What do you think?
Rate this book
The Case for a Creator: A Journalist Investigates Scientific Evidence That Points Toward God
A Journalist Investigates Scientific Evidence That Points Toward God: 'My road to atheism was paved by science . . . But, ironically, so was my later journey to God.' - Lee Strobel
During his academic years, Lee Strobel became convinced that God was outmoded, a belief that colored his ensuing career as an award-winning journalist at the Chicago Tribune. Science had made the idea of a Creator irrelevant - or so Strobel thought. But today science is pointing in a different direction. In recent years, a diverse and impressive body of research has increasingly supported the conclusion that the universe was intelligently designed. At the same time, Darwinism has faltered in the face of concrete facts and hard reason.Has science discovered God? At the very least, it's giving faith an immense boost as new findings emerge about the incredible complexity of our universe. Join Strobel as he re-examines the theories that once led him away from God. Through his compelling and highly readable account, you'll encounter the mind-stretching discoveries from cosmology, cellular biology, DNA research, astronomy, physics, and human consciousness that present astonishing evidence in The Case for a Creator.
During his academic years, Lee Strobel became convinced that God was outmoded, a belief that colored his ensuing career as an award-winning journalist at the Chicago Tribune. Science had made the idea of a Creator irrelevant - or so Strobel thought. But today science is pointing in a different direction. In recent years, a diverse and impressive body of research has increasingly supported the conclusion that the universe was intelligently designed. At the same time, Darwinism has faltered in the face of concrete facts and hard reason.Has science discovered God? At the very least, it's giving faith an immense boost as new findings emerge about the incredible complexity of our universe. Join Strobel as he re-examines the theories that once led him away from God. Through his compelling and highly readable account, you'll encounter the mind-stretching discoveries from cosmology, cellular biology, DNA research, astronomy, physics, and human consciousness that present astonishing evidence in The Case for a Creator.
352 pages, Paperback
First published March 16, 2004
About the author
Lee Strobel
208 books1,449 followersLee Patrick Strobel is an American Christian author and a former investigative journalist. He has written several books, including four that received ECPA Christian Book Awards (1994, 1999, 2001, 2005)[2] and a series which addresses challenges to the veracity of Christianity. He also hosted a television program called Faith Under Fire on PAX TV and runs a video apologetics web site.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 537 reviews
February 25, 2011
I highly recommend this book for anyone with a scientific background. I studied Physics and Math at CU Boulder, and went from a Christian, to an Atheist, to an Agnostic, and then back to a Christian. This was actually good for my faith, but there were still lots of nagging doubts around science and God. This book helped tremendously. I’d like to briefly mention 3 items that really spoke to me.
The Big Bang
For some reason, people seem to think that the Big Bang theory contradicts the Bible. The truth is that Christians (and Jews before that), have argued for centuries that the universe had a beginning, and for the vast majority of that time they had a hard time convincing people (and scientists). Now, science has virtually proven that something (or someone) outside the universe caused it all to come into existence. Pretty cool.
Fine Tuning of the Universe
Not only did the universe ‘come into existence’, it came in such a way that life can exist. For example, take the various forces (gravity, weak nuclear, etc.). They are so fine tuned to life (not just our life, but any life – we’re talking no star formation, or the universe collapsing stuff) that just one part in ten thousand billion billion billion throws the whole thing out of whack.
The Cell
Far from being a piece of goo that got hit with lightning and turned into living matter, a ‘simple’ cell is a very complex piece of machinery. It is like an automobile; with motors (cilium), memory banks, control systems, assembly equipment, a power source, conveyor belts, filtration systems, and the ability to self replicate in a few hours (no car can do that). Each cell contains the equivalent of the Encyclopedia Britannica worth of information. This is not the result of random forces.
So if this is your thing, pick up this book. It is very well researched and documented, and will increase your faith tremendously. I don’t think God wants us to be able to prove His existence (that might mess with free will), but he sure left a lot of fingerprints.
The Big Bang
For some reason, people seem to think that the Big Bang theory contradicts the Bible. The truth is that Christians (and Jews before that), have argued for centuries that the universe had a beginning, and for the vast majority of that time they had a hard time convincing people (and scientists). Now, science has virtually proven that something (or someone) outside the universe caused it all to come into existence. Pretty cool.
Fine Tuning of the Universe
Not only did the universe ‘come into existence’, it came in such a way that life can exist. For example, take the various forces (gravity, weak nuclear, etc.). They are so fine tuned to life (not just our life, but any life – we’re talking no star formation, or the universe collapsing stuff) that just one part in ten thousand billion billion billion throws the whole thing out of whack.
The Cell
Far from being a piece of goo that got hit with lightning and turned into living matter, a ‘simple’ cell is a very complex piece of machinery. It is like an automobile; with motors (cilium), memory banks, control systems, assembly equipment, a power source, conveyor belts, filtration systems, and the ability to self replicate in a few hours (no car can do that). Each cell contains the equivalent of the Encyclopedia Britannica worth of information. This is not the result of random forces.
So if this is your thing, pick up this book. It is very well researched and documented, and will increase your faith tremendously. I don’t think God wants us to be able to prove His existence (that might mess with free will), but he sure left a lot of fingerprints.
May 12, 2008
Lee Strobel starts this book by telling the readers about his prior atheism, and his wife's conversion to Christianity was his impetus to discern the 'truth' behind the scientific evidence for or against a divine Creator.
This is fine, and I wouldn't mind this book if that is what he actually did. Instead he 'interviews' only those who support the divine creator hypothesis, and all of his questions are ones that he knows his interviewee already has an answer for. (Assuming he did any research before his interview)
He (and those being interviewed) are guilty of a wide array of logical fallacies throughout, and the entire book is an exercise in dishonesty.
This is fine, and I wouldn't mind this book if that is what he actually did. Instead he 'interviews' only those who support the divine creator hypothesis, and all of his questions are ones that he knows his interviewee already has an answer for. (Assuming he did any research before his interview)
He (and those being interviewed) are guilty of a wide array of logical fallacies throughout, and the entire book is an exercise in dishonesty.
April 5, 2014
This entire book is a practice in anti-intellectualism and deceit.
This book makes me sooooo angry. I used to be Chirstian, am now an atheist, and was really excited when a friend lent me this book. My love of science is what led me to turn away from religion, and I was really curious as to what scientific evidence there was that possibly led to different conclusions about the nature of the universe.
This book is the very antithesis of intellectualism and critical analysis. The author goes to great pains to convince his audience that he is an atheist, an investigative reporter, and unbiased. As soon as you start reading it is clear he has lied about all three.
As an investigative journalist, he should know to look at BOTH sides of the argument. Instead he cherry picks his interviews to the very few people within those fields who don't accept the current theories in that field. His questions are not hard-hitting - he only asks what he knows the "scientist" would be able to answer and conveniently "forgets" to ask questions that reflect the true nature of scientific practices.
Both the author and the people he interviews have an astounding lack of understanding about the principles of science and the actual theories they think they are disproving. For example, in the interview about evolution, both the author and the scientist CLEARLY have NO idea about what the theory of evolution ACTUALLY is. While Strobel is sitting there saying "wow, this is stuff the Darwinists don't teach you", the rest of us who actually understand evolution are sitting there banging our heads against the wall thinking "of course not, because it's COMPLETELY wrong!"
This entire book is a practice in anti-intellectualism and deceit. It preys upon those who have little understanding of science and refuses to seek out the truth. This book is poison.
This book makes me sooooo angry. I used to be Chirstian, am now an atheist, and was really excited when a friend lent me this book. My love of science is what led me to turn away from religion, and I was really curious as to what scientific evidence there was that possibly led to different conclusions about the nature of the universe.
