Book Review: 5 Crucial Questions about Christianity by Tom Short

Reviewed by: JoeActor

To begin, I’d like to cite the author’s web site where more information on this book can be found:
click here

My review is split into sections that match the original book. They are hopefully concise and incitefull. They represent my impressions as I read the book, and information from any research I performed. Any direct quotes from the book will be in italics for ease of distinction.

In researching the book, I had difficulty finding any reviews online. Aside from the author’s site I only found one other site, where a very detailed rebuttal of the book can be found. It is written by Jacob Spinney and can be found here:
click here

My opinion on this rebuttal is that, although a bit lopsided, it does have many compelling points to offer. I thank the Jacob for being so detailed in his writing endeavor.

And now, on to my section-by-section review - enjoy!

Introduction (p. 4-8)

In the introduction, the author equates “faith” with “trust”. The two are often confused, but here’s my simple rule of thumb: “faith” requires no proof, whereas “trust” is often based on past experience. Let’s use the author’s example of a burning building and firemen to illustrate…

The author posits that you’re in a burning building on the 10th floor. “Faith” that you can fly will not enable you to do so, but “trust” in jumping toward the fireman’s net would save your life. So, why are the two different? You “trust” the firemen because of your prior knowledge and experience of them. You have enough knowledge of their job to make an informed decision prior to jumping.

To quote the book: All the faith in the world won’t enable you to fly. I contend that this isn’t the kind of faith that God wants you to have. This kind of “faith” really is stupid…

I’m not sure how he makes a distinction between “stupid” faith, and the faith “God wants you to have”. After all, Jesus himself says in the bible: If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you. (Mathew 17:20) Faith can move mountains, so by comparison, flying should be a snap!

Based on the fireman example, the rest of the author’s introduction simply does not hold water. All of it is based on confusing “faith” (no proof needed) with “trust” (prior experience or knowledge).

Question 1: Is there really evidence that God exists? (p. 10-19)

This chapter opens with a retelling of an anecdotal story about a professor admonishing his Christian students about their belief in God. The professor tells them if they can’t see, touch, hear or taste God, he doesn’t exist. One plucky student informs the professor that since he can’t see, touch, hear or taste his brain, then it must not exist.

He then continues the analogy with a section entitled A “no-brainer” where he asks such questions as: Have you ever seen an atom? How about gravity? and so on…

I don’t like to attirbute intent, but it certainly seems like the author is trying to confuse us yet again. This time around it’s confusing “faith” with “observable evidence”. I may have “faith” that God exists, but I have “observable evidence” of atoms, gravity, wind, radio waves, etc. Although I cannot see any of them, I can construct devices that allow me to use my 5 senses to measure and quantify each of them. The same cannot be said of God. There is no device capable of measuring or determining the existence of God, aside from “faith”, that is…

The next section entitled Where did it all come from? pulls out the old creationist mantra of “the watchmaker”. If you haven’t visited the TalkOrigins site yet, here’s a link to a page that deals with this issue much better than I could:
click here

As he continues with the section Cosmic proportions, he start by omitting a crucial part of a quote by Francis Crick. The omitted portion changes the intent of the quote from one that is intended to support natural selection to one that seems to indicate that life would be impossible without intervention. Intentionally or not, this is misleading.

Here, the author is confusing “random chance” with “natural selection” - a common mistake made by those who do not understand the process of evolution, or mathematical statistics.

He then goes on to quote misleading statistics from Sir Frederick Hoyle (astrophysicist, not a biologist), and to misquote Roger Penrose to further support his position.

And, once again, he falls back on a tired old mantra of creationism with the statement Does chaos + time = order?. This is the old “entropy” argument, where the claim is that since entropy states that systems become more disordered with time, then evolution is not possible. The crucial part left out is that this applies to closed systems only. The earth’s environment is not a closed system - we have a constant influx of energy from the sun. More information on this can be found here:
click here

My final comment on this chapter (whew!) has to do with the section Speaking of athiests… Here the author supposes that of three possible positions (Theism, Agnosticism, and Atheism), that Atheism is not a logical position. Surprisingly I agree… but not for the same reasons. Of the three, Atheism is a negative hypothesis, which can never be proven, Theism (of the “I know what God is like” kind) is also unprovable due to it’s super-natural nature. The only honest position is Agnosticism or “I don’t know”.

