Reviews for Evidence for Christianity

The average rating for Evidence for Christianity based on 2 reviews is 2.5 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2015-09-08 00:00:00 Jarrett Lee While I haven't read this book completely cover to cover, it has been a fantastic resource for many areas of Christian apologetics (defense of the faith). Even though the book in and of itself is not technically academic in nature, the amount of topics and sources is substantial. If someone wants to really dig into the truth behind the Bible, this book will provide mounds of evidence for a curious skeptic or seeker. For my part, this book introduced me to the various 1st/2nd century non-biblical sources which reveal facts about Jesus and early Christianity. I had no idea that all the key facts and beliefs about Jesus could be found in parallel secular sources without ever referencing the Gospels. This spoke to me in a powerful way and ultimately inspired me to write my book, From Prophecy Into History: Proof of God's Hand on the Bible. These sources form the backbone of my keynote chapter in which I show how several lines of Messianic prophecy from the Old Testament find fulfillment in all these sources outside the Bible. The skeptic can no longer say that the Gospel authors simply wrote their accounts in such a way that Jesus fulfilled these prophecies--these outside sources prove otherwise. I will say that it would have been beneficial for Josh McDowell to include a little more academic critique of these sources, as a skeptic will undoubtedly question their reliability. Overall, this book accomplishes its mission in defending the Christian faith in many ways. It looks at archaeology, form criticism, prophecy, evidence for Jesus' resurrection, and many more subjects. It's a must have for anyone researching the truth behind Christianity, so long as you don't let the number of pages scare you.

Review # 2 was written on 2009-04-08 00:00:00 Risto Ilkka Horribly researched, use of circular logic, omissions and/or misstatements of fact, etc, etc. Many sources are either not present, not reliable, or biased. Need I go on? I've written better things when I was a freshman in college. Anyone that calls this "scholarly," "concrete," or anything of the sort is either stupid or biased themselves. It's obvious on the subtitle ("evidences" is not even a word!) and throughout the text that this book didn't go through a rigorous editing process. On page 30, the author references the wrong part of his own book ("part 2" instead of part 3). The Documentary Hypothesis is explained wrong, and key facts of its formulation and history are either missing or misstated (Chapter 13). These example are only a few of the plethora I could cite. In conclusion, if you value elevated discourse on theology and/or metaphysical studies, do not give this book a second glance. I wouldn't even use it for toilet paper.