By Kush K.
Lee Strobel's book, despite its high sounding title, miserably
fails to make a case for the historicity of Jesus Christ. Strobel,
without doubt, is a dramatic writer. Unfortunately, drama cannot
substitute for substance, logic and consistency. Drama is not evidence.
Strobel is a former legal affairs journalist. Strobel's background
makes it harder for me to believe that his earnestness about
his case for Christ is real. What is real is his immaculate understanding
of his main audience (hordes of believing Christians) who are
predisposed to accept any evidence that confirms
their belief in Jesus Christ as a historical character. Strobel
deftly exploits this predisposition of his audience to the fullest.
To those who are not similarly predisposed, but eager to sincerely
hear his case, Strobel's brilliance fails to dazzle. In fact,
the lack of substance in his case is disappointing,
even annoying.
PREPPING HIS AUDIENCE STROBEL'S INTRODUCTION
Strobel cleverly uses the introduction of his book primarily
to prep his audience. He starts out by informing his audience
that he was an atheist.
[Message: Unlike many of you, I am not predisposed to believing.]
It was the sudden conversion of his wife to evangelical Christianity
that changed Strobel's life. The wife's conversion impelled Strobel
to take Christianity seriously and to inquire the historicity
of the Gospel accounts. Immediately he puts his audience into
a great, positive mood by claiming that Christianity had no negative
effects on his wife. Strobel's initial fears regarding her wife's
conversion, such as her turning into a sexually repressed
prude, were groundless. Much to Strobel's relief, Mrs.
Strobel maintained her upwardly mobile lifestyle. Not
only that, to Strobel's utter amazement, Mrs. Strobel miraculously
developed integrity of character and personal
confidence. To the believing audience the message is clear:
Jesus Christ has to be real to cause such fundamental changes
in her character. To the unbelievers the subtle message
is: No further proof is necessary. But since I said I will
give you evidence for the historical
reality of Jesus Christ, I shall condescend.
To further prep his audience Strobel asserts, we can't
have absolute proof about anything in life. That is a specious
statement. Who is asking for absolute proof? All
that is being asked is proof beyond a reasonable doubt. By making
this absolute proof statement, Strobel is once again
sending a subtle message to his audience: There is sufficient
'proof' for the Jesus story. But the skeptics are not going to
believe even if 'absolute proof' were offered. Strobel
continues this technique through out his book of sending subliminal
manipulative messages to his ingratiated audience.
THE EYEWITNESS EVIDENCE
That is the title of Strobel's first chapter. When I read that
title I thought Strobel is going to do what no one has done:
Present eyewitnesses accounts of the life of Jesus Christ. So
what is Strobel up to? Well, through an irrelevant contemporary
story of a black youth named Leo Carter, who witnesses murder
and in the process almost gets killed, Strobel is dramatizing
the importance of eyewitness testimony. Thank you Mr. Strobel
for the dramatic story of Leo, or we would not know the central
importance of an eyewitnesses testimony. Strobel writes: I
knew just as Leo Carter's testimony clinched the convictions
of three brutal murderers, eyewitness accounts from the mists
of distant time could help resolve the most important spiritual
issue of all. Leo Carter's story as an eyewitness to multiple
murders is real life drama. I begin to shift in my chair with
excitement at the possibility of meeting the Leo Carters of distant
time. Strobel punctures the balloon of my excitement. Instead
of bringing eyewitnesses to the witness box to get solid
answers, who does he bring? Hold your breath! It is Craig
Blomberg, the author of The Historical Reliability of the
Gospels.
So much so for the eyewitnesses!
To clear the mist hanging over Strobel's opening chapter, let
us imagine that Strobel is in the courtroom before the judge.
He just finished relating Leo Carter's story. This is what happens
next.
Judge: Mr. Strobel now produce your eyewitnesses please.
Silence.
Judge: Mr. Strobel, I heard your irrelevant story about the black
kid, now will you produce the eyewitnesses for your case, please.
Silence.
Judge: One last time, Mr. Strobel, do you have an eyewitness?
Strobel: Your honor, I have an expert who can testify...
Judge: Mr. Strobel, by the story of the black kid you gave me
the impression you had eyewitnesses don't you even have one eyewitness?
Strobel: I have an expert, actually several scholarly, sincere,
Christian experts, who are willing to testify.
Judge: So, you concede you have no eyewitness for Jesus Christ?
Strobel: Your honor, I will offer you expert testimony that shall
convince you and the jury of the authenticity of the Jesus story.
That summarizes what Strobel's book is about. From here on all
that Strobel does is talk to Christian experts who according
to him are scholars of distinction and know their subject well.
So much so that Strobel does not see the necessity to talk to
any neutral or non Christian sources. Strobel's case
is exclusively based on interviews he conducts with Christian experts. This
one sided opinion is presented as testimony. And
woe unto you if you do not believe this testimony. Case closed.
Strobel completely aligns himself with the religious mindset
and the book is nothing but a reinforcement of accepted Christian
belief and scholarship. Not only his case has no
eyewitnesses he has nothing to offer by way of new research or
unbiased answers.
Is this deception or what? Why not tell the reader at the outset, Look
I have nothing new to offer. I concede there are NO eyewitnesses
for my case for Christ. But I can offer you the expert opinion
of Christian scholars who know what they are talking about. Such
forthright statements are not made because such an admittance
does not sell books and allow their authors to bank on their
audience credulity.
THE PROBLEM
Religions ask the right fundamental questions about life. But
it does not follow the answers provided are right. Keeping firm
this religious tradition, Strobel raises all the right questions:
But what eyewitness accounts do we possess? Do we have
the testimony of anyone who personally interacted with Jesus,
who listened to his teachings, who saw his miracles, who witnessed
his death, and who perhaps even encountered him after his alleged
resurrection? Do we have any records from first-century "journalists" who
interviewed eyewitnesses, asked tough questions, and faithfully
recorded what they scrupulously determined to be true? Equally
important, how well would these accounts withstand the scrutiny
of skeptics? (Chapter 1, pp. 23)
You could not ask it better. The problem: The standard of his
answers do not match the quality of his questions. When the chaff
is separated, Strobel's provides the standard Christian answers
that fail to withstand the scrutiny of skeptics. As we saw Strobel
fails to produce eyewitness testimony. But never does he acknowledges
that in plain English. He keeps pretending as though eyewitness
accounts exists, and have been found, and have been scrutinized
by scholarly experts. As a former legal affairs writer I am sure
he know what hearsay means.
WHAT ABOUT OTHER EVIDENCE?
So what if Strobel fails to produce any direct eyewitness testimony.
What about other evidence? Once again Strobel convincingly displays
his experience as a legal affairs journalist. Strobel writes:
In this quest for truth, I've used my experience as a
legal affairs journalist to look at numerous categories of proof eyewitness
evidence, documentary evidence, corroborating evidence, rebuttal
evidence, scientific evidence, psychological evidence, and, yes,
even fingerprint evidence (that sounds intriguing, doesn't it?). (Introduction,
pp. 17)
Indeed Strobel is a master of intrigue and drama. Once again,
the unwary reader is given the impression that in his quest for
evidence Strobel has uncovered irrefutable evidence in all these
categories. There is no truth to that impression. It is hard
for me to believe that Strobel actually believes that he has
uncovered convincing evidence in all the categories he enumerates.
As a legal affairs journalist he knows the quality of his evidence.
But Strobel is selling a book not truth. He knows if he can fudge
and hide behind expert Christian scholars of repute and character, he
will succeed in persuading his predisposed audience. Cleverly,
he never claims that his evidence proves anything. He leaves
the final judgment to you, the juror. He urges us
to be of open mind once again sending that subliminal
message to his captive audience of believers: If the skeptics
do not believe this incredible evidence I have presented, it
is because skeptics are prejudiced and do not have an open mind.
The shoe is on the other foot, Mr. Strobel.
ULTIMATE QUESTION THAT CHRISTIANS CANNOT ANSWER
The Christian theology is based on a theistic God who is in
control of the universe and intervenes actively in human affairs.
This God has a plan for salvation. He executed that plan through
Jesus Christ, his only begotten son. In short, Jesus Christ was
sent on earth to fulfill God's plan of salvation through his
suffering and death. This is the bedrock of Christianity.
I ask this to Christians and have never received a satisfactory
answer: If God is in control and the coming of Jesus Christ was
all planned, then how come God forgot to leave eyewitness accounts
of such an important event?
Why are we even discussing this? We are discussing this because
evidence for the historicity of Jesus is so meager that it is
hard to believe that the all-knowing God will not leave any convincing
evidence for the benefit of the coming generations. If this is
true then on the Jesus story depends the salvation of the world.
Then how come we are deprived of any significant historical evidence?
The Christians, of course, retort by saying that there is enough
evidence out there which proves that the Gospel account of the
life of Jesus Christ are accurate. The facts, unfortunately,
are other wise. There is not a single eyewitness account. There
is no archeological evidence. No corroborative evidence. All
we have are a few fragments that even when put together reveal
nothing.
At best the historical evidence for Jesus is so meager that
it is non-existent. Now why would an all-knowing God do such
a poor job of leaving solid historical evidence? I do not understand
that.
One perverted answer is that God wants to test your belief.
If he left irrefutable evidence then there will be no necessity
of belief. This is a circular argument: Heads I win, tails
you lose. If this belief premise is accepted then God must
love selectively. It contradicts, For God so loved the
world... assertion. If God has love, and if he is in control
of this universe, then why will he be testing only the capacity
to believe? Why not test the ability to think and reason and
the capacity for logic?
As I said, no Christian has been able to provide a satisfactory
answer to this contradiction in Christian theology. The omniscient,
omnipotent God fails to provide reasonable and reliable historical
evidence for a supposedly life changing episode in the history
of humankind. He leaves it to the likes of Strobel to explain
to us in the 21st century, the historicity of his only son. Very
strange. Something is not right here.
MORE?
I have not made the attempt to go through, page by page, of
the rest of Strobel's account because this has been brilliantly
done by Jeffrey
J. Lowder.
The reader can also see Earl
Doherty's dedicated work.
Another short but very lucid review is provided by Richard
Packham
By Kush K. |