I can feel that John C. Lennox is deeply devoted to his God. Thus, I cannot blame him if he is such a dye in the wool; he is not far different from the said notorious atheists such as Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, and Richard Dawkins , militantly criticize all the major religions in the world. I may be an avowed atheist as I always put it here bluntly, in accord with their proposition that God does not exist, but I have at last agreed with the famous contemporary British philosopher , Alain de Botton, that in practicality, people need religion , in a sense that without it, is dangerous since such practice has become part of culture around the world. In fact, Alain de Botton is an atheist too.
In this book, originally a response article to Stephen Hawking’s book The Grand Design (co-authored with Caltech physicist Leonard Mlodinow ) that appeared in the Daily Mail, September 3, 2010, John Lennox, a Mathematics professor and religious adviser , contradicts Stephen Hawking’s claim that:
“ Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist. It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going.”
In Lennox ‘s apologetic opinion, the Universe and everything needs a creator: God. However, the problem with John Lennox’s argument is anthropomorphic and pantheistic. Cognizant he may be of these facts , he points out that the Universe and all natural phenomena cannot come into existence without a creator: God. If so, what does he mean by God? In a sense that God is in human form, a superhuman with such superpower to be able to create everything even the vast Universe? Such an idea is beyond our imagination. Or does not he mean that creator is a force as what pantheists believe? How about the idea of Carl Jung that human is the God itself? Since he argues that everything cannot be put into action without an agent?
John Lennox argues that scientific laws and theories do not actuate human and have cause nd effects; they, according to him, only describe how things happen. They are even untestable; for instance, the idea of M-theory. He must have overlooked or, to put it mildly, brushed the fact aside that scientific laws and theories have been the bases on explaining how things happen and are changing ,or can possibly happen in the future , since the time immemorial. To put it bluntly again, I ‘d rather believe in those laws and theories than in something irrational, inconstant, and illogical.
Miracle is another argument not only John Lennox, let alone the believers turn to to believe that God exists. As far as we are concerned, miracle means something happens without explicit and rational explanation. In other words, when people are not able to explain a phenomena, they invoke God. Once again, God means in superhuman or pantheistic form? How about drawing the conclusion that such case is under the subject to extensive and thorough studies Period.? The problem with believers is that they are instilled in the fear of denying God’s existence. And this is the point of Alain de Botton as I have mentioned above.
For me, not in a bellicose and belligerent way, John Lennox’s argument is a product of religious upbringing. His reasons are incorrigible. But to avoid religious collision, I will take deBoton’s opinion: Respect one another. Sad to say, it turns out not to be a religious anti-dote at all.
I could have liked the book by giving it 2 out of 5 stars only if Lennox were not so “ idealistic”.But 1 star does not necessarily mean this is poor, but in a sense that how the book convinced me. This is the way here on Goodreads it is!