Week 1: Introduction — Reopening the Investigation

1.Strobel describes himself at the start of his investigation as a legal journalist and a committed atheist. What assumptions did he bring into his inquiry, and how did those assumptions both help and potentially hinder his search?

2.His wife Leslie's conversion to Christianity is what prompted Strobel's investigation. How do you think you would have reacted in his place — would you have been curious, threatened, dismissive, or something else?

3.Strobel structures the book around the legal and journalistic standards used to evaluate evidence. What are those standards, and why does he think they are the right tools to apply to historical and religious claims?

4.He organizes his investigation into three broad questions: Can the biographies of Jesus (the Gospels) be trusted? Who was Jesus, really? Did Jesus rise from the dead? Why do you think he chose these three areas as the key pillars of the case?

5.Strobel admits that his prior worldview made it difficult to consider the evidence fairly. What worldview assumptions do you bring to a book like this — whether skeptical, devout, or somewhere in between — and how might they color your reading?

6.The Introduction frames the entire book as a quest for truth, not merely a defense of a position. How important is that distinction to you? Is there a difference between an investigation and an argument, and does Strobel actually achieve that distinction?

7.How does this book connect to the broader question of whether faith and evidence are compatible? Do you think it is possible — or even desirable — to build faith on a foundation of historical and rational evidence?