What do you think?
Rate this book
Reasons for Faith: Making a Case for the Christian Faith
Many Christians want to witness for their faith, but they are afraid they will not be able to answer questions that others may ask of them. First Peter 3:15 reminds believers to always be prepared to "make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you." Norman Geisler and Chad Meister realize the fear of facing questions about the Christian faith. Their book Reasons for Faith gives believers grounded biblical apologetics to help them defend their faith. By covering the importance of apologetics and then applying apologetics to popular culture and theological issues, these authors give all Christians the tools they need to stand firm in their faith and to be able to share that faith in today's society.
- GenresTheology
416 pages, Paperback
First published October 12, 2007
18 people are currently reading
96 people want to read
About the author
Norman L. Geisler
226 books319 followersNorman L. Geisler (PhD, Loyola University of Chicago) taught at top evangelical colleges and seminaries for over fifty years and was a distinguished professor of apologetics and theology at Veritas Evangelical Seminary in Murrieta, California. He was the author of nearly eighty books, including the Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics and Christian Ethics. He and his wife lived in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
April 15, 2008
It was hard to rate this book. Its chapters consist of various essays on various topics by various contributors. Some better than others. Some would get 1 star, others 4 stars.
The aim of this book is to honor Bob and Gretchen Passantino (Bob went to be with the Lord recently), and to make a case for the Christian faith.
I would say that they achieved the former, but the latter was lacking as representing a "case" for the Christian faith. Indeed, the best arguments in the book both admitted that they didn't prove the existence of the Christian God, and the supplementary chapters were insufficient in working to present a cumulative case argument.
With regards to Bob Passantino, his brother in-law E. Calvin Beisner wrote the main eulogy. Though it did honor Mr. Passantino, it seemed to reach a bit in places. Beisner's chapter painted the picture that he not only had the time to read a dozen books a week, but that he stayed up to 3 a.m. every morning discussing apologetics and theology with anyone and everyone. Not only that, his main work was done on the phone. People would call him all the time and he would talk with them for hours. Also, he was a regular frequenter of Christian book stores, talking with guests for hours at a time. On top of that he had time to be a great husband. I understand his brother-in-law loved him, and I did gain a lot of respect for Passantino's life, but this chapter seemed, maybe rightfully so, to embellish things a bit. A benefit, and it was an intended benefit, was that this chapter does help one to focus what some of the virtues an apologist should have and/or seek to foster.
Another problem was that the chapter on Mormonism was rather weak. It remembered the debate Bob Passantino and Van Gorden had at Biola against two Mormons as Bob's "crowning moment." If this was his "crowning moment" I think more should have went into this chapter. There was a lot of filler that didn't have much to do with teh debate or Mormonism at all. And the discussion of the debate itself only briefly hi-lighted answers Bob gave to the Mormons. Besides that, I thought the majority of the chapters on the cults, which was Bob's speciality, was a bit underwhelming.
I thought Moreland's Chapter on Truth and Postmodernism, Corduan's chapter on the (Thomistic) Cosmological Argument, Choi's chapter on the Transcendental Argument For God's Existence TAG (this chapter critiques the TAG, so tagsters looking for positive endorsement will be dissapointed), and Geivett's chapter on God and the Evidence of Evil were very good indeed. I'd have to say that Part 3 (Defending Christian Theism) was the best of the book's 4 parts.
Particularly enjoyable, for me at least, was Alan Gome's chapter on The Value of Historical Theology for Apologetics. I think he exposed a weak area in my overall apologetic arsenal, and also instilled a lot of interest in the topic of Historical Theology for me. I think I'll read a few books on that this year.
One other chapter deserves special mention. It was the postscript by Groothuis on A Manifesto for Christian Apologetics: Nineteen Theses to Shake the World with the Truth. Groothuis fires away in rapid succession 19 theses which serve to "ignite the holy fire of apologetic passion and action." He addresses the biblical mandate to be prepared to defend the Christian faith as well as how the apologist should go about doing so. Given his theses statements, he indicts myriad institutions and mindsets which seek to downplay the role of apologetics.
