Jason is fond of claiming that the reviews for his e-book on amazon

subjective (see reviews at this link http://tinyurl.com/4vbzp).

are several critical reviews and Jason has ignored these reviews

he believes they were written by atheists with an axe to grind. In
fact, he has actively tried, with moderate success, to get negative
reviews censored by badgering google (http://tinyurl.com/636ax).

Below is an example of Jason doubting the objectivity of his

Jason Gastrich wrote (http://tinyurl.com/4k5vt):

Enkidu wrote:

"Jason Gastrich"

In my debate with Dan, I mentioned how I would
be writing a "corrected and explained" version of
The Skeptic's Annotated Bible. In the subsequent
months, I did.

And we've read objective reviews of the result.

Objective, eh?

I pasted a review below. This reviewer has written two other reviews
for amazon products too. In all cases the reviews were found to be
helpful by other customers. 17 of 18 people found the first review of
Jasons e-book, that I have pasted below, to be helpful.

I would be interested to know what part of this review Jason finds to
be subjective?

START FIRST REVIEW Reviewer: Stasi Kay Not a good resource, October

2004

I enjoy reading christian apologetics and works of comparative

and I was loaned a copy of this electronic, CD-based book to see what

thought of it. I am afraid that my critical views align with some of
the others on the Amazon site.

This is a poor effort at apologetics, the intellectual value is on a
par with an albeit lengthy pre-secondary school report. There is

some risk when presuming to take a list of errors while presuming to
correct them. One of those risks is that errors are not always

Another risk is that the errors are legitimate but those things
presumed to be "answers," "corrections" or "explanations" fall well
short of the mark by either failing to provide a reasonable,
intelligent explanation or by misdirecting from the subject of the
supposed error. These things occur frequently in this volume.

Also, there have been some attempts to demonize critics of this work

"atheists" both in reviews on Amazon and elsewhere. This strikes me

unfortunate, because it avoids the legitimate criticisms by
perpetuating a division among intelligent, thinking people with
differing world views through means that are not legitimate. Even if

were true that some reviewers are atheists (though it is not true in
any case of which I am aware, including reviews on Amazon), it makes

difference when considering the intellectual value of the review. An
atheist can write an intelligent review of an apologetic work as
readily as a christian can presume to "correct" or "explain" a
presumably atheist work such as the "Skeptic's Annotated Bible." If
there is substance to an unflattering review, that is what should be
addressed, not the religious beliefs -- real, manufactured, or

-- that might be held by the reviewer.

Having said that, I feel that I cannot recommend this electronic

mostly because it fails to do what it claims to do. Other reviewers
have noted that it does little more than provide superficial coverage
of topics that are addressed. "Answers" and "explanations" that are
provided make unwarranted assumptions and are intellectually

as well as lacking in documentary evidence. Very little in this

would be of value as an evangelistic tool. It might best serve as a
"faith-affirming" tool for those whom do not give much critical

to their beliefs and whom already believe as the author does. It
certainly will not be convincing to thoughtful skeptics of the faith

the Scriptures. As a christian, I have disagreements with some of

appears in the Skeptic's Annotated Bible, but this volume is not a
satisfactory rebuttal.
END FIRST REVIEW

In the second review I have pasted here the author specifically

he is not an atheist and also claims to have an advanced degree in
Biblical Studies. Note all customers (13 of 13 people) found this
review helpful:

What part of this second review does Jason Gastrich find subjective?

START SECOND REVIEW Reviewer: Laurence Jameson "Larry" (Chicago)

down, October 13, 2004

This is not a very good compilation of alleged corrections to errors.
There have been many comments here and there about the lack of
substance to this CD as well as the lackluster attempt at whatever is
being called "research," and those comments are supported by any
unbiased examination of the contents. Indeed, much is not explained

corrected. In newsgroups, inadequate response of this sort to

is categorized as "is not." There isn't much more than that in this

In fact, most of this CD is composed of material that doesn't even
belong to the author, provided, as guess, as "supplemental." Okay.

of it helps the general tone of the project (I can't call it a

It seems to be added to project some sort of legitimacy, but that can
only be gained by the effort itself. Unfortunately the effort, like

CD itself, is a failure.

