A Look at Lee Strobels, the Case for Faith

The Case for Faith is a Christian book written by journalist Lee Strobel. He holds a journalism degree from the University of Missouri, a Master of Studies in Law from Yale Law School, and was a self described "spiritual skeptic until 1981". He has won four Gold Medallions for his books including the one being reviewed here. In The Case for Faith, Strobel does not attack as much as poke at his eight objections to faith.

I read this book from cover to cover hoping to gain some insight into my Christian friend's ways of thinking about various topics. I also hoped to learn a little more about Christianity as I have a few of my own questions in regards to their beliefs. Unfortunately, what I found was a lot of judgmental thought wrapped inside a disguise of faith, bad analogies, and a much harped upon connection between being immoral and being an atheist. Over and over again Strobel who claims to be a reformed atheist equates atheism with leading a depraved and morally challenged lifestyle.

He interviews a variety of people including authors and scholars like Charles Templeton and William Lane Craig, PHD. The book is easy to read and understand though not necessarily to agree with.

Throughout the book there are several analogies made and one of the strangest is found on page 32. In this chapter in the book he is interviewing Peter John Kreeft, PH.D. It is Kreeft that actually makes the analogy in trying to describe our relationship with god:

"Okay, then, imagine a bear in a trap and a hunter who, out of sympathy, wants to liberate him. He tries to win the bear's confidence, but he can't do it, so he has to shoot the bear full of drugs. The bear, however, thinks this is an attack and that the hunter is trying to kill him. He doesn't realize that this is being done out of compassion.

Then, in order to get the bear out of the trap, the hunter has to push him further into the trap to release the tension on the spring. If the bear were semiconscious at that point, he would be even more convinced that the hunter was his enemy who was out to cause him suffering and pain. But the bear would be wrong. He reaches this incorrect conclusion because he's not a human being."