The author also assumes that Agnostics cannot be Theists or Atheists. This is just not the case. I myself am an Agnostic Theist. I believe there is a Supreme being of some sort, but I do not claim to “know” or “define” that entity.

Much of this section is based on Pascal’s Wager. There is a detailed analysis from a religous perspective here:
click here

Question 2: Isn’t the Bible just another book? (p. 20-33)

Ok, sorry, but this book just has too many points to cover in a simple blog.
From here forward, I will put a summary per chapter of my thoughts.
Again, there is an excellent point-by-point rebuttal at:
click here

There’s no doubt about it. The bible does have some qualities that other books do not have. However, it is at best a flawed, self-contradicting mass of translated, edited, and pared-down by the church stories. At worst, it’s just clever fiction.

Does it have inspiring passages? Absolutely, as do other books. Can it be just as easily used for evil as good. Most certainly. What about predictions? Aren’t those true? Some are true, others not. And many of the true ones are vague or derivitive of earlier religons and texts.

Is it a consistant story inspired by God? Nope, not even close. There are a great number of inconsistencies. And as for “inspired by God”, if someone wrote a book today that they told you “God inspired me to write it”, that person would either be treated for a mental disorder, or be leading a group of people to visit a comet or drink kool-aid. Just because it’s old doesn’t make it true.

The author asks if he’s Just being gullible? Possibly. But more likely he’s just been misinformed or mislead and has not had the interest or courage to find the answers for himself. Instead he keeps going back to the same book to confirm that it is correct.

A good source for problems with the bible as a book is this site:
click here

Final answer for me: The bible is many things to many people… and it’s just a book. More important is what you do with the contents. A recent example would be the book “The DaVinci Code”. It has inspired many to look for the fictional issues it raises, even though the author and others have said it is just a work of fiction. Some will believe what they wish to be, irreguardless of the evidence.

Knowledge is power - arm yourselves.

Question 3: Don’t I determine what’s right for me? (p. 34-48)

The chapter starts out with the assumption that there are certain absolute “rights” and “wrongs”. I would agree, but see these as a very, very small set (less than ten?). Take for example, how much of a woman’s body may be exposed. What’s “right” in one country, is a punishable offence in another. Society determines most of what’s allowed, not the individual. The individuals make up society, and that’s their contribution to a shared set of morals. Now, if your society is limited to a particular religion, your set of rules is probably more restrictive (unless you’re a Morman!).

The remainder of this chapter is mostly about the “Ten Commandments”. My first question is: Which Ten Commandments? The popular ones are actually the second version of at least three! The first was verbal. The second set was smashed (remember Charleton Heston?), and the third version were another set of tablets. These survived to be put in the ark of the covenant. Here’s the third set taken from Exodus 34:14-26…
1. Thou shalt worship no other god (For the Lord is a jealous god).
2. Thou shalt make thee no molten gods.
3. The feast of unleavened bread shalt thou keep in the month when the ear is on the corn.
4. All the first-born are mine.
5. Six days shalt thou work, but on the seventh thou shalt rest.
6. Thou shalt observe the feast of weeks, even of the first fruits of the wheat harvest, and the feast of ingathering at the year’s end.
7. Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leavened bread.
8. The fat of my feast shall not remain all night until the morning.
9. The first of the first fruits of thy ground thou shalt bring unto the house of the Lord thy God.
10. Thou shalt not seethe a kid in its mother’s milk.

Boy howdy, it’s a good thing I’ve never boiled a baby goat in it’s mother’s milk! I’d be a goner for sure!

