MovieChat Forums > The Case for Christ (2007) Discussion > Ummmm...no?

Ummmm...no?

posted 16 years ago by treetherealest
9 replies | jump to latest

If this were an actual CASE in a court of law, you would not be able to prove anything. Let me first start by saying that all the witnesses were experts that already believed in God. He had no interviews with people who actually were atheiests or non-believers (excluding people on the streets who were not experts and said one sentence) It does not give the other side of the argument at ALL, which is very biased. I'm not saying either side is right, but in a CASE, you hear BOTH sides. Also, there are some "points" they claim to make earlier on that contradict themselves.

The first step for them was proving that the words in the testaments are true. They say this must be because that people back then word of mouth was very reliable. However, the next section in the film talks about how the nostic gospels are wrong and flatout say they are unreliable. However, I thought they just stated that word of mouth back then people's word was very reliable? If you can't prove this first point that the gospels are reliable, then everything after that in the documentary is up in the air.

Another thing is when they "prove" Jesus did miracles. They say some people opposed to him said it was the work of the devil or magic, so the fact they acknowledged that he did stuff, that proves they were miracles. However, I've seen David Blane and David Copperfield do some crazy stuff, it doesn't mean they are miracles. Also, fake-healers like Benny Hinn have "healed" bunches of people, but it's been proven to be a scam. You can easily many people involved in certani things to orchestrate things the way you want.

Then came the argument that being that the diciples were willing to spread the word while risking death proves that Jesus must be ressurected. However, there are obviously many muslims who are willing to flat out die for what they believe in, and I know some make claims of seeing people from the afterlife. Does that PROVE they must have seen those things and know that what they are doing is absolutely the truth?

I am agnostics, so I am open minded to both sides, but this documentary was just giving one side and not allowing anybody to dispute the things this ONE side is saying. I'm not a scholar and I can still see that many of thes arguments made in the film PROVE nothing beyond a resonable doubt.

Verdict: Not enough evidence to convince.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Commando_Matrix 16 years ago

This is nothing but delusional ramblings of people to stupid or stubborn to see the truth.

"eating is not cheating"

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] JrnlofEddieDeezenStudies 15 years ago

The first step for them was proving that the words in the testaments are true. They say this must be because that people back then word of mouth was very reliable. However, the next section in the film talks about how the nostic gospels are wrong and flatout say they are unreliable.

Well, not just that, but after going to pains to claim that the oral tradition could easily, at that time, pass down stories where "not a thing is different" between many tellers of the story, they go on to excuse the differences in the story among the New Testament gospels by saying that "If they didn't have differences people would accuse them of collusion". Now, either it's not the case that at the relevant time period, the oral tradition was passing along important stories with not a thing changed (which would be one way to explain the differences), or it was passing along important stories with not a thing changed and we have a reason to believe that it was collusion or some other kind of "master planning" to have differences in the story in the gospels for fear of people otherwise suspecting the putative gospel writers of colluding with each other (and during the relevant time period, by the way, that would only be the case if people would be suspicious if a number of different story-tellers all agreed on the story, which again suggests that the oral tradition wasn't so infallible). You just can't have it both ways.

Likewise, another big problem is that elements of the story that would supposedly cause doubt in its veracity--such as women being the first to discover Jesus' empty tomb--obviously were not such a big problem for its veracity for the folks who heard the story from the gospels and believed it at that time. Either particular elements by themselves are enough to cause people of the time period to doubt the story altogether when they hear it--in which case, we couldn't explain how there could be any believers of the story at and shortly after that time, OR those elements are not such a problem after all, making the comments about them in the documentary inaccurate and irrelevant.

The person whose story I really couldn't buy was Lee Strobel's, as his approach and reasoning were just too transparently problematic/ignorant. I ended up seeing the story instead as, "What a man will do when he is worried that he's going to lose his wife and family."

http://www.rateyourmusic.com/~JrnlofEddieDeezenStudies

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Remnant_Of_The_Abyss 14 years ago

Verdict: Not enough evidence to convince.

The number of prophesies written about Jesus in the Old Testament, by the Jews, who would have no reason to substantiate the claims and Divinity of Jesus, and the statistical analysis of these prophesies being fulfilled by any one person, should be evidence enough for anyone with a logical, unbiased mind.

But one cannot argue another into the Kingdom of Heaven; it must come from one's own humility and acknowledgment of the clear facts. That is why Jesus said you must come to Him as a child; children have an innocence and a humility that many adults do not.

Any unbeliever who has viewed this film is searching, and I want to let you know that your key to salvation, to eternal life, is to be humble while embarking upon your own journey into discovery. If you are faithful to being humble and pray to God to reveal the truth to you about who Jesus is, God will reveal the truth to you, through His Holy Spirit. Make this a top priority in your life, your eternal soul depends upon it.

"When you see your fears on a screen, it helps you to get rid of them." Gaspar Noé

[–] seanander 13 years ago

<html>

<bl>The number of prophesies written about Jesus in the Old Testament, by the Jews, who would have no reason to substantiate the claims and Divinity of Jesus, and the statistical analysis of these prophesies being fulfilled by any one person, should be evidence enough for anyone with a logical, unbiased mind.</bl>

But one cannot argue another into the Kingdom of Heaven; it must come from one's own humility and acknowledgment of the clear facts. That is why Jesus said you must come to Him as a child; children have an innocence and a humility that many adults do not.

Any unbeliever who has viewed this film is searching, and I want to let you know that your key to salvation, to eternal life, is to be humble while embarking upon your own journey into discovery. If you are faithful to being humble and pray to God to reveal the truth to you about who Jesus is, God will reveal the truth to you, through His Holy Spirit. Make this a top priority in your life, your eternal soul depends upon it.

</html>

Obviously you're not a golfer. - Dude

[–] Enlil-An 13 years ago

The number of prophesies written about Jesus in the Old Testament, by the Jews, who would have no reason to substantiate the claims and Divinity of Jesus, and the statistical analysis of these prophesies being fulfilled by any one person, should be evidence enough for anyone with a logical, unbiased mind.

Except that the passages of scripture in the Old Testament described as prophesies for the historical Jesus are all taken out of context and were never meant by the authors to be prophesies at all - let alone prophecies of the coming of Jesus of Nazareth.

It isn't a coincidence that the bulk of these so-called "prophesies" are taken from Psalms and the book of Isaiah, the most ambiguous and cryptic books in the OT. It's not hard for a person to lift a passage from those books and tailor it to their own interpretation. The early Christians had access tho these ancient scriptures. They simply looked for passages that seemed to resemble aspects of Jesus' life and ministry and claimed they were prophecies regardless of their original context.

jbs.org + thenewamerican.com + lewrockwell.com + mises.org

[–] lowmorale 13 years ago

Agreed, and Liberty University is BS. Not one valid rebuttal source was used. That's just bad investigation. I was kind of intrigued because I like to look at all sides, or maybe get a better understanding of how/why people believe what they believe, but it's obvious Strobel believes what he does because he didn't want to lose his wife. Pretty simple. Least it wasn't as creepy/offensive as "Jesus Camp", or anything Kirk Cameron comes up with, so I give it a "meh, it's watchable".