I feel bad for all you who come and read my very boring blog. It isn't that I haven't wanted to post anything - it's that I don't have anything amusing or interesting to say.
The Case for Christ kind of got me interested in apologetics, so I thought I'd start slowly. My sister taught this big apologetics class at her church - Ken Ham and Josh McDowell evidentialist (I think is what its called - or classical? You smart people can tell me) stuff. We've, of course, become convinced of the Reformed view of Christianity which seems to really push presuppositional apologetics (Van Til) which I have no understanding of whatsoever. Anyway, this is all to explain that I picked up two books on apologetics. The first is Five Views on Apologetics which looks like they had five experts write about what their specific field of apologetics means and how it works. You would think I'd start with this one, but no, I started with the second - Letters from a Skeptic. I picked this one up because Strobel interviewed Boyd for The Case for Christ and recommended this book. Unfortunately, I am not enjoying it very much. I find Boyd's reasoning to be interesting and obviously it was convincing for his father, but I don't agree with his thoughts that God limited his power or that He doesn't know the future. I am going to try and finish it, but I might set it down instead because the arguments he is using, though convincing, are not arguments I'd use because of doctrinal differences. Now I'm feeling kind of snotty because he's a professional, educated theologian and I'm practically dismissing him. He's also a brother in Christ, so I certainly don't mean to kick him, I just don't necessarily agree.