Dr Paul Allen

Image via Wikipedia King David seems like a mystery at times. At least to me he does. On the one hand, he is a man after God ’s own heart. He was the “Lord is my shepherd” guy. God was so pleased with David that he made an everlasting covenant with him, promising him that one of his descendants would be on the throne forever. Spiritually speaking, David had everything going for him. On the other hand, David had some pretty nasty flaws. He seduced Bathsheba and murdered Uriah. He would have killed Nabal if Nabal’s wife, Abigail hadn’t stepped in. Then, after Nabal died David decided to marry Abigail. Which seems like a happy ending until you remember that David already had a wife. By the end of his life David actually had several wives. So what’s the deal? Why did God allow David to have multiple wives? Why didn’t God punish David for his polygamy? Did God approve of David’s polygamy? These kind of questions can make the Old Testament seem really confusing. In his book,

Image via Wikipedia How did this book come about for you? Like any philosopher of religion, I’ve followed the new atheist movement with interest.  But after reading   numerous responses   from Christian apologists , I noticed a conspicuous lack of attention to the moral-psychological roots of atheism.  Given that the biblical writers emphasize this dimension of unbelief, I thought someone needed to address it. How does this book uniquely contribute to critiques of atheism and the “new atheism”? Most Christian apologists’ responses to the new atheists challenge their arguments and reveal the many fallacies in their objections to religious faith.  This is helpful, of course, and I applaud the work of Ravi Zacharias ,   Alister McGrath ,   Dinesh D’Souza ,   Paul Copan ,   William Lane Craig ,   Tim Keller , and others for their superb contributions to the debate.  What they so well demonstrate is that atheism is not the consequence of any lack of evidence for God.  So the question natur

Image via Wikipedia How did this book come about for you? Like any philosopher of religion, I’ve followed the new atheist movement with interest.  But after reading   numerous responses   from Christian apologists , I noticed a conspicuous lack of attention to the moral-psychological roots of atheism.  Given that the biblical writers emphasize this dimension of unbelief, I thought someone needed to address it. How does this book uniquely contribute to critiques of atheism and the “new atheism”? Most Christian apologists’ responses to the new atheists challenge their arguments and reveal the many fallacies in their objections to religious faith.  This is helpful, of course, and I applaud the work of Ravi Zacharias ,   Alister McGrath ,   Dinesh D’Souza ,   Paul Copan ,   William Lane Craig ,   Tim Keller , and others for their superb contributions to the debate.  What they so well demonstrate is that atheism is not the consequence of any lack of evidence for God.  So the question natur