A hard-driving journalist, Lee Strobel was exactly where he expected to be at work: on top. His award-winning investigative reporting recently earned him a promotion to legal editor at the Chicago Tribune. But things weren’t going nearly as well at home where his wife Leslie’s newfound faith in Christ went against everything Lee believed—or didn’t believe—as an avowed atheist.

Check out the clip above. Additionally, catch the movie on Netflix today!

Be On-Point.

Be Positive.

Be Respectful.

Or Be Gone!

I saw the movie, more or less ( I had it on the tv but didnt watch it constantly). I would call it a cut above the average religious proselytizing pic like the ones Kirk Cameron starts in,  but on the other hand I don't think this movie will convert unbelievers. 

As a movie I'd give it a C +, as a religion lesson maybe a C -. 

The acting isn't bad, but the script is run of the mill, other than the overtly religious angle. 

Hi John! Yeah, the movie is covering a lot ground and content in a limited span of time. The book takes its time. Moreover, the movie is 'dated.' In that, Mr. Strobel wrote this book in the 1980's about his own Atheist  to Christian life change. There is an interesting audiobook chapter from the book up in the article window above.

No one, absolutely no one, is "born into faith in God" as you put it.  We are all born atheists, God belief has to be taught and learned

God belief has to be taught and learned

... and the God one believes in is a function of nurture.   (And for adults finding faith later ... a function of culture and influences.)

It is quite a proposition to suggest that almost 20% of the children in China were born with Buddhist beliefs or that nearly 100% of the children of Afghanistan were born with beliefs in Allah or that ~80% of the children of India were born with the pantheistic-polytheistic beliefs in Brahma, Vishnu, et. al.

If the particular beliefs (and indeed the gods) spontaneously emerged throughout the world (thus finding religious views geographically mixed rather than clustered) then one might be able to make the argument that we are born with the belief in God.   However that argument would also need to explain why different infants are born with beliefs in different (quite different) gods.

The argument that human beings are genetically predisposed to believe in a god or gods, however, seems to have legs.   We do seek answers to questions and when we cannot find the answer cultures historically offered a supreme entity (or entities) - and with great success!  Not too long ago Zeus / Jupiter was the explanation for thunderstorms. Vulcan the explanation for volcanoes, etc.

I agree.   We are born with genetic skills (ability to breathe, cry, eat, etc.) and we have a natural ability to bond with those caring for us.   But I would need to see some rather convincing formal evidence that a newborn has a shred of knowledge outside of 'I am comfortable / I am uncomfortable' and similar.

Yes. Faith comes by hearing.

Romans 10:

14 How then can they call on the One they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the One of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone to preach? 15 And how can they preach unless they are sent? As it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who g bring good news!” h

16 But not all of them welcomed the good news. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed our message?” i 17 Consequently, faith comes by hearing , and hearing by the word of Christ.

We are not all born into a lasting faith. Indeed, many, many people born into faith in God have no root in God despite their home-training. Often people want something they can touch to relate to. As a result, many youth walk away to go out and experience life. Later in life, many new and returning adults reconnect with their beliefs. (Read about the Prodigal Son.)  — from the Article

Lennylynx! Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I will consider how to revise that sentence above. I am not sure we are all "born atheist," per se.  However, it was not my intention to write that "all born...faithful." As in, most babies are creatures with a belief system or inherited faith from the womb. I was not thinking on those lines. That said, the paragraph construction explains that it is a passing statement about familial faith.

It was late (nearing 1 AM - LOL). What I meant by the paragraph is this:

Being born into, in my case as in example, a Christian home or in Lee Strobel's case, an Atheist home prior to his household transitioning to Christianity, does not mean a child is incapable of walking away from its family belief systems. Many youth do depart their faith, to return at some later point in life or not at all.

Accepted, thank-you for the correction.  We ARE born atheists, however, this much is absolutely undeniable.  A baby does not even possess the faculties to grasp the concept of a god.  

Article paragraph updated. Now watch the trailer and the movie! Share your thoughts, please.

