Imagine reading the Bible like an attorney looking for evidence of what it actually says. One of the most famous attorneys of our time did just that. The Christian holy book comes undone on its own terms, that is, without resorting to things Christians could argue are "non-biblical."(Bugliosi does not limit himself to Christianity, but also makes observations about Buddhism, Islam, Judaism, and Hinduism at minute 32:20. He misspeaks to suggest that the Buddha might have been an agnostic or atheist when in fact he was a non-theist, which means he said whether or not there are gods is not relevant to saving oneself from suffering).
No mention is made of the Gnostic gospels or New Age material. This is not an atheist attack, nor is it one sect of the religion against another. Instead, all of the information comes from bonafide biblical texts themselves (New Testament, Old Testament, Hebrew, English, Protestant, Catholic, and Greek).
Famed attorney discusses what the Bible really says with KPFK's Sonali Kolhatkar.
Conservative prosecutor and Christian agnostic Vincent Bugliosi is best known for successfully prosecuting Charles Manson and writing the best-selling book Helter Skelter, which went on to sell over 7 million copies, becoming the biggest selling true-crime book in publishing history.
He is also the author of Outrage on the acquittal of O.J. Simpson, and more recently The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder. Bugliosi has won 21 out of 21 murder cases and 105 out of 106 felony cases. He spent the past two years working on his new book Divinity of Doubt: The God Question.
On April 12, 2011, Bugliosi spoke with Uprising host Sonali Kolhatkar about his new work, Divinity of Doubt. Atheism? No. Freewill? No. Virgin birth? No (according to the Bible, see video at minute 48:30). Darwin was an agnostic. Einstein believed in some kind of God, not a Judeo-Christian kind, but some kind. Bugliosi outdoes them both by diving deep into the Bible, which comes undone as we have misinterpreted it. Christians frequently say it says one thing when, in fact, it says the opposite.