From Triablogue:
Last year, John Loftus and some colleagues published a book titled The End Of Christianity (Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books, 2011). The back cover and inside endorsements describe the book as “the sharpest set of intellectual criticisms [of Christianity] found under the cover of a single volume”, “tremendously useful”, “superb”, and “exceedingly well-researched”. One endorser claims, “This book should win the game: Christianity, it’s strike three and you are out!” Another tells us, “No collection better demonstrates how taking Christianity seriously reveals its all-too-human origin.” We’re told that “Loftus and his friends annihilate the Christian Goliath”.
Steve Hays and I have written an e-book in response, which you can read here, titled The End Of Infidelity. We’d like to thank Peter Pike for editing it. We wouldn’t have been able to release it so soon, and it wouldn’t be so readable, without Peter’s help.
Those of you who haven’t read Loftus’ book can find an overview of it here. You might want to read each chapter summary on the page I just linked before reading each of our chapter responses.
Steve and I most likely will have more to say about Loftus’ book, especially if we get a response from the authors.
I took a look at it and it was filled with footnotes, so that’s good.
WINTERY KNIGHT 
I read some of it and wasn’t particularly impressed. I haven’t read the End of Christianity partly because Loftus’ arguments tend not to impress me but the rebuttal sounds too much like what it is rebutting. It all sounded too hollow and shallow to me.
It asserts lots of things as if they were obvious (which they are to me but I daresay lots of people would disagree). I also don’t like its tone and think it could spend a lot more time on Loftus’ arguments. Also, it might be a problem with me, but I think the manner in which some parts were written makes it seem that the writer is ignoring key points of the End of Christianity and focusing on minor details but then, I haven’t read the End of Christianity so I can’t really say.
I wouldn’t give it more than two stars from what I’ve read. It;s pretty good for pointing out the writers’ inconsistencies and inefficiency, but it doesn’t do as well with the arguments. Just my two cents.
LikeLike