I try not to fall into the trap/cliché of “judging a book by its cover,” but this book has self-refutation literally written all over it. Take for example, this excerpt from page 12,
There truly is no argument for God that is capable of bearing the weight of his existence. Things that operate within the realm of human reason bear the fingerprints of human inventors.
Lots of problems with this.
First, that sounds to me like someone giving…wait for it…an argument for God. Specifically, it sounds like a human inventor who says we in fact can’t make an argument for or about God because He has some sort of “weight” to His existence. But isn’t there implicit in that statement that an argument for or about God? So then, if the statement is true, then it is false. It contradicts itself. Besides that, shouldn’t red flags be going up whenever someone gives reasons to argue against the use of reason?
Second, though it may be true that we do not have exhaustive knowledge of God, we can still have true knowledge of Him nonetheless. Is it not possible that God could reveal Himself to us, or is that beyond His ability? Is it also not possible that God Himself has endowed us with reason to use as a tool to be able to apprehend some truths about Him? How does the author conclude that reason is merely a human construct?
Third, to say that Christianity is irrational–if by that one means it is truly illogical–does not take the Christian worldview seriously because it ignores the tremendous heritage of thoughtful believers who have answered tough questions like the ones raised in this book (e.g. How is the Christian idea of the atonement logical?).
In my view, the Christian faith is eminently reasonable, and in fact, Christians are instructed in Scripture to give reasons for their faith (1 Peter 3:15).
After browsing through this book a bit further on Amazon and CBD, I’ve seen enough to safely say that it is not on my wishlist.