Ebook
Three questions are etched into everyone’s subconscious: Who am I? Why am I here? Where am I going? Josh McDowell and Thomas Williams team up to show why nothing short of God answers these questions. But the problem is that in today’s secularized culture, God has largely been banished.
How to Know God Exists explores in depth solid reasons for believing in God and restoring him to his rightful place in our lives. Josh McDowell is widely known for his powerful defenses of God based on historical and biblical evidences. In this book he and Thomas take a new direction and present often-unexplored but formidable evidences based on sheer reason, observable reality, and solid science. They show that belief in God is not the blind, unthinking, and intellectually indefensible fancy today’s secularism makes it out to be.
How to Know God Exists will:
By reason and common sense, How to Know God Exists shows that meaning itself is rooted in the existence of God.
In this competent volume, evangelist McDowell (Evidence for the Historical Jesus) and artist Williams (Knowing Aslan) find evidence for God in the natural world. Using “reason, observation . . . and common sense” to dispute naturalist accounts of the universe, the authors posit that belief in God “is rationally defensible” and supported by empirical evidence. They discuss their doubts about evolutionary explanations for human behavior, contending that widespread disapproval of Nazis since WWII indicates a “universal moral sense” that conflicts with a “survival of the fittest” philosophy primarily concerned with protecting one’s progeny at any cost. The authors take issue with the big bang theory and argue that every variation of it struggles to explain how something (a singularity, energy, gravity) can emerge from nothing. Beauty only makes sense if understood as glimpses of the “supernatural,” they suggest, dismissing out of hand arguments about beauty’s subjective nature. McDowell and Williams pose some questions that will give skeptics pause, even if the authors’ shallow presentation of current scientific consensus undermines their persuasiveness. The result provides food for thought.