I was both intellectually challenged and emotionally touched by this life-changing book. I've read a considerable amount of literature about the historical Jesus, from the skeptical to the orthodox, and this book provides the most readable summary of the evidence for the conservative Christian position. While there are other books that delve more deeply into the subject (such as Gregory Boyd's "Cynic Sage or Son of God?" or "Jesus Under Fire"), this book has done the hard work of "popularizing" the material in a very accessible and even entertaining package. This does not make the material any less persuasive; it only shows that a simple and direct case for Jesus being the Son of God can be made in a format that the average person can appreciate.

Because the data and evidence are expressed in the context of a true story -- that is, the spiritual journey of an atheist who investigated the case for Christ and ended up a pastor -- there is an emotional punch to this book that drier and more scholarly works lack. More than once, I found myself spiritually invigorated by reading it.

Naturally, a book of this nature will have its critics. Those who start with the presupposition that the supernatural is impossible MUST find a way to defuse the evidence of this and similar books. They have no choice but to do so, regardless of how outlandish their arguments. One critic, who takes the ridiculous position that Jesus never lived and who identifies himself as a New Testament scholar without even disclosing whether he has any academic credentials in this regard, has tried to poke holes it in through a self-published book. I've provided my own critique of that sorry effort, but suffice to say it takes a one-sided approach that is so bizarre as to garner little support even from other atheists. One would have to suspend belief in order to buy into these critiques.

For instance, the writings of Papias and Irenaeus, who attest to the traditional authorship of the gospel accounts, are called into question because they come some years after Jesus lived. That critique only succeeds if you believe that early Christians never had any contact with each other and that they somehow lived in isolated pockets. If the apostle John discipled Polycarp, then certainly Polycarp knew from John who authored the gospels (including the gospel of John). Irenaeus, then, knew Polycarp, and certainly obtained his information from him. So there is what scholars call a "living line" of evidence -- information and evidence passed from one early Christian to another. To criticize the account of Irenaeus only makes sense if you leave out this kind of important information -- which critics intentionally do. In addition, none of these critics answer Craig Blomberg's assertion in "The Case for Christ" that if someone were going to make up authorship of these gospels, they most certanly would have chosen the names of more highly regarded people than Matthew, Mark, or Luke -- such as Peter or James.

One thing I especially appreciated about "The Case for Christ" is that it has an excellent bibliography. If anyone has any question about the reliability of any of the facts presented, there is a list of resources he or she can consult in order to obtain further information. In a way, this book provides a portal through which a seeker can obtain basic information about the evidence for Jesus and then continue to delve into deeper and deeper material as he or she desires. (One helpful book, also on an introductory level but quite well done, is "The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?" by scholar F.F. Bruce)

I'd summarize by saying that "The Case for Christ," as well as its companion, "The Case for Faith," which considers eight major objections to Christianity, should be in the library of any individual who is honestly searching for answers about the identity of Jesus.

Click to purchase: The Case for Christ