|
Review Summary: Brilliantly misleading |
Date: 2008-12-22 |
|
| |
|
Details: Right off the bat, some of the claims in this book didn't pass the smell test, so I Googled both author Strobel and some of the "scientists" he interviewed. The inescapable conclusion is that Lee Strobel is falsely portraying himself as a skeptic in order to push his personal agenda. Most of his "scientists" are actually theologians or philosophers, and it seems that literally all of them are advocates of the "Intelligent Design" version of creationism. Worse, he blatantly misrepresents such things as the opinion of Albert Einstein. His journalism is terrible, his science is phony and his book is disingenuous. |
| |
|
Review Summary: The Case for Christ |
Date: 2008-12-17 |
|
| |
|
Details: I was raised Catholic, went to Catholic School and Church every Sunday for 18 years. I learned more about Christianity reading this book than I did with 18 years of Catholic education. This book is the most important book I have ever read. |
| |
|
Review Summary: A Good Start |
Date: 2008-12-10 |
|
| |
Details: Strobel's book is well written and easy to read. As a student at a school for Biblical studies, I found it a refreshing breeze to go through compared to the texts I am used to reading. He keeps it on a level that everyone can understand without talking down to the reader. He also does something that most writers would not: he sources nearly every work that is referenced throughout the book. This gives someone, who wishes to go deeper, the chance to do so.
Strobel does a great job of not only showing the real historical evidence for Christ, but also brings up many of the biggest arguments against it. Each time, systematically showing the flaws in such arguments. Atheist, Contemporary Agnostic, or Christian: either way, one should approach this book as they would a true court case: putting your own bias aside and letting the facts speak for themselves.
I own the smaller hardcover version. After handling both the larger one (sold here) and the smaller one (Which seems impossible to find; I`m not sure Zondervan even knows that they put it out.), I would say that I prefer the smaller one. There is no real benefit of the smaller one; but, as someone who's only fear of his residence burning down is losing his books, I rather enjoyed smaller form-factor hardcover.
I gave it four stars, because the book could also be titled: "When men who know so much miss things so small." For example, in one chapter Strobel is speaking to a man who knows the ins and outs of the medical properties of the crucifixion. As an aside, he mentions when Christ is praying in Luke 22:44, and goes into how Christ was actually sweating drops of blood (Hematidrosis) - a viewpoint that Strobel does not counteract. Anyone with a basic grasp of figures of speech will see that a simile is being used in the verse. The sweat drops where "like as" of blood, they were not literally blood.
There are plenty of other examples like this.
One of the men begins talking about the Q Source and states that it is a hypothetical document that simply does not exist; but, then talks about it for some time as though it does exist.
Most of these men lack a respect for the inspiration of the scripture. Either the Bible is from God or it is from man (Law of Excluded Middle). It cannot be from both; however, after reading Strobel's book, a lesser studied person will come away thinking that Matthew and Luke copied off of Mark, and that Mark copied off of an even earlier source. Which cannot be the case if the Bible is from God. In pushing this, they, are building a case against, not for, the Bible.
Strobel, as well as several men that he interviews, push the idea that Biblical faith is blind faith. He even states at the end of the book how it is ironic that he now has faith in something that he has so much evidence for, and that the Bible speaks the opposite thing of faith. That is not the Biblical definition of faith - as we are told to test everything, and prove things for ourselves. He also gives an absolute Eisegesis (an incorrect interpretation) of John 1:12 at the end of the book. He does this to show how one is saved. All I will say about that is this: if someone tells you how to be saved, and all they can do is give you one verse, not even showing you the full context to the verse, don't believe them. The Bible was not written in verse format, it should not be taught that way either.
Overall, this is a good (not great) book for those who do not know the historicity of the Bible (the chapter on geography is one of the best in the book); and even refutes a few things along the way. In the chapter about prophecy, Strobel interviews a man who was raised Jewish, but came to believe in Christ after giving an honest look at the prophecies in the Old Testament. That chapter, alone, was worth the price of the book. Because of some of the things pushed, it may not be the best for someone who does not know more about the Bible and history... which is ironic, because that is the audience it is aimed at.
If nothing else, it is a great starter for much deeper studies concerning the historicity of Christ.
|
| |
|
Review Summary: A Lawyer's Definition of Evidence |
Date: 2008-12-08 |
|
| |
Details: Lee Strobel asserts in his effort to uncover the Bible's history and meaning that he has found evidence for Jesus and the truth of Christianity. He says his quest somehow changed him from an atheist to a Christian. Strobel begins with the premise that if he can defend biblical criticism by interviewing "experts" such as theology Ph.D.s, then Christianity offers the true explanation of the world. This logical flaw demonstrates Strobel's lawyerly definition of the word `evidence', and is the major flaw of his book.
It is important to make a clear distinction of the word "evidence" used in the title of this book. In legal terms, `evidence' is any piece of material (exhibit A) or testimony offered during the course of a trial to present one's case. It is not required that this evidence actually be true to be entered as `evidence' in a courtroom case. In science, on the other hand, evidence is that which has been thoroughly proven and corroborated by independent scientists. The hypothesis becomes evidence only once it becomes an established fact in science, but this is not a requirement in law. As a lawyer, it is no surprise that Strobel commits this error when he assumes that because documentation of Jesus exists (the Bible, etc.), and that he can defend it, that it somehow proves the importance and truth of Christianity's claims. Using Strobel's law definition of evidence, one could easily argue that Homer's Iliad and Odyssey are evidence for the existence of Zeus, Hades, or any other polytheistic gods of the time. Importantly, lawyers and legal scholars agree that eye-witness testimony is the least reliable type of evidence. The Bible is, of course, simply a long narrative of eye-witness testimony (that wasn't even recorded until decades after Jesus supposedly lived).
If we take a scientific approach to Strobel's findings (see Victor Stenger's book "Has Science Found God?"), we find that there is no scientific evidence for any metaphysical being in the universe. It is known that the presence of a supernatural being actually contradicts well-established physical laws (like the second law of thermodynamics). Simply put, this book tries very hard to convince the reader that because documentation exists for something, that this alone makes it a true fact. This reader is one atheist who is hardly convinced by the conclusions of Strobel's book that Jesus and Christianity have any valid claim to truth in the world. (To learn about a Christian minister of 19 years who later became an atheist, I recommend "Losing Faith in Faith" by Dan Barker).
Paul Johnson, December 2008
|
| |
|
Review Summary: Fail! |
Date: 2008-11-26 |
|
|
| |
Details: The very introduction to the book is a perfect analogy of the exact opposite of the author's intention.
The author describes his giddiness prior to an interview then pretends to be asking hard hitting questions. And finally he looses all credibility when he assists with breaking down his own question.
This is clearly a commissioned work where the conclusion was reached prior to any interviews.
Only theologians were interviews. No opposing points of view.
Fail. Epic Fail!
|
| |
|
out of 650 Reviews
