What do you think?
Rate this book
More Than a Carpenter
He thought Christianity was a sham. Then it changed his life.
Skeptic Josh McDowell thought Christians were out of their minds. He ridiculed and insulted them, then decided to combat them with his own thorough research to disprove the claims of Jesus Christ. To his surprise, he discovered that the evidence suggested exactly the opposite―that Jesus, instead of being simply a first-century Hebrew carpenter, truly was the God he claimed to be.
Josh went on to write the inspirational work on Christian apologetics, More Than a Carpenter , which has sold over 15 million copies. In this revised and updated edition, with over 15 million copies in print since its original publication, More Than a Carpenter has changed countless lives. Now, in this revised and updated edition, Josh is joined by his son, Sean, as they tackle the questions that today’s generation continues to This edition is an accessible read for seekers and a great evangelism tool.
Skeptic Josh McDowell thought Christians were out of their minds. He ridiculed and insulted them, then decided to combat them with his own thorough research to disprove the claims of Jesus Christ. To his surprise, he discovered that the evidence suggested exactly the opposite―that Jesus, instead of being simply a first-century Hebrew carpenter, truly was the God he claimed to be.
Josh went on to write the inspirational work on Christian apologetics, More Than a Carpenter , which has sold over 15 million copies. In this revised and updated edition, with over 15 million copies in print since its original publication, More Than a Carpenter has changed countless lives. Now, in this revised and updated edition, Josh is joined by his son, Sean, as they tackle the questions that today’s generation continues to This edition is an accessible read for seekers and a great evangelism tool.
192 pages, Mass Market Paperback
First published January 1, 1977
About the author
Josh McDowell
473 books570 followersSince beginning ministry in 1961, Josh has given more than 24,000 talks to over 10 million young people in 118 countries. He is the author or coauthor of 112 books, selling over 51 million copies worldwide, including More Than a Carpenter (more than 15 million copies in print worldwide), which has been translated into over 85 languages, and The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict, recognized by World magazine as one of the twentieth century's top 40 books.
Josh continues to travel throughout the United States and countries around the world, helping young people and adults bolster their faith and scriptural beliefs. Josh will tell you that his family does not come before his ministry—his family is his ministry. He and his wife, Dottie, have four children and eight grandchildren.
Connect with Josh on:
Josh.org
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram
Pinterest
YouTube
Josh continues to travel throughout the United States and countries around the world, helping young people and adults bolster their faith and scriptural beliefs. Josh will tell you that his family does not come before his ministry—his family is his ministry. He and his wife, Dottie, have four children and eight grandchildren.
Connect with Josh on:
Josh.org
YouTube
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 930 reviews
July 19, 2012
Someday, in heaven, I am going to thank the kind stranger who handed me this book one day. I was at the height of skepticism, embittered with religion and disillusioned with humanity in general. Christianity was the religion of optimistic but ignorant fools, in my opinion. I didn't even want to talk to the guy, but he asked me to take the book. Hesitantly, I did.
Over the coming weeks I found myself drawn to this book. Through it I realized the skewed, one-demensional Christianity I had always seen presented in the media and elsewhere was far from the actual truth. It was a faith that could be explored with the mind and stand up as robust to skeptical scrutiny. This book presents evidence in a clear straightforward and intellectually honest way, albeit confrontationally. Great read that I'd recommend to anyone with questions of the heart and mind about Christ. I appreciated the author's journey, and followed him along with bated breath. It was not a disappointing journey, and ended up being one among many that was integral to my coming to believe that Jesus Christjust might be who he said he was.
Over the coming weeks I found myself drawn to this book. Through it I realized the skewed, one-demensional Christianity I had always seen presented in the media and elsewhere was far from the actual truth. It was a faith that could be explored with the mind and stand up as robust to skeptical scrutiny. This book presents evidence in a clear straightforward and intellectually honest way, albeit confrontationally. Great read that I'd recommend to anyone with questions of the heart and mind about Christ. I appreciated the author's journey, and followed him along with bated breath. It was not a disappointing journey, and ended up being one among many that was integral to my coming to believe that Jesus Christjust might be who he said he was.
May 12, 2011
This is one of those books I read with a highlighter handy. And I ended up highlighting about half the book...
Here are a few things that caught my attention:
"Christianity is not a religion. Religion is humans trying to work their way to God through good works. Christianity is God coming to men and women through Jesus Christ" (p. 5).
"It amazes me to hear so many people say that Jesus was simply a good moral teacher. Let's be realistic. How could he be a great moral teacher and knowingly mislead people at the most important point of his teaching - his own identity?" (p. 30).
"If you've read any of the New Atheists, it's important to keep the words of King Solomon in mind: 'The first to speak in court sounds right - until the cross-examination begins' (Proverbs 18:17)" (p. 48-9).
"If one discards the Bible as unreliable historically, then he or she must discard all the literature of antiquity. No other document has as much evidence to confirm its reliability" (p. 87).
"Wherever there is forgiveness, there is payment" (p. 156).
Here are a few things that caught my attention:
"Christianity is not a religion. Religion is humans trying to work their way to God through good works. Christianity is God coming to men and women through Jesus Christ" (p. 5).
"It amazes me to hear so many people say that Jesus was simply a good moral teacher. Let's be realistic. How could he be a great moral teacher and knowingly mislead people at the most important point of his teaching - his own identity?" (p. 30).
"If you've read any of the New Atheists, it's important to keep the words of King Solomon in mind: 'The first to speak in court sounds right - until the cross-examination begins' (Proverbs 18:17)" (p. 48-9).
"If one discards the Bible as unreliable historically, then he or she must discard all the literature of antiquity. No other document has as much evidence to confirm its reliability" (p. 87).
"Wherever there is forgiveness, there is payment" (p. 156).
December 5, 2023
Some disclaimers off the bat:
-I am a practicing Christian
-this review is about the text as a book, not as a piece of proselytization
-there is an updated and revised edition of this text. I did not read that edition
“More Than a Carpenter” is a dated book. There is no way around it. (see above note) However, for what it is, and its intended audience, I think it is fine for what it seems meant to do. I am not a person who is in doubt about the divinity of Christ, but I am a person who is very intellectual in my approach to many aspects of religion, and I can see why some folks on intellectual grounds disregard it.
Here are my thoughts on this text, which seems to be written with the goal of giving a person intellectual/logical reasons to believe in Christ.
1. Chapter 2 (Lord, Liar, or Lunatic) presents some interesting thoughts about Christ that I had
never considered.
