Scan barcode
elemenoreed's review against another edition
3.0
This book was a really good basic overview of some big objections to God in the Old Testament. This book is really approachable (as in, not dry and boring and full of pretentious language) and the points come across clearly and comprehensibly. The author includes suggested reading at the end of each chapter and it's a good thing he does because he brings up a lot of points on which I would have liked him to go into further depth. And in the instances when this would happen, he kind of played off the glancing notice of a topic with, "This argument is really too big to go into very much detail here..." which I found quite frustrating at times. Ultimately, this book provided a lot of food for thought and would be great for anyone just getting into apologetics.
abiggal's review against another edition
informative
reflective
slow-paced
2.0
Despite this being written towards believers (I would not give an atheist this book) the tone is still defensive, slightly bitter, and sometimes childish. I have heard better arguments on almost every topic, and the author would chose one position and refuse to acknowledge any possibility that another could be correct, even in conjunction. Finally, while the book felt long and often rambling, it still left some questions unanswered, at least to their completion.
labarrec's review against another edition
3.0
Understanding some of the stranger parts of the Old Testament is ROUGH.
codywhom's review
1.5
"Is God a Moral Monster?": "No, because he's God."
Discussions of some aspects of Mosaic law were covered pretty nicely and helped me to develop understanding that I didn't have before – clean and unclean animals, corporal and capital punishment, for example. But a lot of this book leans heavily into the idea that the justification for any and all of the difficult events and commands found in the Old Testament come back around to the same, simple idea – that God is God, and God is infallible. To a person coming from a background that has already accepted this as fact, sure, this argument is just fine. But I can't say that Copan provided any deeper understanding of the "Canaanite question", the subject I was most interested in coming into this book. Disappointing at best; hair-pullingly frustrating at worst.
Discussions of some aspects of Mosaic law were covered pretty nicely and helped me to develop understanding that I didn't have before – clean and unclean animals, corporal and capital punishment, for example. But a lot of this book leans heavily into the idea that the justification for any and all of the difficult events and commands found in the Old Testament come back around to the same, simple idea – that God is God, and God is infallible. To a person coming from a background that has already accepted this as fact, sure, this argument is just fine. But I can't say that Copan provided any deeper understanding of the "Canaanite question", the subject I was most interested in coming into this book. Disappointing at best; hair-pullingly frustrating at worst.
More...