This book is the very antithesis of intellectualism and critical analysis. The author goes to great pains to convince his audience that he is an atheist, an investigative reporter, and unbiased. As soon as you start reading it is clear he has lied about all three.
As an investigative journalist, he should know to look at BOTH sides of the argument. Instead he cherry picks his interviews to the very few people within those fields who don't accept the current theories in that field. His questions are not hard-hitting - he only asks what he knows the "scientist" would be able to answer and conveniently "forgets" to ask questions that reflect the true nature of scientific practices.
Both the author and the people he interviews have an astounding lack of understanding about the principles of science and the actual theories they think they are disproving. For example, in the interview about evolution, both the author and the scientist CLEARLY have NO idea about what the theory of evolution ACTUALLY is. While Strobel is sitting there saying "wow, this is stuff the Darwinists don't teach you", the rest of us who actually understand evolution are sitting there banging our heads against the wall thinking "of course not, because it's COMPLETELY wrong!"
This entire book is a practice in anti-intellectualism and deceit. It preys upon those who have little understanding of science and refuses to seek out the truth. This book is poison.
July 11, 2022
A solid overview of arguments for the existence of God. I’m pretty familiar with arguments for the existence of God already but this provided me with easier ways of presenting my arguments. Best sections in this book are on DNA and physics, in my opinion.
January 18, 2011
Excellent in the discussion of its subject matter especially in the light of various scientific disciplines, such as Biology, Palaeontology, Physics, Astronomy, Cosmology, Biochemistry and Neuroscience. This might make it a better introductory read than a lot of the recent Intelligent Design books since they discuss ID mainly from the point of view of Biology.
The author interviews big names in the ID movement such as Stephen C. Meyer, Jonathan Wells and Michael J. Behe, as well as other scientists supporting it like Guillermo Gonzalez and Jay Richards, and two philosophers, William Lane Craig and J.P. Moreland. Often he challenges them with the questions, doubts and the attempted rebuttals of materialistic scientists who are critical of ID as a valid scientific theory, which suggests that he did a quite a bit of reading and researching of opposing views and arguments before his interviews.
In addition to the atheist/materialist/naturalist origins doctrine, the author also discusses whether the scientific evidence could support the origins ideas espoused by deism, pantheism, polytheism, new age theism or the theism of the Abrahamic faiths. Also, discusses quite well whether theistic evolution can be harmonized with macroevolution or not - as understood and taught by Darwin and his followers.
Perhaps it might sound a bit one-sided to some people that he only interviewed scholars who support the design argument, and perhaps they are right in their accusation! However, when materialists and Darwinists feel threatened by a tiny informative sticker or two pages in a textbook of hundreds of pages espousing their wordview and cannot seem to tolerate it, even when the media and public education system disseminates their ideology for them all the time, how can any any of them expect equal (not a two-page) representation in a book openly supporting creationism? Don't those who raise this objection feel any shame?! All you have to do to hear their side of the story is to just go to school, turn on the TV, pick up almost any science texbook or encyclopedia or visit any of the big name science websites!
The book goes off-subject sometimes and promotes a little Christian doctrine such as making hard-to-follow leaps and connections from the existence of a Creator to claiming that He has a unique son-deity "unified with humankind." Interestingly enough this contradicts one of the author's own conclusions that the Law of Occam's Razor in Physics removes the need for multiple deities. Sometimes promotes the idea that God might be everywhere, and not above and beyond this universe.
I would definitely recommend that Muslims read this as well if they are amply versed in Islamic Theology and comparative religion due to the apparent lack of quality books on this topic in English by qualified Muslim authors.
I listened to the audiobook edition and I think it was superbly narrated and produced. I'm planning to listen to it at least once more in the near future.
The author interviews big names in the ID movement such as Stephen C. Meyer, Jonathan Wells and Michael J. Behe, as well as other scientists supporting it like Guillermo Gonzalez and Jay Richards, and two philosophers, William Lane Craig and J.P. Moreland. Often he challenges them with the questions, doubts and the attempted rebuttals of materialistic scientists who are critical of ID as a valid scientific theory, which suggests that he did a quite a bit of reading and researching of opposing views and arguments before his interviews.
In addition to the atheist/materialist/naturalist origins doctrine, the author also discusses whether the scientific evidence could support the origins ideas espoused by deism, pantheism, polytheism, new age theism or the theism of the Abrahamic faiths. Also, discusses quite well whether theistic evolution can be harmonized with macroevolution or not - as understood and taught by Darwin and his followers.
Perhaps it might sound a bit one-sided to some people that he only interviewed scholars who support the design argument, and perhaps they are right in their accusation! However, when materialists and Darwinists feel threatened by a tiny informative sticker or two pages in a textbook of hundreds of pages espousing their wordview and cannot seem to tolerate it, even when the media and public education system disseminates their ideology for them all the time, how can any any of them expect equal (not a two-page) representation in a book openly supporting creationism? Don't those who raise this objection feel any shame?! All you have to do to hear their side of the story is to just go to school, turn on the TV, pick up almost any science texbook or encyclopedia or visit any of the big name science websites!
The book goes off-subject sometimes and promotes a little Christian doctrine such as making hard-to-follow leaps and connections from the existence of a Creator to claiming that He has a unique son-deity "unified with humankind." Interestingly enough this contradicts one of the author's own conclusions that the Law of Occam's Razor in Physics removes the need for multiple deities. Sometimes promotes the idea that God might be everywhere, and not above and beyond this universe.
I would definitely recommend that Muslims read this as well if they are amply versed in Islamic Theology and comparative religion due to the apparent lack of quality books on this topic in English by qualified Muslim authors.
I listened to the audiobook edition and I think it was superbly narrated and produced. I'm planning to listen to it at least once more in the near future.
April 11, 2017
This book. . .
I read it twice. SO informative and a must read if you have any interest in apologetics and having an answer for the hope that is in you. Full of rich, scientific evidence and arguments that defend our faith. I think everyone should read this at least once in their life.
I read it twice. SO informative and a must read if you have any interest in apologetics and having an answer for the hope that is in you. Full of rich, scientific evidence and arguments that defend our faith. I think everyone should read this at least once in their life.
March 15, 2013
Lee Strobel grew up in a nominally religious home, but the nearly universal teaching of Darwinian evolution in his educational experience, beginning in high school biology and throughout college, led him to become an atheist. However, after the Yale-educated law journalist’s wife was converted to Christ, he began to rethink the foundations of his unbelief, embarking upon the adventure of a lifetime by using his talents as an investigative journalist to examine the facts. I purchased all of Strobel’s major books, including The Case for Christ and The Case for Faith in a combined edition and The Case for the Real Jesus, but decided to start with what I would consider “the beginning,” The Case for a Creator. After all, the Bible opens with the statement, “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1).
After writing about his own background, influenced by images of Darwinism yet eventually developing doubts, Strobel interviews scientific experts in several fields—cosmology, physics, astronomy, biochemistry, biological information, and consciousness—to show how their studies provide astonishing evidence for creation rather than purely naturalistic evolution. To be honest, this book sometimes borders on the academic, delving into subjects which would be far beyond the comprehension of most people, including myself. However, Strobel does try to translate the language of the scientists and philosophers he interviews into more popular style so that it can be more readily understood by those without scientific training. Each chapter also contains suggestions for further reading on particular issues of science and faith.
Of course, rabid atheists will dismiss Strobel’s work with a wave of the hand as nothing more than a biased attempt to bolster a dubious claim that is based only on mythology to begin with. One person said something to the effect that all Strobel did was interview creation scientists to prove creationism. However, the scientists whom he interviewed are not “creation scientists” but primarily proponents of Intelligent Design, and there is a difference. The book accepts, at least on the surface, the idea of “the Big Bang” and a billions-of-years existence for the universe, so there will be disagreement on certain points. I realize that some tension exists between young earth creationists and advocates of Intelligent Design, but even as a young earth creationist myself I believe that the two groups have common cause. Strobel concludes that, when correctly interpreted, science and biblical teaching support each other and quotes physicist Paul Davies who says, "…science offers a surer path to God than religion." With much of what passes for “religion” these days, he may be right.
