Wondering if any atheists on here have ever read Lee Strobel's, "The Case For Faith"?

Question

Lee Strobel was an atheist. He also was a journalist. He set out to disprove christianity and eventually decided to become a christian. Anyway in The Case For Faith, he writes about what he calls the eight "heart" barriers to faith. To summarize, 1) If there is a Loving God why is there suffering? 2) If miracles contradict science, how can a rational person believe? 3) If God is morally pure, How can he sanction the slaughter of innocent children in the OT? 4) If Jesus is the only way, what about people that have never heard of Him? 5) If God cares about people, how could he let them go to hell? 6) If God is the ultimate overseer of the chruch, why has it been rife with hypocrisy and brutality throughout the ages? 7)If God really created the universe, why does the evidence of science compel so many towards evolution? 8) If I'm still plagued by doubts, then is it still possible to be a christian? Wndering if any atheists have read this book, and what they thought about it.

Shawn B What are the holes it is full of in your opinion?
and i didn't ask if it made you change your mind our my question would be directed to former atheists, I just wanted some opinions on the book.

Answer 1

I didn't see anything in it that appeared to be anything other than opinion. He really doesn't make a case for God or for faith.
In suggesting that the arguments like "If there is a Loving God why is there suffering?", "If God is morally pure, How can he sanction the slaughter of innocent children in the OT?", "If God cares about people, how could he let them go to hell?", "If God is the ultimate overseer of the church, why has it been rife with hypocrisy and brutality throughout the ages? " etc., are reasons that people become atheist, then he is really not understanding the true atheist position. While atheists do ask theists those questions, they ask them more for the purpose of making theists really THINK about the things they claim to believe. Those aren't really the reasons that atheists ARE atheist. The majority of atheists will tell you that there is ONE reason that they are atheist, and that is because there is no valid reason to believe in the existence of gods.

Answer 2

All of these theodicies have been disputed long before he arrived on the scene. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 were answered in various forms by Thomas Aquinas, St Augustine, David Hume, Liebniz, Descartes and others. 7 and 8 are more contemporary, but there are still responses. However, every counter argument to a theodicy has it's own refutal, and so the situation still ends up being a stalemate. The only determiner so far seems to be "Either you got faith or you don't". All the other arguments have been metaphysically argued into immobility.

Answer 3

Excerpt from Introduction to "The Case Against Faith"

Strobel's supporters say that this is fair because he intended to write an apologetic, not a balanced point/counterpoint. But Strobel portrays himself as a former atheist and a tough reporter, and reminds us of this constantly. He seems to try too hard to make us believe that he isn't going to take an easy answer from those he interviews. Does he really expect us to believe that he spoke "in a voice laden with sarcasm" to those he interviewed? It is the fact that Strobel proceeds on the pretense of playing the part of the skeptic, but then clearly stacks the deck against the skeptic, that I object to. The Case for Faith hardly qualifies as the work of a hard-nosed reporter trying to cover all the angles, as Strobel would have us believe.

Sometimes the people Strobel interviews seem to contradict each other. Though it is reasonable that, like doctors, not all theologians will agree with each other, if Strobel is to play the part of the skeptical, hard-nosed reporter, he shouldn't let contradictions pass without exploration. There is something disingenuous about interpreting theology in one way to give a plausible answer to one question, and then interpreting it in another way so as to make an answer to another question plausible.

There is one other minor thing to note, and that is that Strobel's interviews often stray from the main topic, or objection, for that chapter. This isn't a criticism, just something to keep in mind. Because Strobel's interviews often stray from the topic at hand, so will my commentaries.

Answer 4

No. I honestly do not need or want to read theist opinions on theism. Their entire religion and everything that makes them who they are is directly taken from only one book, The Bible. That I have read, and studied for years.

People attempting to explain why they choose to believe in a collection of ancient Hebrew myths, I find a bit desperate, and occasionally sad. In particular when it is from someone who had the appearance of being reasonable and fairly intelligent. There is nothing in his book of any value to anyone except another believer.

EDIT
This is a great site debunking Strobel.

Answer 5

I've asked myself each of those question and no Abrahamic based religion could answer them without putting their own spin on them - the cynical me sees it all as propaganda.

What obviously happened to Lee was that he tried so hard to disprove the thing he got swallowed and burned by the thing.
He forgot to remain outside the forest; he forgot to remain objective.

From 'Tales of the Dervishes' by Idries Shah
When the Waters Were Changed

Once upon a time Khidr, the teacher of Moses, called upon mankind with a warning. At a certain date, he said, all the water in the world which had not been specially hoarded, would disappear. It would then be renewed, with different water, which would drive men mad.
Only one man listened to the meaning of this advice. He collected water and went to a secure place where he stored it, and waited for the water to change its character.
On the appointed date the streams stopped running, the wells went dry, and the man who had listened, seeing this happening, went to his retreat and drank his preserved water.
When he saw, from his security, the waterfalls again beginning to flow, this man descended among the other sons of men. He found that they were thinking and talking in an entirely different way from before; yet they had no memory of what had happened, nor of having been warned. When he tried to talk to them, he realized that they thought that he was mad, and they showed hostility or compassion, not understanding.
At first, he drank none of the new water, but went back to his concealment, to draw on his supplies, every day. Finally, however, he took the decision to drink the new water because he could not bear the loneliness of living, behaving and thinking in a different way from everyone else. He drank the new water, and became like the rest. Then he forgot all about his own store of special water, and his fellows began to look upon him as a madman who had miraculously been restored to sanity.

Seneca: Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.
Religion is for people who don't want to go to Hell

When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called Religion.

Morality is doing what is right no matter what you are told. Religion is doing what you are told no matter what is right.
.

Answer 6

Theists lose every argument by reason and evidence—because there is none. If you want to justify your faith read Sören Kierkegaard (reading the Danish philosopher is a miserable experience; something all theists can appreciate). Without him, modern hucksters would not know where to start.

Answer 7

Yes, it's full of holes. Lee Strobel is a fraud and knows nothing of science.

Answer 8

Chances are, he wasn't really an atheist, but was just pretending to be to get better ratings for his book. sorry, some book isn't going to make me change my mind about religion being garbage and lies

Answer 9

I think I have that book. I need to read it again. It's been a long time. He set out to prove to others the Bible was false.