What do you think?
Rate this book
Challenging the Verdict: A Cross-Examination of Lee Strobel's "The Case for Christ"
In the face of modern critical scholarship, which is steadily eroding the historical reliability of the Gospels and their presentation of Jesus, conservative writers have been making valiant attempts to reestablish confidence in the Christian record and doctrine. The most prominent of these, in popular exposure and commercial success, has been Lee Strobel, in his 1998 book The Case for Christ. In that book, Lee Strobel, an ex-court journalist, conducts a series of 14 interviews with well-known conservative and evangelical scholars of the New Testament, such as Craig Blomberg, William Lane Craig and Gary Habermas, in an attempt to establish the reliability of the Gospel account and the truth of the Resurrection. Within the context of a scholarly critique, Earl Doherty, author of The Jesus Puzzle (also available on Amazon) takes quotations from those interviews and sets up his own dialogue with them, as though cross-examining Strobel and his witnesses in a courtroom before judge and jury. This makes for gripping reading, a strong atmosphere and an effective way to present the case in favor of a more rational and coherent view of the Christian record and the origins of Christianity. Challenging the Verdict exposes the deficiencies, the fallacies, the selective and misleading use of evidence inherent in The Case for Christ, and offers more reasonable alternatives. Challenging the Verdict is written in simple, clear, conversational language, with elements of humor and insight into logic and history. The book addresses all aspects of the Christian Gospels, epistles, non-canonical documents. Occasionally, it steps beyond the scope of New Testament interpretation and discusses religion and rationality in general. Challenging the Verdict provides an ideal response for those who have had Lee Strobel's book urged upon them by friends, family members and their local clergy. Now you can offer something in return that will show why there is good reason to question the Gospels and reject their claims.
Paperback
First published December 1, 2001
1 person is currently reading
99 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
Read
May 29, 2015The Case for Christ was a Christian propaganda book in which Lee Strobel interviewed a selection of fundamentalist Christians and got them to give their excuses for why the vast majority of modern scholarship is wrong and the bible can be considered literally true. He throws a few softballs, but makes no attempt to critically interrogate them or their responses.
This book asks the questions a skeptic would have asked, with imagined responses and counter responses. It is clear that the conclusions of Strobel's book are totally unreliable and in no way represent actual scholarship
This book asks the questions a skeptic would have asked, with imagined responses and counter responses. It is clear that the conclusions of Strobel's book are totally unreliable and in no way represent actual scholarship
August 13, 2024
A DETAILED, CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF A POPULAR APOLOGETICS WORK
Earl J. Doherty (born 1941) is a Canadian author who has also written books such as 'Jesus: Neither God Nor Man - The Case for a Mythical Jesus,' 'The Jesus Puzzle: Did Christianity Begin with a Mythical Christ? Challenging the Existence of an Historical Jesus,' etc.
This book is a detailed critique of Lee Strobel's book, 'The Case for Christ: A Journalist's Personal Investigation of the Evidence for Jesus.' Doherty wrote in the Introduction to this 2001 book, "my main purpose here is to expose the fallacy, distortion of evidence and extensive misinterpretation of the record inherent in the 'case' for Christian orthodoxy as presented by Strobel's assembly of conservative scholarly opinion." (Pg. 2)
Against the argument that 1st century critics would have criticized the gospels if they weren't true, Doherty says, "what we don't see is any comment on Christianity at all. If no one seems even aware of Jesus' existence during the first century, it is not surprising that we find no protest against the Gospel story." (Pg. 35) Against Jesus' existence, he states, "There are no Christian artifacts from the first century, no evidence of Jesus' presence anywhere on the landscape. There is not a trace of a mention of any relics associated with Jesus. What about his clothes, the things he used in his day-to-day life? Would none of these artifacts have survived his death, to be preserved by early believers, prized, clamored for, to be seen and touched by the faithful?" (Pg. 78)
About the Messianic prophecies, he argues, "I note that fulfilling all of the so-called prophecies runs into the trillions of trillions. But these numbers are meaningless, because they are based on false premises... if one reads the passages for what they say, and takes into account their contexts, one finds that those ancient prophets were anticipating a king or governor who would literally rule Israel... Jesus, as we know, never ruled Israel; he never brought about the new Golden Age the prophets were promising." (Pg. 138)
He asks, "if Mark was Peter's reporter, how can the original ending of his Gospel have stopped at the angel's direction to the women at the empty tomb, without reporting a single post-resurrection appearance, not even the one to Peter himself?" (Pg. 15) About the statement in Matt 28:15 ['this story has been widely spread among the Jews to this day'], he comments, "If this story was widely known throughout the first century, why do we see no sign of it anywhere else, either in the other Gospels or in the epistles? ... Those reputed references to Jesus in the Jewish Talmud give no hint of such a story circulating among Jews... and ... they would hardly have lost sight of the argument that the disciples had stolen Jesus' body." (Pg. 172)
He rejects the purported "historical core" of the resurrection stories, since we "have reason to regard Matthew and Luke, as well as John in his passion, as essentially reworkings of Mark. The core then becomes the product of Mark alone, with others adding or changing details. Those changes of detail we have examined in regard to the Joseph of Arimathea incident, the exchange with the two thieves on the cross, the different treatments of Jesus' baptism by the evangelists, to mention only a few... [which are] editorial changes by the Gospel writers themselves, to bring things into line with the way they wanted them or felt they should be." (Pg. 173)
Doherty's books are some of the most detailed arguments against traditional Christianity, and will be greatly appreciated to skeptics, atheists, agnostics, and freethinkers of all sorts.
