RE: The Trilemma
January 17, 2012 at 1:12 pm
(This post was last modified: January 17, 2012 at 1:34 pm by DeistPaladin.)
***Continued from OP***
OK, having established that Jesus isn't all that great a philosopher or moral teacher nor does he have any divine understanding of how the universe works, I'm ready to comment in greater detail on the Trilemma itself.
As Phil has pointed out, the Trilemma makes use of a false dilemma (or trilemma, as it were) but the argument is more fallacious than that. It effectively relies on both over-simplification and strawmanning the undesirable conclusions in an effort to work toward the desired conclusion.
Josh McDowell, in his book "Evidence for Christianity", says that if Jesus were lying, he'd be a "demon". Seriously, he used that word. Anyone who ever tells a lie is a demon? It isn't possible that Jesus saw the austere nature of the god of the OT and thought it useful to soften it up a bit, using his influence to do so? Anyone seen "The Road to El Dorado"? Miguel masquerades as a god, at first to rip off a credulous tribe, and later his idealistic side kicks in and he tries to use his divine influence for good.
See YouTube video here and scroll to 4:10.
Look familiar? Would Josh McDowell call Miguel a "demon"?
Or suppose Jesus was just like the modern sleazy televangelists, making money off the credulous by selling his snake oil. Does that necessarily mean he couldn't possibly tell people to "love thy neighbor" or "turn the other cheek"? Even sociopaths are capable of playing the role of saint or talking a good game.
Or was he crazy. ***To be continued***
***Continued***
OK, so Jesus could have been a liar and still capable of uttering some pithy sayings of wisdom. Could he also have been crazy and done the same? I suppose someone who thinks they're God is absolutely incapable of ever telling people to live peacefully or love one another?
MASH Episode
Or perhaps the apologists wish to imply that someone making crazy claims could never be charismatic enough to attract a following? Certainly not enough that the followers would be so fanatical as to be willing to die for their trust in this crazy man? Right? Totally impossible?
CNN coverage of the Koresh compound burning
The fact is not all crazy religious people are the huddled-in-a-corner-giggling-to-themselves kind of crazy. It's been said we're all crazy in different ways. Throughout history, there have been cult leaders charismatic enough to attract a following. It's also not beyond comprehension that some of these leaders might have been capable of a few pearls of wisdom now and then.
But exactly what did Jesus claim to be again? He claimed to be God did he? Thank you ShellB for reminding me. I almost forgot this point.
***To be continued***
OK, having established that Jesus isn't all that great a philosopher or moral teacher nor does he have any divine understanding of how the universe works, I'm ready to comment in greater detail on the Trilemma itself.
As Phil has pointed out, the Trilemma makes use of a false dilemma (or trilemma, as it were) but the argument is more fallacious than that. It effectively relies on both over-simplification and strawmanning the undesirable conclusions in an effort to work toward the desired conclusion.
Josh McDowell, in his book "Evidence for Christianity", says that if Jesus were lying, he'd be a "demon". Seriously, he used that word. Anyone who ever tells a lie is a demon? It isn't possible that Jesus saw the austere nature of the god of the OT and thought it useful to soften it up a bit, using his influence to do so? Anyone seen "The Road to El Dorado"? Miguel masquerades as a god, at first to rip off a credulous tribe, and later his idealistic side kicks in and he tries to use his divine influence for good.
See YouTube video here and scroll to 4:10.
Look familiar? Would Josh McDowell call Miguel a "demon"?
Or suppose Jesus was just like the modern sleazy televangelists, making money off the credulous by selling his snake oil. Does that necessarily mean he couldn't possibly tell people to "love thy neighbor" or "turn the other cheek"? Even sociopaths are capable of playing the role of saint or talking a good game.
Or was he crazy. ***To be continued***
***Continued***
OK, so Jesus could have been a liar and still capable of uttering some pithy sayings of wisdom. Could he also have been crazy and done the same? I suppose someone who thinks they're God is absolutely incapable of ever telling people to live peacefully or love one another?
MASH Episode
Or perhaps the apologists wish to imply that someone making crazy claims could never be charismatic enough to attract a following? Certainly not enough that the followers would be so fanatical as to be willing to die for their trust in this crazy man? Right? Totally impossible?
CNN coverage of the Koresh compound burning
The fact is not all crazy religious people are the huddled-in-a-corner-giggling-to-themselves kind of crazy. It's been said we're all crazy in different ways. Throughout history, there have been cult leaders charismatic enough to attract a following. It's also not beyond comprehension that some of these leaders might have been capable of a few pearls of wisdom now and then.
But exactly what did Jesus claim to be again? He claimed to be God did he? Thank you ShellB for reminding me. I almost forgot this point.
***To be continued***
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