After writing about his own background, influenced by images of Darwinism yet eventually developing doubts, Strobel interviews scientific experts in several fields—cosmology, physics, astronomy, biochemistry, biological information, and consciousness—to show how their studies provide astonishing evidence for creation rather than purely naturalistic evolution. To be honest, this book sometimes borders on the academic, delving into subjects which would be far beyond the comprehension of most people, including myself. However, Strobel does try to translate the language of the scientists and philosophers he interviews into more popular style so that it can be more readily understood by those without scientific training. Each chapter also contains suggestions for further reading on particular issues of science and faith.
Of course, rabid atheists will dismiss Strobel’s work with a wave of the hand as nothing more than a biased attempt to bolster a dubious claim that is based only on mythology to begin with. One person said something to the effect that all Strobel did was interview creation scientists to prove creationism. However, the scientists whom he interviewed are not “creation scientists” but primarily proponents of Intelligent Design, and there is a difference. The book accepts, at least on the surface, the idea of “the Big Bang” and a billions-of-years existence for the universe, so there will be disagreement on certain points. I realize that some tension exists between young earth creationists and advocates of Intelligent Design, but even as a young earth creationist myself I believe that the two groups have common cause. Strobel concludes that, when correctly interpreted, science and biblical teaching support each other and quotes physicist Paul Davies who says, "…science offers a surer path to God than religion." With much of what passes for “religion” these days, he may be right.
May 13, 2008
I was floored! This was an amazing book! I was expecting religious arguments but instead it's almost entirely cutting edge scientific and philisophical argument!
Taking a philosophy class, and theology being the next subject, I decided to pick this up. Thankfully my professor is pretty objective about teaching philosophy, so I've come to love it as the tool it is. This was perfect! I have a paper to do on a controversial subject and there's nothing like opposing macro-evolution to raise a few eyebrows!
Best of all I have to say is the foundation it lays on; direct testimony from top experts, referanced material direct to the source, and more.
Taking a philosophy class, and theology being the next subject, I decided to pick this up. Thankfully my professor is pretty objective about teaching philosophy, so I've come to love it as the tool it is. This was perfect! I have a paper to do on a controversial subject and there's nothing like opposing macro-evolution to raise a few eyebrows!
Best of all I have to say is the foundation it lays on; direct testimony from top experts, referanced material direct to the source, and more.
January 19, 2011
I feel the book could be summed up by this quote towards the end of this book "If I was to embrace Darwinism and its underlying premise, I would have to believe nothing produces everything, that non-life produces life, that randomness produces fine tuning, that chaos produces information, that non-consciousness produces consciousness & that non-reason produces reason" And for him that would take way more of a leap of faith then to believe in a creator.
Hardcore naturalist might as well not even read this book though, it only interviews the people they already ridicule, they will think the whole book is irrational, utter b.s propaganda & that Strobel should not be allowed to breed. Their presuppositions and perspective will automatically discredit every argument Strobel makes. To them it is not science if it points to a creator. but they will fail to realize they have a double standard. For they are perfectly comfortable coming to naturalistic conclusions, and making naturalistic speculations, theories and guesses, and naturalism is a philosophical world-view, a set of presuppositions that color all they see. They do not realize they are using science to promote their own philosophical worldview, all the while crying bloody murder the moment scientist claim science points to a Theist worldview. The fact is both sides have tons of evidence, and the judgment of whether the evidence is good or bad is fully dependent upon ones worldview. This means that evidence no matter HOW obvious, if in favor of God's existence, will be utterly stupid nonsense in the mind of naturalist, for there worldview does not allow it. PERIOD. The theist are guilty of bias too of course, We both are to a point like "Don't confuse me with the facts, I have my mind made up" Both sides can ALWAYS explain way the other side, ALWAYS. Its a matter of belief over a matter of evidence, no matter which belief you take, naturalistic or theistic, you will find butt loads of evidence supporting your view and Ph.D's back you up
Hardcore naturalist might as well not even read this book though, it only interviews the people they already ridicule, they will think the whole book is irrational, utter b.s propaganda & that Strobel should not be allowed to breed. Their presuppositions and perspective will automatically discredit every argument Strobel makes. To them it is not science if it points to a creator. but they will fail to realize they have a double standard. For they are perfectly comfortable coming to naturalistic conclusions, and making naturalistic speculations, theories and guesses, and naturalism is a philosophical world-view, a set of presuppositions that color all they see. They do not realize they are using science to promote their own philosophical worldview, all the while crying bloody murder the moment scientist claim science points to a Theist worldview. The fact is both sides have tons of evidence, and the judgment of whether the evidence is good or bad is fully dependent upon ones worldview. This means that evidence no matter HOW obvious, if in favor of God's existence, will be utterly stupid nonsense in the mind of naturalist, for there worldview does not allow it. PERIOD. The theist are guilty of bias too of course, We both are to a point like "Don't confuse me with the facts, I have my mind made up" Both sides can ALWAYS explain way the other side, ALWAYS. Its a matter of belief over a matter of evidence, no matter which belief you take, naturalistic or theistic, you will find butt loads of evidence supporting your view and Ph.D's back you up
February 2, 2009
One of my favorite quotes from the book is "Science done right points to God." This book discusses many scientific topics from the beginning of the universe, to Darwins theory of Evolution, to molecular biology and DNA to the human consciousness and uses it to create the case that scientific evidence points to a creator and that everything did not and could not have happened by naturalistic random chaotic chance.
Take the universe for example: Science by definition is the systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation. What has the knowledge gained by the scientific community via observation and experimentation found about the universe? It has found that the universe had a beginning. It came into being at some point in the past. That beginning was the creation of time, space, and matter. Logically everything that has ever "come into being" has some sort of a cause? What caused the universe to come into being? Whatever it was has to transcend time, space, and matter because before the universe began none of that existed.
Also consider what science has revealed about the origin of life, the irreducible complexity of the cell, DNA, all the fine tunings of the universe so that life is possible and then consider if it could have happened randomly and chaotically, and without any outside intellectual intervention.
Take the universe for example: Science by definition is the systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation. What has the knowledge gained by the scientific community via observation and experimentation found about the universe? It has found that the universe had a beginning. It came into being at some point in the past. That beginning was the creation of time, space, and matter. Logically everything that has ever "come into being" has some sort of a cause? What caused the universe to come into being? Whatever it was has to transcend time, space, and matter because before the universe began none of that existed.
Also consider what science has revealed about the origin of life, the irreducible complexity of the cell, DNA, all the fine tunings of the universe so that life is possible and then consider if it could have happened randomly and chaotically, and without any outside intellectual intervention.
July 7, 2017
For some reason, starting out, I thought I wouldn’t like this book as much as the other two Lee Strobel books I’ve read. I don’t know why I thought that.
For me, Lee Strobel is always a winner. Okay, so his actual writing leaves something to be desired. He’s been writing for newspapers too long, and has that bland, formulaic style that it can give you. But his method is what makes him great.
Some apologetics books come off kind of as one guy’s interpretation. But in this, we get the voices of critical-thinking experts from various fields working separately. That’s why I find this book so solid. Nobody has the whole picture, so if they try to interpret the whole picture themselves, it isn’t going to satisfy, but here we have pieces coming together from all over science and philosophy, all doing what they do best.
Let me say something, though. There’s something I’ve discovered in my reading of apologetics books. None of them are the foolproof answer. I don’t believe this book is going to convince anyone who doesn’t want to be convinced. But what this book will do, if anyone gives it an ear, is break the myth that all IDers are uneducated bigots. These are people with their eyes open—people who have been to (and taught at) the same schools that their detractors have been to. Not all Creationists are idiots—neither are all idiots Creationists.
Overall, I found this book quite enjoyable, and I highly recommend it.
For me, Lee Strobel is always a winner. Okay, so his actual writing leaves something to be desired. He’s been writing for newspapers too long, and has that bland, formulaic style that it can give you. But his method is what makes him great.
Some apologetics books come off kind of as one guy’s interpretation. But in this, we get the voices of critical-thinking experts from various fields working separately. That’s why I find this book so solid. Nobody has the whole picture, so if they try to interpret the whole picture themselves, it isn’t going to satisfy, but here we have pieces coming together from all over science and philosophy, all doing what they do best.
Let me say something, though. There’s something I’ve discovered in my reading of apologetics books. None of them are the foolproof answer. I don’t believe this book is going to convince anyone who doesn’t want to be convinced. But what this book will do, if anyone gives it an ear, is break the myth that all IDers are uneducated bigots. These are people with their eyes open—people who have been to (and taught at) the same schools that their detractors have been to. Not all Creationists are idiots—neither are all idiots Creationists.
Overall, I found this book quite enjoyable, and I highly recommend it.
August 3, 2011
And absolute must read for those who have an interest in the so-called religion vs science debate. Strobel's talent as a journalist is evident in his ability to make what is scientifically technical book come to life and be accessible to the reader. Systematically addressing the issue of the origins of the universe in the fields of Physics, Biochemistry, Cosmology, Astronomy etc, Strobel illustrates that rather than disprove the existence of an intelligent designer over the past 150 years, scientific evidents points towards and supports the case for a creator.
August 12, 2008
Good book. Intense read, reader should probably have some science background or at least be interested in science-related topics in order to fully enjoy. Basically it's an "investigative" book that explores the existence of God from a scientific perspective - i.e. Creationism vs. Darwinism; intelligent design vs. evolution. Lays out many very good points that makes you consider the FACTS of both evolution and creationism.
The real value of this book, in my opinion, is that it gives you a tremendous appreciation for our world and our universe and thus by extension, God. It really made me think about our place as humans in the broader universe and where we "came from." The underlying question of this entire book is "How can something come from nothing?" Strobel argues, through his various interviews, that this is impossible and thus there MUST BE a higher creator. The laws of Physics and Chemistry don't dictate how us as humans, for example, would have come into existence by chance alone.
This will challenge your thinking about huge topics (such as where we came from) and force you to consider the implications of any past "truths" you've been taught. The strangeness about this book is that after reading it, you feel a much deeper attraction to God and the world around us but without having been "preached at." Strobel does a great job of persuasively laying out the facts but letting the reader come to their own conclusions. Because he was a former atheist, he comes about it from the perspective of "here's I got to the place of being a Christ-follower, now I hope YOU will follow the evidence and make the same choice."
The real value of this book, in my opinion, is that it gives you a tremendous appreciation for our world and our universe and thus by extension, God. It really made me think about our place as humans in the broader universe and where we "came from." The underlying question of this entire book is "How can something come from nothing?" Strobel argues, through his various interviews, that this is impossible and thus there MUST BE a higher creator. The laws of Physics and Chemistry don't dictate how us as humans, for example, would have come into existence by chance alone.
This will challenge your thinking about huge topics (such as where we came from) and force you to consider the implications of any past "truths" you've been taught. The strangeness about this book is that after reading it, you feel a much deeper attraction to God and the world around us but without having been "preached at." Strobel does a great job of persuasively laying out the facts but letting the reader come to their own conclusions. Because he was a former atheist, he comes about it from the perspective of "here's I got to the place of being a Christ-follower, now I hope YOU will follow the evidence and make the same choice."
April 22, 2008
"It's pure a concept, an idea, without scientific proof [...]. skeptics have to come up with such an outlandish theory is because [...] some people will hypothesize anything to avoid reaching that conclusion."
The above is actually an out-of-context quote from this book that argues *for* the case of an intelligent designer. It's hard to tell at times if this is supposed to be ironically tongue-in-cheek.
I was hoping this would be good rebuttal to Dawkin's "The God Delusion" but this book doesn't even come close. The "conversational" writing style is as condescending as a late night infomercial. There's straw-men aplenty and every chapter is essentially re-iterating the same argument: "Current scientific evidence is telling us the physical world is very complex, and that complexity *logically* can only be the work of an intelligent designer."
The above is actually an out-of-context quote from this book that argues *for* the case of an intelligent designer. It's hard to tell at times if this is supposed to be ironically tongue-in-cheek.
I was hoping this would be good rebuttal to Dawkin's "The God Delusion" but this book doesn't even come close. The "conversational" writing style is as condescending as a late night infomercial. There's straw-men aplenty and every chapter is essentially re-iterating the same argument: "Current scientific evidence is telling us the physical world is very complex, and that complexity *logically* can only be the work of an intelligent designer."
December 29, 2015
This is a fabulous, easy-to-read book for those who doubt God's existence based on science, as well as those who believe. Strobel concisely reviews the scientific evidence for evolution, the Big Bang and cellular biology, and shows how the evidence points to Intelligent Design as a basis for life on Earth. Additional references are provided for those who want to do more research on their own.
Currently reading
November 26, 2008There IS a God-HE is alive!
September 4, 2016
Poor arguments, multiple fallacies, flawed science, bogus experts. This book is a waste of time and money.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/The_Fine...
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/The_Fine...
April 14, 2014
For several years in Reno, I taught a class called "Science and the Restoration." Strobel's book is a series of interviews with scientists who's work (in biology, genetics, cosmology, astronomy, physics, etc.) has strengthened their belief in an Intelligent Creator. Almost every one of these interviews is with a scientist who's works I read in developing my class! So I really didn't learn any new from Strobel's book, although it was a good refresher. Not all of his points match my personal theology (the necessity of an ex-nihlo creation, and a disembodied God, for example). But the book is well worth reading.
Many non-believers have criticized the book as not being objective and they are completely correct. Strobel is clearly a believer looking for scientific confirmation for his faith. On the other hand, many more books have been written by atheists looking for reasons NOT to believe. I've read several of both.
I love science & I believe! As Christ said to Moses, "…all things have their likeness, and all things are created and made to bear record of me, both things which are temporal, and things which are spiritual; things which are in the heavens above, and things which are on the earth, and things which are in the earth, and things which are under the earth, both above and beneath: all things bear record of me" (Moses 6:63).
Many non-believers have criticized the book as not being objective and they are completely correct. Strobel is clearly a believer looking for scientific confirmation for his faith. On the other hand, many more books have been written by atheists looking for reasons NOT to believe. I've read several of both.
I love science & I believe! As Christ said to Moses, "…all things have their likeness, and all things are created and made to bear record of me, both things which are temporal, and things which are spiritual; things which are in the heavens above, and things which are on the earth, and things which are in the earth, and things which are under the earth, both above and beneath: all things bear record of me" (Moses 6:63).
November 23, 2011
Strobel lays out three arguments in this book, all of which are problematic:
1) Creationism and Evolution are two completely distinct ideas, completely at odds with each other, there is no viable middle ground between the two, and no viable alternatives. His proof of this largely boils down to "both religious creationists and atheist scientists have asserted this to be true, therefore it must be true!"
2) Evolution is "just a theory", not all evolutionary biologists can agree on even some of the most basic tenets of it, and therefore it is an inherently flawed theory. In this, Strobel only demonstrates that he has never read any philosophy of science, and has no idea how scientific progress is made.