By the way, I'm not an atheist, either. I have a legitmate advanced
degree in Biblical Studies from an old, reputable, accredited
institution, as well. That's all I'll say about that, but I would

srongly suggest that my fundamentalist brethren stop using that line

attack. It makes Christians appear mean-spirited and bitter, which is
contrary to the teachings and example of Christ.

I can say that this CD might be okay for one who is new in the Faith

what we sometimes call a "baby Christian," but it will not be useful

the weapon against atheists, if my evaluation of the author's debate
performances, as well as this CD, is any indication. At any rate, I
wouldn't use it for any faith-affirming tool for even a new

I simply suggest that it might serve that purpose because I can't
really find anything else positive to say about it. I would also have
other reasons for not using it.

Elsewhere it has been said that "anyone can write a book," and in

day and age, anyone can "publish" one and get it placed on sites such
as Amazon. Usually this is a great service because we get to see many
competent and even outstanding authors that the publishing houses

somehow pass over. That isn't the case here. This CD compilation is

amateurish piece of work, and there are far better researched and
better-argued apologetics out there, not burdened down with the
author's vacation pictures and other useless material apparently
designed to pad the volume of the CD.
END SECOND REVIEW

I would like to hear Jason's opinion with regard to which parts of
these two reviews are subjective. It is a claim he makes frequently,
therefore, it should be easy to back up this claim if it has any
validity.

Jason is fond of claiming that the reviews for his e-book on amazon

subjective (see reviews at this link http://tinyurl.com/4vbzp).

are several critical reviews and Jason has ignored these reviews

he believes they were written by atheists with an axe to grind. In
fact, he has actively tried, with moderate success, to get negative
reviews censored by badgering google (http://tinyurl.com/636ax).

Below is an example of Jason doubting the objectivity of his

Jason Gastrich wrote (http://tinyurl.com/4k5vt):

Enkidu wrote:

"Jason Gastrich"

In my debate with Dan, I mentioned how I would
be writing a "corrected and explained" version of
The Skeptic's Annotated Bible. In the subsequent
months, I did.

And we've read objective reviews of the result.

Objective, eh?

I pasted a review below. This reviewer has written two other reviews
for amazon products too. In all cases the reviews were found to be
helpful by other customers. 17 of 18 people found the first review of
Jasons e-book, that I have pasted below, to be helpful.

I would be interested to know what part of this review Jason finds to
be subjective?

START FIRST REVIEW Reviewer: Stasi Kay Not a good resource, October

2004

I enjoy reading christian apologetics and works of comparative

and I was loaned a copy of this electronic, CD-based book to see what

thought of it. I am afraid that my critical views align with some of
the others on the Amazon site.

This is a poor effort at apologetics, the intellectual value is on a
par with an albeit lengthy pre-secondary school report. There is

some risk when presuming to take a list of errors while presuming to
correct them. One of those risks is that errors are not always

Another risk is that the errors are legitimate but those things
presumed to be "answers," "corrections" or "explanations" fall well
short of the mark by either failing to provide a reasonable,
intelligent explanation or by misdirecting from the subject of the
supposed error. These things occur frequently in this volume.

Also, there have been some attempts to demonize critics of this work

"atheists" both in reviews on Amazon and elsewhere. This strikes me

unfortunate, because it avoids the legitimate criticisms by
perpetuating a division among intelligent, thinking people with
differing world views through means that are not legitimate. Even if

were true that some reviewers are atheists (though it is not true in
any case of which I am aware, including reviews on Amazon), it makes

difference when considering the intellectual value of the review. An
atheist can write an intelligent review of an apologetic work as
readily as a christian can presume to "correct" or "explain" a
presumably atheist work such as the "Skeptic's Annotated Bible." If
there is substance to an unflattering review, that is what should be
addressed, not the religious beliefs -- real, manufactured, or

-- that might be held by the reviewer.

