Shai Reads The Case for Christ
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
20-02-2017, 08:49 PM
RE: Shai Reads The Case for Christ
After an hour of discussion about the Intro and Chapter One, our conclusions are rather anti-climactic. We agree on basically every point I posted about. Though we did veer off into the territory of discussion about how much of faith is really a choice, versus something that changes within us and whether childhood indoctrination is a big part of why so many people declare themselves to be Christians, when not necessarily holding fast to the tenets of Christianity.

Chapter One, both our notes were automatically how he doesn't acknowledge the unreliability of eyewitness testimony. Then discussing how things like the Tulsa Race Riot happen from eyewitness testimony that wasn't accurate. Then how Strobel is still starting with a presuppositionalist position; he doesn't try to really contradict or offer alternatives to the interviewed expert's explanation of things. We also noted how he doesn't seem to acknowledge the existence of the Deuterocanonical books (Baruch, Sirach, etc.) by being an Evangelical, and therefore wonder if we'll see him actually investigating them further on. Or if he even ever considered them, because all of his sources are Protestant. By the end of Chapter One, he's no better than he was during the Dixon case, he's just replaced this scholar with the Prosecutor and Cops

Need to think of a witty signature.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Shai Hulud's post
20-02-2017, 11:47 PM
RE: Shai Reads The Case for Christ
I watched Steve Shives dissect this book on YouTube, and it was fucking painful.

I wish these authors would stop pretending their books are aimed at anyone except those who already believe. They're a reassuring pat on the back. For a price, of course. Strobel is to scepticism what I am to weightlifting.

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Robvalue's post
21-02-2017, 12:01 AM
RE: Shai Reads The Case for Christ
I keep thinking that there's a good counter-apologetic against the Christian God (specifically with the idea of an omnipotent, omniscient being who wants the world to know of him and his son etc etc) based on the abysmal quality of Christian apologists.

Glad to see that he's having trouble even convincing fellow Christians.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Reltzik's post
21-02-2017, 12:41 AM
RE: Shai Reads The Case for Christ
(18-02-2017 01:05 PM)Shai Hulud Wrote:  Then there's the utter rejection of the Q hypothesis as only a hypothesis, when in fact it's the most generally accepted theory in Biblical scholarship regarding the Synoptic Gospels. Also what's with slamming Karen Armstrong's A History of God and not interviewing her for a rebuttal? Is this going to be a theme of this book?
The assumption going in, is that readers in the target audience won't have read or be aware of any of this scholarship or other literature, and will accept his paraphrase of it without questioning it. If they *do* question it, they're not really targets in the first place. No true gullible fool...

Quote: Also the idea that the Gospels were written still within the lifetime of some who would have seen Jesus is accurate, but what is inaccurate is that they're saying there were not detractors who said it wasn't true. When in fact, the opposite was the case.
I have no idea what you just said. Hang on... gospels were written within lifetime... OK got that, not sure of veracity but OK. Ah, I see. So Lee Strobel claims that there was no one at the alleged time of Jesus who said the Jesus shit was untrue? I mean, even if that was the case... at the time of Jesus I imagine most literate humans had never heard of him. Bit hard to shout about untruth of statements concerning some bloke you're not even aware exists.

Quote:Also a brief bibliography at the end of the chapter has suggested readings for further evidence, but seems to not want to include Karen Armstrong's A History of God, despite taking potshots at her throughout.
As you saw yourself, it's written to *convince*, not to find truth. It's the exact opposite of teaching properly - proper teachers teach people to think for themselves. Strobel et al try to teach them "the Truth according to Strobel", and to *appear* open to alternative ideas meanwhile subtly trying to avoid engaging with them. Even when a clown like him encounters a direct attack he'll respond in some way so as to portray it as a disagreement between learned men, relying on the trope that "wise men are fools in the eyes of God" and so forth.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like morondog's post
21-02-2017, 12:24 PM
RE: Shai Reads The Case for Christ
(21-02-2017 12:41 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(18-02-2017 01:05 PM)Shai Hulud Wrote:  Then there's the utter rejection of the Q hypothesis as only a hypothesis, when in fact it's the most generally accepted theory in Biblical scholarship regarding the Synoptic Gospels. Also what's with slamming Karen Armstrong's A History of God and not interviewing her for a rebuttal? Is this going to be a theme of this book?
The assumption going in, is that readers in the target audience won't have read or be aware of any of this scholarship or other literature, and will accept his paraphrase of it without questioning it. If they *do* question it, they're not really targets in the first place. No true gullible fool...

Point taken, and agreed mostly. Not about people being inherently fools for reading it, but yeah, I don't think the average audience has ever even heard about the Q document prior to the book. So to hear it so cavalierly dismissed, is probably just going to be what they get about it, and it won't even be worth a Google.

Quote: Also the idea that the Gospels were written still within the lifetime of some who would have seen Jesus is accurate, but what is inaccurate is that they're saying there were not detractors who said it wasn't true. When in fact, the opposite was the case.
I have no idea what you just said. Hang on... gospels were written within lifetime... OK got that, not sure of veracity but OK. Ah, I see. So Lee Strobel claims that there was no one at the alleged time of Jesus who said the Jesus shit was untrue? I mean, even if that was the case... at the time of Jesus I imagine most literate humans had never heard of him. Bit hard to shout about untruth of statements concerning some bloke you're not even aware exists.[/quote]

On the Gospels within the lifetime, the definition I'm using is based on his very loose definition; that someone who was technically alive within the lifetime of Christ, wrote them. Lifetime sometimes extended 60-90 years afterward, but not necessarily meaning they weren't one year old when the events happened. But a fair point regarding the second one, literacy wasn't exactly widespread, at least among the occupied class of Judea. Funny aside, we were discussing the evolution of law the other day in class, and how the Romans were revolutionary in posting their laws where anyone could read in the Forum...assuming you could read.