I am too! 

So true.

We are not born Atheists.

We're not born believing in fairies and ghosts either.  

We ARE born atheists,

I'd put it that we're born agnostic but don't know what that means either. 

Or the denial of One.  No one is born believing that no God exists.  

Or the denial of One.  No one is born believing that no God exists.

I agree with you.  How could an infant know that no god exists sans any real knowledge?  Makes no sense, right?

By the very same logic, everyone is born unconvinced  that a god exists.   An infant lacking even the vaguest idea of what a god is will certainly not hold belief in a particular god.   (Unless one can deliver evidence that a newborn possesses knowledge of the concept 'god' and is convinced that the god exists.)

Also, if newborns did possess knowledge of god then is it not curious that infants throughout the world are born with very different gods in their minds?    Seems also to be the case that the god in the mind of the infant tends to be the god of the parents, family, community, culture.   So one born in India is far more likely to be Hindu, while one born in China is more likely to be Buddhist and in Afghanistan it is almost certainty that each newborn has Allah in its mind.  Suggests that the concept of god enters the mind through nurture - not nature.   Also suggests that the 'right' god depends on one's influences.

To cap this off, consider the millions of ancient infants born into this world believing in Zeus or Jupiter.   Since Zeus, Jupiter, et. al. do not exist (pretty sure everyone is a Zeus-atheist by now) how did those thoughts get into the minds of the infants?

... just a thought experiment ...

To be properly informed about what you are discussing you should WATCH the movie or at least its movie trailer, The Case for Christ, on Netflix or read the book using your best means. Consider this: You can not address what you do not know about.

BULLETIN: I have added to the main article, Lee Strobel - The Case for Christ Audiobook Ch. 1!

Great question. Generally speaking, my worldview takes into account that our nation is not a theocracy and is governed by a strong Constitution. I conclude that other religions and non-religious entities have similar rights and privileges as Christians. Moreover, I like people, and have social friends, in other sects, traditions, and religions. Did I reply to the gist of your question? If not, ask again.

The documentary above in 2.2.3.3.… @ timestamp 32:46 brings up a question about the Talmud regarding Jesus. Can someone with knowledge of the Talmud explain this:

1. It was considered by the Jewish leadership and non-supporters of Jesus, that he was a magician.

There is nothing wrong with this perception per se.  It would be consistent and explain a lot. If so, that is.

Is there a member available for Q & A for the question above?

I may be able to give some "secular" information about it. I'll give it a try and, see if I can back it up with anything.

Galen! Thanks for the offer of help. (-:

NP, I think that even though I know nothing of the Talmud, I can at least give some historical info of the times.

Galen, I found one of the Talmudic references to Jesus as one who practiced magic in Sanhedrin 107b. NOTE: I am interested in the truth of this factual statement as history and not as a point of contention.

Remember, it was a group of Magi that came to see Jesus when he was in Bethlehem.

en.wikipedia

Magi were magicians, that is were the word comes from, they weren't considered "evil" at the time, just followers of Zorianderism because, Rome was in charge of most of the Middle East at the time magic was accepted, except were some religions looked down on it, like the Hebrews did. Magi read the stars to learn of events  that would happen in the future, think of the Magi following a star to Bethlehem to find Jesus. They were also considered Wise Men and, Wise Women in some circles.

When Joseph and, Mary fled to Egypt it is possible that Jesus picked up (in his education), some of the Magi teachings, thus he would have been thought of as a magician. 

Now that's interesting. More to consider.

When Joseph and, Mary fled to Egypt it is possible that Jesus picked up (in his education), some of the Magi teachings,

And perhaps also he studied with spiritual masters in India as well?

You don’t think Jesus could have reached India during his years as a young man? If he had remained in Judea, wouldn’t he have been married off at age thirteen, the age all Jewish boys attain manhood? The silk road to India and beyond was much-traveled. There were caravans of merchants. And if there were three Wise Men (the Magi) from the East who were present at Jesus’ birth, doesn’t it imply (as Indian sage Paramahansa Yogananda claimed) that a tug from the Orient was present in Jesus’ life from the beginning? Then why would the Lord not return the visit? Especially since the oldest temples in the world, belonging to the oldest religions, were in India. 

