After having approached the economic arguments against socialism (and its subordinate -isms like Marx-, Commun-, Naz-, Lenin-, Mao-, etc.) from the perspectives of Adam Smith, Ludwig von Mises, Thomas Sowell, and most especially Friedrich Hayek, it didn't take much to be convinced that Marx was, well, just plain wrong. We have the empirical evidence of something like 80 years of actual practice to point to, to assess, and from which to draw conclusions.

Not until I read Prof. Kreeft's work did I come to comprehend the more important question: *why Marx was wrong*. Socialism was not just hampered by a flawed execution ("everyone" says that Russia should not have been the first nation to try socialism), but fundamentally crippled by a flawed premise. And thereby fated to fail.

I won't give the lesson away - you'll enjoy getting there yourself. I will say, though, that if Marx had been right, our world would be a much more horrifying place than any Matrix-like "Dis-topia" that Hollywood could contrive.

This book saved me from never having known the joys and invigorating certainties of Aristotelian logic.

Compared to the course in 'modern' Logic I took in the fall, which focused on the dry and obtruse 'computer science logic' of the last two centries, this tome was a flood of useful and clear Truths about how to think. It is a primer on Sanity and doesn't rest until you know your stuff.

If you are a teacher, please buy this book for your class. This is one of the few times where the book students need is also one they'd want!

Prof. Kreeft does a masterful job taking a very difficult subject and reducing it into manageable pieces. The Angelic Doctor can be a bit daunting when approached directly; this book gives a helpful mix of direct quotes and clear commentary. It reminded me of a college course given by a great teacher

This book is a virtual treasure trove of ideas for how to approach many aspects of the Catholic faith with your kids. It also raises many issues that a parent will have to deal with in each age group. There are suggestions for helping toddlers appreciate the Mass, for example. Or for helping a youngster come to grips with death and the afterlife. It's a short book, but very well-organized and well presented and is sure to be a reference in my home for a long time.

A tiny little book with the wisdom of an encyclopedia! Clear, concise, intelligent. It presents arguments one might never have thought of on one's own; these arguments definitely hold water. It makes a good case against the standard argument: "Jesus didn't have female apostles because he bowed to the standards of his time." A must read for anyone who wants to know WHY women will not be priests.

For years Peter Kreeft has been trying to be the new C. S. Lewis. For years he has failed. He lacks the learning, the style, and the wit. He should stick to teaching philosophy at Boston University and abandon his endless series of superficial books(never acknowledged by professionals)which only serve to show how much he owes to other thinkers and how utterly unoriginal he is.

Although I am a Protestant, I have come to appreciate every thing Peter Kreeft writes. I bought his Handbook of Apologetics and could not put it down. Now these essays are feeding both mind a soul. Kreeft's way with words must be inspiration. His idea that faith, hope and charity together are the tripod that holds Christianity together is wonderful. In just one paragrpah he shows how you can't have one without the other two. Together they keep Christianity from becoming cold, cruel and wishful thinking.Each chapter is short and every word wothy of thought. My copy of the book is well marked and each page written on.
Just one example of Kreeft's powerful imagery is his picture of Christianity as a flower: Faith is the root, hope the stem, and charity the flower. "The flower is the fairest, the stem does the growing, but the root must come first" (p.170)
I expect to return to this book time and again. For anyone who wants to know what Christians believe (including Christians), this is essential reading. The last section on the unity of the Church in which Kreeft lists the things both Protestants and Catholics would have to surrender to become one again is worth the price of the book. Kreeft calls his vision of a united Church "The Evangelical Catholic Church" and perhaps his ideas could serve as a starting point for meaningful conversation. I also enjoy his list of questions concerning orthodoxy that can unify all Christians.

I first ran across this book ten years ago and have found myself continually buying copies for friends. Having just purchased it and reread it, yet again, I am convinced that, of Kreeft's many works, and among Christian apologetics generally, this one continues to stand out as foundational. By starting with the very "fundamentals lf the faith" in the first part of the book, Kreeft enables those with little or no understanding of Christianity to embrace it. He moves on to some of the tougher issues of the faith, and without flinching, presents a defense that is both philosophically and theologically sound. Finally, he turns to a series of essays on the Lord's Prayer that has continued to revitalize my prayer life. Overall, what makes this book such a winner for me is his clear, articulate prose -- and the fact that the book is presented in short essays that are ideal for an evening's consumption... if, in fact, you can resist the temptation to plough through the whole thing in a sitting.

I fell in love with this author and his writings after reading this beautiful, simple-hearted though philosophically-deep book. The passages that he quotes and the thoughts that he stirs are nothing shy of amazing! My spirit felt refreshed and challenged upon finishing the book. What a wonderful encouragement this book is. Don't be fooled by the small size, it is loaded with fresh insights and tender spiritual reflections.

I'm in love with this book! It's my favorite book of all time. I first laid my eyes on this book in 1980 when it was first published. It is a book on philosophy but it is written simply and flawlessly, very refreshing. This is one book that you can go back to, time and time again to reflect and be inspired. It uplifts you when you feel down and unspirited. It has been written for the lay person to understand faith, death, hope and happiness drawn from different religions and from different philosophies.

This is a joyfully intense book, the best I've read on the subject. It does require time to read, and time to reflect, to fully understand the message. That's one reason I loved it -- it isn't trite and full of the same old stuff you've always heard about heaven.

In this work, Peter Kreeft portrays a meeting of C.S. Lewis, John F. Kennedy and Aldous Huxley in the afterlife (all three died on November 22, l963). C.S. Lewis engages first Kennedy and then Huxley in a debate on the divinity of Christ. The conversation goes on for 114 pages with C.S. Lewis clearly making his points -- that Christ was either divine or a charlatan or insane. Lewis goes on to debunk any possibility of Christ being a charlatan or insane, ergo Christ is God. Kreeft has wonderful ideas and constructs nice logical proofs. However, I was expecting something deeper than an argument that could be summarized in two sentences.

My strongest criticism of this book is that it completely misses the point where the real-life Lewis's teachings overlap with those of the real-life Huxley: that the one true God is no respecter of persons and that God is equally accessible to all, regardless of culture, upbringing or background. Both men taught that all of mankind comes to God on equal footing; that no religion, culture or class of men has an advantage over the others. At one point in BETWEEN HEAVEN AND HELL, Kreeft's Lewis actually shoots down arguments that the real-life Lewis propounded.

I felt that Kreeft glossed over some of the greatest religious controversies faced by modern man. In doing so, Kreeft unwittingly undercut the points he was trying to make. I'm turning back to my studies of C.S. Lewis and Aldous Huxley. I strongly recommend Lewis's MERE CHRISTIANITY (upon which Kreeft based his Lewis arguments) and a collection of 28 essays by Huxley called HUXLEY AND GOD. By the way, Kreeft's Kennedy has very little to offer either intellectually or where matters of faith are concerned in this book.

One final note: the last page and a half of this book is stunning in its beauty and truth. Kreeft's epilogue is also worth reading.

John F. Kennedy, C. S. Lewis, and Aldous Huxley all died on November 22, 1963. What if they all met after death, somewhere between heaven and hell? That's the premise of this engaging and intriguing book by philosophy professor Peter Kreeft.

Written in the form of a Socratic dialogue, Kreeft's book casts Lewis as a Christian theist, Kennedy as a modern humanist and Huxley as an Eastern pantheist. The three interact and challenge one another's worldviews, examining and testing each other's beliefs to see what is true about life after death and the meaning of life.

This book is ideal to read with a few other friends, be they believers, skeptics or seekers. It will provide lively discussion and ample food for thought.

Between Heaven & Hell has a subtitle which reads, "A Dialog Somewhere Beyond Death with John F. Kennedy, C.S. Lewis & Aldous Huxley". Yes, this is a fictional trialog in "limbo" of the most important question in human history - Who is Jesus Christ? Many people are unaware that JFK, Lewis and Huxley all died within hours of each other on November 22, 1963. It seems the assassination of President Kennedy from either the grassy knoll or from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository somehow managed to overshadow the deaths of the other two men. Go figure!

Much of the fictional discussion between these three characters revolves around their own writings although Kreeft employs a bit of literary license for the sake of argument. The fact that Kreeft is a Catholic doesn't affect the content of this book since the argument is essentially Lewis' straight, or "mere" Christianity. The position of JFK is that of a humanistic Christian in the sense of emphasizing "horizontal" social activity rather than "vertical" religious experience...religion without revelation. Kennedy portrays his view of Christ as that of a man become god. Huxley doesn't get the air time that Lewis and JFK get, but his contribution is significant. He represents the eastern pantheist position and reinterprets Christianity as a form of the universal philosophy of pantheism. In this view, Jesus was one of the great sages of history along with Buddha, Socrates, Confucius, Mohammed and the rest. Employing the Socratic method of question and answer, Kreeft slowly but surely uses Lewis' arguments to refute the views of Jesus being a lunatic, liar or just a great moral teacher. Once this is done, He argues that Jesus was God in the flesh, just as He claimed to be. Approximately the last third of the book focuses on the reliability of the gospel accounts which record the claims of Christ.

