I'm a sharp nosed journalist and quite the skeptic so I set out to really dig into the evidence on the question of Christ. I went to ten different fundamentalist christians and asked them some hard questions like: "Is it really true that Jesus is Lord?". The man sipped his coffee and looked me in the eye and said "Yes". Being the astute critical mastermind that I am, I wasn't going to let him get away that easy, so I asked: "And what about all those academics who say there are mistakes and contradictions in the Bible, are they just wrong?". He chuckled to himself and said "Indeed they are". He waved some papers in my face and said it was all evidence of how wrong they were. I was stunned. My immense skepticism had been completely refuted. I fell to my knees and thanked Jesus for dying for our sins.

Lee Strobel must think the reader a complete moron. ( )

Admittedly, there was very little chance that this book was going to change my skeptical worldview. I think a lot of people cross a threshold of inquiry from which it is impossible to return. Regardless of what Strobel writes in this book, it is clear that he wanted a change in his life, and he only interviewed apologists that would grease his path to faith. To use his somewhat tortured analogy of building a legal case, it is a bit like a trial in which only the prosecution was allowed to present evidence.

My first problem with Strobel is that he is a mediocre writer. There is a lot of shifting in chairs, sipping coffee, leaning forward in excitement, and grinning with confidence. I think that all of this description of his interview subjects is meant to build their ethos, and to create a sense of realism, but what you get is gruelling repetitiveness and a wish that he would just get to the point.

C.S. Lewis is much better, mainly because you get a sense of candor and honesty about his spiritual belief- he not trying to hoodwink anyone, merely express his true faith the best way he knows how. The Case for Christ, on the other hand, is a classic example of card-stacking and argumentative sleight of hand.

Some basic logical problems with the specious reasoning of this book:

1) Strobel argues that the apostles could not have lied about the resurrection without the people of Jerusalem refuting them. Well, most people of Jerusalem DID NOT adopt Christianity. It is entirely possible that they saw this as just another sect that they could ignore.
2) People do not die for a lie - I agree with this. But a lot of religious belief could generously be called delusional - meaning that the early followers of Jesus actually believed in the Resurrection, ignoring contradictory evidence to grasp on to a belief that gave their lives meaning and purpose. The great classic work on religious fervor is William James' "The Variety of Religious Experience". I assume most Christian apologists disregard James, because he clearly shows how people's spiritual experiences can lead them to extreme acts.
3) Strobel never addresses the supernatural vs. materialism piece. How do you bring a dead body back to life? Does it require supernatural "magic", or is there a rational scientific explanation? People for many centuries were absolutely convinced of the existence of witches and demons in their midst. From the modern perspective, these beliefs can be explained away as a lack of understanding of natural phenomena.
4) Christianity spread rapidly through the Roman Empire - which is not proof of the truth of its claims - and coincided with the decline of Rome and the onset of the dark ages. Not exactly an argument in favor of Christianity.
5) He interviews psychologist Gary Collins, who professes a belief in demons as a cause of psychological distress / mental illness. Dr. Collins should have his license revoked.
6) This was the most offensive part:
"I shook my head, saddened at the thought of how many other Jewish children have grown up thinking of Christians as their enemies."
Does Strobel not know about THE CENTURIES of persecution and slaughter of Jews by Christians, culminating in the Holocaust? Do Jews have no reason to suspect Christians, especially when Christians call them IGNORANT for not embracing the "truth of Christ"?

I would like to hear more about Strobel's supposed "atheism" before he started writing this book. Did he read the great skeptical writers and philosophers? Or was this a canard to draw in unbelievers?

Also, the ad hominem attacks on the Jesus Project as being "radical, left-wing scholars" does nothing to diminish their arguments. Why not interview one of the participants, instead of giving all of the page space to their right-wing critics?

As an agnostic, I don't believe that this conversation will ever be over. What troubles me is that Evangelicals (along with radicals in all religions) are not content to let people alone with their beliefs. Atheists can be just as strident and dogmatic in their desire to convert people. To me, it is interesting that people are drawn to religion - but the individual should have the freedom and autonomy to find his own way through life.



( )

A basic understanding of the evidences of Christ. Should be read as a first step toward a deeper understanding of Jesus and Christianity. ( )

If you were a journalist, how would you investigate the top story in human history? Join the award-winning former legal editor of the Chicago Tribune as he cross-examines scholars to uncover incontestable evidence supporting Jesus' claims. Includes updated archaeological material, an interview with Strobel, and more. A powerful defense of the Christian faith!

žánr: naučná, rozhovory s odborníky v oblasti teologie, psychologie, historie, archeologie
Novinář hledá pravdu - je Ježíš skutečná historická postava, je Nový Zákon spolehlivý, proč bychom měli věřit, že Kristus vstal z mrtvých a je Spasitelem světa?