3) There are plenty of natural phenomenon that science cannot adequately explain, therefore a higher power must exist. Never mind that if science knew everything already, there would be no need for further scientific exploration.
1) Creationism and Evolution are two completely distinct ideas, completely at odds with each other, there is no viable middle ground between the two, and no viable alternatives. His proof of this largely boils down to "both religious creationists and atheist scientists have asserted this to be true, therefore it must be true!"
2) Evolution is "just a theory", not all evolutionary biologists can agree on even some of the most basic tenets of it, and therefore it is an inherently flawed theory. In this, Strobel only demonstrates that he has never read any philosophy of science, and has no idea how scientific progress is made.
3) There are plenty of natural phenomenon that science cannot adequately explain, therefore a higher power must exist. Never mind that if science knew everything already, there would be no need for further scientific exploration.
September 6, 2008
This book used logic and deductive reasoning to make a strong case for intelligent design vs. evolution. Not being one to put all my stock into one point of view, I also read a book on evolution. They both have very valid points, and I don't deny evolution's principle of survival of the fittest, and how over time it can actually cause organisms to 'evolve' to their environment, however the Case for a Creator is much more believable as far as the beginnings of life and organisms. Don't take it from me though. Read it and decide for yourself.
July 6, 2015
As most of you know Lee Strobel has written several "The Case for ..." books. This one is very good. I don't necessaryly like his writing style but the information in is books are great. It takes me a little bit longer to read his books than most books I read but it is worth it. You will get a great taste for the book from the quotes below. I trust they will either encorage you or challenge your belief. Enjoy!
William Provine of Cornell University said, “If Darwinism is true, then there are five inescapable conclusions:
• there’s no evidence for God
• there’s no life after death
• there’s no absolute foundation for right and wrong
• there’s no ultimate meaning for life
• and people don’t really have free will.”
It is hard to resist the impression that the present structure of the universe, apparently so sensitive to minor alterations in numbers, has been rather carefully thought out. … The seemingly miraculous concurrence of these numerical values must remain the most compelling evidence for cosmic design. ~Physicist Paul Davies
Would it not be strange if a universe without purpose accidentally created humans who are so obsessed with purpose? ~Sir John Templeton
… all the seemingly arbitrary and unrelated constants in physics have one strange thing in common – these are precisely the values you need if you want to have a universe capable of producing life. ~Patrick Glynn
In his book God: The Evidence, [Patrick] Glynn credits the absolutely incredible fine-tuning of the cosmos as being among the key reasons why he concluded that the universe must have been the handiwork of a master designer.
A universe aiming at the production of man implies a mind directing it. Though man is not at the physical center of the universe, he appears to be at the center of its purpose. ~Robert Augros
When scientists talk about the fine-tuning of the universe they’re generally referring to the extraordinary balancing of the fundamental laws and parameters of physics and the initial conditions of the universe. Our minds can’t comprehend the precision of some of them. The result is a universe that has just the right conditions to sustain life. The coincidences are simply too amazing to have been the result of happenstance. ~Robin Collins … as Paul Davies said, “the impression of design is overwhelming.”
As scientific knowledge grew, dreams of finding lunar civilizations dissipated. Everyone came to agree that the moon cannot support life. Yet surprising discoveries in recent years have shown the opposite to be true: the moon really does support life – ours! Scientific evidence confirms how this parched, airless satellite actually contributes in unexpected ways to creating a lush and stable environment a quarter of a million miles away on Earth. ~Lee Strobel
There was a remarkable finding that the moon actually stabilizes the tilt of the earth’s axis. The tilt is responsible for our seasons. During the summer, in the northern hemisphere the north pole axis is pointed more toward the sun. Six months later, when the Earth is on the other side of the sun, then the south pole is more pointed toward the sun. While the Earth’s tilt at 23.5 degrees, this gives us very mild seasons. So in a very real way, the stability of our climate is attributable to the moon. ~Guillermo Gonzalez
What would happen if the moon were not there? Then our tilt could swing wildly over a large range, resulting in major temperature swings. If our tilt were more like ninety degrees, the north pole would be exposed to the sun for six months, while the south pole would be in darkness, then vice-versa. Instead, it varies by only about one and a half degrees – just a tiny variation, because the gravity from the moon’s orbit keeps it stabilized. ~Guillermo Gonzalez
We are, by astronomical standards, a pampered, cossetted, cherished group of creatures; our Darwinian claim to have done it all ourselves is as ridiculous and as charming as a baby’s brave efforts to stand on its own feet and refuse his mother’s hand. If the universe had not been made with the most exacting precision we could never have come into existence. It is my view that these circumstances indicate the universe was created for man to live in. ~John A. O’Keefe
If God so precisely and carefully and lovingly and amazingly constructed a mind-boggling habitat for his creatures, then it would be natural for Him to want them to explore it, to measure it, to investigate it, to appreciate it, to be inspired by it – and ultimately, and most importantly, to find Him through it. ~Lee Strobel
We have always underestimated the cell. … The entire cell can be viewed as a factory that contains an elaborate network of interlocking assembly lines, each of which is composed of a set of large protein machines. … Why do we call [them] machines? Precisely because, like machines invented by humans to deal efficiently with the macroscopic world, these protein assemblies contain highly coordinated moving parts. ~Bruce Alberts, President, National Academy of Sciences
We should reject, as a matter of principle, the substitution of intelligent design for the dialogue of chance and necessity; but we must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution of any biochemical system, only a variety of wishful speculations. ~Biochemist Franklin M. Harold
One scientist described a singled-celled organism as a high-tech factory, complete with artificial languages and their decoding systems, memory banks for information storage and retrieval, elegant control systems regulating the automated assembly of parts and components, error fail-safe and proof-reading devices utilized for quality control, assembly processes involving the principle of prefabrication and modular construction … [and] a capacity not equaled in any of our own most advanced machines, for it would be capable of replicating its entire structure within a matter of a few hours. ~Lee Strobel
Today we buy information, we sell it, we regard it as commodity, we value it, we send it down wires and bounce it off satellites – and we know it invariably comes from intelligent agents. So what do we make of the fact that DNA stores far more information in a smaller space than the most advanced supercomputer on the planet? ~Lee Strobel
Wilder Penfield, the renowned father of modern neurosurgery, has encountered concrete evidence that the brain and mind are actually distant from each other, although they clearly interact.
At this point, having considered J.P. Moreland’s critique of physicalism. I wanted to hear his affirmative case that consciousness and the souls are immaterial entities. “What positive evidence is there that consciousness and the self are not merely a physical process of the brain?” I [Lee Strobel] asked.
“We have experimental data, for one thing,” he replied. “For example, neurosurgeon Wilder Penfield electrically stimulated the brains of epilepsy patients and found he could cause them to move their arms or legs, turn their heads or eyes, talk, or swallow. Invariably the patient would respond by saying, ‘I didn’t do that. You did.’ According to Penfield, ‘the patient thinks of himself as having an existence separate from his body.’
“No matter how much Penfield probed the cerebral cortex, he said, ‘There is no place … whose electrical stimulation will cause a patient to believe or to decide.’ That’s because those functions originate in the conscious self, not the brain.
“A lot of subsequent research has validated this. When Roger Sperry and his team studied the differences between the brain’s right and left hemispheres, they discovered the mind has a causal power independent of the brain’s activities. This led Sperry to conclude materialism was false.”
The portrait of the Creator that emerges from the scientific data is uncannily consistent with the description of the God whose identity is spelled out in the pages of the Bible.
• Creator? “In the beginning You laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of Your hands.”
• Unique? “You were shown these things so that you might know that the Lord is God; besides Him there is no other.”