Having said that, I feel that I cannot recommend this electronic

mostly because it fails to do what it claims to do. Other reviewers
have noted that it does little more than provide superficial coverage
of topics that are addressed. "Answers" and "explanations" that are
provided make unwarranted assumptions and are intellectually

as well as lacking in documentary evidence. Very little in this

would be of value as an evangelistic tool. It might best serve as a
"faith-affirming" tool for those whom do not give much critical

to their beliefs and whom already believe as the author does. It
certainly will not be convincing to thoughtful skeptics of the faith

the Scriptures. As a christian, I have disagreements with some of

appears in the Skeptic's Annotated Bible, but this volume is not a
satisfactory rebuttal.
END FIRST REVIEW

In the second review I have pasted here the author specifically

he is not an atheist and also claims to have an advanced degree in
Biblical Studies. Note all customers (13 of 13 people) found this
review helpful:

What part of this second review does Jason Gastrich find subjective?

START SECOND REVIEW Reviewer: Laurence Jameson "Larry" (Chicago)

down, October 13, 2004

This is not a very good compilation of alleged corrections to errors.
There have been many comments here and there about the lack of
substance to this CD as well as the lackluster attempt at whatever is
being called "research," and those comments are supported by any
unbiased examination of the contents. Indeed, much is not explained

corrected. In newsgroups, inadequate response of this sort to

is categorized as "is not." There isn't much more than that in this

In fact, most of this CD is composed of material that doesn't even
belong to the author, provided, as guess, as "supplemental." Okay.

of it helps the general tone of the project (I can't call it a

It seems to be added to project some sort of legitimacy, but that can
only be gained by the effort itself. Unfortunately the effort, like

CD itself, is a failure.

By the way, I'm not an atheist, either. I have a legitmate advanced
degree in Biblical Studies from an old, reputable, accredited
institution, as well. That's all I'll say about that, but I would

srongly suggest that my fundamentalist brethren stop using that line

attack. It makes Christians appear mean-spirited and bitter, which is
contrary to the teachings and example of Christ.

I can say that this CD might be okay for one who is new in the Faith

what we sometimes call a "baby Christian," but it will not be useful

the weapon against atheists, if my evaluation of the author's debate
performances, as well as this CD, is any indication. At any rate, I
wouldn't use it for any faith-affirming tool for even a new

I simply suggest that it might serve that purpose because I can't
really find anything else positive to say about it. I would also have
other reasons for not using it.

Elsewhere it has been said that "anyone can write a book," and in

day and age, anyone can "publish" one and get it placed on sites such
as Amazon. Usually this is a great service because we get to see many
competent and even outstanding authors that the publishing houses

somehow pass over. That isn't the case here. This CD compilation is

amateurish piece of work, and there are far better researched and
better-argued apologetics out there, not burdened down with the
author's vacation pictures and other useless material apparently
designed to pad the volume of the CD.
END SECOND REVIEW

I would like to hear Jason's opinion with regard to which parts of
these two reviews are subjective. It is a claim he makes frequently,
therefore, it should be easy to back up this claim if it has any
validity.

Jason is fond of claiming that the reviews for his e-book on amazon

subjective (see reviews at this link http://tinyurl.com/4vbzp).

are several critical reviews and Jason has ignored these reviews

he believes they were written by atheists with an axe to grind. In
fact, he has actively tried, with moderate success, to get negative
reviews censored by badgering google (http://tinyurl.com/636ax).

Below is an example of Jason doubting the objectivity of his

Jason Gastrich wrote (http://tinyurl.com/4k5vt):

Enkidu wrote:

"Jason Gastrich"

In my debate with Dan, I mentioned how I would
be writing a "corrected and explained" version of
The Skeptic's Annotated Bible. In the subsequent
months, I did.

And we've read objective reviews of the result.

Objective, eh?

I pasted a review below. This reviewer has written two other reviews
for amazon products too. In all cases the reviews were found to be
helpful by other customers. 17 of 18 people found the first review of
Jasons e-book, that I have pasted below, to be helpful.

I would be interested to know what part of this review Jason finds to
be subjective?

START FIRST REVIEW Reviewer: Stasi Kay Not a good resource, October

2004

I enjoy reading christian apologetics and works of comparative

and I was loaned a copy of this electronic, CD-based book to see what

thought of it. I am afraid that my critical views align with some of
the others on the Amazon site.

This is a poor effort at apologetics, the intellectual value is on a
par with an albeit lengthy pre-secondary school report. There is

some risk when presuming to take a list of errors while presuming to
correct them. One of those risks is that errors are not always

Another risk is that the errors are legitimate but those things
presumed to be "answers," "corrections" or "explanations" fall well
short of the mark by either failing to provide a reasonable,
intelligent explanation or by misdirecting from the subject of the
supposed error. These things occur frequently in this volume.

Also, there have been some attempts to demonize critics of this work

"atheists" both in reviews on Amazon and elsewhere. This strikes me

unfortunate, because it avoids the legitimate criticisms by
perpetuating a division among intelligent, thinking people with
differing world views through means that are not legitimate. Even if

were true that some reviewers are atheists (though it is not true in
any case of which I am aware, including reviews on Amazon), it makes

difference when considering the intellectual value of the review. An
atheist can write an intelligent review of an apologetic work as
readily as a christian can presume to "correct" or "explain" a
presumably atheist work such as the "Skeptic's Annotated Bible." If
there is substance to an unflattering review, that is what should be
addressed, not the religious beliefs -- real, manufactured, or

-- that might be held by the reviewer.

Having said that, I feel that I cannot recommend this electronic

mostly because it fails to do what it claims to do. Other reviewers
have noted that it does little more than provide superficial coverage
of topics that are addressed. "Answers" and "explanations" that are
provided make unwarranted assumptions and are intellectually

as well as lacking in documentary evidence. Very little in this

would be of value as an evangelistic tool. It might best serve as a
"faith-affirming" tool for those whom do not give much critical

to their beliefs and whom already believe as the author does. It
certainly will not be convincing to thoughtful skeptics of the faith

the Scriptures. As a christian, I have disagreements with some of

appears in the Skeptic's Annotated Bible, but this volume is not a
satisfactory rebuttal.
END FIRST REVIEW

In the second review I have pasted here the author specifically

he is not an atheist and also claims to have an advanced degree in
Biblical Studies. Note all customers (13 of 13 people) found this
review helpful:

What part of this second review does Jason Gastrich find subjective?

START SECOND REVIEW Reviewer: Laurence Jameson "Larry" (Chicago)

down, October 13, 2004

This is not a very good compilation of alleged corrections to errors.
There have been many comments here and there about the lack of
substance to this CD as well as the lackluster attempt at whatever is
being called "research," and those comments are supported by any
unbiased examination of the contents. Indeed, much is not explained

corrected. In newsgroups, inadequate response of this sort to

is categorized as "is not." There isn't much more than that in this

In fact, most of this CD is composed of material that doesn't even
belong to the author, provided, as guess, as "supplemental." Okay.

of it helps the general tone of the project (I can't call it a

It seems to be added to project some sort of legitimacy, but that can
only be gained by the effort itself. Unfortunately the effort, like

CD itself, is a failure.

By the way, I'm not an atheist, either. I have a legitmate advanced
degree in Biblical Studies from an old, reputable, accredited
institution, as well. That's all I'll say about that, but I would

srongly suggest that my fundamentalist brethren stop using that line

attack. It makes Christians appear mean-spirited and bitter, which is
contrary to the teachings and example of Christ.

I can say that this CD might be okay for one who is new in the Faith

what we sometimes call a "baby Christian," but it will not be useful

the weapon against atheists, if my evaluation of the author's debate
performances, as well as this CD, is any indication. At any rate, I
wouldn't use it for any faith-affirming tool for even a new

I simply suggest that it might serve that purpose because I can't
really find anything else positive to say about it. I would also have
other reasons for not using it.

Elsewhere it has been said that "anyone can write a book," and in

day and age, anyone can "publish" one and get it placed on sites such
as Amazon. Usually this is a great service because we get to see many
competent and even outstanding authors that the publishing houses

somehow pass over. That isn't the case here. This CD compilation is

amateurish piece of work, and there are far better researched and
better-argued apologetics out there, not burdened down with the
author's vacation pictures and other useless material apparently
designed to pad the volume of the CD.
END SECOND REVIEW

I would like to hear Jason's opinion with regard to which parts of
these two reviews are subjective. It is a claim he makes frequently,
therefore, it should be easy to back up this claim if it has any
validity.

