Cathy Cooper's Reviews > On Guard: Defending Your Faith with Reason and Precision

On Guard by William Lane Craig
Rate this book
Clear rating

's review
Apr 13, 2011

did not like it
Read on April 13, 2011

Dr. Craig mentions in his book that if Christians have good arguments in support of their faith, they are less apt to become quarrelsome or upset. Hmmm....this is very telling. I guess Christians did not have very good arguments during the Dark Ages, and when Christians took over the Americas from the Indians. Why didn't they use their "arguments" then too, instead of the rack, or the noose, or the rifle, and so forth?? Well...when they got to Africa, and explained Christianity to the natives, the Africans laughed at them, so I assume when that did not work, their arguments consisted of a very sharp blade and/or a tight noose. Even today, the classic Christian arguments fail to prove god exists or that Jesus is god, but that hasn't stopped them.

Dr. Craig mentions in his book that he is afraid that secularists are "bent on eliminating religion from the public square." This is far from the truth, as I welcome public debate. This is how people learn how to become critical thinkers, which prevents them from becoming the "sitting ducks" that Craig talks about.

Dr. Craig also states that "A person who has been raised in a culture that is sympathetic to the Christian faith will be open to the gospel in a way that a person brought up in a secular culture will not. For a person who is thoroughly secularized, you may as well tell him to believe in fairies or leprechaun as in jesus Christ!"

Ahh....Dr. Craig does seem to be aware of cultural relativism, and that this does not just apply to Christianity, or to secularism, but to Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, and so on. But, if I use Dr. Craig as an example, I can say with almost certainty that if he moved to India, I doubt he would adopt Hinduism, and the Hindus would feel the same way about him that Craig now feels towards "secularists." It goes both ways.

Dr. Craig's also states that his experience with professors who may be very knowledgeable in their area of specialization, is that they are almost clueless when it comes to the evidence for Christianity.

I highly doubt the professors were clueless to the evidence--because there is no evidence! This is why Christians have FAITH, as faith is belief WITHOUT evidence. Dr. Craig is misrepresenting his "faith" by making such a claim.

Dr. Craig explains how distraught he is at the amount of young people dropping out of religion, and goes on to explain one of the reasons why. You see, according to Dr. Craig, the churches these days are focused on "...emotional worship experiences, felt needs, and entertainment. It's no wonder they become sitting ducks for that teacher or professor who RATIONALLY takes aim at their faith. In high school and college, students are intellectually assaulted with every manner of non-Christian philosophy conjoined with an overwhelming relativism and skepticism."

Students of all ages should be taught philosophy and logic in particular in order to be critical thinkers. They should not just be taught Christian philosophy, but all of philosophy, including the philosophy of religion, and world religion courses. In college, students do not learn the "Sunday School" version of religion believers are familiar with--they learn it academically, which is much different. Remember what I said earlier, in that the arguments for the existence of any gods or goddesses have been refuted, so when someone is exposed to RATIONAL thought and ideas, the fallacies in the arguments are more likely to become clearer, which is one reason why people loose their faith. Furthermore, when they are provided with all the information they would get if they were going to seminary to become priests or preachers,and so on, this too would lead to skepticism. This is exactly what happens to many students when the study at seminary--they become disillusioned, and many "loose their Jesus"

Also remember,there is NO evidence--just faith--even if Dr. Craig attempts to say otherwise. Dr. Craig believes that skepticism is not a good thing, as it leads to loss of faith--but if skepticism were not a good thing, we would still be in the Dark Ages. It is when one questions everything they do not understand, and they are taught to think logically and critically, that things become more clearly understood--which is something Christians want to avoid. Their bible does not meet the standards for historicity, and is not "evidence" of anything. It is, in fact, a book of myths--largely plagiarized myths--with a bit of historical reference thrown in. Just imagine if you will the Jews, who were nomads and slaves, and never had an empire of their own. They adopted gods and traditions of their slave masters, and other groups, and created their own god, based on other gods. The Jews have also admitted to embellishing the text, so it cannot be deemed reliable.

As a side note, Yahweh did say that he would "destroy the wisdom of the wise" (1Cor1:19) So far though, I would say Yahweh is rather impotent in this regard (and many others), as the number of "wise" people keeps growing.

I recommend not wasting time or money on this book unless you favor indoctrination over education.

6 likes · flag

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read On Guard.
Sign In »

Reading Progress

02/15/2016 marked as: read

Comments (showing 1-8 of 8) (8 new)

dateDown arrow    newest »

Alex Stroshine Your review doesn't actually seem to discuss any of Dr. Craig's evidences for God (e.g. the Kalam Cosmological Argument). Instead, it simply serves as a rant against Dr. Craig.

Mark Hawker I fail to see what any of this has to do with the book. Maybe less of the straw men and ad hominems in the next review?

message 3: by Nathan (new)

Nathan You guys, this is obviously Cathy's way of avoiding critical thought. This rant was for her, not for any potential reader. Oh, and one point, a MAJOR reason Europe escaped the dark age was the Catholic church, hence its major influence in politics during and after. (I know that was probably a more figurative reference)

Brian Chilton I have to agree that Cathy's review holds serious ad hominem attacks. She claims that there is no evidence. How did she not see evidence in "On Guard" if she truly read it as she claims? By the way, Cathy makes an error claiming the personal name of God "Yahweh" is used in the New Testament. Also, the text shows that God uses those of His own to destroy the wisdom of those against His cause...not that God destroy wisdom. I think this is shown to be true in this review as well as in John Lennox's debates with Richard Dawkins. Praying that you become open to the truth.

Jehsa I hope you really read the whole book, not just the sample pages provided by bookstores online.

Peter Kalam has been debunked and easily so. WLC's ridiculous use of the pascal wager error is awful. The number of errors, lies and frankly poor thinking in this awful book are nauseating.

Jesse Consider this, if Craig is ignorant of reality and his arguments are as bad as you say they are, why are you so hostile towards him and Theism? If God doesn't exist why dost Thou fret? Being hostile towards a non existent being is a waste of breath and nonsensical.

message 8: by Paulwp (new)

Paulwp Cathy, are there any books defending the Christian faith that you appreciate for their logic and writing style? You're review seems to be against Christian Apologetics as a whole rather than against a particular author. Are you saying that any defense of the Christian religion is illogical and off base? If you are more balanced in your thinking than that and open to opposing ideas please clarify your comments.

back to top