Case for Christ Essay

Dr. Jeffry McDonald was an ex-marine standing trial for killing his family. He did not think the jury would find him at fault because he had an alibi. However, his alibi did not stand up to scientific evidence. Dr. McDonald was sentenced based on blood and trace evidence that did not back up his alibi. In this case scientific evidence is introduced to prove or disprove the consistency of the gospels based on the discipline of archeology. Strobel turns to an archeological professional who has personal experience working digs in the Middle East. His name is John McRay. As Strobel seeks to stay independent in gathering the evidence he proposes a question to help him determine if McRay will exaggerate the role of archeology when it comes to determining the reliability of the gospels. McCray points out that archeology can bring forth evidence is presented to either explain or disprove evidence presented. In this chapter the search for opinions contrary to those already collected, which includes the opinions of Jesus Seminar, a self-selected group representing a small portion of New Testament scholars who believe Jesus did not say most of what is credited to him in the gospels. They also published The Five Gospels which include the traditional four plus a manuscript titled the Gospel of Thomas which was written in the second century. The author examines their claims to see if he can find reliable evidence to disprove these confusing opinions. To find answers he visits Dr. Gregory Boyd to gather evidence to the Jesus Seminar’s widely publicized views. Most skeptics take pride in their intellectual ability. Some people like to think that they have no beliefs. However, modern science has shown us that everyone has beliefs. Although people would like to think that everything we believe is based upon evidence and logic this cannot be. We become emotionally bound to our worldview, so much so that worldview changes occur rarely. Observational evidence became apparent that the universe was expanding. Inferring back in time revealed that the universe was merely billions of years old. The data eventually led to the â€Å"Big Bang† theory which is virtually universally accepted by modern day cosmologist. The idea that the universe could have gone through an infinite number of birth and deaths was shown to be false on the basis of the lack of amount of matter within the universe. So we have come to realize that the universe first began to exist 13 billion years ago. Atheists are left with a problem because their worldview requires all things have a cause to exist So logic says that the universe had a cause. Virtually all atheists say that this cause was some natural phenomenon. It is also possible that the cause of the universe was a supernatural intelligence, God. The problem gets worse for the atheist. The physical laws of the universe fall within very small ranges in order for life or matter to exist contradicting strong atheism. The prospect of finding a naturalistic cause for the origin of the universe is dreary since the laws of physics indicate that we will never be able escape the bounds of our universe to even look for the cause of the universe.