess right or you’re out” position on denominational identity. All Christians and, to a degree, all theists of good will are brothers and sisters, if somewhat separated. Don’t assume that because you may run into loud voices shouting, “My way or hellfire!” that that’s a widespread Christian or theist position. You know, the Internet and all.
And thanks very much for the review. It’s been hard to find a book that supports the respect I want to communicate for the person’s thought process and presumes a desire in them for integrity and good will. Some aren’t good-willed, of course, but I believe if you assume good will, you’re more likely to find it.