The Case for Christ

In general, this was a well written book. He does build a strong case for Christ with his arguments and evidence, using 'typical' law rules to prove his case. Eye Witness, Historical Evidence, Expert Testimony and so on. He makes references in the bible to test consistency of the writings and events. All in all, it's not something scholars have never thought of - Lee Strobel verbalized it well.

There are however, 'holes' to his logic if you will.

1. No expert testimony from the opposing view. To get a holistic picture and to present a well balanced case, seeing as this is one of his 'key' premises to proving the case for Christ.

2. He makes a case for the authenticity of the document against the Illiad. If the Illiad is inaccurate from the beginning and has x number of versions, it doesn't matter how many translations it's been through, or version control or whatever, it is still inaccurate. Making a comparison to this book does not increase the bible's authenticity. He quotes the nature and stature of those who kept those records as time goes by and the strictness of versioning. Well, if the 'original' was wrong to begin with, it doesn't matter how strict the Church maintains its versioning control, you're maintaining strict control of inaccuracy.

Those were my biggest objections to his logic. All in all, it was a well written book and I do recommend it.