Rating: 
Summary: Christians should read this book
Review: As someone who has defended Christianity, it might be expected that I would praise Strobel's book and damn Doherty's. However, Doherty does a wonderful job of skewering Strobel's "The Case for Christ." Christians who read Strobel's book and then think they're ready to take on skeptics like Doherty are in for a rude disappointment. However, that's not to say that Doherty's book doesn't have a few problems of its own. For instance, I think it would be interesting to see how well other personages of ancient history like Socrates would fare if Doherty applied the same standards to them as he uses to question the historicity of Jesus. However, it is not my intention to use this review for a rebuttal. Instead, I would recommend this book to all thinking Christians who want to really understand why sincere and thoughtful skeptics disagree with us regarding Jesus.
Rating: 
Summary: My REVIEW is a must read, but the book isn't
Review: Let's take an honest look at how this book is presented: Earl Doherty "cross-examines" his opponents without even giving them the chance to respond. How scholarly of him. Lee Strobel's book ("The Case For Christ") is far more balanced, whereas Doherty makes his "critiques" and apparently ASSUMES that they cannot be refuted. If the Biblical scholars, theologians, and philosophers whom Earl criticizes had been given the opportunity to counter Doherty, they would have grilled him. It's obvious why Earl didn't bother to interview them--he would have never been able to withstand the heat. All you have to do is compare their credentials with his to see why. By the way, the notion that Jesus never even existed is so far-fetched that few reputable historians give it credibility. Doherty is in the vast, VAST minority in taking such a position. I like the way the late F.F. Bruce, eminent professor at the University of Manchester, put it: "Some writers may toy with the fancy of a 'Christ-myth,' but they do not do so on the ground of historical evidence. The historicity of Christ is as axiomatic for an unbiased historian as the historicity of Julius Caesar. It is not historians who propagate the 'Christ-myth' theories." Along with "The Case For Christ" and "The Case For Faith" (both by Lee Strobel), I encourage all skeptics to read "Reasonable Faith" by Dr. William Lane Craig. Especially check out the two chapters entitled "The Absurdity of Life Without God" and "The Existence of God." These chapters provide obvious philosophical, scientific (i.e., the Big Bang, thermodynamics, etc.) and moral arguments in support of God's existence that will challenge any open-minded skeptic. Dr. Craig also has a concise little booklet available called "God, Are You There?" (which is also very good and contains similar proofs). The great Puritan preacher Charles Spurgeon once said, "The only real argument against the Bible is an unholy life. When a man argues against the Word of God, follow him home, and see if you cannot discover the reason of his enmity to the Word of the Lord. It lies in some sort of sin." So then, skeptic, this is why you shouldn't wait any longer about your eternal salvation: If you have ever told a lie, you are a liar. If you have ever stolen something (regardless of value), you are a thief. Jesus said that if you look with lust, you commit adultery in your heart. If you've ever hated someone, the Bible says that you have committed murder in your heart. And because you have a conscience, you sin with full knowledge that it's wrong. Your sin has angered God. In fact, the Bible teaches that you are His enemy. When God judges you by the Ten Commandments, He will find you guilty, and a guilty person (like in any court of law) must be punished. After all, God, like any just and moral judge, must punish wrongdoing; and so just as a human judge must sentence you for breaking civil law, so God must sentence you for breaking His Law. On Judgment Day, you will be found guilty and end up in Hell. But there's good news: "...God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us" (Romans 5:8, NIV). Jesus Christ took your punishment when He suffered on the cross, and then He rose from the dead and defeated death. You are guilty of breaking God's Law (the Ten Commandments), but Jesus paid your fine. If you repent and trust in Him as your Savior and Lord, God will forgive you and grant you everlasting life. So do it today--you may not have a tomorrow. One day this will be true. If you die in your sins, however, there will be no second chance. God will be forced to give you justice, and the Bible says, "Nothing in all creation is hidden from God's sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account" (Hebrews 4:13, NIV). On the Day of Judgment, God will expose every secret sin in your life and every deed done in darkness. As Jesus put it: "...do not be afraid of those who kill the body and after that can do more. But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after the killing of the body, has power to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him" (Luke 12:5, NIV). "For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--His eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse" (Romans 1:20, NIV). And finally, skeptics and Christians alike, be sure to check out the following website: livingwaters.com/good/001.shtml
