If so what did you think of it?
I am agnostic and for me personally the book, ironically enough, nearly pushed me into absolute atheism. Every example for God that he gave could easily be refuted, the people he interviewed are people who not respected or professionals in their field, and several of the people he interviewed gave misleading and deceptive evidence and on several occasions were caught in their own logic.
Overall I found that the book was manipulative and deceptive and attempted to create the illusion that the reader was given answers when in fact none were actually given.
2007-11-06 11:39:12 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Yes, I read it.
I found it pretty sophomoric.
2007-11-06 11:43:43 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I haven't read that one. I did read The Case for Christ and it was just as poor. Half truths and deceptive evidence seem to be Lee's forte.
It was really humorous following it up with
Challenging the Verdict: A Cross-Examination of Lee Strobel's "The Case for Christ" by Earl Doherty.
He shows just how deceptive and misleading Lee Strobel and his interviewees are.
I think Mr. Strobel is just capitalizing off the Christian sheep who will latch onto anything that supports their views without actually verifying the so called "facts".
2007-11-06 11:50:22 · answer #2 · answered by Primary Format Of Display 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, I read his "The case for Christ" many years ago when I was still more of a deist heading towards agnosticism and I found his arguments very weak, contrived, and didn't stand up to investigation. Actually a pretty poor effort for a supposed trial lawyer.
I don't bother reading apologists books now. I have heard all the recycled arguments in all their versions, and they are no more convincing to me now then when I first found them. All these types of apologist books are written for the believer, not for the true skeptic.
2007-11-06 11:45:14 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
My three-year-old nephew could refute most of what Strobel says.
Also, for whoever posted this, Hugh Ross is just as bad as Strobel is. I'm not familiar with Antony Flew, but he's not in real good company.
2007-11-08 15:56:30 · answer #4 · answered by v35322 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am in the process of reading it. I find it interesting in parts. Some of the data and information presented does lead to the idea of a creator. However when they go from proving a generic creator to trying to probe it is the God of the Bible the logic is very shaky.
I came to the book from a Christian perspective and the perspective of a scientist. And it did not shake my faith but neither did it increase it greatly. The problem is with any argument mainstream science is not going to say it points to God. Not from a conspiracy so much as science cannot by its nature accept the possibility of the supernatural. Science explains the natural world. It is not interested in gods or miracles.
Having said all this I would still recommend reading it. While some of their logic can be a bit strained. It still presents some compelling evidence.
2007-11-06 11:49:10 · answer #5 · answered by Bible warrior 5 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Most of it was over my head. I am ignorant when it comes to science so I'm neutral on the subject. But those people he interviewed at least explained things much better than my biology teacher. My biology teacher openly said she was an atheist, the Bible was wrong and that man is 98% similar to chimps so evolution is true. It was just poor teaching, thats why I do not believe in evolution. The teacher was not academic and did not give any real evidence for it. Similarity proves nothing. The personality of my dog is similar to many humans, is that proof man evolved from dogs?
2007-11-06 11:46:58 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Yes, I have.
Unfortunately, he makes so many horrible errors of logic that the text is completely useless.
Anyone who knows Lee Strobel's life history knows that the real reason for his conversion had nothing to do with the truth but rather desperation to save his marriage.
A prime example of the resolution of cognitive dissonance.
2007-11-06 11:44:05 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
A friend read several passages to me about his views the significance of current work in DNA and implications for evolution. For someone who is a supposed former science writer, his grasp of molecular genetics was poor and his misrepresentation of research in the field was so misleading it could only be described as a collection of lies.
2007-11-06 11:44:59 · answer #8 · answered by Dendronbat Crocoduck 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Sounds just like every other book Lee Strobel has written.
2007-11-06 11:43:15 · answer #9 · answered by Minh 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yes, only the naive give it any merit. It offers absolutely nothing solid.
2007-11-06 11:45:29 · answer #10 · answered by Shawn B 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
That's why I don't take someone else's word for anything.
I use my own mind to reason through things.
Why are you looking to someone else for answers?
2007-11-06 11:46:34 · answer #11 · answered by harshmistressmoon 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