I read this book as, I suppose, what you might call a 'Christian agnostic' (I know this sounds like a contradiction in terms, but I'm sure that there are many other church-goers who will know exactly what I mean) hoping to find that I would be convinced that the arguments of the atheists would be totally demolished, but, like some of the other reviewers, I was disappointed. Many of the points that I would have raised here have been more than adequately dealt with by Stevens, Lillis, and 'Shane', so I will not repeat them. However, I there are a couple of things that may be worth mentioning.
One is that Lennox treats the Bible as a totally reliable source whereas it has long been known that it is a collection of books written by men (some of whom may have believed that they were divinely inspired) over many centuries. Each author added his own spin to suit his own time and situation, and the final selection of what is included was again made by men (and it was probably a committee decision at that)to suit the arguments for the divinity of Christ and his fulfilment of the Old Testament prophecies.
Another point has been touched on by other reviewers: the assumption that there is no morality without religion. I am not a philosopher, but I can see no logical reason why a species such as H. sapiens with a highly evolved brain cannot have a sense of right/good and wrong/evil without God (with or without an upper case G - and I don't intend to get into an argument about the definition of 'right'and 'wrong' and 'good' and 'evil'!). Similarly, Lennox describes atheists as 'hope-less'. Of course one can have hope; it might not be concerned with a possible after-life, but nevertheless, one can still hope for better things for mankind in this life.
Deviating from the book itself for the moment, it is interesting to note that the reviews that have been most widely read and responded to, for the greater part favourably, are those giving Lennox's book a good rating; very few people have commented on the more detailed critical reviews. Could it be that the respondents did not read these, worried that their faith in what Lennox had written might be shaken? Just a thought...