posted on Feb, 6 2013 @ 07:17 PM
reply to post by NOTurTypical
but for the experts he interviewed?
Yes, you did say that....
but, my investigations after watching him revealed that he was spreading 'claims' of 'scholars' who had no evidence....
and that he talked to some of the 'scholars' who knew something about the leaders of the Jesus Symposium (or whatever it is/was) EDIT: The Jesus
Seminar..... but not to ANY of the people who were actually part of it!!
Kinda like me becoming a convert to the Baptist church next door, based solely on what that preacher said and not talking to any of his "microscopic"
congregation. (Seriously, Sunday there were 3 cars in the parking lot. Most Sundays there are ZERO.)
That, for me, is a 'no go.'
The Case Against The Case for Christ
A response to Christian apologetics literature This review and analysis is of the book
The Case for Christ, by Lee Strobel
First Edition paperback, published 1998 (ISBN 0310209307), by Harper-Collins Zandervan
I often get letters from Christian apologists and evangelicals of the fundamentalist stripe. They often challenge me to read some apologetic
literature and then decide for myself. I've always challenged them in response, telling them to send me some, saying that I would read it. The
apologists almost never respond to that offer. So I was surprised, one day, when a Christian actually did just that - he sent me a copy of the book he
was recommending. Well, I'm a man of my word, so I read it. In the process, I decided to write this essay from my notes.
This book consists largely of "interviews" of prominent Christian apologists - no secular scholars of any note, just apologists. Written in a
narrative style, designed for easy, laid-back reading that is familiar to readers of apologetic literature, it is intended to build a case that the
historical record of the New Testament is accurate and believable. Its case is most powerfully made to those who already accept unquestioningly the
authority of the gospels. In this sense, it is really preaching to the choir. For the rest of us, the author tries to get us hooked by demonstrating
that authority early on - right in the first part of the book, in fact.
The book is very cleverly crafted. It is often claimed by the proponents of this book that the author wrote it when he was an atheist, and was
undergoing the conversion process. This is not true. From a careful reading (see the last two paragraphs at the bottom of page 14), he makes it quite
clear that he wrote it as a fully committed Christian, "retracing" his spiritual path an indeterminate period of time after the fact. As such, it is
yet another ordinary piece of apologetic axe-grinding.
It has a logical sequence of interviews, ostensibly by a skeptical journalist, yet never once does he interview even a single skeptic, either
first-line such as Michael Shermer or Steven Jay Gould, or any of the many more obscure, such as Thomas Mack, Earl Doherty or Dan Barker, any of who
could have easily and quickly demolished the points raised by the apologists he so eagerly interviewed.
This is not the product I would expect from someone trying to faithfully recount the details of his conversion, having gone through more than one
conversion process myself. Rather, this is precisely the structure that I would expect to see from a "market" book, one written for a specific market
by or with a skilled propaganda ghost writer.
For example, each part is prefaced with a captivating story, ostensibly drawn from the journalist-author's "experience," that is designed to
underscore the methods the subsequent chapter uses as being valid. It then proceeds to the interview, bringing up each point to reinforce that
salesmanship, and lack of objective sources. Fail.
But, Wait! There's more!!
I am quite familiar with the ghostwriting process, having been interviewed extensively for a book written by a ghostwriter that eventually became
a New York Times best seller. Ironically enough, it was also a religious book - cleverly designed to sell Mormonism by selling its doctrine in the
guise of "personal experience." It, too, was a market propaganda fake.
The market Strobel's book was written for, is clear: it is written for the Christian evangelical market. It is really preaching to the choir; it is
so blatantly one-sided that I can't imagine any thinking skeptic being taken in by it, and I'm sure that Strobel realized that. But he's not selling
the book to skeptics. He's selling it to Christians who either want to reinforce their faith, or think they're going to convince their skeptic friends
Yet another scathing review of Strobel's lack of depth and bent toward sales alone.
edit on 6-2-2013 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)