A Case for Christ

[JAStewart]

I'm an atheist, and my christian friend is constantly trying (and failing) to convert me. This time he's dropped me a book by Lee Strobel called "A Case For Christ", I probably won't read it soon because I have a backlog of books I need to read and I really do not read very often.

Can anyone shed light on this book before I pick it up? I'm obviously reading it with a skeptical mind, but my friend assures me that "the evidence is there" for Jesus.

[Bikewer]

There are some "reader reviews" up on Amazon....Looks like pretty much the same sort of things Christian apologists have been promoting for years.

Evidently talks about the "reliability" of the Gospels, for instance. I once read a simplistic notion on this; the author essentially saying that "the authors wouldn't have had any reason to lie."
Extremely superficial....

[JAStewart]

Well I told him that I thought that the bible should be called into question, and but he kept saying the 'scriptures' were 100% accurate and true, he also said he'll prove that to me, presumably by that book.

[Loss Leader]

I'm an atheist, and my christian friend is constantly trying (and failing) to convert me. This time he's dropped me a book by Lee Strobel called "A Case For Christ", I probably won't read it soon because I have a backlog of books I need to read and I really do not read very often.

Can anyone shed light on this book before I pick it up? I'm obviously reading it with a skeptical mind, but my friend assures me that "the evidence is there" for Jesus.


Since it is impossible to logically prove the existence of God (because it's impossible to logically define the existence of God), any so-called "case" must either have logical fallacies built in or must take as a given things which are untrue or unfalsifiable.

If you are a Christian who needs help feeling good about your faith, I'm certain this book will give you enough pseudo-intellectual gibberish to sustain you. If you are an atheist who undestands how a "case" is actually proven, I am certain the flaws in the argument will be maddening.


ETA: Here (http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jeff_lowder/strobel.html) is the book review from Infidels.Org. The author's conclusion mirrors mine, I think:

Perhaps this will be a welcome feature to people who already believe Christianity but have no idea why they believe it. For those of us who are primarily interested in the truth, however, we want to hear both sides of the story.

[TX50]

Tell them you'll read it but only if they read "God is not Great" or
"The god Delusion". Fair's fair.

[ColumbusRyan]

Maybe I am missing something, but if your friend is trying to make a case that Jesus actually existed I was under the impression that history had already verified that? (As much as it can be with the accuracy problems in something that old.) It seems to me that the only thing they would be attempting to prove would be Jesus' divinity - something of which we have no evidence. In fact, I don't think that Jesus considered himself divine from the separate historical sources i have read.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

[patrick767]

I read part of it many years ago. As I remember, it's written by a journalist who went around to various Christian clergy and claims to have asked them the hard questions about Christianity with a journalist's eye for ferreting out the truth or some such...

Garbage. It quickly becomes obvious that his interview questions were extremely leading and the results are simplistic. It's not a long book. Read a couple chapters if you want and you'll see what I mean.

[colin]

Maybe I am missing something, but if your friend is trying to make a case that Jesus actually existed I was under the impression that history had already verified that? (As much as it can be with the accuracy problems in something that old.) It seems to me that the only thing they would be attempting to prove would be Jesus' divinity - something of which we have no evidence. In fact, I don't think that Jesus considered himself divine from the separate historical sources i have read.

Please correct me if I am wrong.
You may be wrong (http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/marshall_gauvin/did_jesus_really_live.html). There is a staggering lack of any mention of Jesus in the historical record.

[Freethinker]

Maybe I am missing something, but if your friend is trying to make a case that Jesus actually existed I was under the impression that history had already verified that? (As much as it can be with the accuracy problems in something that old.)

There is only one contemporary extra-biblical reference to Jesus, and it is widely believed to have been added at a later date. Google "Josephus" for more information. Throw out the bible, and there is very little evidence of his existence, and certainly nothing to indicate he had any notoriety during his lifetime if he did exist.

[jjramsey]

Tell them you'll read it but only if they read "God is not Great" or
"The god Delusion". Fair's fair.

Hmm, IMHO, Robin Lane Fox's The Unauthorized Version: Truth and Fiction in the Bible is probably a better choice for people into apologetics, since it's readable but more in-depth when it comes to the Bible. I've read The God Delusion and I'd say that there is little there that someone exposed to apologetics hasn't seen before.

[NeilC]

I'd just say that if he knows of and understands proof that X is true then he should be able to explain it to you, rather than point to some book.

