Review: Nailing down Jell-O; I hope no Christians try to use this book to assist their apologetics....
Rating: 2 out of 5
Date: 02 9, 2012
First, I'd like to qualify my review: I am a Believer, and I consider myself one who speaks with God and Jesus regularly in prayer, I serve in a church, and I read and know my Bible. So I am NOT rating this book poorly based on my feelings of "Christianity", instead of it's content.I rated it poorly because of its mechanics and purpose.I will tell you positives, enough to gain 2 stars:1. It's well put-together.2. The Author has done a lot of research. A lot.3. The Author's literary voice comes out strongly, and it's practiced, polished, and rational.4. The Author uses many sources to refer to, and uses Logic.The Problems come from the book's Premise:He likens the idea of "God" to the idea of "Gravity": How can a person choose to "believe" in God, like they don't choose to "believe" in Gravity?Well, Gravity is experienced in the womb. Gravity is quantifiable, measurable, able to be tested, and explained. One can use logic to denote its existence and predict its influence.God is not so easily quantified, measurable, tested, or explained. Kind of like trying to nail down Jell-O: energy and resources are wasted on something that will end up falling apart. He is neither provable, nor can you predict God. Put God in a box, and He will surprise you by still being outside of it, as well as part of the box.God is, for the bulk of Humanity, an Emotional force. He has Spiritual impact. (If this were not true, there would not be crying in church or joy at baptisms. Likewise, atheists would not get angry with Believers when they talk about God.) Therefore their concepts and language descriptors (for 99% of us) are in an emotional, esoteric space in our brains and character, regardless of whether or not we choose to believe. Logic is a different function of human intellect; Logic can NEVER assist Emotion. Use Logic with a crying Two-Year-Old. How far do you get? Nowhere.His presuppositions are misplaced. Example? Kindle Location 547, his presupposition is that all (or certainly a majority) scientists bias out God, in "Overcoming Evidence of Bias"; this section tries to point out that many scientists "rule God out before they start, then conclude He doesn't exist". He SAYS it, but doesn't GET it. It comes down to a matter of faith, do they believe or don't they? Then they go from there.Well, Duh. Science is all about ruling out EVERYTHING but specific, controlled differences between a sample (the Control part) and its variation (the Experiment part).For the true test to prove God's existence, you'd have to design an Experiment with particles that can detect the presence of God's influencing factors, set up a laboratory situation where NO God-Influence-Force particles can do their thing, contrasted against a different Lab where Any or ALL God-Influence-Force particles can do their thing.Ain't Gonna Happen. Since "GOD" is supposed to be EVERYWHERE, there could never be a situation (using Science's rules) to ever create a No-God place. And Vice-Versa: If there is NO God, then He wouldn't be ANYWHERE, therefore the God-Influence-Force would NEVER be present, and the experiment is a loss.Logic has been likened to a Knife: you "cut away" what is extra, to get down to the bones of the subject matter. First, Emotion continually changes. Spirit changes. They cannot be removed, cut out, negated, ruled out,  How people FEEL about God will never be convinced by ANY logic, because they can not be cut. The person is cut; they feel.Please, sir, reexamine your presuppositions.