• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

A case for Christ

I read Case for a Creator by the same author. A better name for the book would have been Interviews with Christian Scientists. He writes the book like he's unconvinced (and it's obvious he's not unconvinced), and he tries to pretend that he's doing a journalistic piece (and it's obvious the book is not a journalistic piece). The author doesn't cover both sides at all. He quotes some non-Christian science authors, but the only scientists he interviews are Christians. The story was the same with every interview. "The probability is small that this event, which is necessary for life to begin, will occur without outside intervention." Well, having gone to school for engineering and having been force fed statistics and mathematics for 6 years, I know that if there's a 1 in a billion chance of something happening, it will surely happen, so for me, this book actually had an effect opposite that of the author's intended purpose.

Hope this was helpful.
 
I need to add that this book did make me realize something important. Whether you choose to believe in religion or science, you're still using faith because we don't have all the answers. To steal a device from Life of Pi, there will always be meerkat bones.
 
RitalinKid said:
The author doesn't cover both sides at all.
Click to expand...

Of course he doesn't. It's called "A Case for Christ". The whole point is taking a position on a subject. If he wasn't taking a position it would be "A Balanced Look at Christ" or something like that.
 
Daniel Bell said:
Of course he doesn't. It's called "A Case for Christ". The whole point is taking a position on a subject. If he wasn't taking a position it would be "A Balanced Look at Christ" or something like that.
Click to expand...
If you've read the book Case for a Creator, which was the one I was talking about, you know he wrote the book as if he's a skeptic, and you also know he wasn't when he wrote the book. His writing style gives you the impression that his coverage of the subject is a balanced look to sway him to creationism. Since he doesn't need to be swayed, that's flirting with dishonesty. Maybe he was expecting an audience that was already convinced, not skeptics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top