The Differences Between My Book and Martin's Book

Some people have wondered what the difference is between Michael Martin’s The Case Against Christianity and my book on Why I Rejected Christianity. Let me offer what I think are some differences.

1) My book reveals a personal account of both my conversion and my deconversion, which explains the whole process of both coming and leaving the faith, whereas Martin does not. A personal story which shares the kinds of things that caused one to accept the faith and then to leave the faith produces a level of understanding for the whole process itself. It offers a reasonable understanding how this process happened and how it could possibly happen to other Christians.

2) Because Martin does not show evidence he was ever an insider to Christianity, some of his arguments may not resonate with the Christian reader, whereas I have a better understanding of what questions a Christian needs to have answered.

3) My book covers issues that Martin’s book leaves out. He leaves out a discussion of the existence of God, the problem of religious diversity, the problem of unanswered prayer, the relationship of science and the Bible, the nature of the Bible, the problem of the historian in assessing the claims of the Bible, the self-authenticating witness of the Holy Spirit, the Devil, hell, the problem of evil, and he only barely touches the philosophical problem of miracles. Granted he deals extensively with some of these issues in his other books, especially his book Atheism: A Justification. But the questions that I write about are the most important ones for the evangelical Christian. And these issues can all (or nearly all) be found in just one book.

4) Martin is a scholar and he’s writing to other scholars, and as such the topics he deals with are probably better argued than by me in my book, especially since the level of writing I'm doing is for the informed college student. But that means with my book Martin’s arguments and those of other scholars are made accessible to a much wider audience, and I refer my readers to his book several times, along with other scholarly books on those same issues.

5) Finally I end my book describing the process of why I finally became an atheist and what it’s like to live life without God, which isn’t found in Martin’s book. Again, I reveal the whole story, from start to finish about my journey from a Christian to an atheist along with a nearly comprehensive cumulative set of powerful arguments that persuaded me to change. It's a complete story.

I hope this explains the differences without anyone concluding that mine is a better book. Both books serve their purpose at their respective levels, and mine would be worse off had Martin not written his book at all. These are the differences I see, that’s all.