2. I see some flaws and weaknesses in some of Josh McDowell’s arguments. But find me a
philosophy or argument that does not have weak points. I will not discard the text for that
reason.
3. I found especially intriguing the section called “Bibliographical Test” which makes a potent
argument for the historical truth of the New Testament manuscripts that I had never really
given much thought to. I looked elsewhere to find if McDowell was alone in presenting this
information. He is not. Religious and secular scholars back his points up.
4. Ironically, for a text that makes an intellectual argument for Christ, I found chapter 5 (Who Would Die for a Lie?) and chapter 11 (He Changed My Life) to be the most persuasive aspects of the book. Chapter 5 is a very simple ethical rhetorical appeal that is so simplistic I was stunned momentarily by its power. Chapter 11 is a plain old emotional appeal that is the author’s personal testimony about finding Christ.
Overall, I am not sure if “More Than a Carpenter” is a successful text or not. I do not feel that I am its intended audience, yet I did find aspects of it that reinforced my faith.
If the topic interests you, take a look. Josh McDowell is polite and practical in his approach, and I would think one would be hard put to be offended by this text if they end up disagreeing with him.
-I am a practicing Christian
-this review is about the text as a book, not as a piece of proselytization
-there is an updated and revised edition of this text. I did not read that edition
“More Than a Carpenter” is a dated book. There is no way around it. (see above note) However, for what it is, and its intended audience, I think it is fine for what it seems meant to do. I am not a person who is in doubt about the divinity of Christ, but I am a person who is very intellectual in my approach to many aspects of religion, and I can see why some folks on intellectual grounds disregard it.
Here are my thoughts on this text, which seems to be written with the goal of giving a person intellectual/logical reasons to believe in Christ.
1. Chapter 2 (Lord, Liar, or Lunatic) presents some interesting thoughts about Christ that I had
never considered.
2. I see some flaws and weaknesses in some of Josh McDowell’s arguments. But find me a
philosophy or argument that does not have weak points. I will not discard the text for that
reason.
3. I found especially intriguing the section called “Bibliographical Test” which makes a potent
argument for the historical truth of the New Testament manuscripts that I had never really
given much thought to. I looked elsewhere to find if McDowell was alone in presenting this
information. He is not. Religious and secular scholars back his points up.
4. Ironically, for a text that makes an intellectual argument for Christ, I found chapter 5 (Who Would Die for a Lie?) and chapter 11 (He Changed My Life) to be the most persuasive aspects of the book. Chapter 5 is a very simple ethical rhetorical appeal that is so simplistic I was stunned momentarily by its power. Chapter 11 is a plain old emotional appeal that is the author’s personal testimony about finding Christ.
Overall, I am not sure if “More Than a Carpenter” is a successful text or not. I do not feel that I am its intended audience, yet I did find aspects of it that reinforced my faith.
If the topic interests you, take a look. Josh McDowell is polite and practical in his approach, and I would think one would be hard put to be offended by this text if they end up disagreeing with him.
June 23, 2010
This was one of the first books by a Christian apologists that I ever read, and now that I've read it for a second time I have a better sense of how the book measures up. As an overall comment, I think the value of this book is comprised solely of the fact that it is a quick, easy read which presents some of the basic arguments for Christianity. If you are a complete novice when it comes to Christian apologetics, this book will at least acquaint you with the kinds of claims that are made and the basic structure of arguments for Christianity. And you'll be able to read the book in a few hours at most. Those two positive factors are the only thing that keep this book from being one or one and a half stars.
For starters, McDowell has this somewhat annoying tendency to quote other authors at length. You'll read a chapter and rather than McDowell making his own points, you'll find that often times he punts to other historians and apologists to let them explain in a paragraph-length quote the point that is being made. This gives the impression that the author is too lazy to write his own book; of course, it also gives the impression that there are plenty of good scholars who agree with him.
But the main problems with the book are deeper than that general flaw. The arguments themselves are clearly flawed, so much so that it's a wonder that anybody would put so much stock into them as to subsequently dedicate their life to Christianity. Starting in chapter one you know that something is amiss. The argument there is simply that Jesus claimed to be God, and that's what makes Jesus so much different from other major religious figures. What proof does McDowell offer in support of this claim? He simply quotes the Gospels! Most of these quotes come from the Gospel of John, which was the latest Gospel to be written and was intentionally crafted to make Jesus out to be knowingly divine. Some other passages are offered as well, but not as many, suggesting that Jesus claimed he was God in the other Gospels. For example, in the Gospel of Mark there are a few relevant passages (such as the one where Jesus claims to forgive sins--which is something only God can do). The major problem with this chapter is that McDowell just assumes that if the Gospels record Jesus as having said something, then the actual historical Jesus (if there ever was one) said those things. No attempt is made to show that what the Gospels record Jesus as saying is probably, in fact, what Jesus said. But without such an argument, the main premise of this chapter falls flat rather quickly.
This carries on into the next chapter, which builds upon the previous conclusion that Jesus claimed to be God. McDowell takes a page from famed Christian apologist C.S. Lewis: If Jesus claimed to be God, then there are only three possibilities. He was either Lord, Liar, or Lunatic. There are no other options, says Lewis (and McDowell). And since it is unreasonable to conclude that Jesus was a liar or a lunatic, we must conclude that he was Lord! If you're wondering what convincing evidence there is that Jesus was not a liar, or that he was not a lunatic, you'd be hard pressed to find that evidence in this book. How much evidence does one need that somebody is *not* a liar in order to conclude that the person must be the creator of the universe after all? Most people who claim to be God are either liars or lunatics, so the general trend counts against Jesus, if he indeed claimed such a thing in the first place. But this infamous "trilemma" doesn't capture all of the possibilities anyway. At least two possible scenarios are missing: (1) Legend, or (2) Literature. The former possibility should have been quite obvious to McDowell. It is distinctly possible that a Jewish prophet named Jesus garnered a following without ever claiming to be God himself, and then decades later stories were recorded (by anonymous authors, who don't tell us where they got their information or what historical methods they use when deciding what to record) where Jesus claimed to be God. Sounds like such claims could have been legendary embellishment. But even supposing that we don't accept that, it's at least possible that Jesus was never even a flesh and blood Jewish prophet, but instead a literary religious character like Hercules or Romulus. Admittedly, the "mythicist" position (which claims there was no historical Jesus) is a minority viewpoint, so the legend option seems more attractive. But it is at least possible that the best explanation of the evidence is that Jesus was a mythical character, and people like Earl Doherty and Robert M. Price have made at least somewhat plausible (even if not probable) attempts at making such an argument. In any case, the Lord, Liar, or Lunatic schtick fails to convince.
In the next chapter McDowell argues that the New Testament documents are reliable. In particular, the Gospels are reliable records of history. But Luke is the only one who ever claims to be writing history at all, and how good is a historian who doesn't tell you who he got his information from, and what methods he used to decide between conflicting accounts? Well, according to McDowell and Sir William Ramsay, who is quoted, "Luke is a historian of the first rank...this author should be placed along with the very greatest historians." Such a claim is refuted in Richard Carrier's "Not the Impossible Faith." Part of McDowell's argument for reliability rests on a dubious historical method which seems to claim, essentially, that we should accept what a document says "unless the author disqualified himself by contradictions or known factual inaccuracies." Or maybe McDowell doesn't want to claim that we should believe what the documents say, only that we should not assume fraud or error. In either case, one wonders what justification there is for this method. McDowell never says, he just seems to take it for granted. Regardless, since the Gospels do contradict one another, there is already justification to distrust them. Just read the crucifixion-burial-resurrection-postmortem appearances accounts in the four Gospels side-by-side. The kind of acrobatics that apologists do to harmonize these accounts is fit for a circus. Yet McDowell doesn't even try to harmonize the accounts. In fact, he doesn't even reveal that there are known contradictions here at all! When he finally discusses what happened (in a later chapter) he simply chooses an account of events and states that this is what happened. Never mind the fact that the earliest Gospel (Mark) says otherwise! Most of the time in the present chapter McDowell is simply quoting historians who have come to the conclusion that the NT documents are reliable. He also resorts to such arguments as this: "The disciples could not afford to risk inaccuracies (not to speak of willful manipulation of the facts), which would at once be exposed by those who would be only too glad to do so." This assumes that there were people who would care enough to go on a fact-checking expedition, and it assumes that claims of inaccuracies would have changed the minds of already fervent believers. Moreover, it assumes that the claims in question were made by the disciples, but there is no known eyewitness testimony by disciples. The Gospels were written several decades after the fact by anonymous individuals. The latter part of this chapter serves as McDowell's damage control on this issue.
In chapter five he asks: "who would die for a lie?" The implication is that if Jesus was not raised from the dead, then the disciples knew it was a lie. And who would die for such a thing (like the disciples did) if they knew it was a lie? It is more reasonable, says the apologist, to conclude that Jesus really was raised from the dead. I've blogged about this claim before under the title "David Marshall on Christian Martyrs," so here I'll just briefly raise some objections. First, McDowell presents no reliable historical evidence that any of the disciples died for their belief in Jesus' resurrection. He does provide a list of individuals followed by their alleged fates, writing that "They were tortured and flogged, and they finally faced death by some of the cruelest methods then known." But where is the evidence that the list accurately reflects history? McDowell doesn't say! And anyway, even if the disciples did die in the manners described, why assume that either Jesus was raised from the dead or it was all a big hoax? Quite possibly some series of events occurred which convinced the disciples that Jesus had been vindicated and had conquered death, but in reality Jesus had remained as dead as any other animal that's ever died. Isn't it possible that the disciples were just mistaken? People claim to see ghosts all the time, and most of the time I conclude that they are just mistaken. It's not: Either they really saw a ghost or they are a liar.
In chapter six McDowell argues that Jews were expecting a messiah who would be a great military and political ruler, not some guy who would suffer and die at the hands of unjust leaders. "What good is a dead messiah?" he asks. But he partly answers this question himself in a later chapter. The fact is, there are prophecies in the Old Testament that suggest that the messiah would have to suffer a humiliating death and be vindicated by God. This is argued in detail in one of the early chapters of "Not the Impossible Faith," mentioned earlier. McDowell himself claims that Jesus uniquely fulfilled the prophecies from the Old Testament. He and other apologists want to have their cake and eat it too. The idea is that nobody would have accepted a crucified messiah, because that's not what the prophecies said. But at the same time Jesus fulfilled the prophecies from the Old Testament. Well, which is it? If the prophecies said he wouldn't be killed unjustly, then it follows automatically that Jesus was not the messiah (or else the prophecies were just wrong). It looks like apologists want to claim that Jews universally expected a certain kind of messiah, apparently not paying attention to the prophecies that he would be killed unjustly, yet as it turned out Jesus' death confirmed the prophecies nobody ever thought about, which serves as even more confirmation for Christianity. Such special pleading is not at all convincing.
Next it is argued that Saul's conversion is remarkable confirmation for Christianity. But sometimes an opponent of a religion converts; how can that count as good evidence that Jesus rose from the dead? Apparently Saul had an experience where he saw a light and heard a voice, and that helped convince him that Christianity was true after all. Maybe Jesus really appeared to him in the form of a light and a voice, or maybe it was a hallucination. The mere fact that he changed his mind and became a leading Christian does not entail that Jesus rose from the dead. As Richard Carrier points out in response to the question "why did Saul convert?": why *only* Saul? Why not all of the persecutors of the church? Why not the Roman elite? Why not everybody on earth? Why did Jesus only appear to one persecuting outsider? The fact that it only happened to Saul suggests that it was probably some natural event like a hallucination. And even if we can't make this inference, neither can we make the inference that it *wasn't* a hallucination.
The chapter on the resurrection is again pretty lame. "How do you explain the empty tomb?" asks McDowell. Well, for starters, we don't have an empty tomb. What we have are stories of an empty tomb written several decades later. So the real question is, how do you explain the fact that there are stories of an empty tomb? This is not the same as explaining the actual presence of an empty tomb. But even if the empty tomb were a fact in need of explanation, since when do we conclude resurrection when a body goes missing? And isn't it possible that an empty tomb was found, but that it wasn't Jesus' tomb? That Jesus was still in the tomb he was buried in? McDowell argues that this couldn't have happened, because there were soldiers posted at the *real* tomb. But only a single Gospel says such a thing--the Gospel of Matthew. And this Gospel also seems to make up a bunch of other details anyway, so how much trust can we place in his claim that the tomb was guarded? (Just read his account of the crucifixion and resurrection and compare what he says to what everybody else says.) McDowell also trots out the old argument that if Jesus' tomb wasn't really empty, then his body would have been wheeled out by the authorities and dragged around town to prove that he was still dead. No evidence is given that this would have been ordinary protocol in such a situation, and no evidence is given that the authorities would have cared enough to do such a thing once they heard rumors that some fanatical group of individuals was claiming that Jesus was alive. But more importantly, no evidence is offered to show that the early Christians were even spreading this rumor shortly after Jesus' death. And after less than a week sitting in a tomb and decomposing, the body would have already been beyond recognition, so that Christians could always claim that any body that was brought out to prove that Jesus was still dead was somebody else's body! The Jews did not have forensic testing and DNA analysis to prove otherwise.
