The Case for Christ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Struggling1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Struggling1

Guest
What did people think of the movie? Is the book more in depth? It gave me a lot of hope someone more skeptical than I became a pastor and that he actually dug. Does the book list the evidence? Alternatively have you read the Case for Jesus? Is it worth reading?
 
I just watched the movie last night coincidentally! I enjoyed it! I didn’t know a lot of the facts from the movie that ended out convincing the husband journalist- like the number of sightings and the history and the medical science stuff. Very interesting 🙂
 
I need to read the book. It really gives someone like myself a lot of hope if someone who desperately doesn’t want God to be real can find God!
 
I enjoyed the movie, but I imagine the book would be more convincing, because condensed into a two hour movie the whole thing feels a little rushed and not particularly impactful, or so I felt anyway.
 
Yeah! I am hoping it’s much more in depth and I hope the proof he found hasn’t been refuted in the meantime.
 
The book (I’ve seen the website) is more in view.

Pitre is a great scholar, I haven’t read that particular work by him though.
 
What did people think of the movie? Is the book more in depth? It gave me a lot of hope someone more skeptical than I became a pastor and that he actually dug. Does the book list the evidence? Alternatively have you read the Case for Jesus? Is it worth reading?
Yes, I read A Case for Christ. I saw the movie, too, but liked the book more.
The author Lee Stroble has another book coming out, called, A Case for Miracles.
 
Last edited:
The Case for Jesus is a great book. What I remember most is his treatment of the earliest surviving manuscripts we have of the gospels. All of them were attributed to one of the authors we know (Matthew, Mark, Luke or John), despite claims that they were originally anonymous.

He also compares the gospels to Greco-Roman biographies of the time. All (or, at least most- I forget) of the gospels fall within the typical word amount used by these biographers. Similarly, like the biographers, the gospel authors were focused on Jesus’ public life and death, rather than His childhood, providing only small details about the latter.

It’s a really great book.
 
He also compares the gospels to Greco-Roman biographies of the time. All (or, at least most- I forget) of the gospels fall within the typical word amount used by these biographers.
I suspect that would probably have something to do with the practical consideration of how long a scroll could be made, without getting too heavy to handle.
Similarly, like the biographers, the gospel authors were focused on Jesus’ public life and death, rather than His childhood, providing only small details about the latter.
I’ve never read any Greek or Roman biographies, but one thing that strikes me about all four Gospels is the focus on the Passion, Crucifixion, and Ressurection. The Passion narrative, beginning with the entry into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday, starts at Matt 21:1, Mark 11:1, Luke 19:28, and John 12:12. A very rough calculation, based solely on the number of chapters, shows that the Passion narrative, including the burial and the Resurrection, accounts for 30 percent of the full extent of the four Gospels, or 26 chapters out of 86.

Breakdown by chapters
Before/after Palm Sunday

Gospel …. Before …… After …… Total
Matt ………. 20 ………… 8 ………. 28
Mark ……… 10 ………… 6 ………. 16
Luke ……… 18½ ……… 5½ … 24
John ………11½ ……… 6½ ……… 18
Total ………. 60 ………. 26 ….…… 86

A more accurate calculation, based on word count or column inches, would probably yield a slightly higher proportion, I think, possibly as much as one-third in some translations.
 
Last edited:
Pitre’s book is a really good read. 👍
I’ve never read any Greek or Roman biographies, but one thing that strikes me about all four Gospels is the focus on the Passion, Crucifixion, and Ressurection.
In his book, Pitre makes the point that Greco-Roman biographies do the same thing. It’s a feature of modern biographies to include information about a person’s childhood (after all, the reason to do so is to gain psychological insight into the adult they became, right?); ancient biographies tend to focus exclusively on their actions as an adult – and not comprehensively, but in terms of their public actions.
 
Last edited:
ancient biographies tend to focus exclusively on their actions as an adult – and not comprehensively, but in terms of their public actions.
Yes, but to the point that the last week of the subject’s life takes up 30 percent or more of the entire biography?
 
Yes, but to the point that the last week of the subject’s life takes up 30 percent or more of the entire biography?
You’re killing me, man… I had to go dig out my copy of Pitre’s book…!

Yes, Pitre makes the claim that Roman biographers didn’t attempt to document every event in a person’s life (with a quote from Plutarch). Moreover, he quotes Lucian in asserting that his project was to help the reader understand who the man he was writing about really was.

In the case of Jesus, what’s the event that helps the reader know who He is? His passion, death, and resurrection. So, yeah… that would naturally be the focus of an ancient biography!

p.s., read the book. 😉
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top