David

Jason is fond of claiming that the reviews for his e-book on amazon

subjective (see reviews at this link http://tinyurl.com/4vbzp).

are several critical reviews and Jason has ignored these reviews

he believes they were written by atheists with an axe to grind. In
fact, he has actively tried, with moderate success, to get negative
reviews censored by badgering google (http://tinyurl.com/636ax).

Below is an example of Jason doubting the objectivity of his

Jason Gastrich wrote (http://tinyurl.com/4k5vt):

Enkidu wrote:

"Jason Gastrich"

In my debate with Dan, I mentioned how I would
be writing a "corrected and explained" version of
The Skeptic's Annotated Bible. In the subsequent
months, I did.

And we've read objective reviews of the result.

Objective, eh?

I pasted a review below. This reviewer has written two other reviews
for amazon products too. In all cases the reviews were found to be
helpful by other customers. 17 of 18 people found the first review of
Jasons e-book, that I have pasted below, to be helpful.

I would be interested to know what part of this review Jason finds to
be subjective?

START FIRST REVIEW Reviewer: Stasi Kay Not a good resource, October

2004

I enjoy reading christian apologetics and works of comparative

and I was loaned a copy of this electronic, CD-based book to see what

thought of it. I am afraid that my critical views align with some of
the others on the Amazon site.

This is a poor effort at apologetics, the intellectual value is on a
par with an albeit lengthy pre-secondary school report. There is

some risk when presuming to take a list of errors while presuming to
correct them. One of those risks is that errors are not always

Another risk is that the errors are legitimate but those things
presumed to be "answers," "corrections" or "explanations" fall well
short of the mark by either failing to provide a reasonable,
intelligent explanation or by misdirecting from the subject of the
supposed error. These things occur frequently in this volume.

Also, there have been some attempts to demonize critics of this work

"atheists" both in reviews on Amazon and elsewhere. This strikes me

unfortunate, because it avoids the legitimate criticisms by
perpetuating a division among intelligent, thinking people with
differing world views through means that are not legitimate. Even if

were true that some reviewers are atheists (though it is not true in
any case of which I am aware, including reviews on Amazon), it makes

difference when considering the intellectual value of the review. An
atheist can write an intelligent review of an apologetic work as
readily as a christian can presume to "correct" or "explain" a
presumably atheist work such as the "Skeptic's Annotated Bible." If
there is substance to an unflattering review, that is what should be
addressed, not the religious beliefs -- real, manufactured, or

-- that might be held by the reviewer.

Having said that, I feel that I cannot recommend this electronic

mostly because it fails to do what it claims to do. Other reviewers
have noted that it does little more than provide superficial coverage
of topics that are addressed. "Answers" and "explanations" that are
provided make unwarranted assumptions and are intellectually

as well as lacking in documentary evidence. Very little in this

would be of value as an evangelistic tool. It might best serve as a
"faith-affirming" tool for those whom do not give much critical

to their beliefs and whom already believe as the author does. It
certainly will not be convincing to thoughtful skeptics of the faith

the Scriptures. As a christian, I have disagreements with some of

appears in the Skeptic's Annotated Bible, but this volume is not a
satisfactory rebuttal.
END FIRST REVIEW

In the second review I have pasted here the author specifically

he is not an atheist and also claims to have an advanced degree in
Biblical Studies. Note all customers (13 of 13 people) found this
review helpful:

What part of this second review does Jason Gastrich find subjective?

START SECOND REVIEW Reviewer: Laurence Jameson "Larry" (Chicago)

down, October 13, 2004

This is not a very good compilation of alleged corrections to errors.
There have been many comments here and there about the lack of
substance to this CD as well as the lackluster attempt at whatever is
being called "research," and those comments are supported by any
unbiased examination of the contents. Indeed, much is not explained

corrected. In newsgroups, inadequate response of this sort to

is categorized as "is not." There isn't much more than that in this

In fact, most of this CD is composed of material that doesn't even
belong to the author, provided, as guess, as "supplemental." Okay.

of it helps the general tone of the project (I can't call it a

It seems to be added to project some sort of legitimacy, but that can
only be gained by the effort itself. Unfortunately the effort, like

CD itself, is a failure.