The last main argumentative chapter suggests that there are so many fulfilled prophecies in the life of Jesus that it is extremely improbable that he isn't the true messiah. This argument suffers from a flaw we discussed earlier: it assumes that what the Gospels say happened actually happened. Sam Harris, in "Letter to a Christian Nation", summarizes the counter-argument rather nicely:
"It is often said that it is reasonable to believe that the Bible is the word of God because many of the events recounted in the New Testament confirm Old Testament prophecy. But ask yourself, how difficult would it have been for the Gospel writers to tell the story of Jesus' life so as to make it conform to Old Testament prophecy? Wouldn't it have been within the power of any mortal to write a book that confirms the predictions of a previous book?"
And so dies the argument from McDowell's chapter, since he never seems to consider this obvious possibility.
Overall, the arguments in this book are weak and suffer many major shortcomings, but they're good to at least be familiar with, since so many apologists use them (or variants of them). If you're looking for a better-quality book on Christian apologetics that is still relatively easy to read and understand, go with Lee Strobel's "The Case for Christ." But never underestimate the apologist's ability to present half-truths, straw man objections, and seemingly slam-dunk counter arguments. Read that book alongside Earl Doherty's "Challenging the Verdict" or Robert Price's "The Case Against The Case for Christ" (or both).
For starters, McDowell has this somewhat annoying tendency to quote other authors at length. You'll read a chapter and rather than McDowell making his own points, you'll find that often times he punts to other historians and apologists to let them explain in a paragraph-length quote the point that is being made. This gives the impression that the author is too lazy to write his own book; of course, it also gives the impression that there are plenty of good scholars who agree with him.
But the main problems with the book are deeper than that general flaw. The arguments themselves are clearly flawed, so much so that it's a wonder that anybody would put so much stock into them as to subsequently dedicate their life to Christianity. Starting in chapter one you know that something is amiss. The argument there is simply that Jesus claimed to be God, and that's what makes Jesus so much different from other major religious figures. What proof does McDowell offer in support of this claim? He simply quotes the Gospels! Most of these quotes come from the Gospel of John, which was the latest Gospel to be written and was intentionally crafted to make Jesus out to be knowingly divine. Some other passages are offered as well, but not as many, suggesting that Jesus claimed he was God in the other Gospels. For example, in the Gospel of Mark there are a few relevant passages (such as the one where Jesus claims to forgive sins--which is something only God can do). The major problem with this chapter is that McDowell just assumes that if the Gospels record Jesus as having said something, then the actual historical Jesus (if there ever was one) said those things. No attempt is made to show that what the Gospels record Jesus as saying is probably, in fact, what Jesus said. But without such an argument, the main premise of this chapter falls flat rather quickly.
This carries on into the next chapter, which builds upon the previous conclusion that Jesus claimed to be God. McDowell takes a page from famed Christian apologist C.S. Lewis: If Jesus claimed to be God, then there are only three possibilities. He was either Lord, Liar, or Lunatic. There are no other options, says Lewis (and McDowell). And since it is unreasonable to conclude that Jesus was a liar or a lunatic, we must conclude that he was Lord! If you're wondering what convincing evidence there is that Jesus was not a liar, or that he was not a lunatic, you'd be hard pressed to find that evidence in this book. How much evidence does one need that somebody is *not* a liar in order to conclude that the person must be the creator of the universe after all? Most people who claim to be God are either liars or lunatics, so the general trend counts against Jesus, if he indeed claimed such a thing in the first place. But this infamous "trilemma" doesn't capture all of the possibilities anyway. At least two possible scenarios are missing: (1) Legend, or (2) Literature. The former possibility should have been quite obvious to McDowell. It is distinctly possible that a Jewish prophet named Jesus garnered a following without ever claiming to be God himself, and then decades later stories were recorded (by anonymous authors, who don't tell us where they got their information or what historical methods they use when deciding what to record) where Jesus claimed to be God. Sounds like such claims could have been legendary embellishment. But even supposing that we don't accept that, it's at least possible that Jesus was never even a flesh and blood Jewish prophet, but instead a literary religious character like Hercules or Romulus. Admittedly, the "mythicist" position (which claims there was no historical Jesus) is a minority viewpoint, so the legend option seems more attractive. But it is at least possible that the best explanation of the evidence is that Jesus was a mythical character, and people like Earl Doherty and Robert M. Price have made at least somewhat plausible (even if not probable) attempts at making such an argument. In any case, the Lord, Liar, or Lunatic schtick fails to convince.
In the next chapter McDowell argues that the New Testament documents are reliable. In particular, the Gospels are reliable records of history. But Luke is the only one who ever claims to be writing history at all, and how good is a historian who doesn't tell you who he got his information from, and what methods he used to decide between conflicting accounts? Well, according to McDowell and Sir William Ramsay, who is quoted, "Luke is a historian of the first rank...this author should be placed along with the very greatest historians." Such a claim is refuted in Richard Carrier's "Not the Impossible Faith." Part of McDowell's argument for reliability rests on a dubious historical method which seems to claim, essentially, that we should accept what a document says "unless the author disqualified himself by contradictions or known factual inaccuracies." Or maybe McDowell doesn't want to claim that we should believe what the documents say, only that we should not assume fraud or error. In either case, one wonders what justification there is for this method. McDowell never says, he just seems to take it for granted. Regardless, since the Gospels do contradict one another, there is already justification to distrust them. Just read the crucifixion-burial-resurrection-postmortem appearances accounts in the four Gospels side-by-side. The kind of acrobatics that apologists do to harmonize these accounts is fit for a circus. Yet McDowell doesn't even try to harmonize the accounts. In fact, he doesn't even reveal that there are known contradictions here at all! When he finally discusses what happened (in a later chapter) he simply chooses an account of events and states that this is what happened. Never mind the fact that the earliest Gospel (Mark) says otherwise! Most of the time in the present chapter McDowell is simply quoting historians who have come to the conclusion that the NT documents are reliable. He also resorts to such arguments as this: "The disciples could not afford to risk inaccuracies (not to speak of willful manipulation of the facts), which would at once be exposed by those who would be only too glad to do so." This assumes that there were people who would care enough to go on a fact-checking expedition, and it assumes that claims of inaccuracies would have changed the minds of already fervent believers. Moreover, it assumes that the claims in question were made by the disciples, but there is no known eyewitness testimony by disciples. The Gospels were written several decades after the fact by anonymous individuals. The latter part of this chapter serves as McDowell's damage control on this issue.
In chapter five he asks: "who would die for a lie?" The implication is that if Jesus was not raised from the dead, then the disciples knew it was a lie. And who would die for such a thing (like the disciples did) if they knew it was a lie? It is more reasonable, says the apologist, to conclude that Jesus really was raised from the dead. I've blogged about this claim before under the title "David Marshall on Christian Martyrs," so here I'll just briefly raise some objections. First, McDowell presents no reliable historical evidence that any of the disciples died for their belief in Jesus' resurrection. He does provide a list of individuals followed by their alleged fates, writing that "They were tortured and flogged, and they finally faced death by some of the cruelest methods then known." But where is the evidence that the list accurately reflects history? McDowell doesn't say! And anyway, even if the disciples did die in the manners described, why assume that either Jesus was raised from the dead or it was all a big hoax? Quite possibly some series of events occurred which convinced the disciples that Jesus had been vindicated and had conquered death, but in reality Jesus had remained as dead as any other animal that's ever died. Isn't it possible that the disciples were just mistaken? People claim to see ghosts all the time, and most of the time I conclude that they are just mistaken. It's not: Either they really saw a ghost or they are a liar.
In chapter six McDowell argues that Jews were expecting a messiah who would be a great military and political ruler, not some guy who would suffer and die at the hands of unjust leaders. "What good is a dead messiah?" he asks. But he partly answers this question himself in a later chapter. The fact is, there are prophecies in the Old Testament that suggest that the messiah would have to suffer a humiliating death and be vindicated by God. This is argued in detail in one of the early chapters of "Not the Impossible Faith," mentioned earlier. McDowell himself claims that Jesus uniquely fulfilled the prophecies from the Old Testament. He and other apologists want to have their cake and eat it too. The idea is that nobody would have accepted a crucified messiah, because that's not what the prophecies said. But at the same time Jesus fulfilled the prophecies from the Old Testament. Well, which is it? If the prophecies said he wouldn't be killed unjustly, then it follows automatically that Jesus was not the messiah (or else the prophecies were just wrong). It looks like apologists want to claim that Jews universally expected a certain kind of messiah, apparently not paying attention to the prophecies that he would be killed unjustly, yet as it turned out Jesus' death confirmed the prophecies nobody ever thought about, which serves as even more confirmation for Christianity. Such special pleading is not at all convincing.
Next it is argued that Saul's conversion is remarkable confirmation for Christianity. But sometimes an opponent of a religion converts; how can that count as good evidence that Jesus rose from the dead? Apparently Saul had an experience where he saw a light and heard a voice, and that helped convince him that Christianity was true after all. Maybe Jesus really appeared to him in the form of a light and a voice, or maybe it was a hallucination. The mere fact that he changed his mind and became a leading Christian does not entail that Jesus rose from the dead. As Richard Carrier points out in response to the question "why did Saul convert?": why *only* Saul? Why not all of the persecutors of the church? Why not the Roman elite? Why not everybody on earth? Why did Jesus only appear to one persecuting outsider? The fact that it only happened to Saul suggests that it was probably some natural event like a hallucination. And even if we can't make this inference, neither can we make the inference that it *wasn't* a hallucination.
The chapter on the resurrection is again pretty lame. "How do you explain the empty tomb?" asks McDowell. Well, for starters, we don't have an empty tomb. What we have are stories of an empty tomb written several decades later. So the real question is, how do you explain the fact that there are stories of an empty tomb? This is not the same as explaining the actual presence of an empty tomb. But even if the empty tomb were a fact in need of explanation, since when do we conclude resurrection when a body goes missing? And isn't it possible that an empty tomb was found, but that it wasn't Jesus' tomb? That Jesus was still in the tomb he was buried in? McDowell argues that this couldn't have happened, because there were soldiers posted at the *real* tomb. But only a single Gospel says such a thing--the Gospel of Matthew. And this Gospel also seems to make up a bunch of other details anyway, so how much trust can we place in his claim that the tomb was guarded? (Just read his account of the crucifixion and resurrection and compare what he says to what everybody else says.) McDowell also trots out the old argument that if Jesus' tomb wasn't really empty, then his body would have been wheeled out by the authorities and dragged around town to prove that he was still dead. No evidence is given that this would have been ordinary protocol in such a situation, and no evidence is given that the authorities would have cared enough to do such a thing once they heard rumors that some fanatical group of individuals was claiming that Jesus was alive. But more importantly, no evidence is offered to show that the early Christians were even spreading this rumor shortly after Jesus' death. And after less than a week sitting in a tomb and decomposing, the body would have already been beyond recognition, so that Christians could always claim that any body that was brought out to prove that Jesus was still dead was somebody else's body! The Jews did not have forensic testing and DNA analysis to prove otherwise.
The last main argumentative chapter suggests that there are so many fulfilled prophecies in the life of Jesus that it is extremely improbable that he isn't the true messiah. This argument suffers from a flaw we discussed earlier: it assumes that what the Gospels say happened actually happened. Sam Harris, in "Letter to a Christian Nation", summarizes the counter-argument rather nicely:
"It is often said that it is reasonable to believe that the Bible is the word of God because many of the events recounted in the New Testament confirm Old Testament prophecy. But ask yourself, how difficult would it have been for the Gospel writers to tell the story of Jesus' life so as to make it conform to Old Testament prophecy? Wouldn't it have been within the power of any mortal to write a book that confirms the predictions of a previous book?"
And so dies the argument from McDowell's chapter, since he never seems to consider this obvious possibility.
Overall, the arguments in this book are weak and suffer many major shortcomings, but they're good to at least be familiar with, since so many apologists use them (or variants of them). If you're looking for a better-quality book on Christian apologetics that is still relatively easy to read and understand, go with Lee Strobel's "The Case for Christ." But never underestimate the apologist's ability to present half-truths, straw man objections, and seemingly slam-dunk counter arguments. Read that book alongside Earl Doherty's "Challenging the Verdict" or Robert Price's "The Case Against The Case for Christ" (or both).