Rating:
Summary: Earl Doherty, the atheist champion
Review: In some ways, I almost feel bad for Earl Doherty. At this point in his career, very young and very fragile, he's almost the sole champion of the Christ-myth. A few others have popped up from time to time, but only Doherty has shown clear, concise, and objective rational to his decisions and information. Other Christ-myth books have thus far projected a lot of animosity towards Christianity, and use sources that are so unreliable and questionable that it's clear the bias to destroy the historical Jesus is stronger than scholarship or an objective viewpoint. Earl Doherty is much different than that. Earl shows a logical, sequential, and unbiased progression through the mud and obfuscations that Strobel's researchers have put up. In many cases, it is just mud that they throw up to get us to accept their reasonings. The book by Strobel shows a clear amount of ghost-writing done in it, in such a fashion that the book is written so that:
1.) It starts by examining the easiest objections, by saying that the New Testament documents are reliable, and have been accurately transmitted down to us. 2.) Then it seeks to reinforce the believers that the New Testament is correct, by showing historical and archaeological evidence for the New Testament. 3.) Then it seeks to destroy counter-arguments by using the Bible, which the previous two points should have proved "irrefutable", and the Bible is the complete Word of God. 4.) Finally, it says that you can trust the Bible completely, so don't worry about any objections that those silly liberal Christians and secular researchers may put up. The manner in which the book is constructed is clearly intended to first convince, then reinforce that conviction, and finally by taking on any dissenting views, squelch any doubt. However, Doherty destroys their foundation down so that the four step process of conviction doesn't happen anymore. As Doherty gains fame through the printing of books like this, the Christ-myth will become more and more popular,... The bottom-line is that Doherty is a fantastic scholar who will hopefully be writing books for a long time to come. His thorough and exhaustive work is a joy for any secular reader, or even a Christian who wants a real look into the Christ-paradigm.
Rating:
Summary: A Compendium of Scholarship and Common Sense
Review: Lee Strobel in "The Case for Christ" organized his arguments in orderly fashion, dividing his interviews with Christian scholars into neat categories relating to the Gospels and evangelists, the manuscripts, Jesus' nature and personality, Old Testament prophecy, the resurrection, etc. But because Doherty more or less follows Strobel step by step, discrediting just about everything Strobel and his witnesses have put forward, this book is a very efficient compendium of counter-arguments to many facets of Christian doctrine. I also liked the Index, which is quite detailed, and identifies important sub-categories for each of the pages listed under a main heading. It's easy to find your way around this book, and it's also a delightful read, often amusing, due in no small part to Doherty's easy and clear writing style and his colorful courtroom approach in which he dialogues with quotations from Strobel's book. I could almost smell the wood of the judge's bench. There's something on every page, and it struck me just how effortless it all seems. Rarely does Doherty have to reach for a counter-argument, and everything makes a lot of sense. Of course, Strobel and his witnesses, being extremely conservative, often leave themselves wide open, but I've never seen the entire range of unreliable beliefs which Christianity has been saddled with so neatly and effectively debunked. Craig Blomberg, for example, declares confidently that we can trust in the identities and eyewitness character of all four Gospel authors, but he himself admits that the first mention of all four can be found no earlier than the year 180, and Doherty shows that there is little sign of any wider knowledge of those Gospels' existence before the 150s. Doherty comes up with some fresh arguments I'd never heard before to discredit the idea that Acts could have been written no later than 62, as Blomberg claims, such as that "Luke" (or whoever was the author) would have had to go to Paul himself for a lot of information, since traditions about Paul and his movements could hardly have been circulating so early; but in that case why did he get so much 'wrong' when you compare Acts' details to Paul's own letters? And if Luke, Paul's reputed companion, was the author of the Gospel of that name, why doesn't he identify himself as such in the Gospel's Preface, or give any hint that he had known Paul? The book is full of things like this which seem so sensible once they're raised. Bruce Metzger, a very respected scholar (perhaps Strobel's one stellar light) claims that we have parts of New Testament manuscripts from "a couple of generations from the writing of the originals" but Doherty points out that only a small