By the way, I'm not an atheist, either. I have a legitmate advanced
degree in Biblical Studies from an old, reputable, accredited
institution, as well. That's all I'll say about that, but I would

srongly suggest that my fundamentalist brethren stop using that line

attack. It makes Christians appear mean-spirited and bitter, which is
contrary to the teachings and example of Christ.

I can say that this CD might be okay for one who is new in the Faith

what we sometimes call a "baby Christian," but it will not be useful

the weapon against atheists, if my evaluation of the author's debate
performances, as well as this CD, is any indication. At any rate, I
wouldn't use it for any faith-affirming tool for even a new

I simply suggest that it might serve that purpose because I can't
really find anything else positive to say about it. I would also have
other reasons for not using it.

Elsewhere it has been said that "anyone can write a book," and in

day and age, anyone can "publish" one and get it placed on sites such
as Amazon. Usually this is a great service because we get to see many
competent and even outstanding authors that the publishing houses

somehow pass over. That isn't the case here. This CD compilation is

amateurish piece of work, and there are far better researched and
better-argued apologetics out there, not burdened down with the
author's vacation pictures and other useless material apparently
designed to pad the volume of the CD.
END SECOND REVIEW

I would like to hear Jason's opinion with regard to which parts of
these two reviews are subjective. It is a claim he makes frequently,
therefore, it should be easy to back up this claim if it has any
validity.

Jason is fond of claiming that the reviews for his e-book on amazon

subjective (see reviews at this link http://tinyurl.com/4vbzp).

are several critical reviews and Jason has ignored these reviews

he believes they were written by atheists with an axe to grind. In
fact, he has actively tried, with moderate success, to get negative
reviews censored by badgering google (http://tinyurl.com/636ax).

Below is an example of Jason doubting the objectivity of his

Jason Gastrich wrote (http://tinyurl.com/4k5vt):

Enkidu wrote:

"Jason Gastrich"

In my debate with Dan, I mentioned how I would
be writing a "corrected and explained" version of
The Skeptic's Annotated Bible. In the subsequent
months, I did.

And we've read objective reviews of the result.

Objective, eh?

I pasted a review below. This reviewer has written two other reviews
for amazon products too. In all cases the reviews were found to be
helpful by other customers. 17 of 18 people found the first review of
Jasons e-book, that I have pasted below, to be helpful.

I would be interested to know what part of this review Jason finds to
be subjective?

START FIRST REVIEW Reviewer: Stasi Kay Not a good resource, October

2004

I enjoy reading christian apologetics and works of comparative

and I was loaned a copy of this electronic, CD-based book to see what

thought of it. I am afraid that my critical views align with some of
the others on the Amazon site.

This is a poor effort at apologetics, the intellectual value is on a
par with an albeit lengthy pre-secondary school report. There is

some risk when presuming to take a list of errors while presuming to
correct them. One of those risks is that errors are not always

Another risk is that the errors are legitimate but those things
presumed to be "answers," "corrections" or "explanations" fall well
short of the mark by either failing to provide a reasonable,
intelligent explanation or by misdirecting from the subject of the
supposed error. These things occur frequently in this volume.

Also, there have been some attempts to demonize critics of this work

"atheists" both in reviews on Amazon and elsewhere. This strikes me

unfortunate, because it avoids the legitimate criticisms by
perpetuating a division among intelligent, thinking people with
differing world views through means that are not legitimate. Even if

were true that some reviewers are atheists (though it is not true in
any case of which I am aware, including reviews on Amazon), it makes

difference when considering the intellectual value of the review. An
atheist can write an intelligent review of an apologetic work as
readily as a christian can presume to "correct" or "explain" a
presumably atheist work such as the "Skeptic's Annotated Bible." If
there is substance to an unflattering review, that is what should be
addressed, not the religious beliefs -- real, manufactured, or

-- that might be held by the reviewer.