July 23, 2018
Originally posted on Reveries Reviews.
Jesus is all He claimed – and that’s all there is.
This book is the most inspiring thing I’ve read in decades. I’d recommend it to any Christian – because I believe that although faith is the only principle you can base your relationship with God on, it’s super nice to be able to say, “Hey, this is real. I’ve looked into it,” if someone ever asks you. This book is an absolute treasure!
Jesus is all He claimed – and that’s all there is.
This book is the most inspiring thing I’ve read in decades. I’d recommend it to any Christian – because I believe that although faith is the only principle you can base your relationship with God on, it’s super nice to be able to say, “Hey, this is real. I’ve looked into it,” if someone ever asks you. This book is an absolute treasure!
June 30, 2015
As a former hardened cynic, this book changed my life. It didn't change my life single-handedly but as part of a series of influences really. Nonetheless I've never been able to look at Jesus the same since I read it -- for the better I think.
In my experience, most who suggest that McDowell's arguments are drivel offer no support for their claim(s), as if they're self-evident. My suggestion? Ask them to detail their counterargument(s). Then read the book and ask yourself the same question throughout.
In my experience, most who suggest that McDowell's arguments are drivel offer no support for their claim(s), as if they're self-evident. My suggestion? Ask them to detail their counterargument(s). Then read the book and ask yourself the same question throughout.
November 18, 2019
This book takes a rather slapdash approach to apologetics, and commits some grievous errors in argumentation. For instance, the author falls into the silly modern contrivance of insisting that Christianity isn't a religion, in order to dump any negativity onto his customized definition of religion and preserve the 'pure' character of his supposed personal relationship with god.
When arguing against counter-apologetics, McDowell provides an underwhelming and often inaccurate summary of the non-christian argument, and then proceeds to simply assert that god is a better explanation...just because. He points out what the god of the gaps fallacy is, and then proceeds to directly commit it multiple times.
He presents the flawed false trilemma (liar, lunatic, lord) of C.S. Lewis, and simply assumes far too often that everything recorded in the bible concerning what Jesus supposedly said and did is undisputed truth, in spite of the fact that the majority of the books contained in the bible are anonymously written. And while some of the events are historically accurate and verifiable via other sources, many, including the various miracle claims, are not. There is no requirement (beyond religious dogma) to take the bible as either completely factual or completely fictional.
Above and beyond everything, the author ignores one simple thing - extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. McDowell wants to lump all historical claims together and treat them equally, regardless as to what is being described.
I suppose if one is unfamiliar with the common Christian apologetics and was already a believer, this book offers a brief, yet inadequate introduction on the topic. Someone passingly familiar with the counter arguments, however, can quickly spot the glaring holes in McDowell's case for Christianity. This book will convince the already-convinced, and perhaps sway some fence-sitters who don't care to do more than scratch the surface of the topic. Anyone else who actually cares about the issues this book attempts (and fails) to cover in any depth will find little of any use here.
When arguing against counter-apologetics, McDowell provides an underwhelming and often inaccurate summary of the non-christian argument, and then proceeds to simply assert that god is a better explanation...just because. He points out what the god of the gaps fallacy is, and then proceeds to directly commit it multiple times.
He presents the flawed false trilemma (liar, lunatic, lord) of C.S. Lewis, and simply assumes far too often that everything recorded in the bible concerning what Jesus supposedly said and did is undisputed truth, in spite of the fact that the majority of the books contained in the bible are anonymously written. And while some of the events are historically accurate and verifiable via other sources, many, including the various miracle claims, are not. There is no requirement (beyond religious dogma) to take the bible as either completely factual or completely fictional.
Above and beyond everything, the author ignores one simple thing - extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. McDowell wants to lump all historical claims together and treat them equally, regardless as to what is being described.
I suppose if one is unfamiliar with the common Christian apologetics and was already a believer, this book offers a brief, yet inadequate introduction on the topic. Someone passingly familiar with the counter arguments, however, can quickly spot the glaring holes in McDowell's case for Christianity. This book will convince the already-convinced, and perhaps sway some fence-sitters who don't care to do more than scratch the surface of the topic. Anyone else who actually cares about the issues this book attempts (and fails) to cover in any depth will find little of any use here.
December 19, 2016
I loved More Than a Carpenter, I think everyone should read this book. If you have any doubt about Jesus Christ being the son of God and that he died on a cross for our sins and God raised him from the dead. This is the book to read it gives you tons of evidence that you can't dispute about Jesus. This book is very powerful and it speaks the truth and I believe it has changed many readers to where they have given there lives to Jesus. The book also reconfirmed my commitment as a follower of Jesus Christ and it has strengthened my walk with Him as a Christian. This is a must read for everyone, you don't have to be a believer to read it.
May 22, 2008
The heart of this book is that either Jesus was who He said he was (Son of God, single path to God) or he was crazy or lying. For some to call Him a "good teacher" without being the Savior is a flawed argument. And to try to fit Him into a view that there are many roads to God doesn't hold up either. Either accept Him as the sole way to God, or leave Him out of the argument altogether because it just doesn't fit with His very own teachings.
Classic book that deserves to be read more than once.
Classic book that deserves to be read more than once.
March 28, 2010
"More Than a Carpenter" is a book that defends the Christian faith. The authors pack a lot of information into this slim book, but it's written with a conversational tone and is easy to read and understand.
The authors use common questions they've been asked during talks on this topic to start most of the sections, then they answer them using information they've discovered themselves or by quoting other experts. In this revised edition, they added updated material and a new section on science to answer newer objections that have been raised.
They convincingly answer the most common objections or doubts about the Bible and Jesus. I wish they had put chapter six directly after chapter one since a reader can validly criticize the "Lord, Liar, or Lunatic" argument if you haven't already proven that the Bible does accurately record the words and actions of Jesus.
The main questions answered were: Did Jesus really claim to be God? Can't he just be a good, moral teacher? Doesn't science prove that the Bible is wrong? Atheists can be moral and religion has caused the worst suffering in the world, so shouldn't we get rid of it? Wasn't the New Testament written long after Jesus lived, so how can we believe it's a reliable account of what happened?
It also brought up how the disciples changed from thinking they were wrong about Jesus and hiding in fear to proclaiming a risen Messiah; the missing body of Jesus that no one ever brought out to prove the disciples wrong; and the change of Saul/Paul from hunting down those who believed in Jesus as the Messiah to preaching that Jesus was the Messiah. Also, evidence that Jesus really did die and really did come back from the dead; that Jesus really was the Messiah (using Old Testament prophesy); and why Jesus is the only way "to heaven."
I'd highly recommend this book to all Christians and to those who have honest questions.
The authors use common questions they've been asked during talks on this topic to start most of the sections, then they answer them using information they've discovered themselves or by quoting other experts. In this revised edition, they added updated material and a new section on science to answer newer objections that have been raised.
They convincingly answer the most common objections or doubts about the Bible and Jesus. I wish they had put chapter six directly after chapter one since a reader can validly criticize the "Lord, Liar, or Lunatic" argument if you haven't already proven that the Bible does accurately record the words and actions of Jesus.
The main questions answered were: Did Jesus really claim to be God? Can't he just be a good, moral teacher? Doesn't science prove that the Bible is wrong? Atheists can be moral and religion has caused the worst suffering in the world, so shouldn't we get rid of it? Wasn't the New Testament written long after Jesus lived, so how can we believe it's a reliable account of what happened?
It also brought up how the disciples changed from thinking they were wrong about Jesus and hiding in fear to proclaiming a risen Messiah; the missing body of Jesus that no one ever brought out to prove the disciples wrong; and the change of Saul/Paul from hunting down those who believed in Jesus as the Messiah to preaching that Jesus was the Messiah. Also, evidence that Jesus really did die and really did come back from the dead; that Jesus really was the Messiah (using Old Testament prophesy); and why Jesus is the only way "to heaven."
I'd highly recommend this book to all Christians and to those who have honest questions.
July 11, 2009
I read this back in college when I was a christian, and I just read it again as an atheist. I remember thinking it was well-written and scientific. Boy, was I wrong. SO much sloppy logic, littered with straw men arguments.
And what the heck is this "Aristotle's Dictum"? I can't find any references to it on the web outside of Christian apologetics. Basically, McDowell says the benefit of the doubt should be given to any historical document - we should assume its writer is telling the truth until proven otherwise. Um ... if he did say that, Aristotle's an idiot.
And what the heck is this "Aristotle's Dictum"? I can't find any references to it on the web outside of Christian apologetics. Basically, McDowell says the benefit of the doubt should be given to any historical document - we should assume its writer is telling the truth until proven otherwise. Um ... if he did say that, Aristotle's an idiot.
October 16, 2007
This is one of the silliest books I've ever read. Anyone planning to use any of the information in this book to "logically" support their religious claims should reconsider what logic is. Stuff like the "lord, liar, lunatic" argument and "why would the disciples die for a lie?" are laughable. Don't read this book for any rational purpose. It should only be used to add a touch of humor to your day.
May 22, 2013
One of the first books (aside from the bible) that I read that helped lead me to a clearer understanding of who Christ is, and into a saving relationship with Him. Elementary, clear and poignant. I haven't picked it up recently but I'd imagine it's still very much worth a read for the same reasons.
Read
May 3, 2022This book profoundly impacted me as a college freshman, and for that reason I re-read (by listening to audiobook) this tiny and encouraging gem. Jesus Christ has risen and is changing lives today!
May 10, 2022
Figured after giving certain chapters good skims in the past, it was finally time to read through the whole book well! This was a great, quick read on the reliability of the life and person of Jesus Christ. I would recommend this to believers wanting to grow in worship of God through their mind, those wanting to hone their apologetics on the person of Jesus, and most importantly, for those seeking truth and life purpose. Great read and will continue to be recommending this to many.
January 7, 2016
Christianity is not a myth and Jesus Christ is real, all the evidence you need are presented concisely in this book. I found this book at Booksale, and knew without a doubt that I should take it home with me. True enough, this book proved to be a blessing. I liked best that the approach was not argumentative nor persuasive, like Yancey's style, the facts of Jesus and his life are presented here in an unbiased and objective manner. You journey together with McDowell as his thoughts become transformed from an atheist into a Christ-believer and then a Christian.
February 14, 2016
Not only is this book amazing, it is definitely a must-read.
April 19, 2023
nawet nie będę się wysilać żeby napisać tu coś wartościowego… to było jedno wielkie logical fallacy; drugą gwiazdkę dostaje tak w zasadzie tylko dlatego, że ja jestem bardzo biased i nie potrafię dać książce jednej gwiazdki, bo hej, mogło być gorzej 🙄🙄
July 25, 2022
If you have any familiarity with The Case for Christ and the story behind it, Josh McDowell, the author of More Than a Carpenter, was Lee Strobel long before Lee himself was. A proclaimed atheist, McDowell set out to disprove the viability of Christianity while still a college student. What he found on his journey accomplished the very opposite; instead of proving Christianity false to the world, the evidence supporting proved the faith the be unquestionably true to his own mind. Hearing him tell this story at a conference was incredible, and it made me eager to pick of the book that outlined his findings.
More Than a Carpenter is a profoundly educational read that I found both enlightening and uplifting. Here lies the evidence McDowell found that so supported Christianity in his mind that it led to his conversion experience. Said information was presented in what I think was a suitably easy way to understand for those who have no experience with the faith, but which is still very interesting for those who have spent their entire lives attending Sunday School. My only complaint is that I was hoping for more of McDowell’s own faith story. There were pieces of it scattered throughout the book, but I would have loved a bit more.
I think this would be a wonderful book to press into the hands of anyone from teens to senior citizens who have deep questions about the Christian faith, and I hope to do that very thing with it. Some truly amazing conversations could come from exposure to this book. While sometimes a bit dry and verbose, it was never too much to easily follow. So, if you find yourself on a spiritual quest for answers, I highly recommend giving More Than a Carpenter some time on your journey.
More Than a Carpenter is a profoundly educational read that I found both enlightening and uplifting. Here lies the evidence McDowell found that so supported Christianity in his mind that it led to his conversion experience. Said information was presented in what I think was a suitably easy way to understand for those who have no experience with the faith, but which is still very interesting for those who have spent their entire lives attending Sunday School. My only complaint is that I was hoping for more of McDowell’s own faith story. There were pieces of it scattered throughout the book, but I would have loved a bit more.
I think this would be a wonderful book to press into the hands of anyone from teens to senior citizens who have deep questions about the Christian faith, and I hope to do that very thing with it. Some truly amazing conversations could come from exposure to this book. While sometimes a bit dry and verbose, it was never too much to easily follow. So, if you find yourself on a spiritual quest for answers, I highly recommend giving More Than a Carpenter some time on your journey.
March 13, 2023
ta książka przedstawia główne punkty historyczno-logiczne za chrześcijaństwem. część z nich faktycznie ma sens, część w ogóle do mnie nie przemawia, brakuje wielu przykładów + cytowanie wykształconych ludzi nie jest argumentem. jeśli kogoś z moich znajomych ateistów (albo chrześcijan poszukujących fundamentów) ciekawi chrześcijaństwo i chciałby zgłębić temat, dużo bardziej polecam "chrześcijaństwo po prostu" lewisa.
September 19, 2023
I have read the works of Sean McDowell and have listened to Josh on podcast. This book of basics which every Christian should be aware is really great for anyone to gain hold of the basics of Christianity and the teachings and purpose of Jesus. Definitely well worth your time to get and read this book. Small and compact book chock full of information, as basic as it may be is well worth it to have in your arsenal of understanding.
November 28, 2021
He makes some strong arguments. He also makes some extremely weak arguments that take away from the core of faith for BEING faith, IMHO.
And yes, I do think this is playing logic games and twists of real fact for the choir. It's not only for the people in the choir stalls themselves, though. Some outside just roaming around might become interested as some of his better chapters.
3.5 stars but I cannot round it up. Christianity IS a religion, regardless how you dice it. For more than a millennia it also had political power that was quite considerable. But to say it is not? Dogma exists and that the disciples died and suffered is a very poor argument. So did and do all types of people "convinced" in cults. Jihadists do. Manson followers to Jones' koolaid poisoned group. I could name dozens throughout the centuries that went into the millions counts for "members". Who do you think the kamikaze pilots were in their "belief"?
There is a challenge in the new atheism and with the up is down to all moral relativity. And other chapters are excellent. Science doesn't refute either the way I've read arguments insisting that it does. That was a chapter of considerable substance. Not so much with the chapter about Bible reliability, IMHO.
Worth the read. The updated version is still somewhat dated. The truth of peace, happiness, joy despite the troubles and failures and suffering in living coming from self-identity core strengthened by a GOOD loving source is valid for humans. And its being missing in non-believers is observable to far worse outcomes. Measurable too.
Still, this is not a book that I would think could begin to convince hedonistic "life is the pits and then you die" multitudes that reign presently in a relative morality which in many ways is no morality at all other than self pleasing.
And yes, I do think this is playing logic games and twists of real fact for the choir. It's not only for the people in the choir stalls themselves, though. Some outside just roaming around might become interested as some of his better chapters.
3.5 stars but I cannot round it up. Christianity IS a religion, regardless how you dice it. For more than a millennia it also had political power that was quite considerable. But to say it is not? Dogma exists and that the disciples died and suffered is a very poor argument. So did and do all types of people "convinced" in cults. Jihadists do. Manson followers to Jones' koolaid poisoned group. I could name dozens throughout the centuries that went into the millions counts for "members". Who do you think the kamikaze pilots were in their "belief"?
There is a challenge in the new atheism and with the up is down to all moral relativity. And other chapters are excellent. Science doesn't refute either the way I've read arguments insisting that it does. That was a chapter of considerable substance. Not so much with the chapter about Bible reliability, IMHO.
Worth the read. The updated version is still somewhat dated. The truth of peace, happiness, joy despite the troubles and failures and suffering in living coming from self-identity core strengthened by a GOOD loving source is valid for humans. And its being missing in non-believers is observable to far worse outcomes. Measurable too.
Still, this is not a book that I would think could begin to convince hedonistic "life is the pits and then you die" multitudes that reign presently in a relative morality which in many ways is no morality at all other than self pleasing.
June 14, 2015
A small volume that communicated well why Jesus Christ is more then a prophet or simply a good man. I found this book to be a pleasant refresher on why makes Jesus and Christianity unique. The author uses quotes and supporting data from a varied group of individuals, and clearly shows, that you cannot partly believe in Christ, for you either believe he was the son of God, or alternatively, you believe he was a lunatic or a fraud. McDowell shows his communication ability in the fact that he is able to display how and why Jesus is unique while also making it possible for the common man to understand and process what he is saying. A good, quick read that is spiritually strengthening, but also, a excellent defense of the faith.
December 17, 2015
Great short walk-through of a basic Christian apologetic, focused on the historicity of Christ's resurrection. Good to give to unsaved friends, but also a good resource to help Christians learn how to answer most common questions and objections from unbelievers. Not recommended for children due to graphic medical analysis of crucifixion; also elements of McDowell's personal testimony near the end.
And let's keep in mind: the work of apologetics, in itself, doesn't save anyone. That's the job of the Holy Spirit. One thing I appreciate about McDowell is that he never seems to lose sight of that fact.
And let's keep in mind: the work of apologetics, in itself, doesn't save anyone. That's the job of the Holy Spirit. One thing I appreciate about McDowell is that he never seems to lose sight of that fact.
April 9, 2016
This is an outstanding book for the skeptic examining with an open mind the claims that Jesus Christ and His early followers made about Him. It is factual, rational, clear, and easy to read. I highly recommend this book for religious and non-religious alike looking to see their preconceptions about Jesus Christ and Christianity challenged and addressed.
April 18, 2020
"Christianity is not a religion. Religion is humans trying to work their way to God through good works. Christianity is God coming to men and women through Jesus Christ offering them a relationship with himself."
Absolutely loved this book! ❤️
Absolutely loved this book! ❤️
August 26, 2023
This book beautifully exposits the firm reasoning we have to trust in Jesus as more than a historical figure, but to see him as the resurrected Son of God
Written in an accessible way that made it understandable and possible to read multiple chapters at a time.
I usually don’t like extensive block quotes, but it fits into the style of this book given that it’s critical examination of evidence.
Would recommend to non-believer needing proof, or someone wanting to grow in their historical apologetics.
Written in an accessible way that made it understandable and possible to read multiple chapters at a time.
I usually don’t like extensive block quotes, but it fits into the style of this book given that it’s critical examination of evidence.
Would recommend to non-believer needing proof, or someone wanting to grow in their historical apologetics.
November 29, 2021
Originally from 1977, this is sort of the proto-The Case for Christ. Makes a lot of the same observations. Also see Cold-Case Christianity: A Homicide Detective Investigates the Claims of the Gospels.
I still want to read The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict.
I still want to read The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict.
July 9, 2021
MUST READ!
July 16, 2023
A great book would recommend if you're questioning the Legitimacy of Christianity
Displaying 1 - 30 of 930 reviews