“I Don’t Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist,” written by apologetic gurus Norman Geisler and Frank Turek, is everything I expected and more. It has become one of my first turns in looking for apologetic answers.
It draws heavily upon C.S. Lewis’ masterpiece “Mere Christianity.” In that Lewis is quoted extensively and the organization of the book is laid out very similar to “Mere Christanity.” I would not consider it on par with Lewis, in that it does not break much new ground or give nearly as much quotable statements, but this is a perfect beginning to the realm of apologetics and provides the reader with significant intellectual support for the Christian faith.
What is one of the books strongest assests is also, at times, one of its weakest points. Geisler and Turek rip through weak philosophical arguments so rapidly that it can come off as dismissive. Maybe this was their point, but if I was someone reading the book from a different viewpoint I may feel more attacked than convinced.
Personally, I found the earlier sections dealing with the existence of God and the support of a monotheistic God to be much more informative and better written than the second half of the book dealing with the deity of Christ and the support of the Christian faith specifically. The first half, while dealing with significantly tougher topics was lightened up with humorous anecdotes and stories illustrating the absurdity of various philosophies. The second half abandoned many of those stories that gave the book its character through out the first half.
That being said, the book provides much needed ammo to Christians in the current battles over the legitimacy of the Christian faith and the intellectual basis for it. As I said, while they may come off as dismissive in some instances, it is merely because they so thoroughly dismantle philosophical arguments that they see no time in dwelling on a philosophy that is so evidently self-defeating.
The vast amount of ground to be covered in the novel also played a part in the seemingly dismissive attitude. It is difficult to dwell on a particular line of thinking when you are seeking to cover as much ground as Geisler and Turek did. Looking back over the book, I am amazed that they were able to squeeze so much into it.
While this may not obtain “masterpeice” status (which I am not sure Geisler and Turek set out to do), this book certainly does reach the level of “modern classic” in my view. Anyone seeking to bolster their apologetics library would do well to pick up this book.
I also issue a challenge to all those who may not hold to the traditional Christian worldview: read this book. Let it challenge your way of thinking. If you come away, still not convinced of the truth in Christianity, at least you have the opportunity to know why you believe what you believe and to better understand the rationale behind the 2,000 year old faith.
I would like to thank Mind & Media for providing me with the book.