Having said that, I feel that I cannot recommend this electronic

mostly because it fails to do what it claims to do. Other reviewers
have noted that it does little more than provide superficial coverage
of topics that are addressed. "Answers" and "explanations" that are
provided make unwarranted assumptions and are intellectually

as well as lacking in documentary evidence. Very little in this

would be of value as an evangelistic tool. It might best serve as a
"faith-affirming" tool for those whom do not give much critical

to their beliefs and whom already believe as the author does. It
certainly will not be convincing to thoughtful skeptics of the faith

the Scriptures. As a christian, I have disagreements with some of

appears in the Skeptic's Annotated Bible, but this volume is not a
satisfactory rebuttal.
END FIRST REVIEW

In the second review I have pasted here the author specifically

he is not an atheist and also claims to have an advanced degree in
Biblical Studies. Note all customers (13 of 13 people) found this
review helpful:

What part of this second review does Jason Gastrich find subjective?

START SECOND REVIEW Reviewer: Laurence Jameson "Larry" (Chicago)

down, October 13, 2004

This is not a very good compilation of alleged corrections to errors.
There have been many comments here and there about the lack of
substance to this CD as well as the lackluster attempt at whatever is
being called "research," and those comments are supported by any
unbiased examination of the contents. Indeed, much is not explained

corrected. In newsgroups, inadequate response of this sort to

is categorized as "is not." There isn't much more than that in this

In fact, most of this CD is composed of material that doesn't even
belong to the author, provided, as guess, as "supplemental." Okay.

of it helps the general tone of the project (I can't call it a

It seems to be added to project some sort of legitimacy, but that can
only be gained by the effort itself. Unfortunately the effort, like

CD itself, is a failure.

By the way, I'm not an atheist, either. I have a legitmate advanced
degree in Biblical Studies from an old, reputable, accredited
institution, as well. That's all I'll say about that, but I would

srongly suggest that my fundamentalist brethren stop using that line

attack. It makes Christians appear mean-spirited and bitter, which is
contrary to the teachings and example of Christ.

I can say that this CD might be okay for one who is new in the Faith

what we sometimes call a "baby Christian," but it will not be useful

the weapon against atheists, if my evaluation of the author's debate
performances, as well as this CD, is any indication. At any rate, I
wouldn't use it for any faith-affirming tool for even a new

I simply suggest that it might serve that purpose because I can't
really find anything else positive to say about it. I would also have
other reasons for not using it.

Elsewhere it has been said that "anyone can write a book," and in

day and age, anyone can "publish" one and get it placed on sites such
as Amazon. Usually this is a great service because we get to see many
competent and even outstanding authors that the publishing houses

somehow pass over. That isn't the case here. This CD compilation is

amateurish piece of work, and there are far better researched and
better-argued apologetics out there, not burdened down with the
author's vacation pictures and other useless material apparently
designed to pad the volume of the CD.
END SECOND REVIEW

I would like to hear Jason's opinion with regard to which parts of
these two reviews are subjective. It is a claim he makes frequently,
therefore, it should be easy to back up this claim if it has any
validity.

Jason is fond of claiming that the reviews for his e-book on amazon

subjective (see reviews at this link http://tinyurl.com/4vbzp).

are several critical reviews and Jason has ignored these reviews

he believes they were written by atheists with an axe to grind. In
fact, he has actively tried, with moderate success, to get negative
reviews censored by badgering google (http://tinyurl.com/636ax).

Below is an example of Jason doubting the objectivity of his

Jason Gastrich wrote (http://tinyurl.com/4k5vt):

Enkidu wrote:

"Jason Gastrich"

In my debate with Dan, I mentioned how I would
be writing a "corrected and explained" version of
The Skeptic's Annotated Bible. In the subsequent
months, I did.

And we've read objective reviews of the result.

Objective, eh?

I pasted a review below. This reviewer has written two other reviews
for amazon products too. In all cases the reviews were found to be
helpful by other customers. 17 of 18 people found the first review of
Jasons e-book, that I have pasted below, to be helpful.

I would be interested to know what part of this review Jason finds to
be subjective?

START FIRST REVIEW Reviewer: Stasi Kay Not a good resource, October

2004

I enjoy reading christian apologetics and works of comparative

and I was loaned a copy of this electronic, CD-based book to see what

thought of it. I am afraid that my critical views align with some of
the others on the Amazon site.

