Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 29, 2024, 10:46 am

Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 4 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Trilemma
#1
The Trilemma
In another thread, rbumbalough mentioned the Christians love for the "Trilemma", as argued by C.S. Lewis and other apologists.

The apology goes something like this: Jesus claimed to be God. Since Jesus made this claim, we can only conclude that he must either be a liar (he said he was God when he knew he was not), a lunatic (he thought he was God when he was not) or Lord. We can't call him a "wise teacher" or a "great moral philosopher" and yet reject his claim of divinity. He did not leave this option open to us.

Let me start by saying it is true that many non-believers do praise Jesus as a moral teacher. I've even known some "atheist Christians", those who say they follow Jesus' teachings but don't believe in any of the superstition. Further, I agree with the statement that you can't have one without the other. To reject the claims of divinity, the salvation scheme or the miracles of Jesus is to virtually reject the entire story. Anyone who clings to the picture of the wise and loving Jesus who preached a message of peace and charity that can work independently of the religion is probably someone who's understanding of Jesus is more molded by pop culture than scripture.

Put bluntly, our society tends to view Jesus through rose-colored glasses. The romanticized view of Jesus is so pervasive that even skeptics and other non-believers may be inclined to believe that somehow Christians who persecuted, hated and killed in his name have somehow been getting it wrong all these years.

You have to consciously rip off these rose-colored glasses and read the Gospels with a critical eye, as if you were an outsider learning of Jesus for the first time with no preconceived ideas. Once I was able to do so, I concluded that Jesus, to put it kindly, is highly overrated as a philosopher or moral teacher.

First of all, he isn't consistent with applying his own standards to himself. He tells a rich man to sell all he has and give to the poor (Mark 10:21). But when a rich family is lavishing on him, he says essentially to screw the poor, they'll always be around but he won't (Mark 14:6). He tells us to forgive others (Luke 6:37) but throws a tantrum and condemns entire cities where he was rejected (Matt 11:21).

Second, some of his moral advice he offers isn't practical to say the least. Love your enemies? Do good to those who harm you? Pray for those who mistreat you? Who are we kidding? If Christians had actually practiced any of these teachings, the religion would have been wiped out long ago. Other moral teachings were gruesome to say the least. His vaunted "Sermon on the Mount" included prescriptions for self-mutilation, teachings that have turned out to be tragic for those who take them a little too literally.

Thirdly, the good advice he offered wasn't terribly original or so insightful as to require a divine mind to conceive them. "Love your neighbor as yourself" is straight out of Leviticus (19:18). With Jesus' teachings, what was good wasn't original and what was original wasn't good.

Fourthly, some of the advice was either immoral or missed key moral issues that a divine mind should have commented on. In one parable, he says a king commands all those who do not wish to be ruled by him to be slain (19:27) and he seems fine with that. He often used slaves in his parables and at one point says the one who doesn't obey his master's will should be beaten with many stripes (Luke 12:46-47). He says nothing on abolishing slavery, nothing on gender equality and certainly nothing on democracy.

Finally, he expresses a poor understanding of how the natural universe operates. He could have admonished some basic concepts of hygiene but instead lets people think illness is caused by demonic possession. He believes in the story of Noah's Ark (Luke 17:26-27). He thinks the moon is a light source (Matt 24:29). His lineage is traced back to a literal Adam (Luke 3:38).

I mention all of this for the proper context in which to discuss the Trilemma. More on this later. ***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
Reply
#2
RE: The Trilemma
Since it's a false trilemma, that is, there are more than three possibilities, nonChristians can freely cherrypick the 'good stuff' from the teachings while discarding the 'bad stuff'. It's only people who think the story is literally true who have to take the bad with the good.
Reply
#3
RE: The Trilemma
Christians apparently never heard of the Bifurcation fallacy.
Reply
#4
RE: The Trilemma
I could never find a passage in the Bible where Jesus says he is god.
Reply
#5
RE: The Trilemma
***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***
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
Reply
#6
RE: The Trilemma
The "trilema" is a bogus argument...it is completely grounded in the idea that Jesus actually existed in a physical human form.

the argument all falls to shit once you give out the FOURTH answer...the correct one..."or Jesus was merely a fictional character".
Reply
#7
RE: The Trilemma
(January 17, 2012 at 12:27 pm)Shell B Wrote: I could never find a passage in the Bible where Jesus says he is god.

Found this showing what one religious group sees...

http://www.godonthe.net/evidence/said_god.htm
Even if the open windows of science at first make us shiver after the cozy indoor warmth of traditional humanizing myths, in the end the fresh air brings vigor, and the great spaces have a splendor of their own - Bertrand Russell
Reply
#8
RE: The Trilemma
***Continued from above***

So having covered that the liar or lunatic strawmen are just that, let's get to the "Lord" possibility. What exactly did Jesus claim again?

First of all, good luck ever knowing the true story of Jesus or what he said, assuming he existed at all. He wrote nothing down in his own lifetime (one wonders just what kept him so busy during the first 30 years of life that documenting his message for posterity had to be put off and finally, 40 years after his death, delegated to third hand accounts). This alone seems a curiosity since we have the books of Moses and Paul, neither of whom claimed to be divine.

The job of relating the teachings of Jesus for posterity fell to Mark, who was a companion of Paul, who saw Jesus in a vision. Where Mark got his information is left to speculation but let's give him the benefit of the doubt and say he got it from surviving disciples, those that were still alive 40 years later, whatever they could clearly remember.

So we've got hearsay of hearsay? No, actually it's worse than that. We're assuming we can take Christian claims of authorship at face value and that Mark is indeed the author of the Gospel that bears his name. In reality, "Mark" is a source allegedly a companion of Paul who heard what Jesus said from other unknown witnesses based on what they could remember 40 years after the events?

"Reliable Eye-Witness Accounts" should be made of sterner stuff.

***Conclusion coming soon***
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
Reply
#9
RE: The Trilemma
Faithnomore, they read funny. *wrinkles nose* That is all interpretation. He came right out and said a shitload of things. "I am god" is not one of them. That is all I can find too. Passages that say, "I'm like my dad." being interpreted as, "I am my dad."
Reply
#10
RE: The Trilemma
Yeah, I honestly expected to find statements that were completely unambiguous with the J-man saying, "I am God." Just more internal inconsistency fom Christianity.
Even if the open windows of science at first make us shiver after the cozy indoor warmth of traditional humanizing myths, in the end the fresh air brings vigor, and the great spaces have a splendor of their own - Bertrand Russell
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  The Trilemma YahwehIsTheWay 34 3071 December 5, 2018 at 4:22 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)