Over all this was a good book. I wouldn't recommend it as a first time apologetics manual as you will be left insufficiently prepared, and some of it will be over your head and requires background knowledge in order to sufficiently profit from the reading.
The aim of this book is to honor Bob and Gretchen Passantino (Bob went to be with the Lord recently), and to make a case for the Christian faith.
I would say that they achieved the former, but the latter was lacking as representing a "case" for the Christian faith. Indeed, the best arguments in the book both admitted that they didn't prove the existence of the Christian God, and the supplementary chapters were insufficient in working to present a cumulative case argument.
With regards to Bob Passantino, his brother in-law E. Calvin Beisner wrote the main eulogy. Though it did honor Mr. Passantino, it seemed to reach a bit in places. Beisner's chapter painted the picture that he not only had the time to read a dozen books a week, but that he stayed up to 3 a.m. every morning discussing apologetics and theology with anyone and everyone. Not only that, his main work was done on the phone. People would call him all the time and he would talk with them for hours. Also, he was a regular frequenter of Christian book stores, talking with guests for hours at a time. On top of that he had time to be a great husband. I understand his brother-in-law loved him, and I did gain a lot of respect for Passantino's life, but this chapter seemed, maybe rightfully so, to embellish things a bit. A benefit, and it was an intended benefit, was that this chapter does help one to focus what some of the virtues an apologist should have and/or seek to foster.
Another problem was that the chapter on Mormonism was rather weak. It remembered the debate Bob Passantino and Van Gorden had at Biola against two Mormons as Bob's "crowning moment." If this was his "crowning moment" I think more should have went into this chapter. There was a lot of filler that didn't have much to do with teh debate or Mormonism at all. And the discussion of the debate itself only briefly hi-lighted answers Bob gave to the Mormons. Besides that, I thought the majority of the chapters on the cults, which was Bob's speciality, was a bit underwhelming.
I thought Moreland's Chapter on Truth and Postmodernism, Corduan's chapter on the (Thomistic) Cosmological Argument, Choi's chapter on the Transcendental Argument For God's Existence TAG (this chapter critiques the TAG, so tagsters looking for positive endorsement will be dissapointed), and Geivett's chapter on God and the Evidence of Evil were very good indeed. I'd have to say that Part 3 (Defending Christian Theism) was the best of the book's 4 parts.
Particularly enjoyable, for me at least, was Alan Gome's chapter on The Value of Historical Theology for Apologetics. I think he exposed a weak area in my overall apologetic arsenal, and also instilled a lot of interest in the topic of Historical Theology for me. I think I'll read a few books on that this year.
One other chapter deserves special mention. It was the postscript by Groothuis on A Manifesto for Christian Apologetics: Nineteen Theses to Shake the World with the Truth. Groothuis fires away in rapid succession 19 theses which serve to "ignite the holy fire of apologetic passion and action." He addresses the biblical mandate to be prepared to defend the Christian faith as well as how the apologist should go about doing so. Given his theses statements, he indicts myriad institutions and mindsets which seek to downplay the role of apologetics.
Over all this was a good book. I wouldn't recommend it as a first time apologetics manual as you will be left insufficiently prepared, and some of it will be over your head and requires background knowledge in order to sufficiently profit from the reading.