This is a poor effort at apologetics, the intellectual value is on a
par with an albeit lengthy pre-secondary school report. There is

some risk when presuming to take a list of errors while presuming to
correct them. One of those risks is that errors are not always

Another risk is that the errors are legitimate but those things
presumed to be "answers," "corrections" or "explanations" fall well
short of the mark by either failing to provide a reasonable,
intelligent explanation or by misdirecting from the subject of the
supposed error. These things occur frequently in this volume.

Also, there have been some attempts to demonize critics of this work

"atheists" both in reviews on Amazon and elsewhere. This strikes me

unfortunate, because it avoids the legitimate criticisms by
perpetuating a division among intelligent, thinking people with
differing world views through means that are not legitimate. Even if

were true that some reviewers are atheists (though it is not true in
any case of which I am aware, including reviews on Amazon), it makes

difference when considering the intellectual value of the review. An
atheist can write an intelligent review of an apologetic work as
readily as a christian can presume to "correct" or "explain" a
presumably atheist work such as the "Skeptic's Annotated Bible." If
there is substance to an unflattering review, that is what should be
addressed, not the religious beliefs -- real, manufactured, or

-- that might be held by the reviewer.

Having said that, I feel that I cannot recommend this electronic

mostly because it fails to do what it claims to do. Other reviewers
have noted that it does little more than provide superficial coverage
of topics that are addressed. "Answers" and "explanations" that are
provided make unwarranted assumptions and are intellectually

as well as lacking in documentary evidence. Very little in this

would be of value as an evangelistic tool. It might best serve as a
"faith-affirming" tool for those whom do not give much critical

to their beliefs and whom already believe as the author does. It
certainly will not be convincing to thoughtful skeptics of the faith

the Scriptures. As a christian, I have disagreements with some of

appears in the Skeptic's Annotated Bible, but this volume is not a
satisfactory rebuttal.
END FIRST REVIEW

In the second review I have pasted here the author specifically

he is not an atheist and also claims to have an advanced degree in
Biblical Studies. Note all customers (13 of 13 people) found this
review helpful:

What part of this second review does Jason Gastrich find subjective?

START SECOND REVIEW Reviewer: Laurence Jameson "Larry" (Chicago)

down, October 13, 2004

This is not a very good compilation of alleged corrections to errors.
There have been many comments here and there about the lack of
substance to this CD as well as the lackluster attempt at whatever is
being called "research," and those comments are supported by any
unbiased examination of the contents. Indeed, much is not explained

corrected. In newsgroups, inadequate response of this sort to

is categorized as "is not." There isn't much more than that in this

In fact, most of this CD is composed of material that doesn't even
belong to the author, provided, as guess, as "supplemental." Okay.

of it helps the general tone of the project (I can't call it a

It seems to be added to project some sort of legitimacy, but that can
only be gained by the effort itself. Unfortunately the effort, like

CD itself, is a failure.

By the way, I'm not an atheist, either. I have a legitmate advanced
degree in Biblical Studies from an old, reputable, accredited
institution, as well. That's all I'll say about that, but I would

srongly suggest that my fundamentalist brethren stop using that line

attack. It makes Christians appear mean-spirited and bitter, which is
contrary to the teachings and example of Christ.

I can say that this CD might be okay for one who is new in the Faith

what we sometimes call a "baby Christian," but it will not be useful

the weapon against atheists, if my evaluation of the author's debate
performances, as well as this CD, is any indication. At any rate, I
wouldn't use it for any faith-affirming tool for even a new

I simply suggest that it might serve that purpose because I can't
really find anything else positive to say about it. I would also have
other reasons for not using it.

Elsewhere it has been said that "anyone can write a book," and in

day and age, anyone can "publish" one and get it placed on sites such
as Amazon. Usually this is a great service because we get to see many
competent and even outstanding authors that the publishing houses

somehow pass over. That isn't the case here. This CD compilation is

amateurish piece of work, and there are far better researched and
better-argued apologetics out there, not burdened down with the
author's vacation pictures and other useless material apparently
designed to pad the volume of the CD.
END SECOND REVIEW

I would like to hear Jason's opinion with regard to which parts of
these two reviews are subjective. It is a claim he makes frequently,
therefore, it should be easy to back up this claim if it has any
validity.