I found this book to be a very enjoyable read, especially the Socratic method that Kreeft employs. Although I don't criticize Kreeft for making the most out of the historical situation, I'll just say that the only theological disagreement I had with this book was the immediate destiny of the three men being "limbo" which I'm sure is only used by Kreeft as a setting for the discussion. The argument from Lewis was very thought-provoking and required honesty with the end result being much clearer thinking concerning the person of Christ, not to mention his inescapable conclusions which were drawn. I found it very interesting how he would ask of the opposition very pointed, yet fair questions. I was glad to find that the rabbit trails were quickly discounted so the reader can follow the arguments more easily. Throughout the discussion, Kreeft continually reminds the reader that as Christians, we don't try to win arguments for ourselves (I use "argument" in the technical sense of presenting evidence in favor of one's position). It doesn't matter who wins or loses. Truth is what we all must submit to, not someone's ability to debate.We present evidence in favor of the truth and truth must win the battle.

This is an excellent book for discussion groups (includes great, thought-provoking discussion questions at the end of each chapter) and an excellent overview of Christian apologetics with a good list of recommended reading in the appendix. Also, the chapters on Hell and Heaven are perhaps the best I've read (even though the information in these chapters is based mostly on quotes from C.S. Lewis) On the downside, being that the authors are both professors of philosophy, I would have expected more information about reasoning, logical fallacies and the nature and limitations of proof. I think the majority of apologetic problems can be dealt with if people understood what consistutes a valid argument to begin with as well as the common fallacies BOTH believers and skeptics fall for. Also, some of the objections they grapple with in the book are dismissed a little too easily --- especially with the arguments for God's existence. While many of their replies may be effective for someone with little philsophical knowledge, they are often too simplistic for answering more sophisticated and philosophically-informed objections. This is a great introductory book, but readers seriously interested in apologetics and in answering intellegent objections to the Christian faith, will need to dig much deeper into these issues.

This is one of the books that brought me back from the brink of agnosticism. Christianity is a worldview that is based on historical evidence and rational arguments. The Handbook of Christian Apologetics provides a firm basis for defending Christianity by offering a wide range of reasons for belief. It is aimed at both believers and non-believers alike. Its goal is to help believers defend their faith and to help non-believers see the reasonableness of believing in Christianity.

Kreeft and Tacelli write in a lively and intelligent manner. Their train of thought is fairly easy to follow, althought it wouldn't hurt if the reader has a bit of knowledge of philosophical terms under her belt. The authors begin with a look at faith and reason. They note how both are vital, and that faith and reason can never contradict each other.

In the following chapters they tackle topics such as, Does God Exist? (they offer 20 arguments for the existence of God), The Problem of Evil, The Divinity of Christ, Life after Death, Objective Truth, just to name a few. Each chapter is followed by a number of discussion questions to help the reader digest and cogitate on what was just read. A bibliography is provided for those who wish to delve more deeply into each of the subjects presented. The authors confine themselves to the core beliefs common to all orthodox Christians. As a result, this is a book that can be read and used by all orthodox denominations and traditions.

One section I found particularly interesting was where they discuss how a person receives salvation by asking if a good pagan like Socrates could have been saved. Another good section (there's so many of them) is where they discuss free will in the chapter on evil. For example, they write, "the simplest argument for the existence of free will is observation of how we use words. We praise, blame, command, counsel, exhort, and moralize to each other. Doing these things to robots is absurd. We do not hold machines morally responsible for what they do, no matter how complicated the machines are. If there is no free will, all moral meaning disappears from language - and from life."

I highly recommend Handbook of Christian Apologetics for all who have ever yearned for answers to life's most important questions.

