Customer Reviews
Circular Reasoning - By: Eden's Talking Snake, 27 May 2008 
I have tried repeatedly to find some sort of credible evidence of historical truth for the bible & was hopeful that this book would provide it. Unfortunately the basis of the book goes along the lines of 'the bible is true because the bible says so'. Circular reasoning. It relies heavily on a literal interpretation of bible passages - one of the many problems of this liesin the fact that the bible was written at least 4 decades after the supposed lifetime of Christ (the destruction of the Jewish templesin AD70 isin the Gospels).
Modern minds will also be aggrieved (or amused) by the blatent gender biasin the book & a number of assumptions are made on this basis.
I'll keep reading both sides of the argument, but alas the Richard Dawkins/ Sam Harris arguments seem more credible.
Dated - By: Pillowtail, 05 Apr 2007 
I call this dated due to the languagein places & also the author's views of the psychology of the genders. That aside, the book is readable &in the main the argument is presented well & with conviction. The chapter on James the brother of the Lord is the weakest link & the book would have been strengthened by excluding this chapter. The chapter on Paul is probably the most convincing. I would not recommend this book for would be Christians due to the two problems mentioned above, but for those already convinced about the resurrection, it does provide arguments which can be modernised for contemporary apologetics.
An amazingly clear discussion of Jesus' last days - By: T. Roberts, 27 Sep 2006 
This book will make you question everything you think you know about the last days of Jesus, his death & apparant resurrection. Morison leaves no stone unturnedin his quest to find the truth, starting from the last supper he uses his amazing logic to pick out each & every clue from the Gospels to ascertain the true course of events. His views are unbiased, & the reader is offered every alternative to the view presentedin the Gospels. His writing style is extremely lucid, Morison has an impressive skillin explaining complex historical issuesin a clear & understandable way.
I would recommend this book for both believers & unbelievers, for the former it will unlock the Gospel accounts to an amazing degree & for the lattr it goes quite some way to dispelling the idea that Christianity is based on "blind faith" & nothing else. The fact that Morison set out to disprove the resurrection, but found that the facts would not bend this way is surely reason enough to read this book...it is an extremely enjoyable read & one of my all time favourites.
Captivating read - By: , 10 Mar 2003 Having been recommended this book months ago I never got round to reading it but having started I cannot put it down. Through examination of facts & clear presentation of the same the author convinces without pushing his conclusion. Although published so many years ago it is as relevant today as it was when it was first written. Written by one who set out to prove that the resurrection did not take place but who eventually was convinced by evidence to change his stand. I would recommend it to anyone who wants a straight answer & a fresh perspective on what happened that first Easter morning.
Convincing - By: rcf@argonet.co.uk, 20 May 2002 This book, as well as being a gripping read, is a very convinving account of what happened to Jesusin those last days of His life before His crucifixion. But this is really only there to set up the scene. It is Jesus' resurrection which the book sets out to convince us of & it does so very well.
Granted, it relies heavily on the accounts written by Jesus' desciples. But then I've never quite understood why people object to this. Why are we more willing to listen to biased anti-Christian writers like Tacitus & Josephus who wrote long after the events, got there information very second hand & whose writtings we scarcely have any copies written less than 700 years after the originals! With the gospels you eye witness (orin some cases once removed) accounts that were written no more than 30 years after the events took place (and probably long before that), by people who dies for what they had written (so they had to be pretty convinced it was true) & copies of which we have within 100 years of the originals & many fragments much earlier than this. So I think he has every right to use such historical documents as he does. And as to them being inconsistent - they contain just the inconsistencies that you would expect between different eye witnesses. If they were identical then I would smell a rat.
Oh, &in case you were wondering. What little Josephus & Tacitus say about Jesus, agrees with the gospels anyway.
So well done Frank Morison. If you read this boook with an open mind you will surely be convinced of the truth of Christ's resurrection. And if that is true, well then that means we need to take His teaching about Himself pretty seriously too.