May 27, 2024
A SERIES OF ESSAYS EXPLAINING AND DEFENDING “EVIDENTIALIST” APOLOGETICS
The authors wrote in the Preface of this 2007 book, “Our goal for this book is twofold: first, we wish it to be an effective tool for bolstering the faith of Christians and building the faith of seekers; second, we desire that it honor Bob Passantino and Gretchen Passantino Coburn… The Bible makes it clear that as Christians we are to ‘always be prepared to give an answer’ for our faith… Such an answer make take a variety of forms and styles… Neverthelsss, the ability to give reasons for faith---solid, rational and powerful reasons---should be part and parcel of the follower of Jesus Christ. In this book we have included leading Christian apologists, philosophers, and theologians and have covered some of the most important and pressing issues of our day related to giving answers to the Christian faith… Providing reasons and evidences for faith, however, is only one part of Christian apologetics. The MANNER in which these reasons are presented is just as important as their content…”
John Warwick Montgomery rejects “the conservative tendency to think that the best apologetic strategy consists of showing that Christian affirmations are indeed philosophically ‘meaningful,’ i.e., not irrational or technical nonsensical. One of the most influential and important Christian philosophers of our time [i.e., William Lane Craig] has succeeded in showing, for example, that the existence of evil is not logically incompatible with the existence of an omnipotent, omniscient Deity. Fine! But logical possibility is hardly the same as de facto existence! There is nothing LOGICALLY absurd in a claim that the Big Bang was the product of a Divine Burp, but that hardly means that such occurred. There is no substitute for evidence in our defense of the faith.” (Pg. 44)
Norman Geisler argues, “What makes a doctrine essential?... It must be a doctrine connected to our salvation… It must undergird the gospel, which is essential to salvation…. That is to say, salvation as God has revealed it would not be possible without this being true… Obviously, the Trinity, the deity of Christ, and his atoning death and bodily resurrection are all necessary for our salvation… both by the underlying doctrine of Christ’s sinlessness and by its nature as a supernatural sign, the virgin birth was a divinely appointed necessity for our salvation.” (Pg. 98-99)
Chad Meister critiques Open Theism: “One of the most difficult issues for Openness proponents is the long list of biblical prophecies that appear to clearly entail God’s knowing the future… One of the central elements of Openness theology is a strong view of the freedom of the human will… But the view that our actions are DETERMINED by our character is contrary to a libertarian view of free will… It seems that Openness theologians make a hermeneutical mistake similar to the Mormon error when they take as literalisms passages in the Bible that were meant to be anthropomorphisms. God doesn’t literally need to test people to see that they will do before he knows it.” (Pg. 194-195, 197)
Sean Choi critiques Greg Bahnsen’s version of the Transcendental Argument for God [TAG]: “Bahnsen’s TAG basically [asserts]… it Christian theism is false, then there is no rational justification for the laws of logic… But establishing the truth of [this proposition] turned out to be a difficult matter… No one sympathetic to Bahnsen’s TAG has yet provided any good reason against believing that [there may be a worldview distinct from Christian theism which would provide a sufficient justification for the laws of logic].” (Pg. 242-243)
R. Douglas Geivett says of the Problem of Evil, “It is logically possible that a morally perfect God has a morally sufficient reason for permitting all of the evils that exist. The objector does not know that it is not possible that God has a morally justifiable reason for allowing every instance of suffering. What the absolute moral perfection of God actually implies is not that God must absolutely prevent evil, but that if God permits evil there must be some moral justification for his permission of it. Notice, the theist is not required to KNOW the specific ‘morally sufficient reasons’ that would justify God’s permission of evil… it is enough that the availability of morally sufficient reasons is a LOGICAL POSSIBILITY.” (Pg. 259-260)
Douglas Groothuis notes in the Postscript, “The commonly heard canard, ‘No one comes to Christ through arguments,’ is patently false. Many people, such as the apologists C.S. Lewis and John Warwick Montgomery, were drawn to the gospel through apologetic arguments… Not all Christian teachers are equally gifted in apologetics, and some will emphasize this discipline more than others; but none should minimize the necessity of apologetics or preach around it when the biblical text requires otherwise.” (Pg. 405)
This detailed and “in-depth” book will be of great interest to those seriously studying apologetics.