scrap of John can be dated around the middle of the second century, while everything else comes, in pieces, only after the year 200 and later, and in any kind of complete form only after 300. Metzger should have known better than to set up sitting ducks like this. But he's not the only one. William Lane Craig, that much-touted debater on the resurrection, is caught out by Doherty in an outrageous circular argument in defending the historicity of Matthew's guard at the tomb scene. And Gary Habermas doesn't fare much better in trying to skate around all the contradictions in the various Gospel accounts of the resurrection appearances. Doherty's writing skills can conjure up the tone of the prosecuting attorney very well, and one can almost imagine the sweat on the brow in cross-examinations like these. Which is not to say that it's all a case of sitting ducks. Some of the exchanges Doherty sets up are quite sophisticated and even subtle, such as his cross-examination of Gregory Boyd about naturalism vs. supernaturalism, and the question of who might have borrowed from whom where Christianity and the Greek mysteries are concerned. And his "God the Son" chapter with Donald Carson shows that Doherty knows his stuff when it comes to Greek philosophy and how early Christian faith in a divine, spiritual Son is dependent on ideas most people today have never heard of. His chapter on Old Testament prophecy completely undercuts the fundamental Christian claim that the Jewish Bible was a divinely-directed prophetic book about Jesus. Then there's Luke's universal census under Augustus. Untenable. Matthew's slaughter of the innocents by Herod? The same. The reliability of a genuine original in Josephus' Testimonium? Not a chance. Judas, Mary Magdalene, Joseph of Arimathea: all literary inventions of Mark, more than likely. Demons and demon possession, such as the Gospels portray in Jesus' healing exorcisms? Primitive and irrational. Hell has to go, too, under Doherty's insightful observations about that deranged little dogma. This sort of thing is the icing on the layer cake where Doherty occasionally discusses issues of rationality and modern enlightenment, and the need for more of it in our society today. From what I gather from his Jesus Puzzle website, he himself has published this book under the name "Age of Reason Publications." A very apt name. One comes away from Challenging the Verdict wondering how long it's going to take before we come to our senses.
Rating: 
Summary: May we have a little civility, please?
Review: As I read both the supporters and detractors of this book, I am saddened by the lack of respect shown by readers and reviewers toward each other on both sides of the issue. Name calling, insults, and red herrings do not accomplish anything, except to drive people of differing opinions further apart. It is so easy to set up a straw man and knock him down "intellectually" in a book review. I see it happen all the time in these reviews. The reviewers often do not present much of a case themselves, either. A suggestion I have for anyone wanting to search out these issues is to invest in videotaped debates between the best minds on both sides of these important issues. They can be gotten from a variety of sources (probably including Amazon). Then sit back and evaluate as the issues are confronted by the debators head to head. But please, knock off the written insults. It is so tiring, and produces more heat than light. I have purposely been non-committal in my star rating of this book, and am not stating my position for or against it. I believe that, given enough time, truth wins out. That is my comfort.
Rating:
Summary: A few explanations
Review: Some of the arguments he produces may seem good at a glance but they could easily contradict his own belief. For example, he states that in Strobels book when they said Matthew,Mark,Luke were unlikely characters, he then says that they were likely characters and they did play a big role in spreading the gospel.OK, now, you see Earl here does not beleive Jesus ever existed. But now he wants us to believe that Matthew, Mark, Luke were real, and they were major characters. But why then would they dedicate their lives to something they know to be false and then die for it. That is what I would call strange.
Another is wher he cross examines Bruce Metzger and says most of the new testament is in fragments. What Earl here is expecting is that we should find entire gospels not fragments. Now look we are talking 2000 years you are not going to find whole gospels dating from that long ago. And even Atheist Antony Flew admits that the quantity of new testament articles unuaslly high. Last once you say Jesus never existed you are throwing a lot of theories out the window such as Swoon theory,Hallucinations, Group think, and so on. But do not think these are valid any way. They are not, again Antony Flew even says the Swoon Theory is rubbish. And last Earl Doherty and G.A. Wells are the last of there kind. They both think Jesus never existed, virtually no one holds this positon anymore. Dr. Morton Smith a known sceptic even said that Wells view was "absurd". Earl would get seroiusly pounded in a debate with Habermas or Will Craig.