The point is, that even within the bible itself, there is quite a bit of confusion over what the commandments are. For a more detailed look at the variety of the “Ten Commandments” check out:
click here

As a final note on this chapter, there are scores of instances in the bible where evil acts are condoned, suggested or commanded by God, his son and followers. The bible as a moral guide? Hardly. Let’s take “Thou Shalt Not Murder”… unless they’re gay (Lev 20:13), had sex before marriage (women only - see: Deut 22:13-21), or one of the Amalekites (kill all of ‘em, men women and children - see: 1st Samuel 15:2-3)

Think you know the bible? Try this quiz:
click here

Question 4: Wasn’t Jesus just a great teacher? (p. 49-63)

Well, to start, the question makes a few assumptions. First, that Jesus existed. Second, he was a teacher. Third, an implied assumption that he was more.

This chapter’s “evidence” relies almost completely on biblical references. Self-referential evidence is no evidence at all.

Non-Christian sources for the existance of Jesus are scarce and even those are of a questionable nature. One oft-quoted one (Josephus) is widely believed to have been altered or possibly forged entirely. Another (Pliny the younger) is an account of what he was told by believers, not his own impressions. In later writings he equates Christianity to a foolish superstition. Others are mis-interpreted, or spotty references at best.

For a more detailed look at this subject see:
click here

As for Jesus, predictions, and miracles… all I can say is “Been there, done that!” Many of the attributes associated with Jesus have thier roots in earlier dieties such as Osiris, Dionysus, and Mithras. And plenty of other heros had histories like Jesus. Such things as virgin birth, son of god (Hercules, Thor, etc), and miracles are commonplace in many of our mythologies. The Hindu god Krishna has many of the same attributes to his stories.

“Ah, but this one is real!”… Uh, ok… if you say so…

Question 5: Isn’t being a Christian boring and limiting? (p. 64-71)

I’ll confess; I only skimmed this chapter.

Mainly because I know Christians. Boring? No reason they have to be. Limiting? Sure, it is limiting by its very nature. Choosing to be a Christian means limiting yourself to a set of beliefs that preclude others. By definition, it is limiting. So are many other religions.

Not a lot to say about this chapter, except that I think the author wasted one of his 5 questions…

Conclusion: The Most Important Question of All (p. 72-77)

Which is of course: Have you personally placed your faith in Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior?

No sir, I have not. And this book has not helped me to come to that conclusion in the least.

In the book’s Introduction Tom states “Christianity is a thinking person’s religion.” From the contents of this book, I can only see that as being the case if you can limit your knowledge to the bible and the church, and ignore much of what exists outside of them.

This final chapter is devoted to the usual circular logic of “The bible is the word of God because it says so in the bible…”. Considering the history, omissions, translations and inconsistencies in the bible, I do not think it is a very reliable source to bet your eternal soul on… if you have one that is.

There’s also a bit of “you’ll be rewarded if you believe” and “you’ll be punished if you don’t”.
It doesn’t matter to me if you show me a stick or a sugar cube.
I’m not a horse.
I’ll think for myself if you don’t mind…

Review Summary

All in all, I found the book thankfully short, and very disappointing. It brings up the same tired arguments that I’ve heard time and time again from those attempting to convert others to their way of “thinking”.

If you prefer to think for yourself, I have a few suggestions for you:

First: study the bible. You’ll be surprised at what you find. And by “study” I don’t mean just to read it. Look into it’s origins, history, strengths and weaknesses.

Second: study other religions. There are many views on the truth. The only way to see more of it is to take your head out of your own view and try to see as others do.

Third: Secular is not evil. Science has given us much over the centuries, both good and bad. You wouldn’t even be reading this if it weren’t for technology, and chances are that without modern medicine, many of you would be dead by now. Intelligence and logic are wonderful gifts. Ignoring them would seem to be like returning an un-opened gift. If you believe in God, cherish his gifts.

This thread is open to comments, and so am I…

Web Site Links to Resources
Author’s Web Site for the book: click here
Rebuttal Web Site: click here
Creation/Evolution Controversy: click here
Online Parallel Bible: click here
Promoting Religous Tolerance: click here
Arguments against creationism: click here
Skeptics Annotated Bible: click here
Bible Quiz: click here
Historicity of Jesus: click here