[TX50]

Even if there were contemporary references to a "Jesus the
anointed one", how would you know which one they were
referring to? Jesus/Jeshua/Joshua was a common name around
those parts and many were acclaimed as messiahs. It's entirely
possible that "Jesus of Nazareth" was/is a fictional, composite
character.

[jjramsey]

There is only one contemporary extra-biblical reference to Jesus

Actually, there are two references (http://earlychristianwritings.com/testimonium.html) in Josephus' work, one of which is suspect, namely the Testimonium Flavianum, and one of which is almost universally regarded as genuine.

[qayak]

I agree with patrick767. I have one of Stobel's books, The Case For the Real Jesus" and it begins with a logical fallacy that completely destroys the argument he uses throughout the rest of the book.

He gives a little story about finding the "truth." He says that when he was with some newspaper, one of the guys running for governor of the state he was in was arrested for domestic violence. Apparently, the governor is in charge of all women's shelters and the fact that he had been arrested was important to his ability to do the job. He states that some people wanted to print the story but this editor of great integrity said they needed proof that this guy had actually abused his wife.

So, someone digs up an complain report through freedom of information with the governor-to-be's name blacked out but they manage to put 2 and 2 together and show that he is indeed the guy in the report. They call the gov-to-be and he declines comment. They run the story and he resigns fromt he race.

Anyway, the fallacy is that they didn't find any truth. All they had was an arrest report which is just one person claiming another did something. There was no evidence to base his claim of finding the "truth" on.

Stobel uses this crazy reasoning through the whole book, he talks to some authority and the authority says "I have studied this for a long time and I have decided it is true!" It is the strongest evidence Stobel puts forth and it ain't worth the paper it took to print it on.

He uses the same reasoning to attack bible scholars, basically saying that all their evidence doesn't stack up to a friend of his saying "It just ain't so!"

Very poor writer in my opinion but he has a easy audience. They all want it to be true.

[qayak]

{Deleted: Double Post}

Please see my brilliant words elsewhere in this thread!

[A Christian Sceptic]

I'm a Christian and I didn't find ithat book that convincing. I would have preferred if he would have interviewed non-christians and got their opinions and expertise.

To be honest: I don't really understand the whole Apologetics thing. You can never have enough proof for someone who doesn't want to believe in something - whether of a religious nature or not. Besides - with a God who is outside of reality, there is no way to prove or disprove his existence.

Josh MacDowell's book Evidence That Demands a Verdict is better in my opinion, although still not the greatest. He has some great points on the reliability of the text saying what it says. But again - what ancient writings say is not what is usually disputed - it's what the text means that people have issue with.

I also like C.S. Lewis's book Mere Christianity. He has some great observations on mankind as a whole and what it reveals.

But again, if you don't want to believe, and if Jesus and his teachings don't convince you then I doubt someone elses writings will.

[Beerina]

There is only one contemporary extra-biblical reference to Jesus, and it is widely believed to have been added at a later date. Google "Josephus" for more information. Throw out the bible, and there is very little evidence of his existence, and certainly nothing to indicate he had any notoriety during his lifetime if he did exist.

That there were a number of other myths from around that time and before ascribing almost every single "miracle" and saying to someone else should be mighty suspicious.

...and it ain't that the Devil is crafty.

Indeed, that it appears there were previous pantheons that lead to Judaism (and, ultimately, Christianity) as a derivative isn't even a modern notion, and it troubled the ancient Christians.

[fuelair]

Is the case wood or leather. I like leather better.

[pgwenthold]

Hmm, IMHO, Robin Lane Fox's The Unauthorized Version: Truth and Fiction in the Bible is probably a better choice for people into apologetics, since it's readable but more in-depth when it comes to the Bible. I've read The God Delusion and I'd say that there is little there that someone exposed to apologetics hasn't seen before.

You are making the assumption that JAStewart's christian friend knows anything about "apologetics" and isn't just parroting on a book their pastor gave them.

[DoubtingStephen]

Besides - with a God who is outside of reality, there is no way to prove or disprove his existence.


I agree that the way that Christian theologists describe their Imaginary Bearded Sky Daddy is consistent with it existing only outside of reality.

But is it not plainly evident that a thing that can only exist outside of reality therefore can not exist?

As to the topic of this thread, I have not read the book in question and I feel quite confident in predicting that I never will.

The description of Yahweh and his relationship to the things that actually do exist make it perfectly clear to me that Yahweh can not possibly exist. This makes the entire Judaeo Christian stack of cards tumble down into a set of ancient fairy tales, no more compelling than tales of Zeus or Egyptian Pharaoh gods. Just brutal, cruel and repulsive, that's my opinion of the Legend of Yahweh..