• Uncaused and timeless? “Before the mountains were born or You brought forth the earth and the world, from everlasting to everlasting You are God.”
• Immaterial? “God is spirit.”
• Personal? “I am God Almighty.”
• Freedom of will? “And God said, ‘Let there be light,’ and there was light.”
• Intelligent and rational? “How many are Your works, O Lord! In wisdom You made them all; the earth is full of Your creatures.”
• Enormously powerful? “This Lord is … great in power.”
• Creative? “For You created my inmost being; You knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise You because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Your works are wonderful, I know that full well.”
• Caring? “The earth is full of His unfailing love.”
• Omnipresent? “The heavens, even the highest heaven, cannot contain You.”
• Has given humankind purpose? “For everything, absolutely everything, above and below, visible and invisible, … everything got started in Him and finds its purpose in Him.”
• Provides for life after death? “He will sallow up death forever.”
As the apostle Paul wrote two millennia ago: “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 [that is, His creation], so that men are without excuse.” ~ Lee Strobel
James Tour of Rice University said, “Only a rookie who knows nothing about science would say science takes away from faith. If you really study science, it will bring you closer to God.” Astrophysicist and priest George Coyne put it this way, “Nothing we learn about the universe threatens our faith. It only enriches it.”
Polkinghome, who achieved acclaim as a mathematical physicist at Cambridge before becoming a full-time minister, the same kind of thinking he uses in science has helped him draw life-changing conclusions about God: “ No one has ever seen a quark, and we believe that no one ever will. They are so tightly bound to each other inside the protons and neutrons that nothing can make them break out on their own. Why, then, do I believe in these invisible quarks? … In summary, it’s because quarks make sense of a lot of direct physical evidence. … I wish to engage in a similar strategy with regard to the unseen reality of God. His existence makes sense of many aspects of our knowledge and experience: the order and fruitfulness of the physical world; the multilayered character of reality; the almost universal human experiences of worship and hope; the phenomenon of Jesus Christ (including His resurrection). I think that very similar thought processes are involved in both cases. I do not believe that I shift in some strange intellectual way when I move from science to religion. … In their search for the truth science and faith are intellectual cousins under the skin.”
Religious knowledge is more demanding than scientific knowledge. While it requires scrupulous attention to matters of truth, it also calls for the response of commitment to the truth discovered. ~ Polkinghome
Many have found that the awesome sight of the star-studded heavens evoke a sense of wonder, an awareness of transcendence, which is charged with spiritual significance. Yet the distant shimmering of stars does not itself create this sense of longing; it merely exposes what is already there. They are catalysts for our spiritual insights, revealing our emptiness and compelling us to ask whether and how this void might be filled.
Might our true origins and destiny somehow lie beyond these stars? Might there not be a homeland, from which we are presently exiled and to which we secretly long to return? Might not our accumulation of discontentment and disillusionment with our present existence be a pointer to another land where our true destiny lies and which is able to make its presence felt now in this haunting way?
Suppose that this is not where we are meant to be but that a better land is at hand? We don’t belong here. We have somehow lost our way. Would not this make our present existence both strange and splendid? Strange, because it is not where our true destiny lies; splendid, because it points ahead to where that real hope might be found. The beauty of the night skies or a glorious sunset are important pointers to the origins and the ultimate fulfillment of our heart’s deepest desires. But if we mistake the signpost for what is signposted, we will attach our hopes and longings to lesser goals, which cannot finally quench our thirst for meaning. ~Alister McGrath
William Provine of Cornell University said, “If Darwinism is true, then there are five inescapable conclusions:
• there’s no evidence for God
• there’s no life after death
• there’s no absolute foundation for right and wrong
• there’s no ultimate meaning for life
• and people don’t really have free will.”
It is hard to resist the impression that the present structure of the universe, apparently so sensitive to minor alterations in numbers, has been rather carefully thought out. … The seemingly miraculous concurrence of these numerical values must remain the most compelling evidence for cosmic design. ~Physicist Paul Davies
Would it not be strange if a universe without purpose accidentally created humans who are so obsessed with purpose? ~Sir John Templeton
… all the seemingly arbitrary and unrelated constants in physics have one strange thing in common – these are precisely the values you need if you want to have a universe capable of producing life. ~Patrick Glynn
In his book God: The Evidence, [Patrick] Glynn credits the absolutely incredible fine-tuning of the cosmos as being among the key reasons why he concluded that the universe must have been the handiwork of a master designer.
A universe aiming at the production of man implies a mind directing it. Though man is not at the physical center of the universe, he appears to be at the center of its purpose. ~Robert Augros
When scientists talk about the fine-tuning of the universe they’re generally referring to the extraordinary balancing of the fundamental laws and parameters of physics and the initial conditions of the universe. Our minds can’t comprehend the precision of some of them. The result is a universe that has just the right conditions to sustain life. The coincidences are simply too amazing to have been the result of happenstance. ~Robin Collins … as Paul Davies said, “the impression of design is overwhelming.”
As scientific knowledge grew, dreams of finding lunar civilizations dissipated. Everyone came to agree that the moon cannot support life. Yet surprising discoveries in recent years have shown the opposite to be true: the moon really does support life – ours! Scientific evidence confirms how this parched, airless satellite actually contributes in unexpected ways to creating a lush and stable environment a quarter of a million miles away on Earth. ~Lee Strobel
There was a remarkable finding that the moon actually stabilizes the tilt of the earth’s axis. The tilt is responsible for our seasons. During the summer, in the northern hemisphere the north pole axis is pointed more toward the sun. Six months later, when the Earth is on the other side of the sun, then the south pole is more pointed toward the sun. While the Earth’s tilt at 23.5 degrees, this gives us very mild seasons. So in a very real way, the stability of our climate is attributable to the moon. ~Guillermo Gonzalez
What would happen if the moon were not there? Then our tilt could swing wildly over a large range, resulting in major temperature swings. If our tilt were more like ninety degrees, the north pole would be exposed to the sun for six months, while the south pole would be in darkness, then vice-versa. Instead, it varies by only about one and a half degrees – just a tiny variation, because the gravity from the moon’s orbit keeps it stabilized. ~Guillermo Gonzalez
We are, by astronomical standards, a pampered, cossetted, cherished group of creatures; our Darwinian claim to have done it all ourselves is as ridiculous and as charming as a baby’s brave efforts to stand on its own feet and refuse his mother’s hand. If the universe had not been made with the most exacting precision we could never have come into existence. It is my view that these circumstances indicate the universe was created for man to live in. ~John A. O’Keefe
If God so precisely and carefully and lovingly and amazingly constructed a mind-boggling habitat for his creatures, then it would be natural for Him to want them to explore it, to measure it, to investigate it, to appreciate it, to be inspired by it – and ultimately, and most importantly, to find Him through it. ~Lee Strobel
We have always underestimated the cell. … The entire cell can be viewed as a factory that contains an elaborate network of interlocking assembly lines, each of which is composed of a set of large protein machines. … Why do we call [them] machines? Precisely because, like machines invented by humans to deal efficiently with the macroscopic world, these protein assemblies contain highly coordinated moving parts. ~Bruce Alberts, President, National Academy of Sciences
We should reject, as a matter of principle, the substitution of intelligent design for the dialogue of chance and necessity; but we must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution of any biochemical system, only a variety of wishful speculations. ~Biochemist Franklin M. Harold
One scientist described a singled-celled organism as a high-tech factory, complete with artificial languages and their decoding systems, memory banks for information storage and retrieval, elegant control systems regulating the automated assembly of parts and components, error fail-safe and proof-reading devices utilized for quality control, assembly processes involving the principle of prefabrication and modular construction … [and] a capacity not equaled in any of our own most advanced machines, for it would be capable of replicating its entire structure within a matter of a few hours. ~Lee Strobel
Today we buy information, we sell it, we regard it as commodity, we value it, we send it down wires and bounce it off satellites – and we know it invariably comes from intelligent agents. So what do we make of the fact that DNA stores far more information in a smaller space than the most advanced supercomputer on the planet? ~Lee Strobel
Wilder Penfield, the renowned father of modern neurosurgery, has encountered concrete evidence that the brain and mind are actually distant from each other, although they clearly interact.