The authors wrote in the Preface of this 2007 book, “Our goal for this book is twofold: first, we wish it to be an effective tool for bolstering the faith of Christians and building the faith of seekers; second, we desire that it honor Bob Passantino and Gretchen Passantino Coburn… The Bible makes it clear that as Christians we are to ‘always be prepared to give an answer’ for our faith… Such an answer make take a variety of forms and styles… Neverthelsss, the ability to give reasons for faith---solid, rational and powerful reasons---should be part and parcel of the follower of Jesus Christ. In this book we have included leading Christian apologists, philosophers, and theologians and have covered some of the most important and pressing issues of our day related to giving answers to the Christian faith… Providing reasons and evidences for faith, however, is only one part of Christian apologetics. The MANNER in which these reasons are presented is just as important as their content…”
John Warwick Montgomery rejects “the conservative tendency to think that the best apologetic strategy consists of showing that Christian affirmations are indeed philosophically ‘meaningful,’ i.e., not irrational or technical nonsensical. One of the most influential and important Christian philosophers of our time [i.e., William Lane Craig] has succeeded in showing, for example, that the existence of evil is not logically incompatible with the existence of an omnipotent, omniscient Deity. Fine! But logical possibility is hardly the same as de facto existence! There is nothing LOGICALLY absurd in a claim that the Big Bang was the product of a Divine Burp, but that hardly means that such occurred. There is no substitute for evidence in our defense of the faith.” (Pg. 44)
Norman Geisler argues, “What makes a doctrine essential?... It must be a doctrine connected to our salvation… It must undergird the gospel, which is essential to salvation…. That is to say, salvation as God has revealed it would not be possible without this being true… Obviously, the Trinity, the deity of Christ, and his atoning death and bodily resurrection are all necessary for our salvation… both by the underlying doctrine of Christ’s sinlessness and by its nature as a supernatural sign, the virgin birth was a divinely appointed necessity for our salvation.” (Pg. 98-99)
Chad Meister critiques Open Theism: “One of the most difficult issues for Openness proponents is the long list of biblical prophecies that appear to clearly entail God’s knowing the future… One of the central elements of Openness theology is a strong view of the freedom of the human will… But the view that our actions are DETERMINED by our character is contrary to a libertarian view of free will… It seems that Openness theologians make a hermeneutical mistake similar to the Mormon error when they take as literalisms passages in the Bible that were meant to be anthropomorphisms. God doesn’t literally need to test people to see that they will do before he knows it.” (Pg. 194-195, 197)
Sean Choi critiques Greg Bahnsen’s version of the Transcendental Argument for God [TAG]: “Bahnsen’s TAG basically [asserts]… it Christian theism is false, then there is no rational justification for the laws of logic… But establishing the truth of [this proposition] turned out to be a difficult matter… No one sympathetic to Bahnsen’s TAG has yet provided any good reason against believing that [there may be a worldview distinct from Christian theism which would provide a sufficient justification for the laws of logic].” (Pg. 242-243)
R. Douglas Geivett says of the Problem of Evil, “It is logically possible that a morally perfect God has a morally sufficient reason for permitting all of the evils that exist. The objector does not know that it is not possible that God has a morally justifiable reason for allowing every instance of suffering. What the absolute moral perfection of God actually implies is not that God must absolutely prevent evil, but that if God permits evil there must be some moral justification for his permission of it. Notice, the theist is not required to KNOW the specific ‘morally sufficient reasons’ that would justify God’s permission of evil… it is enough that the availability of morally sufficient reasons is a LOGICAL POSSIBILITY.” (Pg. 259-260)
Douglas Groothuis notes in the Postscript, “The commonly heard canard, ‘No one comes to Christ through arguments,’ is patently false. Many people, such as the apologists C.S. Lewis and John Warwick Montgomery, were drawn to the gospel through apologetic arguments… Not all Christian teachers are equally gifted in apologetics, and some will emphasize this discipline more than others; but none should minimize the necessity of apologetics or preach around it when the biblical text requires otherwise.” (Pg. 405)
This detailed and “in-depth” book will be of great interest to those seriously studying apologetics.
June 13, 2014
This book is a multi-author volume dedicated to Christian apologetics. Like a lot of similar multi-author works, it serves only as an introduction to various topics. One would do better to read books dedicated to one topic. For example, Scott Klusendorf has a chapter on abortion in this book, and Francis Beckwith has a chapter on politics. One would do better to read the former's "The Case for Life" and the latter's "Politics for Christians." Some chapters felt like duds. The better ones were J. P. Moreland's chapter on postmodernism, a chapter debunking "The Da Vinci Code," and some chapters devoted to cults like Mormonism and Oneness Pentecostalism. Since there are many other books on apologetics that are both superior and more detailed, I wouldn't recommend this one.
July 31, 2012
Great for the Christian philosopher.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews