The Case For a Creator: A Journalist Investigates Scientific Evidence That Points Toward God

How does Strobel’s book fit into a broader conversation about the appropriate relationship between science and religion?

Strobel structures his book around interviews with scientists and scholars. How does this interview format strengthen or weaken his overall argument? Would the book be more or less persuasive if written as a traditional academic text?

Some of Strobel’s experts hold positions outside the scientific mainstream. How does Strobel’s use of minority viewpoints bear on his case?

Michael Behe’s concept of irreducible complexity plays a significant role in Strobel’s argument. Research critiques of this concept from the mainstream scientific community. How do these critiques hold up against Strobel’s presentation?

Critics often argue that intelligent design commits the “God-of-the-gaps” fallacy—invoking God to explain what science hasn’t yet explained. Evaluate whether Strobel’s arguments are vulnerable to this critique.

Read selections from a book presenting a naturalistic worldview (such as Carl Sagan’s Cosmos or Richard Dawkins’s The Blind Watchmaker). How do the authors address the same phenomena Strobel discusses?

Compare and contrast the various interpretations of the anthropic principle (weak versus strong, theistic versus non-theistic). Where does Strobel’s argument fit within this broader philosophical debate?

Strobel frames his investigation through his personal journey from atheism to Christianity. How does this narrative structure affect your reading of the evidence he presents? Does it make his case more relatable or potentially more biased?