One of my atheist friends (yes, I really do have them) promised to read The God Conclusion and said he would publish a review when he finished. Amazon (as typically the case) refused to allow him to post the review, so my friend Tony sent his review to me and I'm posting it on my website. Tony is an honest broker, and fair. I like what he wrote, even when he disagrees with me, and we're going to talk about it in further detail on my next podcast. Here is his review of my book: The Introduction offers important context and sketches some of the arguments to follow. Chapters 1-10 of the book constitute a nearly point-by-point response to "The God Delusion" by biologist Richard Dawkins, with chapters 11-15 forming a positive argument in favour of the author's own position, "The God Conclusion".In his Introduction, Leonard recounts personal experiences that have led him to believe in the Christian God. This sets up the tone of the entire work - this is a book that mixes philosophy, science, and theology with personal thought. To my mind, that is what makes it worthwhile. He also sets up some of the themes he will return to later in the text, including that not believing in God is an act of free will rather than unbiased evaluation. He gives Dawkins credit where credit is due for intelligence and erudition, which is a notable thing contrasted to the generally toxic tone dominating the "God debate". He closes the introduction by pointing out that truth MATTERS. In our current age of "post-fact" discourse, this is also a worthy reminder.Leonard offers responses to … [Read more...]
The second best argument for atheism
When I try to think of what the best arguments for atheism might be, two immediate possibilities come to mind. The first is the problem of suffering and evil. How does a kind and loving God allow humans to suffer from natural disasters as well as our own evil deeds? Aren't murders, rapes, and incest bad enough without some innocent people enjoying a lazy day at the beach being suddenly swept away by a seismic wave? There is no valid human explanation for the problem of suffering because humans don't like pain but do like pleasure. People never want to experience sorrow; they only want to feel joy. But without sorrow, how do we understand and appreciate joy? Without pain, does pleasure even exist? For a moment let us consider the possibility of a supernatural Creator for this natural world we currently occupy...how could this Creator/God have some purpose for allowing pain and suffering in our imperfect world? Sure He could, and we would still not have the mental capacity to understand the Grand Plan. Naturally, this raises a new question--is there a Grand Plan, or only the illusion of a Grand Plan? To answer that question, I would ask the reader to read my book, The God Conclusion. If expressed in the correct language, the origin of our universe can be reduced to two basic, binary options: the universe was either planned or unplanned. If the universe was planned, we don't need a true multiverse hypothesis, where an unlimited number of failed universes exist only to reduce the improbability of the universe we have and still don't supply a cause for the … [Read more...]
