The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part Deux)

[YahwehIsTheWay]

8. Liar, Lord or Lunatic?

What do you get when you start with a preconceived notion, throw it in a pot, toss in two caricatured alternatives presented in a false trilemma, mix in some strawmanning, sprinkle a dash of argument from incredulity, flavor with cherry picked Bible verses and stir over a roaring fire of confirmation bias?

You have the perfect recipe for the Trilemma, C.S. Lewis' classic argument for the divinity of Jesus. Enjoy the video of his argument presented in his words with the Mel Gibson BDSM gay-porn flick in the background.





The argument is simple: Jesus said he was God.

Sort of.

Well, he did say that his will was inferior to God's ("Not my will but thy will be done"). And he did say he didn't have the knowledge of God ("No man knows the day, no not even the Son, but the Father only"). And he did speak to God in 2nd person and about him in 3rd, as did the booming voice from the sky when speaking to him ("This is my son, hear ye him"). And he did say that his morality was inferior to God's ("Why do you call me good? There is no one good but God.")

But see, all that is when Jesus is fully human. He's also fully divine, which is when he's forgiving sins. The Trinity is the way of having it both ways, which works to smooth out the rough spots of the story.

Anyway, I digress. If Jesus is going around forgiving sins, that means he's either a "demon" as Josh McDowell put it, he's insane along the lines of claiming to "be a poached egg" as C.S. Lewis puts it or he's The Lord.

Now, we all know that anyone claiming to be God must be a demon right? No possibility that, just to spitball out a possibility, that Jesus was picked as Messiah of the week, at first saw an opportunity for his own gain, then his idealistic side kicked in and he thought he could reform an austere religion and make it more gentle and loving for the people, right?





I wonder if Josh McDowell would call Miguel a "demon"?

The other possibility, at least the only one we allow for, is that Jesus was crazy. And we all know that crazy people never get a religious following or get taken seriously as religious leaders, right?

And if Jesus was crazy, how could he have had the sanity to stand in front of a fig tree when figs were out of season and then curse the tree for not bearing fruit? If Jesus was crazy, how could he have been wise enough to use bloody metaphors in his sermon on the mount about cutting your hands off or plucking your own eyes out of they offend you, metaphors taken tragically too literally on occasion. And if Jesus were not completely grounded, how could he give such advice as "love your enemies" and "do good to those who hate you" while condemning any who don't believe in him to eternal Hell?

Clearly, anyone who reads the Gospel accounts must come to the conclusion that Jesus is not crazy nor is he lying but that he must be Lord. After all, why would we not get a complete and clear picture from such credible sources as religious texts?

...Let's see if there's any other arguments I missed...