The Questions Christians Hope No One Will Ask by Mark Mittleberg
"The Questions Christians Hope No One Will Ask" is an apologetics book that attempts to provide answers to difficult questions regarding faith. Author Mark Mittleberg makes a faith-based attempt to respond to some thought-provoking questions of today. Are his answers satisfactory? Find out what this freethinking reviewer has to say. This 350-page book is composed of ten chapters that cover a wide spectrum of inquiries.
Positives:
1. Generally well written and pleasant conversational tone used throughout.
2. Accessible book ideal for the masses.
3. The author does inject some humor into his prose.
4. I like the format of the book. Each chapter begins with the question that will be answered. At the end of each chapter it provides a summary of the question and answer. Plus thought-provoking questions and recommendation on how to approach a non-believer. Best thing about the book.
5. "If there were a culture in which men kept females as slaves and beat and raped them at will, we would be morally outraged." Good, because the Bible never denounces slavery as evil and in fact provides guidelines for it. We at least agreed on the first part.
6. The questions selected are thought provoking.
7. Links worked fine.
Negatives:
1. The book fails miserably to answer questions to my satisfaction. In fact, it only strengthens what I call my realistic worldview. A worldview in which I try to the best of my ability to incorporate the best evidence that corresponds to reality.
2. Fails to define some basic terms that are essential in making compelling arguments. As an example, define truth. Furthermore, what is a Holy Spirit?? How can you tell an unholy spirit from a holy one? What characteristics does a spirit have that would enable me to know objectively that a "spirit" exists let alone how it works.
3. If you continue to use terms that are meaningless to me you can't possibly convince me to your argument. As an example, "Then, when I finally gave in to what I'm confident was the Holy Spirit drawing me to trust and follow Christ, I sensed his forgiveness and his acceptance as God's newly adopted son." Once again, what characteristics does a spirit have that would enable me to know objectively that a "spirit" exists let alone how it works. Sensed forgiveness, for what?? Acceptance for what??
4. Prayers?? What objective evidence do you have that provides empirical evidence of its efficacy?
5. "We know he exists because he's our friend!" Really? Love me or go to Hell...does that sound like an arrangement between friends. Please, I'm so frustrated with this book.
6. Personal experiences are not reliable. There is nothing unusual about sensing things that do not exist. Religious believers of all kinds of beliefs have sensed different gods. It's impossible for all believers of different gods to be right...
7. So many poor arguments, "It can also influence those who have seen clear evidence of God's work in us, they can't see him, but they can see what he's done in our lives." Really? I'm a moral person. I'm successful...but I don't believe there is compelling evidence for gods yet I'm able to conduct myself in an ethical manner and others can see that. In fact, there is not a single moral act that you perform as a Christian that I can't do as an atheist.
8. The cosmological argument has been debunked for years. Who created "God"? The more interesting version is the Kalam argument; it maintains that the most plausible explanation for the universe coming into being is that "God" brought it into existence. The introduction of "God" only adds an even bigger mystery into the equation and says nothing about the characteristics of these gods. Furthermore, it begs the question that coming into existence does not apply to "God" who always existed (a faith-based claim not one based on compelling evidence). It is better to have the intellectual courage to accept that we don't know and continue to pursue answers instead of filling gaps of knowledge with gods than to claim to know without compelling evidence. If one thing history has shown us; given time, technology and curiosity, gaps of knowledge have been filled with superior natural explanations. In my further recommendations section of this review you will find a number of books that present much better arguments against the arguments for the existence of gods. You are welcome.
9. The fine-tuning argument is very weak. "The universe is not fine-tuned to us; we are fine-tuned to our particular universe."
10. The author makes misrepresentations. For instance, there is no scientific consensus that states a "divine designer" was involved in the creation of the universe.
11. "There are countless examples of goodness and virtue in our world." So what? There are countless examples of evil. Let me be kind and leave it at that.
12. The author's view of objective moral values is sickening! As a realist, I GROUND my morality on reason and logic. You can't ground your morality on an unsubstantiated supernatural entity. You must first establish the existence of gods, and then prove that your god is the right one and then and only then can you possibly ground your morality on the "right" god(s). Once again, there is not a single moral act that you perform as a Christian that I can't do as an atheist.
13. "We believe in many things that we don't see or directly experience with our senses -the virtue of love being a great example. Yet we see evidence of love through its effects. Similarly, we can't see God, but we can believe in him based on his work in us and in the universe around us." Really? Personal experiences do not necessarily correlate to reality. You can love your wife based on your personal experiences and have faith in her to be faithful only to find out that in fact she wasn't. So you as countless others of various faiths and gods at the disposition of humans all over the world may share common experiences of the supernatural and you may all be wrong.
14. "It's almost a cliché to say atheists are angry. But if your friends don't believe in God and do seem angry, ask why." Really?? It's more about being frustrated than angry. I'm frustrated that with everything we know about the world today we as a species still hold on to unsubstantiated beliefs in gods. We need to move on and have the courage to accept the facts no matter where they lead us and understand that there is no compelling evidence for a theme park called heaven. There is no compelling evidence of an afterlife and that we should rely in the best interest of all learn to love one another and work toward making this planet a better place to live in.
