|
[This is post #2, carried over from my previous post.]
The second criticism of Strobel's writings is that, in my opinion, they do not make their arguments in a logical, well-reasoned way (I am extrapolating from the one book of his that I've fully read. I know that that can be "dangerous"). They mainly seem to consist of disjointed points, such as the stories that he tells about flying to visit various experts and what they said. He tries to draw a conclusion from the points that he makes, but it sure is difficult to see how he "got there."
In all fairness, this probably comes from Strobel's training and career as a newspaper journalist. Articles in newspapers generally consist of a collection of quotes from people and other facts. They do not draw conclusions, so that they can make arguments; indeed they do not intend to (again, generally speaking).
|