Rating:
Summary: 21st Century Thomas Paine
Review: Whenever I see a book pertaining to Christian apologetics in which the reviews are either one-star or five-star, my interest level soars. Why? Because, the author has hit somebodies hot button. The five-star reviewers consider the book a gem and the one-star reviewers are furiously trying to find some basis on which to appear objective in refuting it. The prospective book buyer can simply read the reviews,decide which viewpoint is intellectually appealing,and act accordingly. In my view, Doherty's book is a simple straight forward refutation of fundamentalist Christianity's shining lights of alleged scholarship. Doherty has no need to use ad hominem slurs to which the one-star reviewers resort. The authors logic and honesty exposes the intellectual dishonesty of Christian apologists in their search to find some rational basis for belief their savior-god, Jesus of Nazareth. If someone is looking for a quality intellect to recommend Doherty's book, consider the words of deist Thomas Paine, whose pamphlet "Common Sense" helped inspire the American Revolution: "The study of theology, as it stands in Christian churches, is the study of nothing; it is founded on nothing; it rests on no principles; it proceeds by no authorities; it has no data; it can demonstrate nothing; and it admits of no conclusion. Not any thing can be studied as a science, without our being in possession of the principles upon which it is founded; and as this is not the case with Christian theology, it is therefore the study of nothing." -- Thomas Paine For an objective overview of Christanity's bankrupt foundations, Doherty's books are a "MUST READ"!
Rating:
Summary: Excellent & Necessary!
Review: With all the rubbish being shoveled into innocent and uneducated minds, the human race sorely needs "Challenging the Verdict." It seems as if the critics have not read Doherty's book but are relying on a critique by the irrational and dishonest "tektonics" cult, which instantly damages their credibility. No reasonable person will concur with these critics, who keep repeating the same nonsense about the poor apologists not being able to respond to Doherty's remarks. The fact is that these apologists and many others have practically free rule of the media, with many radio and TV programs, where they can and do air their views, constantly, 24-7. Doherty's small voice is being heard by a tiny minority, but still these whiners want to silence even that. Are they so insecure in their beliefs? They should be, as the more reasonable people should speak up more loudly concerning the rampant fraud committed in the name of religion, which goes unchecked day in and day out. Since when is it a sign of intelligence to blindly believe every fish story that comes along? Yet, with religion, it seems to be a virtue to just accept outrageous claims! Actually, it's up to the person making claims like those of Christianity to prove them, not up to people like Earl Doherty to disprove them. But they can't, so he must. And he does it well, despite all the vitriol and hatred tossed at him. Despite the typically disparaging remarks concerning his credentials--and just what are the credentials of these unaccomplished armchair critics that make them so qualified to judge Doherty's work?--Earl Doherty is a scholar, and a very good one. His previous book "The Jesus Puzzle" will prove that. One critic claims that Doherty's work concerning Paul not knowing any historical Jesus ignores 1 Corinthians 15, which discusses Jesus's resurrection and appearance before "500 brethren." It is obvious that Paul's experience and that of the "500 brethren," if it is even true, represents a mystical initiation into a mystery school, and was a common experience. It certainly does not prove any historical Jesus, but it will apparently suffice for the simple-minded. Fortunately, more people are becoming encouraged and emboldened to challenge the fairytale in the New Testament--those who do not are the ones who should look ridiculous, in a sane society. Don't go by "faith"--someone trying to get somebody else to believe something that goes against natural laws needs to PROVE it. Ask for proof! In this case, there is none! So, who has more integrity and honesty? Those who are defending the attempts to get everyone to believe these extraordinary claims without any proof, or those who are questioning it, like Doherty? It's really time for human beings to stop being so credulous and to become more intelligent about their religions. Questioning whether or not Jesus is a historical figure is no more ridiculous than questioning whether or not Hercules is a historical figure. For centuries people thought Hercules was a real person, but he's really a myth, as common sense should have revealed. The same is the case with Jesus, which means that the arguments attempting to make Doherty look foolish for doubting are idiotic. What, you don't believe in Hercules? You are then to be subjected to endless ridicule, have your credentials and integrity impugned, and your intelligence and sanity questioned. Is this the backwards planet? As concerns Strobel, as a journalist he is basically trained to aim for a sixth-grade educational level, and his book shows it! His "proofs" are childish in the extreme. Strobel's experts appear fatuous, as they pontificate upon what is obviously a fairytale. Doherty is taking them to task and chiding them for their beliefs and behavior, since it is obvious they should know better, especially after all the scholarship in the past centuries that has shown Jesus to be a myth. In this regard, Doherty is clearly in the right--and well within his rights in writing this book. Nobody else seems motivated to take on these folks in their wild contentions, and for that we should be grateful to Doherty. He's taking a lot of flak for his self-motivated critiques of these deceptive practices and concepts. I doubt any of his critics, hiding behind their "majority rules" safety net, tossing rocks and then running away, have the courage and passion to do anything so important and hazardous as what Doherty does. Also, the fact that a majority believes something rarely proves much except that the majority will believe just about anything. Yet, the critics keep trying to use this fallacious argument! Which shows their lack of intelligence and integrity. In addition to Doherty's excellent arguments in "Challenging the Verdict" are his insightful commentaries concerning the deplorable mentality behind Christianity. For example, in regard to Christ's crucifixion, so vividly and brutally described by apologist Dr. Metherell, Doherty remarks: "How can we think of the God of the universe, a God of love--if such a being exists--operating in this fashion, requiring that such a depraved death be inflicted on even a human being, let alone a divine one, choosing blood sacrifice as the means of our salvation? How can we envision a plan for the redemption of humanity that must entail the performance of such a hideous deed?" (p. 160) It is quite clear that Earl Doherty is a wiser and deeper thinker than the Christian apologists and detractors. These grown men, who appear to be at least somewhat intelligent, yet keep beating this dead horse of Christianity and its myth of the "historical" Jesus, should really be embarrassed at their imbecility and infantilism. Fighting off these pathetic and deluded ignoramuses is exhausting work--thank goodness for Doherty's tirelessness!