15. It's not about being anti-God it's about being pro-evidence.
16. The only difference between micro and macro evolution is time. Same principles and guidelines just more time. Don't let faith get in the way of the evidence. The consensus among biologists is clear: evolution (including micro and macro) is a scientific fact. Since evolution is true, we were not created we EVOLVED; Adam and Eve is a myth and original sin is a fallacy.
17. The author consistently inserts "gods" where humans lack knowledge this approach does not help in any way to properly answer the questions.
18. I can't forgive this author for misrepresenting evolution. The OVERWHELMING consensus among the subject matter experts (SMEs) around the world is that evolution is a fact (both micro and macro). To even attempt to minimize how strong the theory of evolution is among the SMEs is a disgrace and just fuels my contempt for such misleading assertions. It is one thing to state your case with certain biases; it is another to misrepresent the facts about science! An expert in the evolution-creationism controversy, professor and author Brian Alters, states that "99.9 percent of scientists accept evolution." That means about 500,000 scientists in the US support evolution over the alleged 800 scientists who don't! That's what I call overwhelming! I would never lower myself in misrepresenting the number of believers in the U.S. in such a manner with the purpose of deceiving.
19. "Darwin's theory does not explain the origin of the `stuff' that makes up the environment we live in..." the theory of evolution is about describing how diversity of life occurred over time not origins. That being said, it debunks this notion that Adam and Eve were created...humans evolved! Science doesn't know for a fact how life originated...but it does not cheat by claiming to know what it doesn't have evidence for, as theists have!
20. Genetic evidence proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that we share a common ancestor with the great apes. The same DNA that is used in the courts of law to determine paternity is used to determine common ancestry. Look up Chromosome #2.
21. So the proper answer to the question, "Didn't evolution put God out of a job?" In short, it puts the biblical god out of a job! We are not sure on other potential gods, superior beings, life forms perhaps and such but we can discard the biblical god since the Bible clearly got that wrong. Perhaps, just perhaps it may just be nature.
22. The Bible can't be trusted as a moral instrument. It endorses acts that we consider immoral today such as slavery just to name one. A book that was inspired by God should leave no room for doubt. The fact that the words were not protected for posterity as evidenced that we don't have the original copies should give any reasonable person pause. Furthermore, when one looks at the history of how the Bible was assembled well that leaves a lot to be desired. Add to that blatant scientific mistakes and errors of logic, and contradictions...
23. "How could a good God allow so much evil, pain, and suffering - or does he simply not care?" A good "God" simply doesn't exist...perhaps a bad one but not a good one based on the problem of evil.
24. "Our primary focus should be on affirming the positive model God gives us for sexual expression within a biblical marriage -between one man and one woman, for life." What at the expense of the "negative" model. Honestly, what do we say to hermaphrodites? "God" was wrong because "God" had nothing to do with the Bible, we can say so much with certainty.
25. "And why are Christians judgmental toward everyone who doesn't agree with them?' Because they are empowered by thinking they have the "right God" on their side and hence have the divine authority to impose...
26. "Why should I think that heaven really exists -and that God sends people to hell?" There is no compelling evidence for a theme park called heaven. There is no compelling evidence for an afterlife and thankfully no compelling evidence for hell. These were made up in order to provide religion with the tools to control societies by creating the disease and the cure. A way to create the fear and provide the hope...The notion that a good "God" would have the audacity to send otherwise good people to a burn in hell for eternity without compelling evidence for them
27. I must stop here...it would take me too much time and effort to go over all the negatives of this book. I can rarely read a page where I can't find an error, a misrepresentation, something that totally baffles me. I'm sorry this reviewer can only take so much!
In summary, I had to stop my negatives to a point, otherwise, I would have been writing a book of refutation instead of a review. I don't enjoy giving bad reviews. It's not in my nature to do so but this book left me no other choice. I was expecting an even-handed, a valiant attempt to defend the indefensible but what I got instead was a book that totally misrepresents science with the purpose of elevating Christian faith. Clearly this author felt the need to resort to such tactics because faith can't stand on its own. I'm open-minded enough to listen to opposing views, on the other hand, I will not put up with blatant misrepresentations of the facts. The misrepresentation of Evolution is a total disappointment. This author went out of his way to LIE about evolution, what a shame! If you want to read about apologetics please go elsewhere, hopefully you will find someone who has the decency to represent the opposition without resorting to lies and misrepresentations. I was ashamed for the author.
Further suggestions: "The Fallacy of Fine-Tuning..." by Victor J. Stenger, "50 Reasons People Give for Believing in a God" Guy P. Harrison, "The God Debates: A 21st Century Guide for Atheists and Believers" for John R. Shook, "Can We Be Good Without God?..." By Robert Buckman, "Bible Thumper to Atheist" by Tom Crawford, "Society without God" by Phil Zuckerman, "Why I am Not Christian" by Richard Carrier, "The Invention of the Jewish People" by Shlomo Sand, "Man Made God..." by Barbara G. Walker, "God and the Burden of Proof" by Keith M. Parsons, "God?: A Debate between a Christian and an Atheist" by William Lane Craig, "Decoding the Language of God..." by George C. Cunningham and "Why I Became an Atheist" by John W. Loftus.