At this point, having considered J.P. Moreland’s critique of physicalism. I wanted to hear his affirmative case that consciousness and the souls are immaterial entities. “What positive evidence is there that consciousness and the self are not merely a physical process of the brain?” I [Lee Strobel] asked.
“We have experimental data, for one thing,” he replied. “For example, neurosurgeon Wilder Penfield electrically stimulated the brains of epilepsy patients and found he could cause them to move their arms or legs, turn their heads or eyes, talk, or swallow. Invariably the patient would respond by saying, ‘I didn’t do that. You did.’ According to Penfield, ‘the patient thinks of himself as having an existence separate from his body.’
“No matter how much Penfield probed the cerebral cortex, he said, ‘There is no place … whose electrical stimulation will cause a patient to believe or to decide.’ That’s because those functions originate in the conscious self, not the brain.
“A lot of subsequent research has validated this. When Roger Sperry and his team studied the differences between the brain’s right and left hemispheres, they discovered the mind has a causal power independent of the brain’s activities. This led Sperry to conclude materialism was false.”
The portrait of the Creator that emerges from the scientific data is uncannily consistent with the description of the God whose identity is spelled out in the pages of the Bible.
• Creator? “In the beginning You laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of Your hands.”
• Unique? “You were shown these things so that you might know that the Lord is God; besides Him there is no other.”
• Uncaused and timeless? “Before the mountains were born or You brought forth the earth and the world, from everlasting to everlasting You are God.”
• Immaterial? “God is spirit.”
• Personal? “I am God Almighty.”
• Freedom of will? “And God said, ‘Let there be light,’ and there was light.”
• Intelligent and rational? “How many are Your works, O Lord! In wisdom You made them all; the earth is full of Your creatures.”
• Enormously powerful? “This Lord is … great in power.”
• Creative? “For You created my inmost being; You knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise You because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Your works are wonderful, I know that full well.”
• Caring? “The earth is full of His unfailing love.”
• Omnipresent? “The heavens, even the highest heaven, cannot contain You.”
• Has given humankind purpose? “For everything, absolutely everything, above and below, visible and invisible, … everything got started in Him and finds its purpose in Him.”
• Provides for life after death? “He will sallow up death forever.”
As the apostle Paul wrote two millennia ago: “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 [that is, His creation], so that men are without excuse.” ~ Lee Strobel
James Tour of Rice University said, “Only a rookie who knows nothing about science would say science takes away from faith. If you really study science, it will bring you closer to God.” Astrophysicist and priest George Coyne put it this way, “Nothing we learn about the universe threatens our faith. It only enriches it.”
Polkinghome, who achieved acclaim as a mathematical physicist at Cambridge before becoming a full-time minister, the same kind of thinking he uses in science has helped him draw life-changing conclusions about God: “ No one has ever seen a quark, and we believe that no one ever will. They are so tightly bound to each other inside the protons and neutrons that nothing can make them break out on their own. Why, then, do I believe in these invisible quarks? … In summary, it’s because quarks make sense of a lot of direct physical evidence. … I wish to engage in a similar strategy with regard to the unseen reality of God. His existence makes sense of many aspects of our knowledge and experience: the order and fruitfulness of the physical world; the multilayered character of reality; the almost universal human experiences of worship and hope; the phenomenon of Jesus Christ (including His resurrection). I think that very similar thought processes are involved in both cases. I do not believe that I shift in some strange intellectual way when I move from science to religion. … In their search for the truth science and faith are intellectual cousins under the skin.”
Religious knowledge is more demanding than scientific knowledge. While it requires scrupulous attention to matters of truth, it also calls for the response of commitment to the truth discovered. ~ Polkinghome
Many have found that the awesome sight of the star-studded heavens evoke a sense of wonder, an awareness of transcendence, which is charged with spiritual significance. Yet the distant shimmering of stars does not itself create this sense of longing; it merely exposes what is already there. They are catalysts for our spiritual insights, revealing our emptiness and compelling us to ask whether and how this void might be filled.
Might our true origins and destiny somehow lie beyond these stars? Might there not be a homeland, from which we are presently exiled and to which we secretly long to return? Might not our accumulation of discontentment and disillusionment with our present existence be a pointer to another land where our true destiny lies and which is able to make its presence felt now in this haunting way?
Suppose that this is not where we are meant to be but that a better land is at hand? We don’t belong here. We have somehow lost our way. Would not this make our present existence both strange and splendid? Strange, because it is not where our true destiny lies; splendid, because it points ahead to where that real hope might be found. The beauty of the night skies or a glorious sunset are important pointers to the origins and the ultimate fulfillment of our heart’s deepest desires. But if we mistake the signpost for what is signposted, we will attach our hopes and longings to lesser goals, which cannot finally quench our thirst for meaning. ~Alister McGrath
July 16, 2017
This is a staggeringly heavy read for an author and former journalist who has made so many other topics accessible to the average reader. Like his previous books that examined the evidence for the Biblical Christ and philosophical arguments for faith, this book examines the overwhelming evidence that points away from Darwinism to Intelligent Design. Though I was familiar with some of the evidence having read Michael Behe's "Darwin's Black Box" and seen some Intelligent Design documentaries, Mr. Strobel still finds a great deal of evidence that points towards a Creator. In fact, as it is stated several times over in one form or another, you would have to have more faith to believe in Darwinism than in God after reading through all of the evidence in this book. Still, I have some criticisms that keep me from giving this book five stars: First, though finding a ton of evidence, Mr. Strobel only gives a personal argument as to how all of this points to the Christian God of the Bible. While Mr. Strobel, who has extensively researched these topics, has every right to make that argument, I would have preferred that argument be made by one or more of his interviewees. Second, he didn't seem to forcefully push the skeptics point of view as he had done in his previous works. This is especially true of the chapter on astronomy where, rather than seriously push alternatives, he seems to sit back and be awed by everything. His books always stand out because he pushes back with an atheistic (or Darwinian ) argument and forces the interviewee to defend their argument, which they usually do stupendously. And finally, this book, unlike its predecessors, uses a ton of technical terms that can go over the average reader's head. I even found myself befuddled at times by what was being said. Of course, simpler language would have made the book longer, but I wouldn't have minded so long as it was more accessible. Still, like "The Case for Christ" and "The Case for Faith," this is a great introductory book to the case for Intelligent Design that can be followed up by reading the suggested works that are at the end of every interview.
July 20, 2014
I had low expectations for this book, but it did not live up to them.
Instead of exploring the complicated interplay of science and faith, it just retells the same arguments that have been circulating for centuries, e.g. Cosmological argument, Teleological argument, Anthropic Principle. The scientific evidence presented was one-sided and heavily skewed. It did not do a very good job of addressing the standard responses to the arguments. There was nothing particularly new or interesting presented. The entire work is based on false dichotomies and unfounded premises.
The most annoying part of this book was the incredibly forced pseudo-dialogues that take up the majority of the book. Rather than cover the topics in depth, giving the reader insight into the views, the interviewer throws softball questions and never really delves into any subject. These staged conversations mainly contain vague references to other scientists, Straw Man arguments and painfully stretched analogies. I realize that this book is just an overview of the subject, but it could still fully sketch out the studies and research mentioned in the book.
