I'm going to start off by admitting I didn't finish this book. It was only supposed to be 122 pages, and I made it about 1/3 of the way in before I just couldn't take it anymore.
Apologetics is something I've been interested in off and on for a few years. It's supposed to be a reasoned defense for a religion, and I was looking for "third-party" views into Christianity. This particular book was supposed to deal with the existence of evil and free will. To me, it wasn't doing a great job.
The part I got through was about evil. The saying "If God is omnipotent and truly good, how can there be evil?" or something along those lines. It's something I've struggled with a few times. How did the author deal with it? Semantics. He breaks down why certain phrases don't go together and defines multiple kinds of inconsistency. By the time he was done with that one phrase, he'd basically rewritten it over 20 times. And he still didn't address the main problem. He used the same "there's probably a reason" and "maybe that evil happened because it was needed for a greater good."
What I read of this book was beyond frustrating. "Well, if we say it this way, it combines things that can't go together. What if we say it like this?" That's not the point. This was written in 1974, so maybe it was revolutionary when it came out. But if I can't make it through 122 pages, it is definitely not a book for me.
No comments:
Post a Comment