myrddyn

reflections from the kiddie pool
2003-02-04 23:07:39 (UTC)

The Case for Christ


Did I mention that book title in a previous entry? I think
I did, not having the strength to go back through them all
to see.

I have this friend who sent me this book, and I am almost
done reading it. I sent it to me, maybe a year ago? It
took me a while to pick it up, then I chewed through a
bunch of chapters. About halfway through I stalled out,
but recently I picked it up again and read most of the
rest. I have perhaps 40 pages left. My friend who gave it
to me, I think he thought the book would satisfy some of my
doubts about Christianity. Unfortunately the book ended up
being mostly about history, while my priamry objections are
ideological.

The book is by this guy who was a journalist (wrote for the
Chicago Trib) and a legal education from Yale, apparently
he was an atheist before the events described in the book.
So he goes on this series of interviews to biblical
scholars and the like trying to determine for himself
whether there is factual basis for the Bible. He ends up
being this big-time convert and writes a book about his
interviews. You can read more on the background of the
book at Amazon.com.

The book had me confused for a while, up until just
recently. They pump this author up as being this hard core
intellectual journalist who worked for the Chicago Tribune,
so I thought this book was really going to be that kind of
analysis, treated with the journalist's brush--interviews
of scholars both pro and con, and that in the end he would
decide that the convincing argument was Christianity. The
set-up was that this journalist was going to ask the 'hard
questions'.

But what the book ended up being was really exactly what
the title says it is: A case for Christ, like a legal
case; a plaintiff's presentation, so to speak. I never
would have figured it to be that simple. The interviews
presented in the book run off like a list of 'experts' that
a lawyer would use if he were trying to make his case to
the jury. And, like any attorney preparing their case, he
chose to interview and present experts who were going to
bolster his case. The preparation went right down to
the 'cross examination'. A lot of times lawyers know what
the other side is going to present, so to defuse 'negative'
evidence that the other side would bring up for the first
time, they ask their own expert witness the 'hard'
questions so that the witness can be prepped for their
answer, and present the 'negative' in the best possible
light for their own case. The result is that on cross, the
revelation of that weakness is blunted because the jury has
already heard it, and it has already been explained.

I mean, this was really bugging me for most of the book,
because I have a journalism degree from a pretty good
journalism school and I'm thinking "What the hell, this
isn't something I would expect from a journalist." Now
that I get it, the context of the book makes so much more
sense. He is putting his best foot forward. He is
saying, "These are my best witnesses, here is my best
case." Under those circumstances, there is no obligation
to present both sides. The kicker is that, apparently, he
found the case to be so convincing to himself that he
became a 'convert' to Christianity. So it is written from
the perspective of an attorney who really believes in his
client.

Thus, the writing of the book comes across so strongly; the
witnesses are described in such positive and strong
language as being experts on their subjects, and how good
their information is and how well they did in debates
against those who disagreed with them. The author talks
about their passion for their work and delves into
anecdotal stories from their person background when it
serves to make them sound better. Rather than going more
directly to the interview, the author tries so hard to
bolster each interviewee's credibility before you see a
single word from the interview. If you believed his pre-
interview hype, the expert could tell you Jesus was a
talking Teddy Bear from the Vermont Company and you'd have
no choice but to believe him! I would much rather read a
direct transcript of each interview and come to my own
conclusions, thank you. I think it is an unfortunate
byproduct of being written by the already-converted. The
book has tried my patience at times, but I am going to
finish every page.

I don't mean to sound overly critical of the book. For
what it is, I think it does a fine job. It just was not
what I was expecting and I wanted to write here to help
organize my thoughts about it.

This friend of mine who gave the book to me, I am
perpetually sorry that we do not have a better
relationship. We were college buddies, in the same
fraternity pledge class. He and his girlfriend, who later
became his wife, introduced me to my wife and got us
dating. While I have yet to really repay him for that
favor, we have been friends for the better of 10 years now.

His wife and my wife (who is an absolute bitch on wheels--I
mean, just you wouldn't believe) had a falling out about 3
years ago--over the most stupid thing by the way--and since
that time their fued has interfered with our friendship.
Before that time, we would get together once or twice a
year. Since, we never see each other. We get around this
a little bit by staying in touch by e-mail and being in the
same fantasy football league, but it's hard when you never
get to hang out together.

He was always more religious than the rest of us in
college, although he did his fair share of sinning. After
he got married and moved to the southern part of the state,
he and his wife became very religious.

I miss talking to him. He knows I'm a tough nut, from a
religious perspective, but he never let that get in the way
of our friendship. He would talk on occasion about his
church, and their work, and the books he had read--often
Christian; but it never felt forced. It was more
like 'this is my life, and what I'm into' and it always
made me happy to hear that he was doing things he enjoyed.
And we talk about other things--jobs and sports and hobbies-
-so there is variety. We talk about our college days and
the guys we have lost touch with.

Unlike a lot of Christians I know, he really walks the
walk. He and his wife travelled to South Dakota to
minister to Native Americans. But he didn't just go to
minister blindly. I talked to him when he came back, he
had observed and learned a lot about the communities he
visited, about the things he had learned during the
experience. He gives a lot of his time and effort to his
church, and money I suspect, although he and his wife are
both teachers and they have two children so they are not
busting out with extra cash.

And he walks the walk not just on the big things, but the
small ones too. He is always soft spoken and kind.
Willing to give the benefit of the doubt. He is generous
and of good humor. He is both principled and pragmatic.
He is a hard worker, and a good father. He has his flaws,
but his good nature and good heart are bigger.

And there is his faith. He is always willing to talk about
his faith, but he never pushes it. We have talked many
times in the past on Christianity and religion.

He acknowledges his doubts, but instead of weakening his
faith they make it stronger. I ask him the difficult
questions, the logical challenges. Usually he looks or
sounds a bit sheepish, and rarely has many answers. But he
embraces these things, he never shies away, and I have
never seen his faith waver. Christians whose faith suffers
from no doubt, who have their biblical quotes for answers
to every individual question--they make my teeth grate and
give me headaches.

The humanity of his personal faith is more impressive than
in perhaps any other person I have known. And while he
knows the chances of my conversion, I always think in my
mind that if there was one person who could convince me
that the Christian path was one of truth and merit, it
would be him. He doesn't know I think that about him, but
I hope one day to tell him. I think he would surprised to
hear that.

So I have this book, and I have my notes on 3x5 cards, and
I imagine we will talk soon.




Ad: