Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
11 of 14 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Blanchard buffets Hawkings and Dawkins, 5 Nov 2004
We live in a secular post-Christian world. Our moral code is still basically Christian. In many countries, however, belief that God made heaven and earth, that man is here to live, die and then be judged eternally by God, that He sent his son Jesus Christ to die for the sins of those who believe in him, is seen as naive and wishful. Witness European reactions to George W Bush, who is characterised as stupid, largely for his literal Christian beliefs.John Blanchard has written a devastating defence of Biblical Christianity. A PhD in science, he points out the absurdity of the atheist position. It really is a blind leap of faith to believe that the universe came from nothing, that it - and our human lives - have no purpose. He truly demolishes atheist scientists, such as Dawkins and Hawkings. He addresses questions as to how God could permit evil and suffering. Blanchard's strength is that he has been an unbeliever himself and can address all the objections of the atheist. He writes in a cool conversational style. The book is punctuated by the personal experiences of a number of people who came to faith themselves. Blanchard's book is a huge challenge to anyone who does not bow the knee to our Lord Jesus Christ.
|
|
|
2 of 4 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
An excellent defence of the Christian faith., 25 Sep 2006
This book by John Blanchard, is a shorter version of his extensive volume entitled 'Does God Believe in Athiests?' Personally, I found this an even better book, owing to it being much more easier to comprehend.
Blanchard examines different arguments that are presented by people as proof against the existence of God. These arguments include the teaching that science disproves God, the theory of evolution, and how can a compassionate God allow so much suffering. In response, Blanchard gives clear, logical answers showing the weaknesses and problems associated with such ideas. As you read, you will note how Blanchard has thoroughly researched the different subjects, with lots of quotes, illustrations and facts to support his evidence. In addition, each chapter ends with an independant testimony, relating to the subject covered.
The book ends by presenting the greatest argument for God's existence today - the life and work of His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ. There is then an invitation to trust in Him.
The book is well researched, organised and very readable. It is simple to understand and contains important lessons for people today. Highly recommended.
|
|
|
2 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Rotten Fruit, 3 Dec 2006
Would that it were possible to award zero stars for a book. `Sell-By' is difficult to refute not because it is good - it isn't; the entire volume is a morass of fallacies and misrepresentations - but because the author deluges the reader in such a Niagara of falsehoods that writing a review that could effectively address them all would require something six times as long as the original book. Who has time?
My review must therefore be superficial, but I'll try to convey the problems.
Blanchard's two favourite fallacies are the Appeal to Authority and the quote-out-of-context. The book seems at times entirely composed of these two alone. The former says `this impressive person believes X so you should too' and the latter takes a quote shorn of context, to give a misleading impression.
Key instance: on page 69 in Chapter 4, `The Science Thing' Albert Einstein is quoted to sound respectful of religion generally.
Actually, Einstein thought Christianity was twaddle. Why should we regard him as an authority on the subject anyway since he was a physicist, not a theologian? Not only that, Einstein even made mistakes within his own field of specialisation, as even geniuses do. These few points give some idea of just why the fallacy of Appeal to Authority and the quote-out-of-context ARE fallacies. Blanchard is misrepresenting him.
Ad hominem fallacy - attacking a person rather than their argument. Example: Bertrand Russell. In Chapter 5 Russell is misrepresented - using another quote out of context - to sound like a mercurial flake who couldn't make up his mind about anything. In fact he was a tremendous polymath, and if he did change his views on subjects, perhaps that simply shows that he continued thinking.
Indeed, specialists are quoted out of context throughout the book, either being misrepresented, or, all too often, stating personal opinions rather than the conclusions of the scientific community as a whole.
Blanchard actually inverts the `Burden of Proof' principle; non-believers must disprove his assertions. Guilty until proven innocent?
A theologian - Keith Ward - pronounces on laws of Physics, and talks freewheeling nonsense about giant carrots that has nothing to do with what science says about the origins and `appearance' of laws of Physics.
Heavy reliance on vast numbers illustrating the improbability of whatever the author wishes to disprove. But statistics are routinely abused, and these ones are presented out of context. We cannot validate them. The chapters attacking evolution commit the Either/Or fallacy - amongst others - as though proving evolution false means creationism is true. It doesn't. And the creationist arguments have been destroyed hundreds of times on the Internet. Try TalkOrigins.org.
Heavy reliance upon `testimonies' from Christians. Cue the usual suspects: the man who had atheism `rammed down his throat' in childhood, the former Muslim, the one-time `weak Christian'. But testimonies prove nothing except `here's someone who believes X'. Search on the Internet under `ex-Christian'. You will drown in testimonies.
Weasel words. `Scholar' has positive connotations and `Intellectual' negative. Thus `scholar' is only used to describe Blanchard's allies; `intellectual' is only used for enemies. So Christian/Scholar = Goodie! Atheist/Intellectual = Baddie!
Intimidation and Emotional blackmail. Frequently Blanchard will challenge his readers thus: "Do you wish to argue with this - and are you qualified to?" This is pure intimidation, the core of the Appeal to Authority. And later in the book Blanchard tells a story of deceased souls protesting to God about their fate. This tale is designed to make us feel guilty about even questioning our lot. It also suggest that a person MUST have experienced something in order to judge it, but we don't select juries on THAT basis. The story isn't scripture anyway, so it's irrelevant.
`Sell-By' is an evil book, immensely dishonest from start to finish. The real tragedy of it is the number of people who, unfamiliar with the tricks being deployed against them, will be duped; people who only sought the truth these pages are bereft of. Mercifully, sceptics and others who are better schooled in recognising the traps will not be deceived.
Incidentally, to risk committing an `ad hominem' myself, in response to another reviewer, Dr Blanchard's own website tells us that his PhD is in Divinity, not Science, and, worse, that it came from Pacific International University, a notorious creationist `diploma mill' whose own website warns that its qualifications are not recognised by the academic community. It looks suspiciously as though `Dr' Blanchard's own qualifications are bogus.
If there really is good evidence for Christianity, it's somewhere else, alas. Truly a text of lies.
|
|
|
|
by John Blanchard
by John Blanchard
by J. Blanchard