When I first purchased this book, I was a 20 year old college student looking for an easy, but in-depth read. This book was that.
To start, the book is huge. I hate seeing these books that claim to answer all these questions, and then find it has about 100 pages.
The H.o.C.A. does a great job of explaining each arguement to the point where they even include common objections to the answers, and THEN answering those objections.
This book is so detailed I took about half a year to carefully highlight and take notes.
To those who dismiss a lot of the authors' explinations to questions, read it again, and this time stop and think about it. People so often want clear cut answers that they never stop and think. In reading this book, I often found myself taking a day to reflect and think on one or two points in this book.
Besides content, this book is carefully and wonderfully laid out. I love how the table of contents is laid out in order that the reader can jump straight to the meat of an argument without having to read through 4 or 5 pages of random explinations to pointless arguments.
To those thinking about buying this book, remember. Christianity is so simple that people often dismiss it for it's simplicity. This book is the same way. Many people will speed read through it, toss out a handfull of big words on why this book didn't answer their questions, and walk away. The reason their questions are not answered is not their intellegence, but rather their lack of patience. Buy this book. Take your time. Reflect and discuss what you read.
I can guarantee if you do you'll love this book. It broke down walls I had built between God and myself that existed for over six years. This book is worth the money.

This book is good if you are new to studying Aquinas, but considering in the inreoduction Kreft suggest not skipping the objections and reading the "on the contrary" and the "I answer that" first, he certainly edits many of the articles this way. It is my opinion that Kreeft cut out too much text.

Summa of the Summa (hereafter SS) is a simply wonderful abridgment of Aquinas' Summa Theologica (hereafter ST). Professor Kreeft has done a superlative job of assembling those parts of ST that will be of most interest to readers new to Aquinas' thought. The text is drawn from the Dominican Benzinger Brothers translation of ST, still the most faithful to Aquinas original language and still the most widely available complete edition of ST in English. Kreeft includes a fine glossary of technical terms in ST likely to be unfamiliar to most readers, and a short, readable introductory essay that gives an interesting discussion of the structure of ST. Rather than include a lengthy introductory commentary on the classic text as do many editors, Kreeft includes his comments in footnotes, which appear frequently and are quite extensive. To give one example, to accompany Aquinas' famous "five ways" to prove the existence of God on pp. 57-70, Kreeft provides approximately eight pages worth of footnotes. The footnotes that discuss Aquinas only are nearly always illuminating, and will prove invaluable to readers as they study the primary text. I believe readers of SS will be able to progress more smoothly to the complete ST if they so choose than they could with any other abridgment of ST or other anthology of Aquinas' writings now in print. At the same time, SS is a fine, self-contained introduction to Aquinas' thought.

The only disappointing aspect of SS is its discussion of philosophical positions that are at variance with Aquinas. Like many philosophers working in Roman Catholic institutions, Kreeft has a tendency to present false straw-man interpretations of philosophers whose conclusions he disagrees with, and then to "refute" these philosophers by kicking down the straw men. (For the record, I am Roman Catholic.) For instance, on a footnote on p. 522, Kreeft erroneously attributes to Hobbes the view that people are naturally vicious and to Hume the view that knowledge is nothing other than the passive reception and ordering of sense impressions. Kreeft strongly hints to the reader here that Aquinas' own positions are more cogent than those of Hume and Hobbes, but this is misleading since the footnote presents a "straw-man Hobbes" and a "straw man Hume". Kreeft's tendency to misinterpret and then unfairly dismiss certain important philosophical doctrines even leads him to occasionally misrepresent Aquinas. For instance, in a footnote on pp. 430-431 Kreeft claims that Aquinas' example on these pages refutes utilitarianism. In fact, the classical doctrine of utilitarianism as John Stuart Mill and Henry Sidgwick formulated it is designed to show that the very example Aquinas gives is a CONSEQUENCE of utilitarianism.

In summation, readers can profit immensely from a careful study of the classic text and supplementary materials in SS, but they should take care not to trust anything said here about philosophers who disagree with Aquinas at face value.

Dr. Kreeft provides an excellent introduction here in this anthology of of Aquinas' work. The way it is laid out works very well - Aquinas' writings appear first - then Dr. Kreeft's helpful remarks on the text are footnoted at the bottom of the page. No page flipping is necessary to get his comments - and they dont get in the way with reading the primary text either.

The book begins with a glossary of terms needed to comprehend Aquinas' thought. Unless you are familiar with these terms, you should really take the time to learn them before embarking on the rest of the book.

This book is a very good introduction and reference for Aqunias' thought. For absolute beginners with no background at all in Aristotelian philosophy however, you will probably want to first read Mortimer J. Adler's "Aristotle for Everybody" before tackling this book.