Was Jesus a Liar?

A

A.T.

New Member
Hi Everyone. I’ve been studying the “Lord, Lunatic or Liar” (sometimes called the trilemma) argument. As I understand it, the argument is as follows:

1. Jesus was either Lord, a lunatic or a liar.
2. Jesus was not a lunatic or a liar.
3. Therefore, Jesus was lord.

My question is about the second premise—that Jesus was not a lunatic or a liar. Since Jesus was rejected by men, and since his life ended in crucifixion, he almost certainly wouldn’t have had an incentive to intentionally lie about who he was. However, how can we know that Jesus wasn’t a lunatic? I see three possibilities:

1. The evidence points overwhelmingly in the direction that Jesus wasn’t a lunatic.
2. The evidence points overwhelmingly in the direction that Jesus was a lunatic.
3. The evidence does not point overwhelmingly in either direction.

As a disclaimer, even though I believe the basic story line of the historical books within the New Testament is true, I don’t think the first premise in the “Lord, lunatic or liar” is valid, because there are there are theoretical alternatives (especially that the Jesus of the Bible was a legend, or that he never claimed to be all that people believe he is).
 
A

Algernon

Active member
A.T. said:
Hi Everyone. I’ve been studying the “Lord, Lunatic or Liar” (sometimes called the trilemma) argument. As I understand it, the argument is as follows:

1. Jesus was either Lord, a lunatic or a liar.
2. Jesus was not a lunatic or a liar.
3. Therefore, Jesus was lord.

My question is about the second premise—that Jesus was not a lunatic or a liar. Since Jesus was rejected by men, and since his life ended in crucifixion, he almost certainly wouldn’t have had an incentive to intentionally lie about who he was. However, how can we know that Jesus wasn’t a lunatic? I see three possibilities:

1. The evidence points overwhelmingly in the direction that Jesus wasn’t a lunatic.
2. The evidence points overwhelmingly in the direction that Jesus was a lunatic.
3. The evidence does not point overwhelmingly in either direction.

As a disclaimer, even though I believe the basic story line of the historical books within the New Testament is true, I don’t think the first premise in the “Lord, lunatic or liar” is valid, because there are there are theoretical alternatives (especially that the Jesus of the Bible was a legend, or that he never claimed to be all that people believe he is).
Click to expand...
Lewis' trilemma is a product of faulty reasoning. That so many buy into it is a product of willful ignorance and motivated "reasoning".

1) Jesus never claimed to be God.
2) Jesus called all His followers to make themselves sons of God as He was a son of God. For example:

Matthew 5
9“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.

Luke 6
35“But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return; and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High; for He Himself is kind to ungrateful and evil men.
 
A

American Gothic

Well-known member
A.T. said:
Jesus was rejected by men
Click to expand...
He was rejected by His own people/Nation
and it was done in a very systematic way

I believe the basic story line of the historical books within the New Testament is true
Click to expand...
you would have to deal with the NT accounts relative to OT history and the prophecies concerning Messiah

Jesus was not a lunatic or a liar
Click to expand...
If NT accounts are accurate and the teaching of Jesus was of value, it would have to be explained
how a liar or lunatic would or could have taught as He did


Algernon said:
1) Jesus never claimed to be God.
2) Jesus called all His followers to make themselves sons of God as He was a son of God. For example:
Click to expand...

if Jesus is Savior
only God is Savior Isaiah 43:11

to be a child of God one must be born of the will of God
all mankind since Adam (Messiah exception) are born of the will of the flesh
our efforts don't make us children of God or give us a place in His family
 
E

Eightcrackers

Well-known member
A.T. said:
Hi Everyone. I’ve been studying the “Lord, Lunatic or Liar” (sometimes called the trilemma) argument. As I understand it, the argument is as follows:

1. Jesus was either Lord, a lunatic or a liar.
2. Jesus was not a lunatic or a liar.
3. Therefore, Jesus was lord.

My question is about the second premise—that Jesus was not a lunatic or a liar. Since Jesus was rejected by men, and since his life ended in crucifixion, he almost certainly wouldn’t have had an incentive to intentionally lie about who he was. However, how can we know that Jesus wasn’t a lunatic? I see three possibilities:

1. The evidence points overwhelmingly in the direction that Jesus wasn’t a lunatic.
2. The evidence points overwhelmingly in the direction that Jesus was a lunatic.
3. The evidence does not point overwhelmingly in either direction.

As a disclaimer, even though I believe the basic story line of the historical books within the New Testament is true, I don’t think the first premise in the “Lord, lunatic or liar” is valid, because there are there are theoretical alternatives (especially that the Jesus of the Bible was a legend, or that he never claimed to be all that people believe he is).
Click to expand...
The trilemma omits the fourth "L": Legend.

For example, when you say "Jesus had no reason to lie", you assume that he actually said the things attributed to him.
 
A

Algernon

Active member
Fred said:
Yes, He did.
Since only God is the proper recipient of prayer and Jesus taught that He is the proper recipient of prayer (John 14:14) constitutes a claim to be God.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you need to hold in your mind what I wrote about motivated "reasoning" and consider what the words in John 14:14 actually say vs what you've chosen to read into it.
 
A

Algernon

Active member
Eightcrackers said:
"Fact"?
Click to expand...
Just as Jesus calls for all of His followers to become sons of God as He was a son of God, there's also the fact that Jesus calls for all of His followers to be "resurrected" as He was "resurrected". Jesus was speaking figuratively. In creating the mythology about Jesus that the NT writers wrapped around the words spoken by Jesus while He preached His gospel, they repeatedly took things Jesus said figuratively and made them literal. As a couple of more examples: giving "sight" to the "blind", bringing the "dead" to "life".
 
A

Algernon

Active member
Fred said:
John 14:14
If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it.

www.biblegateway.com

Bible Gateway passage: John 14:14 - New American Standard Bible 1995

If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it.
www.biblegateway.com www.biblegateway.com
Click to expand...
Nothing about "prayer". No claim to be God. Only you and and your motivated "reasoning".

Like I said,
"Perhaps you need to hold in your mind what I wrote about motivated "reasoning" and consider what the words in John 14:14 actually say vs what you've chosen to read into it."
 
F

Fred

Well-known member
Algernon said:
Nothing about "prayer".
Click to expand...
Wrong.
That's like saying there is nothing about prayer in the use of "ask" in John 15:16.

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (TDNT): The unity of the Son with the Father finds expressions in the fact that prayer in the name of Jesus can be directed to either Father or Son (5:276, onoma, Hans Bietenhard).
 
A

Algernon

Active member
Fred said:
Wrong.

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (TDNT): The unity of the Son with the Father finds expressions in the fact that prayer in the name of Jesus can be directed to either Father or Son (5:276, onoma, Hans Bietenhard).
Click to expand...
Okay. You've convinced me. You don't care what John 14:14 actually says or doesn't say.
 
C

Caroljeen

Well-known member
Eightcrackers said:
The trilemma omits the fourth "L": Legend.

For example, when you say "Jesus had no reason to lie", you assume that he actually said the things attributed to him.
Click to expand...
Jesus said that his works (healings, miracles, deliverance from demon possession, etc) prove that his words were true. But then you don't believe his works so why would you believe his words.

John 10: 24-25 So the Jews gathered around him and said to him, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Messiah, tell us plainly.” 25 Jesus answered, “I have told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father’s name testify to me
 
E

Eightcrackers

Well-known member
Caroljeen said:
Jesus said that his works (healings, miracles, deliverance from demon possession, etc) prove that his words were true.
Click to expand...
1. did he say this, and
2. did he do these works

?

I see no good reason to think the answer to either question is a settled "yes".
Caroljeen said:
But then you don't believe his works so why would you believe his words.
Click to expand...
It's not that I don't believe his words; it's that I don't believe that they are his words.
Caroljeen said:
John 10: 24-25 So the Jews gathered around him and said to him, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Messiah, tell us plainly.” 25 Jesus answered, “I have told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father’s name testify to me
Click to expand...
As soon as we can confirm that he said this, we'll be able to discuss it.
 
C

Caroljeen

Well-known member
Eightcrackers said:
1. did he say this, and
2. did he do these works

?

I see no good reason to think the answer to either question is a settled "yes".

It's not that I don't believe his words; it's that I don't believe that they are his words.

As soon as we can confirm that he said this, we'll be able to discuss it.
Click to expand...
The confirmation you require won't happen until he returns or at your death. Either way it will be too late. ☹️
 
C

Caroljeen

Well-known member
Eightcrackers said:
Why?
You got yours, didn't you?
Click to expand...
Yes, I did.
I was wrong. I'm giving up on you too soon.
Let me rephase it. The confirmation you require won't happen until you come to the end of yourself and ask God for help, even if it is only "God, if you exist, please help me" plea, or when he returns, or at your death. It's never too late to sincerely seek God.

We can put this discussion on the shelf until you get your confirmation that God exists and the words attributed to Jesus are truly his.
 
E

Eightcrackers

Well-known member
Caroljeen said:
Yes, I did.
I was wrong. I'm giving up on you too soon.
Let me rephase it. The confirmation you require won't happen until you come to the end of yourself and ask God for help, even if it is only "God, if you exist, please help me" plea, or when he returns, or at your death. It's never too late to sincerely seek God.
Click to expand...
Do you seek things that you don't think

1. you need, and
2. exist

?

If not, why would I seek your god?

"I will only appear to those that seek", he says? Well, unfortunately, he made me so that I will only seek that which appears.
Caroljeen said:
We can put this discussion on the shelf until you get your confirmation that God exists and the words attributed to Jesus are truly his.
Click to expand...
But since your process is backwards - "seek, then evidence", instead of "evidence, then seek" - this has no chance of happening...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top