|
Deepest Differences: A Christian-Atheist Dialogue by James W. Sire
My rating: 3 of 5 stars Deepest Differences is accurately titled. The book is made up of actual emails between two very different people. It is great to see how both James Sire and Carl Peraino talk to each other as friends and yet with passion to their points of view. James make is clear that his position is one of a biblical theist. I’m pretty certain that he is a theistic evolutionist so I don’t personally believe that he is consistent with the “biblical” part. However, to be fair James never says this and instead argues that logically you do not have to believe in creationism to believe in theism. James makes many good arguments but clearly respects the man at the other end of the email. Carl is clearly a naturalist who believes that evolution and social constructs explain the origin of life and the morals that rule our society. He has very little open mindedness to anything supernatural. I would believe that his pre-suppositions would cause him to reject even the most objective proof for a miracle or supernatural event. Again, Carl is quick to apologize when he feels his passion might offend his friend. I was able to learn quite a bit about the two viewpoints these men espoused but I would not recommend an email format for this purpose. It is way more efficient to read summary statements about these world views. The real value I see in this book is the opportunity to hear the passion and heart of a real person’s worldview and the example of respectful dialogue. You might think that this book is a debate but I would disagree. Every debate I am familiar with takes on the format of the following: One person states a position; the next person takes an opposite position and seeks to prove the validity of his view. There is little regard for the other person’s feelings, background or peripheral concerns that would be effected (possibly even devastated) by finding that his view might be wrong. Reality is that they do not focus on helping someone change their view as much as winning an argument. The two gentlemen in this book do argue passionately for their respective views but they clearly value the other person. I believe they could have done a better job of caring for the other person by becoming more concerned holistically with the other person rather than with just the viewpoint. By only discussing viewpoints they finally came to the position that there were DEEPEST DIFFERENCES that were irreconcilable and thus agreed to stop discussing those differences any further. I do recommend this book but not if you are specifically looking to learn how to argue either of these views. View all my reviews >>
|
Book Reviews 