Earl J. Doherty (born 1941) is a Canadian author who has also written books such as 'Jesus: Neither God Nor Man - The Case for a Mythical Jesus,' 'The Jesus Puzzle: Did Christianity Begin with a Mythical Christ? Challenging the Existence of an Historical Jesus,' etc.
This book is a detailed critique of Lee Strobel's book, 'The Case for Christ: A Journalist's Personal Investigation of the Evidence for Jesus.' Doherty wrote in the Introduction to this 2001 book, "my main purpose here is to expose the fallacy, distortion of evidence and extensive misinterpretation of the record inherent in the 'case' for Christian orthodoxy as presented by Strobel's assembly of conservative scholarly opinion." (Pg. 2)
Against the argument that 1st century critics would have criticized the gospels if they weren't true, Doherty says, "what we don't see is any comment on Christianity at all. If no one seems even aware of Jesus' existence during the first century, it is not surprising that we find no protest against the Gospel story." (Pg. 35) Against Jesus' existence, he states, "There are no Christian artifacts from the first century, no evidence of Jesus' presence anywhere on the landscape. There is not a trace of a mention of any relics associated with Jesus. What about his clothes, the things he used in his day-to-day life? Would none of these artifacts have survived his death, to be preserved by early believers, prized, clamored for, to be seen and touched by the faithful?" (Pg. 78)
About the Messianic prophecies, he argues, "I note that fulfilling all of the so-called prophecies runs into the trillions of trillions. But these numbers are meaningless, because they are based on false premises... if one reads the passages for what they say, and takes into account their contexts, one finds that those ancient prophets were anticipating a king or governor who would literally rule Israel... Jesus, as we know, never ruled Israel; he never brought about the new Golden Age the prophets were promising." (Pg. 138)
He asks, "if Mark was Peter's reporter, how can the original ending of his Gospel have stopped at the angel's direction to the women at the empty tomb, without reporting a single post-resurrection appearance, not even the one to Peter himself?" (Pg. 15) About the statement in Matt 28:15 ['this story has been widely spread among the Jews to this day'], he comments, "If this story was widely known throughout the first century, why do we see no sign of it anywhere else, either in the other Gospels or in the epistles? ... Those reputed references to Jesus in the Jewish Talmud give no hint of such a story circulating among Jews... and ... they would hardly have lost sight of the argument that the disciples had stolen Jesus' body." (Pg. 172)
He rejects the purported "historical core" of the resurrection stories, since we "have reason to regard Matthew and Luke, as well as John in his passion, as essentially reworkings of Mark. The core then becomes the product of Mark alone, with others adding or changing details. Those changes of detail we have examined in regard to the Joseph of Arimathea incident, the exchange with the two thieves on the cross, the different treatments of Jesus' baptism by the evangelists, to mention only a few... [which are] editorial changes by the Gospel writers themselves, to bring things into line with the way they wanted them or felt they should be." (Pg. 173)
Doherty's books are some of the most detailed arguments against traditional Christianity, and will be greatly appreciated to skeptics, atheists, agnostics, and freethinkers of all sorts.
December 16, 2012
I have read Lee Strobel's pathetic "Case for" books and was interested in Doherty's book because he wrote it in the form of a courtroom cross examination of that book. Strobel comes away looking like a simple-minded idiot promoting something that would have been thrown out of court for lack of evidence.
As Doherty points out, Strobel did NOT seek real evidence on the existence of an historical Jesus. Instead, he chose people who are conservative Christians to interview and as Doherty accuses, in his "case", the prosecutor, defense attorney, witnesses, judge, and jury are all in collusion and agree on the same evidence and verdict. In other words, there is nothing in that book that would stand up in a real court of law.
He points out in a step-by-step way the problems in Strobel's book. Even I am stunned that Strobel trotted out the old Josephus book which had nothing about Jesus in the original copies and in which church historian and bishop Euresbius admitted to adding two paragraphs about Jesus in medieval times because he was frustrated with the lack of proof there was a Jesus. He also brings out how Pliny was writing about christians being problems which proves there were Christians 200 years later, not that there was a Jesus. He shows clearly that there never was any such census as "Mary and Joseph" were to have gone to (and never any where one had to return to a city where a remote ancestor had once lived) nor was there ever any slaughter of all boys under 2 by Herod or anyone else.
Doherty did an excellent job of calling out Strobel for writing a one sided book with no proof whatsoever.
As Doherty points out, Strobel did NOT seek real evidence on the existence of an historical Jesus. Instead, he chose people who are conservative Christians to interview and as Doherty accuses, in his "case", the prosecutor, defense attorney, witnesses, judge, and jury are all in collusion and agree on the same evidence and verdict. In other words, there is nothing in that book that would stand up in a real court of law.
He points out in a step-by-step way the problems in Strobel's book. Even I am stunned that Strobel trotted out the old Josephus book which had nothing about Jesus in the original copies and in which church historian and bishop Euresbius admitted to adding two paragraphs about Jesus in medieval times because he was frustrated with the lack of proof there was a Jesus. He also brings out how Pliny was writing about christians being problems which proves there were Christians 200 years later, not that there was a Jesus. He shows clearly that there never was any such census as "Mary and Joseph" were to have gone to (and never any where one had to return to a city where a remote ancestor had once lived) nor was there ever any slaughter of all boys under 2 by Herod or anyone else.
Doherty did an excellent job of calling out Strobel for writing a one sided book with no proof whatsoever.
May 11, 2009
Doherty's response to Lee Strobel's lousy book is much appreciated. However, he fails to acknowledge that his own positions are not the most popular with mainstream bible scholarship, and he doesn't always support those positions as well as he should.
July 12, 2010
Strobel is a complete putz and Doherty pretty effectively disassembles the bad apologetics of Strobel and his allies but Doherty is locked into his mythic origins theory that distracted from his arguments
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews