The Case Against Christianity

by Michael Martin

In this systematic philosophical critique of the major tenets of Christianity, Michael Martin examines the semantic and epistemological bases of religious claims and beliefs. Beginning with a comparison and evaluation of the Apostles’ Creed, the Niceno-Chalcedonian Creed, and the Athanasian Creed, Martin discusses the principal theological, historical, and eschatological assumptions of Christianity. These include the historicity of Jesus, the Incarnation, the Second Coming, the Virgin Birth, the Resurrection, Salvation through faith in Jesus, and Jesus as a model of ethical behavior. Until now, an adequately convincing criticism of Christianity did not exist. Martin’s use of historical evidence, textual analysis, and interpretations by philosophers and theologians provides the strongest case made to date against the rational justification of Christian doctrines.
 

Genres: Philosophy, Religion, Atheism, Theology, Nonfiction, Christianity

256 pages, Paperback

First published December 1, 1991

Reviews

[Douglas · Rating 2 out of 5]

Michael Martin is at pains to demonstrate that there are no warrants, no justified reasons or coherent rationality, for holding to or affirming the beliefs of Christianity. All the way through his survey of the principle doctrines of Christianity (virgin birth, incarnation, miracles, resurrection, second coming, etc.), he seeks to demonstrate that there is no credible evidence for any of it, and therefore, at best, the belief structure of the religion is incoherent and conceptually problematic.

Martin is a philosopher whose approach to assessing the coherence and believeability of Christianity trades on privileging a certain type of rationality and a rather limited epistemology. On each doctrinal topic, he sets up as his foil the constructions of one or two scholars whose work he takes to represent the field, and then he critically dismantles these constructions by demonstrating the extent to which there are incoherencies, flaws, illogical moves, and implausible assumptions in them, i.e., the "problems" contained within each and across the spectrum of doctrinal beliefs as a whole.

The book is an interesting read, and if I was still teaching systematic theology in seminary I would have my students read it for one simple reason: He dismisses Christianity as unbelievable because his assumptions about epistemology and rationality reflect the same kind of predisposition to disbelief as he accuses Christians as holding in their predisposition to belief. Exploring and engaging warrants for belief are important, whether one is sympathetic for the subject or not.

[Sarah · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a book of philosophy. It discusses the logic of ideas rather than the actual tangible evidence for things. the author has some very interesting insights, but its hard to get through at times. It requires a lot of thought and careful reading to get the full benefit. I found myself looking up different philosophers online to fully understand what the author was saying,so I could compare the philosopher's actual words with the author's responses, and had to read some parts over again. It was very rewarding though, and had some interesting points. I would recommend it to anyone interested in philosophy and the study of religion from that viewpoint. People who have a background in philosophy would probably enjoy it a lot.

[Nicole · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'm not a philosopher, and I don't read much philosophy. Usually I read more popular-type books about atheism. I just wanted to say that I really enjoyed this book, but found it difficult when the author refers to other people's arguments without explaining them. This is obviously very common practice in writings meant for a professional audience (and students), but it makes it difficult for regular readers to follow, and since I bought this at Borders, I wasn't expecting it.

Still, I enjoyed it and it led to more readings in atheism.

[Wells Lyons · Rating 2 out of 5]

This was a disappointment. Any rational case against a major religion should have some sort of narrative flow, the marshalling of the best scientific evidence, an examination of theodicy. Dry logical statements and a rather bland critique of other scholarly works makes for boring reading. So many solid arguments were simply left unsaid.

[Mazen Alloujami · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very good philosophical study against Christianity. I said really philosophical, not ideological or historical, witch make it a little bit difficult to read by everyone.

[Caleb Ontiveros · Rating 2 out of 5]

I remember thinking this book was both dated, fairly reasonable and very lucid, but not especially insightful.

[Juan Pablo · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a book I think everyone should read. Believer or not, if you have doubts or are pretty confident in non-belief. It's good for information if you're unfamiliar with the historical details (or lack thereof) about Jesus, if he even existed. Martin sheds light on why things like the resurrection, virgin birth & divinity of Jesus are doubtful, are not unique concepts/myths & the problems they pose for the various things believed about him as well as a supposed all good, all knowing, all power god. Going beyond that, Martin also shows how shedding doubt on those things poses significant problems for the specifically Christian ethics & Salvation but also how they pose problems for Christian faith & tenants in general. It's a great book for a believer who may be open to a challenge to what they were raised to believe. It's a great book for someone doubting their faith or an agnostic or non-believer trying to learn as much of the facts as possible & gain a better understanding of what makes faith such a unfounded & fragile thing. I think it would be difficult to read this book & have one's faith remain intact. It's a book I recommend to all.

[Luís Branco · Rating 2 out of 5]

I am rather impressed by the author disbelief in the fundamental points of Christology. The writers make some assumptions based merely on logic and disregarding fundamental points of the Christian faith. In that respect are several hermeneutics and exegetical faults in his writing until this point, but I would highlight just a couple. He is mistaken and mislead by his version of the virgin birth of Christ, the text is very clear in this regard and undeniable: Mary declared that she was virgin (Luke 1:34), Joseph after his angelical experience agreed with her saying (Matthew 1:18-25); as for the author's indication that Mary wasn't a descendant of David, and therefore could not be registered in the census is another mistake, the English text is already clear (Luke 2:5). The Greek form 'com' συν, a preposition, that denotes an act performed together, thus, she did register herself in Bethelem along with Joseph. The author's reading of the second coming is similarly disastrous.

[Mark Gowan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Why three stars...
Dr. Martin is a superb philosopher in my view. But being a superb philosopher is not the same as being a great writer, and rightly so. Good philosophy usually cannot rely upon wonderful artistry and imaginative prose because of the nature of doing good philosophy. Martin makes solid arguments, using simple logic and dialectic. It works well, but it is a difficult read. Do the work that it takes to understand what is being argued and the payoff is great. But, don't do the work and the book becomes an impossible chore. Philosophy demands a meticulous study of any subject matter, but often in demanding that all stones be turned over, the act of turning stones over becomes overwhelming. This is a good book for someone who has a background in philosophy (especially logic and epistemology), but otherwise get ready to study!

[Jack · Rating 4 out of 5]

While trying to fill a rarely explored niche in philosophy, there is too much pedantic, overly subtle, and somewhat boring technical analysis in this book to make it a very readable text, even for philosophers. Nevertheless, there are some very interesting ideas (say, for instance, the idea the Jesus never actually existed) that are presented and defended in the book, and the authors heart is obviously in the right place.

[Alex · Rating 5 out of 5]

Better than anything by the New Atheists, for its views pro and con from Russell to Kierkegaard, Aquinas and Augustine. "Is Christianity ethical? Did Jesus exist? Incarnation? Birth canal a one-way-street? Problem of evil?" Fair, down-to-the-bones academic philosophy of religion. Truly dismantles Christianity, but not in a polemical way. Does not "insist upon itself." Does not propose further answers.