Some Atheist Brief Book Reviews

All God Worshippers Are Mad

A short and stupid book. I give it one star out of five because it was only $1.99 on Kindle. I can’t decide if the book was written for 12 year olds, or if it was written by a 12 year old. For example… His first argument against God is basically summed up as: “In order for God to create the space/time universe, God’s existence can’t depend on space/time. My human brain can’t comprehend that. Therefore there is no God. Booyah!”

Why I Believed

He’s got a couple of decent Dostoevsky-type arguments against faith/God, but most of what he says follows a “I just don’t want to believe anymore” kind of thinking. Christianity is a faith which requires engagement. If you choose not to engage it you will grow cold towards it.

Don’t Sleep, There Are Snakes

I’ll come back to this book for the language sections. Everett is a talented linguist. He had no business being a missionary though. I don’t think he ever fully understood what Christianity is. His descriptions of the faith show he never moved beyond a Sunday-school understanding of it.

God Needs to Go

It’s hard to get into one of these books when it starts out with a straw-man argument; which this book does. In fact, this book is one straw-man after another — falsely representing Christianity and then attacking that false representation.

He makes a couple good points against prayer (or, what I would call the misuse of prayer).

Atheists often argue that morality is based on the evolved sense of the common good. While that might be true for economy, it is not true for morality. Morality is not the same across the world. A westerner being accepting of a transgender person is doing so because he believes it is loving to do so. That belief of loving acceptance stems directly from Christian morality. A Buddhist in Thailand who is accepting of a transgender person is not doing so out of love; his acceptance and noninterference is based on karmic justice. A Buddhist would be less inclined to help the poor for that very same reason, whereas a westerner would be more inclined to help the poor based on Christian morality.

The author states: “Except for certain religiously based societies, many of the secular nations display a sense of right and wrong that has allowed them advance in a positive way.” (page 23) “Certain religiously based societies” — every society is a religiously based society, including the ‘post-Christian’ west. A society’s morality is tied to its predominant religion. This is not hard to see. Western morality is based on Christianity, absolutely. If you don’t see that, you just need to do some travelling. A Buddhist nation’s morality is based on Buddhism. The same is true for Hindu and Muslim nations. If a person born and raised in a Buddhist nation becomes an atheist, his morality will still be based on Buddhism. (Although, Buddhism as a religion lacks the conditions to create atheists — which is a whole other interesting topic. Western atheism would not exist if it weren’t for Christianity.)

Then there are the usual arguments about slavery and God’s wrath and so forth. If you want to understand those issues in the Bible you have to understand two very important things: covenant and holiness. If you don’t get those two things, you won’t get the Bible.

And there are the attacks on biblical prophesy. Jesus said certain things about His return that supposedly didn’t happen. Well, there are plenty of books on eschatology to explain that. But if you’re not willing to study it out, then there’s nothing more to say. Reading Psalm 110 and Daniel 7:13-14 will get you well on your way to understanding what Jesus said when prophesying about Himself.

Use a Transformer

electricity-transformer-300x235 If you live in the west and travel to the east, you have to be careful with the electrical devices you bring.

In the west, the voltage at an outlet is 120 volts, whereas in the east it will be 220 volts. If you plug your western electric razor in without an adaptor, you will fry your razor.

I like to use this illustration when teaching hermeneutics. You have to be careful when taking texts written thousands of years ago and applying them to today’s world.

All the so called “end-times” texts come to mind. When someone writes “the end of all things is at hand” two thousand years ago (1 Peter 4:7*), you don’t read that in 2015 and go out into the streets shouting the end is near.

You have to figure out what the original author meant by his words. What was coming to an end for him two thousand years ago? Then, once you’ve figured out his meaning, you can then apply the principles of what he was saying to your own time.

Sometimes you can take texts and plug them right in without the transformer (like with the wisdom literature), but the bible itself will teach you when and when not to do that.

And… just plain common sense.

*Also see: 1 Corinthians 10:11; James 5:7-9; 1 John 2:18; Hebrews 10:25; Jude 17-18.

Simply Good News by N.T. Wright (Brief Book Review)

Simply Good News: Why the Gospel Is News and What Makes It Good by N.T. Wright
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

Wright starts off by defining the word gospel (good news) as how it would mean to first century people. For many today the gospel is good advice (believe this and you’ll go to heaven when you die) rather than good news. But, the gospel really is news, and that’s how we should present it.

The good news is that Jesus has become king and He is now restoring the world. He’s not going to whisk us all away to heaven and destroy the world. Jesus started this restoration at the cross and will complete it at the last day. N.T. Wright uses an example of a Roman emperor defeating his enemy and taking power. The news of this would be good to all who support this emperor, and they would be happy to hear that he was now in charge. But first, the emperor would have to consolidate his power before taking his throne. So, the good news of his coming to power would include both something that had happened (the defeat of his enemy) and something that would happen (his coming full rule).

We today are living in that between time. Jesus defeated sin and death at the cross, and now His enemies are being put under His feet, and He will one day come and complete the work He has begun of building His kingdom on earth.

Wright also discusses misunderstood concepts people have today about God (and His anger), sin, hell, eschatology, atonement, creation, covenant, rationalism, and romanticism.

I highly recommend this one.

An excerpt…

Most people who regard the statement that Jesus died in your place as the center of the gospel place this truth, this beautiful fragment, into a larger story that goes like this. There is a God, and this God is angry with humans because of their sin. This God has the right, the duty, and the desire to punish us all. If we did but know it, we are all heading for an eternal torment in hell. But this angry God has decided to vent his fury on someone else instead — someone who happens to be completely innocent. Indeed, it is his very own son! His wrath is therefore quenched, and we no longer face that terrible destiny. All we have to do is believe this story and we will be safe. That is the reconstructed scene offered in many churches, sermons, and books. It is not completely wrong. But as it stands, it is deeply misleading. It distorts the very thing it is trying to frame. It takes the truth that Jesus died in your place and puts it in the wrong context. It does indeed make some sense there. But this is not the same sense that it would make if you put it the right context. This, in anyone’s account, is near the heart of what the early Christians meant by the good news. Since it is also, clearly, near the heart of what many Christians today understand by the good news, it is important that we sort this out.
~Page 68 or Location 976 (Kindle)

* You can take an online course on this book taught by N.T. Wright for (I think) $29USD.
Click here for that.

View all my reviews

The Four Stages Prophetic Fulfillment

When we read the bible and find prophesy we want to know when the prophecy will be fulfilled. Has it been fulfilled already? Still to come? Or, will there be a double fulfillment? I have even heard the term “the law of double fulfillment”, stated as though every prophecy must be fulfilled at least twice.

While listening to lecture by James B. Jordan I learned a different way to look at the fulfillment of prophecy.

Often there is a fourfold fulfillment:

1) Anticipatory

The prophecy is given and there is a near fulfillment of it. The purpose of this stage is to confirm the word of the prophet. It’s way of saying, “This prophecy hasn’t been definitively fulfilled yet, but here’s a small fulfillment to prove that the prophetic word is true.”

2) Definitive

This is the actual definitive fulfillment of the prophecy. All biblical prophesy is definitively fulfilled in Jesus Christ.

3) Progressive

This is the full effect of the prophecy coming to pass through the Church. The Church is in Jesus, and Jesus is in the Church, therefore whatever is fulfilled in Christ will also happen in the Church.

4) Cumulative

This is the full effect of the prophecy coming to final fruition on the Last Day.

One example we can look at is the Temple:

In 2 Samuel 7:1-16 we read of how David decided he wanted to build a temple for God.* When David told the prophet Nathan of his idea, Nathan told him to go ahead and do it. But then God said, “You’re going to build a house for me David? No, I will build a house for you. Your descendent will build a house for me.” If you read the text, it is clear that God is talking about Jesus. God gives the prophesy here of Christ’s kingdom and the true temple of God which Jesus will build.

In 1 Chronicles 22:7-11 the exchange between God and David about the temple is elaborated a bit more. David told Solomon that he wanted to build the temple but his hands were too bloody. He also said that God would give him a son, a man of rest, and that son would build the temple. God also said the son’s name would be Solomon, which means peaceful. Then in verse 11 and following, David tells Solomon to go ahead and build the temple and that he had provided resources and plans for it. Again, read the text and you will see that the words God spoke were referring to Jesus.

In 2 Samuel 12:24-25 it is interesting to see that David named his son Solomon, but God named him Jedidiah.

So, God gave a prophecy that He would provide a king of peace, whose kingdom will last forever, and that this king would build a temple for God.

1) The prophecy was fulfilled in an anticipatory way with king Solomon building the first temple.

2) The prophecy was fulfilled definitively when Jesus built the true temple: the Church.**

3) The prophecy is being fulfilled progressively as time goes on and more and more people are brought into the kingdom.

4) The prophecy will will reach its final complete state on the Last Day when the bride (the Church) is married to her Groom (Jesus). From that point on, the temple will grow more and more glorious for all eternity.

There are several examples of prophecy being fulfilled in this fourfold manner in the bible. It doesn’t have to be this way every time, but when it is done this way we need to take notice of it.

*Notice from the text how it was David’s idea to build the temple, not God’s. God was happy with the continued use of the tabernacle — which was a temporary structure. David wanted to make the temporary structure more permanent. God wasn’t interested in that because He had a whole new structure in mind for the temple: the Holy Spirit filled Church. But, God allowed the temple to be built, He wasn’t against it. God can knock down a stone building just as quickly as a tent.

**Old Testament Israel was always the Church. I don’t believe Jesus created something new called the Church. But, because of His work on the cross, the law was fulfilled and God was no longer confined to the Holy of Holies in the tabernacle. The curtain was torn. Also, with the barrier of the law out of the way, the Gentiles were able to enter.

Morality Wars

Within Buddhism there is a thing called Karma. Karma is based on good or bad deeds which then translates to future happiness or future suffering. If you build up bad Karma in this life you will pay for it with suffering in the next life. If you build up good Karma you will be rewarded. This system is the framework for Buddhist morality.

Christian morality is based on the person and work of Jesus Christ. Because He first loved me, I must love others. Because He has forgiven me, I must forgive others. Because He stripped Himself of His power to come save poor humans, I must work to help the poor.

A Buddhist will be reluctant to help the poor. The poor person may be paying for something horrible he did in a past life, and if someone were to alleviate his suffering, that someone would be going against the Karma system and will put her own future happiness at risk. “Live and let live” is the Buddhist moral standard. This actually creates a kind of tolerance that many western Humanists would be envious of. But where the Buddhist would be tolerant of something like homosexual lifestyles, a tolerance which would be celebrated by the Humanist, the Buddhist would also be tolerant of allowing the poor to stay poor, a tolerance which the Humanist would rail against. This is because Humanist morality is a bastardized version of Christian and anti-Christian values.

I remember telling someone how I was helping poor children in Cambodia to get a proper education. She thought that was wonderful. But then her face dropped and she asked if I was also teaching the people about Christianity. “You’re not trying to convert them are you? Don’t they already have their own religion?”

Sigh. So your morality praises me for helping poor children, but then, that same morality scolds me for opposing a religion (Buddhism) which has a moral system that actually prevents Cambodians from helping their own poor children? But to her, her thinking was completely logical, and that is because she has no idea where her Humanist morality comes from.

Humanism is doomed. So what will be the next moral battle fought in the western world? Nihilism versus Humanism? Islam versus Humanism?

Will Christians wake up to the fact that Christendom fell a long time ago and join the fight?