This Fellow Rips Lee Stroebel A New Asshole

[RoadRunner79]

I recently heard an interview with Strobel. It's actually foing fairly well.  The opening was smaller, only about 1100 theaters, and they are talking about adding about 500 more. It's getting excellent reviews.

It's getting decent reviews as a piece of movie making. Rotten Tomatoes has it rated a 77%.

As anything to do with reality, not so much.

I'd agree. Although I'm sure there are some on both sides, who's reviews are biased based on what the story is about. Ratings are a reflection of the film itself (or at least should be), not necessarily on vindication of it's content.
As to having to do with reality... It's a true story, your feelings on the matter or aversion to it, doesn't allow for you to make things up.

I mean, seriously. One of Strobel's main interviewees, Craig Blomberg, member of the Denver Seminary, has to affirm and sign the following doctrinal statements every year:

“We believe the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are the inspired Word of God, inerrant in the original writings, complete as the revelation of God’s will for salvation, and the supreme and final authority in all matters to which they speak.”

Yeah, every honest investigative reporter (which Strobel is trying to portray himself as), actually looking for the truth, will always choose such an impartial source. [end sarcasm].

No investigative reporter with an ounce of intellectual honesty, will fail to interview at least one scholar with a dissenting opinion. Strobel does not interview a single one, in any of his books.

So; what are you claiming here? That Blomberg (and possibly others) where not sincere in his testimony or are being coerced? What do you base that on? In any case, this seems to be questioning motives and the source, rather than the argument or evidence itself. It's unnecessary; and doesn't effect the reasoning.

I'm not that familiar with Strobel, other than hearing a few interviews here and there. I haven't read his books, and I'm only a loosely aware of his story; so I can't speak too much on particulars. However; if you feel that there is reasons, and facts, which go against his investigation, then I would focus on that, rather than going after people and origins. From what I am aware, Strobel described himself as an outspoken atheist, so his investigation, may have been into what he considered at the time as the dissenting scholarly opinion.

Now if you feel that Strobel's investigation is lacking in some way, then feel free to make your opposing claims, and give support for them.
(However as I am often told, atheist's don't make claims).