My Survey of More than a Carpenter

Below I discuss my key takeaways, themes, and ideas drawn from the book.

Jesus is unique in that he claimed to be God; one has to decide if he was a liar, lunatic, or Lord.

Jesus himself claimed to be God. This is supported by the New Testament writers and eyewitnesses of his life and teachings. His claims of divinity may not be apparent to modern western readers, but it doesn’t take a scrupulous reading of the scripture to see that his claim of divinity was clear to the ancient Jewish people.* Even the title of Son of Man, we mistakenly believe this refers to his humanity when in actuality, it is referencing Daniel 7:13–14, and supporting his claim of divinity.

Jesus’ claim to divinity only gives us three options. Either he was a deceitful liar with evil intentions to make a claim he knew was false and to encourage other people to believe in him for their eternal salvation. Or he was sincere in his beliefs but delusional to think that he was divine. Or he was indeed, Lord.

Some make the accusation that this idea of Jesus is God was made up 300 years later at the council of Nicea. However, this has been clearly debunked by textual evidence from not only early New Testament authors within the first century, but also early church fathers within the first and second century, such as Irenaeus, Justin the Martyr, Melito of Sartus, and Ignatius.

And not only Christian testimony, but also Roman historians, such as Pliney the younger (112 AD), Greek satirist Lucian of Samosata (170 AD), and Roman philosopher Celsus (177 AD) attest this was mainstream Christian belief at the time. These external sources corroborated early Christian belief in the deity of Christ prior to the council of Nicaea.

Science by definition cannot enter the debate on the existence of God; theism is not a rival to science but has been its greatest proponent.

There is a misconception that science has to somehow prove the existence of Jesus or God. Empirical science cannot, by definition, comment on the existence of God. There is no testable hypothesis, no repeated experiment that can be undergone to prove or disprove the existence of God. It is a metaphysical claim. Nor can empirical science comment on historical events, such as the person of Jesus. Historical science is not built on observational and experimental data (since it is impossible to conduct such an experiment), but instead on oral, written, and exhibitive data that make a consistent claim.

New atheists claim science has given good reasons to disbelieve in God, and that somehow religion inhibits our scientific pursuits. However, the scientific revolution was largely built upon the back of not atheists, but theists. Some of the greatest scientific thinkers were theists, including Isaac Newton, Blaise Pascal, Robert Boyle, Johannes Kepler, Louis Pasteur, and Francis Bacon, to name a few. Christians believe that there is an order to the world and that in seeking knowledge, one can glorify God. Additionally, there is a lot of evidence of all around us of intelligent design including DNA*, fine-tuning of the universe*, and irreducible complexity.

Scripture has strong bibliographical support, internal validity, and external corroboration.

The Bible is the most well-attested work in all of antiquity. There are three tests of credibility for an ancient document: 1) Bibliographical analysis, 2) internal validity, and 3) external corroboration.

The bibliographical statistics of the Bible, and specifically, the New Testament are unprecedented. The number of manuscripts that are consistent in their message far outweighs any other work of literature, both in the number of manuscripts and their close dating back to the original.* But just because the bibliographical support is there, does not matter if the internal content of the documents is erroneous.

Scholars attest that New Testament authors are accurate in their documentation in regard to historical events. Most notably, Luke is noted in his gospel account to have used very sophisticated Greek language and is judged a very detailed historian.

Lastly, the documents can be further supported if there are external sources that corroborate the internal content. The ancient historian Eusebius confirmed Peter was the eye-witness source for the gospel of Mark.* The successor of John’s other friend Polycarp was Irenaeus who became the bishop of Lyons (180 AD). Writings of the early church father Irenaeus further confirm the authenticity of the gospels being written directly or indirectly (in the case of Mark and Luke) by Jesus’ apostles.* Gary Habermas has done extensive work in this regard to show that Roman, Greek, and Jewish historians support the claims within the gospels and church tradition.

OT prophecies, transformations of Jesus’ apostles, and Saul’s conversion give great support to the resurrection, which itself has substantial evidence.

Old Testament prophecy creates statistical improbabilities.

The number of prophecies that Jesus fulfills is staggering. Most of these prophecies are written, at least 200 years before the time of Christ and it cannot be a mere coincidence that they were fulfilled. Statistical probability analysis estimates that even just eight of the prophecies to be fulfilled by Jesus are estimated to be one in 10 to the 17th power. To put that in an analogy, that would be like covering the state of Texas with silver dollars going two feet deep and then telling a person to walk as far as he wants to pick up a specific silver dollar and for him to pick the exact one.

Transformation of Jesus’ followers.

Scripture attests that Jesus’ apostles were eyewitnesses to his resurrection. It is also unashamed to point out that Peter denies Jesus, that Thomas doubted Jesus, and that James, his brother rejected Jesus. After the resurrection, all of these apostles, even these three are seen to become courageous overnight in their belief. Many people are willing to die for what they believe is true, but no one is willing to die for what they believe to be a lie.