Josh McDowell

Where was this book ten years ago?! Seriously! Normally I don't advocate for abstinence only education (stats prove that a well rounded sex-ed class decreases teen pregnancy drastically, schools that teach abstinence only generally have more pregnant teens and rampant STDs), but if this were the required reading I would definitely reconsider my stance. Unlike a lot of other books in this sub-genre, author Josh McDowell, doesn't just tell teens not to have pre-marital sex because God doesn't show more want them to, he talks about the science why. Now that is a way to get kids listening. Some of the statistics on STDs, birth control, and condoms were scary, even to me! I can't imagine what a teen would think (hopefully to wait a bit). Most teens aren't motivated solely by the bible, sometimes they need an extra push to do the right thing and this book definitely provides that. While their is a lot of Biblical tie-ins (this is a Christian sexuality book) that is the sole research McDowell uses. He sites studies from Planned Parenthood, the Kaiser foundation, Dr. Ruth, the CDC, and hundreds others. He really did his research and that shows! 19 out of 25 STDs aren't prevented by condoms, 80% of all woman will have HPV by the time they are 50, couples who co-habite before marriage have a higher chance of divorce than those who don't, and so on. Some of the statistics were really shocking!

If this book doesn't change your teens mind it will at least force them to think about the consequences of pre-marital sex. A must read for Christian teens, youth groups, and abstinence only education.

I received this book for free from Moody Publishing in return for my honest, unbiased opinion. show less

** I received this book free from Thomas Nelson's Booksneeze program in exchange for an honest review.**

I requested this book, nervous it would be too "traditional" for me, but strongly hoping it would be along my line of belief. I am one who strongly believes that to be Christian doesn't mean we must surrender our intellectualism, or as the author puts it "check our brains at the door"...

Sadly my hopes were squashed when, as I was reading, I had to accept that the more "traditional" line of show more thought is given in this book.

The author/s and I disagree greatly on issues like Universalism (I am a Christian Universalist), the Bible being "copied with precision" (as he claims on page 49 - I tend to agree more with Bart D. Ehrman on this subject), the nature/divinity of Jesus (I'm a Unitarian who rejects the divinity of Christ), the nature of the Bible (I don't see it as "the" Word of God complete, or as historical fact, and I don't believe that it was meant to be written as a history textbook - that doesn't mean I believe it is fiction, though), and the Resurrection (which I reject, while still believing Christianity can be meaningful without it), humanism (do the authors not realize there are Christian Humanists? I know I tend to be humanistic in my beliefs, and many other Christians do, too...) just to name a few.

Not only do I disagree with the author on these issues, but I felt that this book was too short and not comprehensive enough to really mean much. It was written for teenagers, I understand, but I felt it could have been a little more comprehensive, instead of just presenting the "myths" and disagreeing and then offering questions/Bible verses at the end of each, quite short, chapter... There wasn't any real evidence, other than using those Bible verses - and considering the difference in the way we understand the Bible, you can understand my not thinking that such "evidence" is enough to really make their point.

This was typical of the evangelical style, though, and was a lot less intellectual than I had hoped for. Apologetics, it seems, is often more concerned about making persuading arguments, in terms of at least seeming convincing, without really getting into the details or evidence, which is disappointing. I'd love a book from a traditional standpoint discussing Biblical Criticism (or any other issue), for example, even if I don't agree with typical traditional stances, if I were to find one that actually goes into the various examples and evidences, etc. I just don't feel that this style - or this book in particular - does that. They make their argument, support it with the Bible (and their interpretation/understanding of it), and move on...

So I'm kind of glad I'm finished with it, so I, too, can move on... ;)

(No offense intended, just not a book for me.) show less

This book is presented as an approachable and “friendly” apologetic (or explanatory) response to the furor around Dan Brown’s The Da Vinci Code. One can understand why since Brown claims in the preface that “all descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate.”

Whether by design or happenstance there are a number of similarities between the original Da Vinci Code and McDowell’s response; each is divided up into very small units and show more neither has believably human characters. The first of these similarities is easier to explain than the second while both reflect more negatively on Brown than McDowell as a writer. The original book by Brown seemed to be formatted in a manner that made it easy to digest in very small chunks while conveying the illusion of having read much at each sitting. The response appears to be formatted so that each point of rebuttal has a section of its own. This may make it easier to locate specific information but it does make it more difficult for the reader to experience the book as anything but a study companion.

McDowell’s book is written with leaden obviousness and painful dialogue. Characters point out the inaccuracy of various claims Brown puts forth as facts but all the while these same characters talk of The Da Vinci Code as a fascinating page turner. Leaving aside the painfully long time it takes these characters (purportedly college students) to read what they claim to be a hard-to-put-down page-turner they are presented as, at best, naïve readers in the sense that they do not critique the writing, the plot or the characterization of the book that they are supposedly discussing as a group over several weeks. One might almost suppose that McDowell presumes that critical or thoughtful readers will be suspicious as to the accuracy of Brown’s alleged facts when they notice that Brown is barely competent at writing English and clearly unable to create believable human beings who act in believable ways. Unfortunately the pedestrian nature of McDowell’s writing and the obliviousness of his characters to occurrences and claims that are clearly counterfactual suggests that McDowell’s work is not aimed at the informed or critical reader.

When one turns one’s consideration to the purpose of this book this reader feels that it falls far short of its goal. In order for this conceit to work (that the book follows the experiences of three college students attempting to determine the truth of the claims made in Brown’s book) the students should at least be vaguely believable as students. The idea that college students would seriously struggle with the relative factual merits of scholarly books written by academics and a book written by a popular author of mysteries and thrillers makes this reader wonder if the author is writing a book set in an alternate universe. In point of fact what McDowell has done is create ‘straw doubters’ to make the arguments of the experts in the book seem far more persuasive than they would otherwise appear. Time after time, as an ‘expert’ demonstrates that something in Brown’s book is factually wrong, one of the students will say something to the effect ‘but everything in the book can’t be wrong so why not believe this other claim it contains?’ After the four or fifth time something such as this would happen in real life the expert would suggest that when a source has been repeatedly proven to be unreliable the reasonable thing is to take all further claims with a grain a salt rather than presume that, for a change, Brown is correct.

It further undermines the utility of this book as a study companion to The Da Vince Code that McDowell’s “experts” explanations of, among other things, the conversion experience of Constantine and the Arian “heresy” are so over-simplified as to be misleading if not simply wrong. At least some of McDowell’s readers will themselves do the research to notice this and end up doubting the veracity of McDowell’s debunking of Brown at least as much as they doubt the veracity of Brown. show less

Though it's a controversial (banned) book. It's one of the best I have ever read. The thrill and suspense and the plot twist that I sensed from is like none other than pure art!
Being a Christian I too was offended to some extend. But it's fiction and has to be taken that way and I have to praise the author's professionalism and dedication to this book!
I recommend this book to those who'd love to read a good suspense thriller. The real one!!