However, as for the controversy about  Jesus in India , surf over to  http://www.jesus-in-india-the-movie.com "}}" data-beacon-parsed="true" class="bn-clickable" data-ylk="" data-rapid-parsed="slk" data-rapid_p="2" data-v9y="1" style="box-sizing: inherit; color: #000000; text-decoration: none; box-shadow: #0dbe98 0px -2px 0px inset; font-family: ProximaNova, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Roboto, Arial, sans-serif; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;"> www.jesus-in-india-the-movie.com  and you’ll see what’s provoking both agony and ecstasy. You may discover why writer Len Kasten, in the March / April 2009 issue of  Atlantis Rising , says: “this film, some think, has the potential to revolutionize Christianity...”

Magi were magicians, that is were the word comes from, they weren't considered "evil" at the time, just followers of Zorianderism because, Rome was in charge of most of the Middle East at the time magic was accepted, except were some religions looked down on it, like the Hebrews did. Magi read the stars to learn of events  that would happen in the future, think of the Magi following a star to Bethlehem to find Jesus. They were also considered Wise Men and, Wise Women in some circles.

So they were not only magicians but also...Astrologers.

It is possible that he didn't even have to leave Egypt for this to have happened, as it is written there, caravans came and, went all the time, it is possible that he ran into more than one person from India while living in Egypt. Of course one of the things said in the Bible is that he returned with his parents to Nazareth when he was twelve. 

Yes.

The documentary above in 2.2.3.3.… @ timestamp 32:46 brings up a question about the Talmud regarding Jesus. Can someone with knowledge of the Talmud explain this:

I'm not familiar with it. However, it would seem obvious to me-- the miracles He performed! Turning water into wine? Walking on water? That seems like magic to me!!!!

(Actually I think part of the problems with interpretations of what He did is due to various people having different definitions of "magic").

Looking back through time, it is bizarre how the Jewish leadership missed the appearance of its Messiah. . . . This is very, very interesting.

Looking back through time, it is bizarre how the Jewish leadership missed the appearance of its Messiah.

Perhaps some of the "magic tricks" he did made them doubt that he was a real Messiah. (Pre-conceived notions can often limit what one is open to seeing). His magic may have fooled them...???

(Actually I think part of the problems with interpretations of what He did is due to various people having different definitions of "magic").

BTW, speaking of "magic"-- does anyone know what my current avatar is? (The source?)

It is a tarot card used for divination, no?

In your opinion, was Jesus a magician? Your comment is ambiguous. Krishna, what I mean is this: A magician's 'magic', while pleasant and interesting, has no life-changing qualities to it. Did Jesus' demonstrations of power alter the course of lives in the Gospels?

They were looking for a warrior king, like David was, not a peaceful king who wanted to bring all peoples together, they wanted someone to drive the Romans out of Judea.

This will help those to understand the Tarot card.

aeclectic

Good point. As a democracy today, I could ask is Israel still looking for an earthy Messiah? It is a serious and fair question, in my opinion.

INTERMISSION:

AMAZING GRACE

by Brooke Simpson
Native American vocalist on The Voice

The New Testament makes truth claims about Jesus, the Messiah. Around Jesus a system of definitions and ideas on what Christian faith is, is erected. It falls to the believer or seeker as good readers and thinkers to study the system of Christian theology in order to grasp anything relevant and important within it. This, in my opinion, is what Lee Strobel accomplished for himself.

Trout-G, I am sharing this information with you here, because this article corresponds to the death, suffering, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ! Moreover, I do not wish to 'burden' Hal's article down.

I am supplying you a video on the painful death of Jesus lifted out of a dramatized movie version of Lee Stobel's, " Case For Christ ."

 More. A comprehensive look (from both sides of the issue) 1986 Los Angeles Times article. This article is 4 pages of rich input on the very topic you are inquiring about: