Rating: 
Summary: Not a proper cross-examination
Review: I picked up Case for Christ, because it was recommended to me by a friend, and being very skeptical about friend's recommendations, it took me a while to get to that book. But when I did I was blown away. It wasn't just any author trying to persuade you that Jesus Christ really is who he said he is, rather Strobel establishes his case premise by premise, and builds upon a strong foundation. Most importantly, he decides to talk to knowledgeable people when confronted by topics he doesn't know anything about.
Doherty, on the other hand, isntead of interviewing those scholars that Strobel did, takes quotes from the book, and twists them around to fit his argument. In order to do a proper cross-examination, you need to have the witness, not just the witness' statement. Doherty fails to do that, and he failed to win my respect, rather, he lost what little of it I had for him because of his lack of scholarly debate.
Rating:
Summary: Is there no option for 0 stars?
Review: I picked this book up at a local flea market for 50 cents. To think that I could have bought a candy bar instead! It's very obvious that the book was NOT written as an intelligent rebuttal, nor as an honest desire to "disprove" or "correct" Strobel's writings. Strobel's book is a best-seller, resulting from intense research with the BEST of the BEST bible scholars. WHO is this Earl Doerty and what research, credentials, or intelligent background does he possess?
"Challenging the Verdict" is simply another futile attack on the christian faith. Another classic case of atheist-VS-Christianity, or satan VS GOD, and everyone *KNOWS the verdict, as well as the sentence, for "the case for Satan". *smile*
Non-believers have tried to discredit the bible in every possible way but it still prevails as the best-read, top-selling, most-loved and most-respected book of all times. No mere attack, from some unknown author, will ever change that fact.
If debating whether to purchase this book, I suggest buying a Mounds bar instead. You know...the one *without the nuts? =)
Rating: 
Summary: Questioning Doherty's Verdict
Review: Though this book certainly makes for an interesting read, I have some serious concerns regarding its arguments and language. First of all, the book is largely accusatory, rather than persuasive. Doherty, though usually maintaining a civil tongue, slips several times with sarcastic retorts towards Strobel and his "witnesses." Also, a great deal of Doherty's arguments are based on proving that Strobel's account is biased.Certainly this is true to a point, but I believe there are some misunderstandings. First of all, we all are biased in our views. Doherty is biased in his attack on Strobel, considering the evidence against, rather than the evidence for. I am biased, writing this review. But Strobel, I believe, is less biased than Doherty accuses him of being. I, like many others, was disappointed by his limited selection of witnesses, but it must be taken into consideration that Strobel was an Atheist at the time of his research. He was actively seeking to disprove Christianity. It was after the fact that he collected his evidence and placed it all in one place, so that others could see what he had found. From this understanding of Strobel, I reach my other disagreement with Doherty. I don't believe that Strobel intended Case For Christ to be an air-tight, fool proof guide to Christianity. Instead, he was a man seeking knowledge. As a Christian, he wanted to share his findings with others. What is presented, then, is merely the evidence required to convince him. For some it is enough. For others, it might be lacking. It is merely a stepping stone for those interested. If you are looking for a more concrete and logical view of Christianity and its claims, I'd suggest C.S. Lewis's Mere Christianity, and Miracles, also by Lewis. Neither are perfect, but they offer more arguments for Christianity. It is also worth noting that Lewis was very opposed to Christianity until very late in his life. He was a professor at Cambridge, and is well respected in both secular and Christian eyes as a talented writer. Finally, I believe Doherty missed a great opportunity to prove his arguments when he didn't make an effort to contact authorities and interview them, as Strobel does. He could offer that secular viewpoint that is lacking in Strobel's case, as well as questioning the original "witnesses" themselves. As for the argument that these authorities would not be willing to accept an interview that would paint them in a negative light, I would like to dispute that thought. If they were so unwilling, they would never have spoken with Strobel. And, though it is not applicable to every individual, most Christians are happy to share their views with others, no matter how they will look afterwards. Not that they like being painted in a negative view, but that's one of the key tennants of the Christianity that Doherty seeks to disprove. We have been called to witness. That means to unbelievers, those who will call us names and seek to discredit us, not those who will nod agreeably and smile at every word we say.
Rating: 
Summary: Groan... have the 1-star reviewers considered reading it?
Review: I see five recent 1-star reviews; by Mapupin, Collins, Vestuto, Becker & Pipkin. I find it unlikely they've actually read the book. They complain about Doherty having "lack of scholarship". The accuse Doherty of engaging in "ad-homin attacks". But all their reviews amount to are nothing but ad-homin attacks against Doherty. Do any of these reviewers actually produce any specific error in Doherty's arguments? No, not so much as one single error did any one-star reviewer produce. Hmmm... Now I personally didn't happen to care for Doherty's courtroom setting either. But I understand that he felt he needed some sort of metaphor for presenting the arguments. Somebody complained that Doherty didn't really follow standards of legal presentation. Did Strobel? Come on, it was a metaphor folks! Many people complain Doherty didn't interview Strobel's experts. Does anybody honestly think any of Strobel's experts would agree to an interview that isn't pre-programmed to make them look good? Doherty would be more than happy to interview them if they would actually agree to an interview. If somebody actually has any errors in Doherty's work, lets hear them.
Rating:
Summary: Lacks credibility
Review: Earl Doherty's attempt to discredit "A Case for Christ" fails miserably. His attack on Strobel's sources is a cheap shot at best. These experts that Sctrobel interviewed for his book have the most impeccable credentials; something Doherty fails to include in his book.
Doherty critizes Stobel's scholars without even interviewing anyone. He uses Stobel's book to write his own book. Talk about lazy and slipshod.