Rating:
Summary: forget Tolkien, this is real fantasy
Review: In the book, Mr. Doherty, a self proclaimed scholar with no apparent qualifications, presents his case most unconvincing with complete disregard of serious scholarship. His refutations are frustratingly hollow, taking liberties with not only the scholar's postions, but also with the texts themselves. Essentially, all Doherty does is attempt to vindicate his personal position by any means neccessary. "Fundamentalists" are often branded as close minded but this book illustrates how close minded many hyper-liberal positions truly are. Additionally, this book is not even an example of the truly liberal picture of Jesus, which is best revealed by members of the Jesus Seminar like John Dominic Crossan and Marcus Borg. If you believe that Jesus is a purely mythical figure with no historical basis and are willing to completely dismiss the conclusive evidence for Jesus's existence with no thought whatsoever, this is the book for you. You will find a view that though completely incompatible with seroius scholarship, liberal or conservative, validates your opinion. For anyone who thoughfully wants to examine the issue of Jesus, I would recommend Luke Timothy Johnson's The Real Jesus. But what the heck, almost any other book on Jesus will be better than this one.
Rating:
Summary: A devastating refutal of biased Christian apologetics
Review: Apparently, Lee Strobel's "The Case for Christ" represents the best arguments that modern-day born-again evangelists have to offer. And considering how utterly deficient and unconvincing it is, that's pretty sad. However, Strobel is slick. A reader unfamiliar with the facts in the Jesus debate might well be snowed under by the subtlety with which he delivers his logical fallacies and the artfulness with which he conceals inconvenient counter-evidence. Fortunately, we have real scholars like Earl Doherty to clear the air. His first book, "The Jesus Puzzle", was a well-crafted and powerfully delivered argument against the historicity of Jesus Christ. Now, with "Challenging the Verdict", he takes Strobel to task by systematically destroying the testimony of the theologians he quotes, dissecting their arguments one by one to reveal the inconsistencies, circular reasoning and missing evidence inherent in each of them, and taking no prisoners in pointing out the embarrassing inconsistencies and other problems in the gospel accounts that Strobel would prefer to quietly gloss over. (For example: How is it that any of the gospels describe anything Jesus said or did in the garden of Gethsemane? All the disciples were asleep! Who was recording this?) It's not necessarily the best book when it comes to refuting Christianity in general, but if you've read "The Case for Christ" -- or even if you haven't -- and want an opposing view, this is the book you want to see. Most of the critics of this book complain about how Earl Doherty quotes Strobel's theologians to refute their arguments without giving them a chance to respond. But this charge is a monumental hypocrisy considering that Strobel himself only interviews people -- conservative and evangelical scholars -- who support *his* predetermined position. "The Case for Christ" gives no space to even liberal Christian scholars, much less atheists and others who are skeptical of the whole Jesus story. Of course, this is hardly surprising considering that any knowledgeable non-believer could punch dozens of holes in Strobel's flimsy mythology, exposing his numerous logical fallacies and selective use of evidence, which would rather ruin the book's intended purpose as an instrument of evangelism; but then Strobel's partisans should not complain when Doherty counters him on the only grounds he is willing to argue. If Strobel gave equal space to both fundamentalists and their critics, then these people might have a valid point in charging Doherty with unfairness. As it is, they're merely hypocrites, and they don't have a leg to stand on.
|