Instead of exploring the complicated interplay of science and faith, it just retells the same arguments that have been circulating for centuries, e.g. Cosmological argument, Teleological argument, Anthropic Principle. The scientific evidence presented was one-sided and heavily skewed. It did not do a very good job of addressing the standard responses to the arguments. There was nothing particularly new or interesting presented. The entire work is based on false dichotomies and unfounded premises.
The most annoying part of this book was the incredibly forced pseudo-dialogues that take up the majority of the book. Rather than cover the topics in depth, giving the reader insight into the views, the interviewer throws softball questions and never really delves into any subject. These staged conversations mainly contain vague references to other scientists, Straw Man arguments and painfully stretched analogies. I realize that this book is just an overview of the subject, but it could still fully sketch out the studies and research mentioned in the book.
July 7, 2013
Absolutely the worst collection of half-truths, misrepresentations of modern and historical positions, outright lies and total falsehoods that I have ever had the misfortune of reading. I was asked to peruse this title by a friend who had been raised in a born-again Christian household and had attended a Christian high school. Having no context for the "science" contained within the covers of this book, he asked me to read it in order to establish veracity, for the purposes of discussion. Him, I commend. This book, however, necessitated that I keep a running list of everything it lied about, so that I could address it point by point.
This book should not be used to bolster any person's faith, it certainly makes no compelling arguments for a creator, and Lee Strobel is the furthest thing from a Journalist I have ever encountered.
Dreck, and worse than dreck. Do not waste your time.
This book should not be used to bolster any person's faith, it certainly makes no compelling arguments for a creator, and Lee Strobel is the furthest thing from a Journalist I have ever encountered.
Dreck, and worse than dreck. Do not waste your time.
January 8, 2012
"Of course, every house is constructed by someone, but he that constructed all things is God." (Hebrews 3:4)
Do you agree with the logic of this Bible writer? Mankind has experienced some 2,000 years of scientific advancement since that verse was penned. Many scientists identified in Strobel's book believe in God. There is still the common perception, though, that belief in God and the supernatural is incompatible with good science.
Reading Strobel's book is eye-opening, especially for anyone keeping track of the current evolution versus creationism debate raging through the nation's school system. Simply put, you can let others tell you what to believe and what to think. Or you may wish to investigate some of the evidence on your own and reach your own conclusions.
I am familiar with the theory of intelligent design, having tried to wrap my brain around Michael Behe's biochemistry in his outstanding work, "Darwin's Black Box" some years past. His interview with Strobel is one of the highlights of the book. The other is his interview with Jonathan Wells.
Do you agree with the logic of this Bible writer? Mankind has experienced some 2,000 years of scientific advancement since that verse was penned. Many scientists identified in Strobel's book believe in God. There is still the common perception, though, that belief in God and the supernatural is incompatible with good science.
Reading Strobel's book is eye-opening, especially for anyone keeping track of the current evolution versus creationism debate raging through the nation's school system. Simply put, you can let others tell you what to believe and what to think. Or you may wish to investigate some of the evidence on your own and reach your own conclusions.
I am familiar with the theory of intelligent design, having tried to wrap my brain around Michael Behe's biochemistry in his outstanding work, "Darwin's Black Box" some years past. His interview with Strobel is one of the highlights of the book. The other is his interview with Jonathan Wells.
Want to read
February 18, 2014يقول الشيخ سلطان العميري:
كتاب " القضية... الخالق" مؤلفه : لي ستروبل
هو من أفضل الكتب التي ناقشت الإلحاد المعاصر بطريقة علمية احترافية .
وهو في نظري من أثرى البحوث التي تناولت أصول ومنطلقات التيار الإلحادي المعاصرة .
تقوم فكرة الكتاب على حوارات مطولة مع علماء مختصين في عدد من المجالات العلمية , كعلم البيولوجيا وعلم الفلك وعلم الكيمياء .
وكان مؤلفه في أول أمره ملحدا , ثم ترك الإلحاد ورجع إلى الإيمان , بل رجع إلى المسيحية .
وقد تجمعت لديه أسئلة وإشكالات كثيرة في علوم شتى التي يقوم عليها الإلحاد المعاصر .
فأخذ يناقش مع كل عالم من العلماء الأسئلة التي تختص بعلمه المبرز فيه , ويطرح عليه أعمق تلك الأسئلة وأظهرها .
فأصبح الكتاب بهذه المنهجية كتابا ثريا جدا .
وللمؤلف كتابان آخران , هما : "القضية .. الإيمان" و "القضية ... المسيح"
ولم أقرأ
هما بعد .
وكل هذه الكتب مطبوعة في مكتبة دار الكلمة , في مصر (وهي مكتبة مسيحية"
وأظنني لا أحتاج أن أنبه على أن التقييم السابق لا يعني الحكم على كل ما في الكتاب بالصحة والاستقامة .
كتاب " القضية... الخالق" مؤلفه : لي ستروبل
هو من أفضل الكتب التي ناقشت الإلحاد المعاصر بطريقة علمية احترافية .
وهو في نظري من أثرى البحوث التي تناولت أصول ومنطلقات التيار الإلحادي المعاصرة .
تقوم فكرة الكتاب على حوارات مطولة مع علماء مختصين في عدد من المجالات العلمية , كعلم البيولوجيا وعلم الفلك وعلم الكيمياء .
وكان مؤلفه في أول أمره ملحدا , ثم ترك الإلحاد ورجع إلى الإيمان , بل رجع إلى المسيحية .
وقد تجمعت لديه أسئلة وإشكالات كثيرة في علوم شتى التي يقوم عليها الإلحاد المعاصر .
فأخذ يناقش مع كل عالم من العلماء الأسئلة التي تختص بعلمه المبرز فيه , ويطرح عليه أعمق تلك الأسئلة وأظهرها .
فأصبح الكتاب بهذه المنهجية كتابا ثريا جدا .
وللمؤلف كتابان آخران , هما : "القضية .. الإيمان" و "القضية ... المسيح"
ولم أقرأ
هما بعد .
وكل هذه الكتب مطبوعة في مكتبة دار الكلمة , في مصر (وهي مكتبة مسيحية"
وأظنني لا أحتاج أن أنبه على أن التقييم السابق لا يعني الحكم على كل ما في الكتاب بالصحة والاستقامة .
November 26, 2015
Excellent book, both for readers who want to know the science supporting intelligent design and for readers who are searching or doubtful about it. Explores all the disciplines via interviews with experts - physics, astronomy, biology, evolution, chemistry, more. Fascinating without being overly-detailed in the minutia (but plenty of footnotes, heavily referenced for additional drill-down). Makes the case persuasively; in fact, so persuasively that one has to wonder how scientists in any field can not be convinced of intelligent design. Either those scientists are in denial or have another agenda, as Strobel shows the irony in educated scientists ignoring or trying to weave around (through circular and flawed theories) the overwhelming evidence for creation. It's as if those scientists have unwittingly created their own faith-based religion - one in which much greater faith is required than simply following the evidence supporting creation.
June 12, 2019
- Step 1. Have a biased opinion
- Step 2. Find a biased 'Expert'
- Step 3. Straw man the hell out of the opposing view.
- Step 4. Confirm you bias
- Step 2. Find a biased 'Expert'
- Step 3. Straw man the hell out of the opposing view.
- Step 4. Confirm you bias
January 14, 2022
I listened to this through the night while ill, so bits and pieces were missed, but overall I absorbed most of it. I enjoyed the scientific and historical context. Given my years studying Creation science only a few of the sections were new to me. Overall, I always love hearing how God was so intrinsic in His creation of the universe.
Want to read
August 17, 2017Got about 80 pages through in about 4 months time. Ugh. I'll pick this up again in the winter when I can devote more time to it.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 537 reviews