By not giving Stroble's experts a chance to rebut Doherty's claims, Doherty gives up any semblance of credibility.
Nice try Doherty, but no cigar.
Rating:
Summary: The Case for Ignoring this sad case
Review: I was asked by a popular apologetics organization to help work on a response to this latest attempt at discrediting the Gospels and in turn the very foundations of Christianity. What perhaps troubled me more than Doherty's work was the way in which many Christians responded. After reading Challenging the Verdict I can confidently say to all those alarmed Christians "calm down." With all due respect to Mr Doherty and all those who took this attempt so seriously it is just not worth it. I would recommend this book to NO ONE -Skeptic or believer. It is not only dry but drab. Doherty advocates an extreme view which even the majority of unbeleiving scholars do not hold. It is a tiring read and the writing style is horrendous. Doherty would have gained more respect if he had personally interviewed the scholars Strobel had. Christians seemed more upset that Doherty chose to attack one of their latest apologetic "stars" rather than with the arguments themselves. I debated even bothering writing this review. Sorry to bore you even more than Strobel or Doherty already has. -Kerry
Rating:
Summary: Excellent counterpoint to Strobel.
Review: Earl Doherty's CHALLENGING THE VERDICT is a solid chapter-by-chapter counterpoint to Lee Strobel's THE CASE FOR CHRIST. One may disagree with Doherty on a number of points: sometimes he seems to me to go too far, as when he pushes the notion of an entirely mythical Jesus (although this is not by any means central to the case he builds, and his reasons are interesting to read); at other times, he does not go far enough, as with his failure to respond to Vardiman's absurd "micrographic letters" (against which one should see Richard Carrier's Secular Web article "The Date of the Nativity in Luke"). However, all in all, Doherty's book is compelling, providing the other side of the story for those who are not satisfied with Strobel's one-sided pretence of objective journalism.
Rating:
Summary: I'm not sure why this book was written.
Review: Instead of taking time to debunk and talk about why Doherty's book is sophomoric and, at best, destined to end up finding a less-than-scholarly place along side copies of Weekly World News and other inane works of drivel, I would like to comment on the book it's opposing: The Case For Christ: A Journalist's Personal Investigation of the Evidence for Jesus. Strobel clearly goes out of his way to talk to leading experts in many different fields, including Medicine, Anthropology, History, Forensics, Psychology, et. al. and succeeds in making a water-tight case for the Messiah. Doherty embarrassingly tries to build a case against the "experts" interviewed by Strobel citing that they aren't reliable because they are professed Christians. What Doherty doesn't understand, or refuses to admit, is that the people interviewed by Strobel are Scholars; men who have built their entire lives on education and the pursuit of pure thought and reasoning. Impressive are their qualifications. Any attempt to dig their intellectual prowess by Doherty ends in futility on his part. Doherty's tome proves a point I have believed for many years: Give a monkey a pen and you might just get a publishable work. In Doherty's case, give a monkey a pen, lace a banana with LSD and then whack that same monkey over the head several times with a cast iron skillet and you get "Challenging the Verdict".
Rating:
Summary: Is this some sort of joke?
Review: This is pretty poorly reasoned drivel that comes to the table from an author with no less of a bias than those whom he accosts. He states, "I suggest that Mr. Strobel's own preconceptions and biases, in addition to those of his witnesses, have skewed his case to an irreparable degree", only to later make the statement, "...I just wish we were all as biased as the Seminar in rejecting the supernatural as authentic in the Gospels...". This is just an unbelievable equivocation and there's plenty more where that came from. Mr. Doherty would have us believe that he is representative of neutral scholarship. Unfortunately, he is neither neutral nor scholarly. While the book consistently divulges an extreme rhetorical bias, there is also the matter of poorly reasoned arguments. He states, "Mr. Strobel's comparison of the Gospel evangelists with a witness in a murder case testifying to what he saw is patently invalid", based upon the fact that the author cannot personally interview them. Unfortunately, that fact doesn't discount them as eyewitnesses at all. In fact, the supporting argumentation marshalled by Doherty does nothing to discount their status as eyewitnesses... just more rhetorical dogma. Ad hominem attacks abound as well. After a personal attack on Strobel's legal accumen, he states, "Sorry, Your Honor, I will try to limit my remarks to the facts of the case". Too bad he was unable to do so. Ad hominem; ad infinitum; ad nauseum. The accostic demeanor of this book is typical of those billing themselves as scholarly, yet in reality nothing more than diatribes of propaganda. As a well-reasoned, scholarly tome... abyssmal. Read Ludemann, Crossan or Borg if you're looking for critical works on traditional Christianity that make a forceful argument. But of all the presuppositions to be discerned, one stands out as of primary importance. Doherty's work is ultimately founded on the assumption that Strobel's scholars are, to a large degree, disingenuous. While scholars critical of the received Christian faith would disagree with those interviewed in Strobel's book, the vast majority would hardly regard them as disingenuous and it fatally clouds Doherty's attempt at sober examination. That's an assumption that can't be disregarded no matter what your opinion.
Rating:
Summary: Amateurish
Review: As a lawyer, it took me a split second to recognize Doherty's unfamiliarity with legal principles (e.g., admissibility of hearsay, validity of circumstantial evidence, etc.)and thus view his entire argument as, to use a term of art, lacking foundation. It's rhetorical appeal is amateurish and does not parallel the correct application of legal reasoning applied so forcefully in Strobel's magnificent book. Those possessing no litigation background may be won over, but for those with even a little legal education, don't waste your time with this silly tripe. Or read it as confirmation of the strength in Strobel's arguments.
|
