|
Answering the New Atheism: Dismantling Dawkins' Case Against God | 
| Authors: Scott Hahn, Benjamin Wiker
Publisher: Emmaus Road Publishing
Category: Book
List Price: $12.95
Buy New: $11.42
You Save: $1.53 (12%)
New (4) Used (2) from $6.00
Rating:  23 reviews
Sales Rank: 12314
Media: Paperback
Pages: 152
Number Of Items: 1
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.5
Dimensions (in): 8.2 x 5.3 x 0.4
ISBN: 1931018480
EAN: 9781931018487
ASIN: 1931018480
Publication Date: May 8, 2008
Availability: Usually ships in 24 hours
| |
| Also Available In:
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
The essential book for dismantling Richard Dawkins' atheistic agenda. Scott Hahn and Benjamin Wiker collaborate to debunk Dawkins' theories and show how inconsistent and illogical his conclusions truly are. This is the definitive book for college students or faithful Christians hoping to answer Dawkins' claims and assert the logic and beauty of their faith.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 18 more reviews...
 Sticking to the question at hand. December 27, 2008
DJW (NY)
2 out of 2 found this review helpful
I enjoyed this book in particular because the authors (Hahn, Wiker) stick to the question at hand rather than employ their own philosophical argument as a refutation of the Dawkins' "The God Delusion." To their credit, and to the reader's reward, the authors contain the book's entire thesis to Dawkins' own poor scholarship.
Dawkins surely deserves the rhetorical spanking he receives from the authors for each of the "three pillars" of his "proof" of theism's "delusion." While it may have been expected that Dawkins was going to be in over his philosophical head when he tried to apply his experience in evolutionary biology to morality and mathematics, it was surprising how poorly constructed his main pillar of ethology and evolution was. The authors clearly and unequivocally expose that it's Dawkins' own deification of the God of "Chance" that ends up causing his mathematical errors ultimately resulting in the undermining of his claim to reasoned observation through the scientific method. The reader is already faced with a falling facade before the expected collapse of Dawkins' second pillar, philosophy, is even addressed.
Like a first year philosophy student attempting to prematurely deliver his doctrinal thesis to a murder of faculty crows, Dawkins' extension of ethology to morality and deism is particularly damaging to his assertions. It would have been better for him to have rested his laurels on the much better-reasoned work of his atheistic brethren than to have wagered his entire construct on his own poorly tested philosophy. It's not surprising that his secular contemporaries are publicly wincing at his lack of philosophical training wishing perhaps he would have taken a lesson from the Moses that he openly maligns, and waited for the Red Sea to part before jumping in?
By the time the reader is presented with the author's dismantling of Dawkins' theistic arguments, the same "house of cards" that stands as the altar of Dawkins' devotion to his God of "Chance" is already at the mercy of the "hurricane" that makes his case implausible. The authors quickly, and smartly, merely reconstruct Dawkins' own pillars and then simply rest their argument upon Dawkins' own shaky legs. When viewed through the lens of the reality of modern history, the horrors of Dawkins' God of "Chance," the one that Dawkins would seek to force our children to bend their knee to, is shown in fact to be the very hell that he would deny exists.
It should be noted in closing that the weakness in Dawkins argument is symptomatic of atheism as a whole, although admittedly, better minds have made better arguments and will surely again. It is not necessary that the authors address every atheist's argument because like Dawkins' own, they will stand or fall on the merits of their reflection of the truth. Paradoxically, as pointed out by the authors, at the core of every theistic argument is the inability of natural selection to explain why we have this discussion at all.
One negative note: on page 95 there is an unpleasant typographical mistake in the use of the word "their," hopefully one that will be corrected in a subsequent edition. (Sorry to be picky.)
 review of the reviews December 13, 2008
Dave G (USA)
2 out of 4 found this review helpful
It has been interesting, having just read the book, reading the various takes (reviews) on it on this amazon page. The emotional response felt in some of them reveal that this is indeed becoming a hot topic. I also noticed dismissive generalization and various slogans being thrown about that failed to address specific arguments found in the book itself. To those who refrained from this, I tip my hat to you. For those honest thinkers who are trying to wrestle with this issue and might consider this book, I think this quick read might be a helpful addition to the discourse and your understanding of the issues. It can be dense at times, but it does offer real arguments and insights that need to be met in the ongoing discussion over this neo-atheistic movement. I would put it a college reading level.
One interesting insight the book provides is Dawkins' failure to distinguish between chance and impossibility. When does something become so improbable that we should consider it impossible? Further, if Dawkins will accept the possibility of things which are patently absurd and basically impossible, why not also accept God? These are good questions and number among a few good insights that Answering offers. I look forward to Dawkins response.
 The worst book I ever read. December 8, 2008
Bruno Marquez (VENEZUELA)
3 out of 15 found this review helpful
Since I've read many books written by R. Dawkings and other important Atheist like Christopher Hitchins; decided to read this one as the logycal counterpart.
When received the book and started to read it, authomatically felt like reading any Inquisition Manifesto.
All the book is no more than a ridiculous Rethoric about nonsense religious Statements and every argument against Dawkings or Hitchins is like any Middle Age speech.
Use you money in a better way that buying this book.
CONGRATULATIONS TO MR. DAWKINGS . HE IS REALLY THE CHARLES DARWIN OF OUR TIMES.
 Pleased But Left Wanting... December 6, 2008
Michael Gooch (Texas, USA)
3 out of 5 found this review helpful
After reading several of the atheist tomes including the one by Dawkins - The God Delusion and Hitchens - God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything. I then purchased several books offering rebuttals. One I liked was William's Greater Than You Think: A Theologian Answers the Atheists About God
This book did present a few compelling arguments but I felt that they fell short in too many places. Maybe they were trying to keep down the wordcount, however, I believe the intellect was there but not really used at all times. One thing that distracts from the books by both Dawkins and Hitchens is their obvious hatred of God even though they claim that He does not exist. Same thing with this book. The authors hatred of Dawkins I believe should have been mellowed out with less direct attacks and comments and more on the general stupidity of atheists.
The flow of the book and the footnotes were excellent. In addition, I support anyone willing to invest the time and effort to battle this growing crisis of faith. I feel the Dawkins of the world are winning. I certainly hope I am wrong.
I hope you find this review helpful.
Michael L. Gooch - Author of Wingtips with Spurs
full of worthless and rude, arrogant arguments against Dawkins, even against his wife October 9, 2008
F. Tore
12 out of 29 found this review helpful
Both Scott Hahn and Benjamin Wiker use their own brand of "reason" based on faith thinking they have soundly dismantled Dawkins' arguments. Who is delusional here? One hundred and fifty-two pages and they fail to demonstrate how atheism is a faith. What they offer is only rhetoric. What their argument in the end boils down to is based on faith and "evidence" from an invisible world. How convenient. These low caliber shake-down artists enforce the truth of the fundamentals of evolutionary science and the points Dawkins makes in The God Delusion. I only gave it one star because I had to.
|
|
|
|
powered by full speed | |