Quote:Also a brief bibliography at the end of the chapter has suggested readings for further evidence, but seems to not want to include Karen Armstrong's A History of God, despite taking potshots at her throughout.
As you saw yourself, it's written to *convince*, not to find truth. It's the exact opposite of teaching properly - proper teachers teach people to think for themselves. Strobel et al try to teach them "the Truth according to Strobel", and to *appear* open to alternative ideas meanwhile subtly trying to avoid engaging with them. Even when a clown like him encounters a direct attack he'll respond in some way so as to portray it as a disagreement between learned men, relying on the trope that "wise men are fools in the eyes of God" and so forth.
[/quote]

We've yet to get into that trope, but I'm certain it's coming, as you've pointed out. Also, agreed, he doesn't want to explore the truth necessarily, but to convince; and I think that could have been his own investigation as well. I think he wanted to convince himself his wife wasn't crazy and that they could be happy together.

Need to think of a witty signature.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-02-2017, 11:48 PM (This post was last modified: 21-02-2017 11:52 PM by The Organic Chemist.)
RE: Shai Reads The Case for Christ
Oh please PLEASE tell me you're gonna see the movie!!!





This book was SUCH a crock of shit. He claimed that he was going to lay both sided of the argument but forgot the part about the other side.

Edit: calling this book "literature" is a bit of an insult to the written word. What is even scarier is that there is a CFC for kids that is even worse. It's made out of straw. I know, my wife bought a copy.

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like The Organic Chemist's post
22-02-2017, 08:26 AM
RE: Shai Reads The Case for Christ
(21-02-2017 11:48 PM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  Oh please PLEASE tell me you're gonna see the movie!!!





This book was SUCH a crock of shit. He claimed that he was going to lay both sided of the argument but forgot the part about the other side.

Edit: calling this book "literature" is a bit of an insult to the written word. What is even scarier is that there is a CFC for kids that is even worse. It's made out of straw. I know, my wife bought a copy.

On the bolded part...I am so sorry your kids are being exposed to that. No

And do intend to see the movie when it comes out and snark it!

Need to think of a witty signature.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Shai Hulud's post
22-02-2017, 08:31 AM
RE: Shai Reads The Case for Christ
I'd like to say I respect a theist taking a serious look at some apologetics.

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Robvalue's post
22-02-2017, 08:52 AM (This post was last modified: 22-02-2017 08:55 AM by The Organic Chemist.)
RE: Shai Reads The Case for Christ
(22-02-2017 08:26 AM)Shai Hulud Wrote:  
(21-02-2017 11:48 PM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  Oh please PLEASE tell me you're gonna see the movie!!!





This book was SUCH a crock of shit. He claimed that he was going to lay both sided of the argument but forgot the part about the other side.

Edit: calling this book "literature" is a bit of an insult to the written word. What is even scarier is that there is a CFC for kids that is even worse. It's made out of straw. I know, my wife bought a copy.

On the bolded part...I am so sorry your kids are being exposed to that. No

And do intend to see the movie when it comes out and snark it!

They aren't. Evil_monster I masterminded a clandestine operation that managed to dispose of it after I read it.

Edit: If I was going to be your area in April, I would totally sneak out and go see that with you. (You actually live not too far from my in-laws).

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like The Organic Chemist's post
22-02-2017, 10:57 AM
RE: Shai Reads The Case for Christ
I'm really more appalled that they're still pushing this, "I was a skeptical atheist and then I researched The Truth™ and found Jayzus" line of propaganda.

It's easy for Shai to sit there and pick apart the dishonesty of this guy claiming to be performing an honest and neutral investigation into the facts, since in the end all it does is provide a curiosity, an insight into the fundamentalist past he (Shai) walked away from when he changed denominations.

But for us, it's outright slander-- it's propaganda designed to convince people such as my parents/siblings/etc. that any honest atheist who looks into the facts will discover that evangelical Christianity is The Truth™... and therefore any of us who do not come to the "I agree with my family that are pressing this book into my hands" conclusion are deluded, dishonest, and/or outright evil. These books literally destroy families because of the dishonest way they present their cases.

That's why I refer to these guys as the lowest level of scumbag. Watch that video again-- the whole thing is "I was an atheist until I looked into Christianity with an honest and open mind" propaganda. We can sit here all day with people who are actual religious scholars (even amateur ones who simply keep up with actual scholarship on the subject) and point out all the glaring errors, misrepresentations, and illogical nonsense that this book contains on almost literally every page... but in the end, the purpose of the book is to insulate credulous believers against honest inquiry, and inoculate them against listening to anyone who has refused to "drink the KoolAid".

Again, Kudos to you, Shai, for being honest and seeing what the rest of us see when we read these books. I really do appreciate that there are people like you out there.

But if there were very many of you out there, they wouldn't be making that movie. Undecided

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: