Atheists, what do you think of Lee Strobel and his work "The Case for Christ"?

Question

Have you read the book or watched the film? If so, what did you think?

I agree. I did not like the fact that he only sought Christian scholars. If he really was investigating, he'd recieve information from both sides.

Although I do find interesting that Christian scholars were able to convince such a strong atheist. Even though he sought Christian scholars, their "evidence" could still have made him skeptical, yet he became convinced....

Answer 1

I loved that book..It is up there with the "Crisis of Conscience" and "Kingdom of the Cults"

Answer 2

More of the same.
Look, I would like to believe that there is a life after death and some sort of absolute justice in the universe, but I see no evidence of it, and nobody I've spoken to, from any religion (and nothing I've read) has even been able to present even a single piece of unequivocal evidence that their religious beliefs are correct.
When somebody can come and offer me proof of a god, I'll believe, until then, I'll stick to believing things that can be shown to be true and trying not to hurt anybody else in the process (which would also be a good thing for the religious to adopt as a practice, it would certainly make the world a less dangerous place around now)

Answer 3

All of those theodicies were disputed lengthy earlier than he arrived at the scene. one million, two, three, four, five and six had been spoke back in more than a few types via Thomas Aquinas, St Augustine, David Hume, Liebniz, Descartes and others. 7 and eight are extra modern day, however there are nonetheless responses. However, each counter argument to a theodicy has it is possess refutal, and so the concern nonetheless finally ends up being a stalemate. The handiest determiner thus far appears to be "Either you received religion or you do not". All the opposite arguments were metaphysically argued into immobility.

Answer 4

I have read excerpts.But not the whole thing.It seems to be that a person writing a book entitled "the case FOR Christ" has already committed himself to be bias in order to make that case.Choosing experts who are also already bias and pointing to only one perspective for supportive "evidence".The case for Christ is a weak case that depends more on simple faith and the Bible then it does on unbiased historical examination.

Answer 5

He makes claims that are not supported by fact in places and other times states things as fact where there is much debate and lack of consensus in the area of Biblical scholarship. If you try to check out some of the claims or statements he makes anyone would realize he is very much making presumptions and overstating the case.

Answer 6

I have read it and can say that if that's the best he can do in presenting a case, I will never hire him as my attorney.

Sorry, but saying God exists because the Bible says so is an illogical argument to make no matter how many big words you throw in to try and hide your lack of evidence.

Answer 7

I'm a Christian already, and even I as a believer can see the holes in his "documentation." He offers incomplete arguments and doesn't fully cite his sources.

If he were offering this evidence in a court of law, for instance, it would be circumstantial, at best.

Answer 8

He's just another christian apologist. Nothing really new here. Same old tired and mostly incorrect arguments. All faith based, not a lot of fact involved.

Answer 9

I read the book and thought it was a one sided argument. He only talked to other believers. He was heII bent on becoming a believer. Who is it that he interviews again? oh yeah evangelical Christians :) nice.

Answer 10

I thought it was hysterical.

The most irrational and deranged work since Mein Kampf.

Of course, what do you expect from someone who believes in invisible spirit gods?