The Case For And Against Christ

Even though I’m not a particularly religious person, I am very much interested in all things pertaining to the beyond and a higher power (if it is only one, that is). I have read widely, practiced religion myself, and continue to meditate on a consistent basis.

Now, take the question of whether the gospels are a true, historic account of the life of Jesus Christ, his crucifixion and resurrection. A very intriguing subject, at least for me. So I shopped around and got a couple of books.

I read ‘The Case For Christ’, where the author, Lee Strobel, interviewed a series of eminent historians on the matter. Finishing this book, I was impressed. It was so well written, with so many historical facts and scientific evidence, that I was convinced: Of course, it’s all true, exactly as the Bible says.

I read as well ‘Holy Blood, Holy Grail´ by Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh and Henry Lincoln. What a treat! All three of them distinguished journalists with years of experience in historical investigation and analysis. And it turned out that the whole thing was a hoax, the gospels an arbitrary compilation of what the early church fathers wanted to be put in it.

My point here is, you find well documented evidence either way, and it’s basically just a question of what answer you are looking for.


  1. You don't need proof for something not to exist, not exisiting is the base level. That doesn't mean it doesn't actually exist, just that there's no advantage (or point) to assuming it does exist if you have no evidence.

    So, we assume unicorns don't exist because there's no proof they do and even if they secretly did it would make absolutely no difference to anyone.

    I am of course making this up as I go along.

    Moody Writing

  2. Mr. Grey,

    Be careful that you are not making an apples to oranges comparison. While "A Case for Christ" and "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" may both be books about the Bible only one backs up a movement that enveloped the world while the other is a supposed hidden history of what really happened.

    While it is easy to talk unicorns, it really denies the fact that unlike unicorns Jesus impacted and still impacts the world today.

    Haters point to the wrongs people have committed in the name of Jesus, while neglecting all of the right things done in his name and the fact that Jesus never said to do any of those wrongs.

    It is absolutely true that people chose to believe or not to believe, but that not because of any books. It is because God in his love for us gave us that option.

    Tim Lewis

  3. Let me quote you here, Tim: "It is absolutely true that people chose to believe or not to believe, but that not because of any books."
    I absolutely agree, Tim. And it was exactly that point which I tried to make.

  4. The Bible is a book. The Koran is a book , etc.. So there are books that people read and chose to believe or not believe. "Other" books also influence people to believe or not believe. You mentioned two that influenced you first one way than the other. Some might read one "other" book and stop there. It's too broad a stroke to say that NO people will believe or not believe because of ANY book.

    I have 2 more points to make regarding this topic. 1- the hermeneutics of studying a document & the scholarship used to investigate. 2- the influence of the presuppositions of the authors who "investigate" the Bible.

    thanks Geoff,
    Doc (Twitter @mindspanker2002)

  5. And yet not one of you have addressed the existence of the Christian Church which Paul's writings show existed and were based on a living human being within five years of the crucifixion. The facts the Christian Church began existence 50 days after Christ execution as specified by Luke in Acts across the street from the empty tomb and you would have us believe not a soul out of 3000 people checked to see if it was still sealed. Great thinkers have to account for all facts surrounding the Biblical accounts of Christ not selectively pick what they can dispute based on the fact no evidence of that particular event exists.
    As far as the Quran seeing it is a correction of Christianity delivered from an "angel" not God one has to account for the fact Satan was an angel who rebelled, therefore when one considers God never left a covenant to an angel because it is a personal commitment and promise of an individual, avow, it is reasonable ,especially when viewing the contradictions within Islam, that this was a pact delievered by Satan to Mohammed