Trilemma (Lord, Liar, Lunatic?) | Jesus Is Unique

[@debunkingthefundamentalist]

Actually this defense isn't unique and is used to found every religion. As I said to my own people in a recent vid, one of the arguments to the Jesus divinity concept was that he couldn't have been a liar or a lunatic. Well, yes he could have and very easily. How many today claim supernatural occurrences? The entire Burpo family comes to mind with a now twenties man who still believes he went to heaven at four years old even though he never actually died. And how many follow this ministry? How many followed Joseph Smith's claim of being visited by the angel Moroni? He even had eleven signed signatures of witness of later seeing tablets, hearing supernatural voices and such. So no, Jesus and his disciples claming this and that don't mean much--and the fact we actually have no signed signatures of anything or any authorship of anyone else during Jesus life only makes the case look more and more like an urban legend. Cheers, DCF

[@lindseyrae8598]

There’s more evidence for the New Testament, than any of these other religions. For example, all the cities in the new and Old Testament have been found through archaeology. no Mormon cities have been found, or cities mentioned in the Korean.

[@debunkingthefundamentalist]

@@lindseyrae8598 This is a standard apologist defense and it is completely incorrect. Stories were based on historical places yes. But that doesn't mean the events happened. NY exists. Doesn't mean spider man does. What you are doing is classic apologist argument---you are taking a truth and creating another true. It is a logical fallacy. You are making up a truth based on a first truth. Cheers, DCF

[@twinsoultarot473]

"The greatest among you will be your servant." That is lunacy, all the more reason to believe He is God! ;)

[@LHS_Shadow]

What is meant by this is that what the world esteems as good, God does not. Things like money, fame, power, and more.

[@davidmuniz1437]

God is life

[@russelld2925]

Jesus only claimed to be God in the Gospel of John. This is the latest gospel, written as far away as fifty years after his supposed death, and the legend of Jesus had been building for many additional years since Matthew Mark and Luke were written. the greatest claims about Jesus are all in John. most Bible scholars do not consider John to be reliable because of this reason. when you read the gospels in the order they were written, Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John you can see the legend of Jesus building. and if the Miracles and teachings of Jesus on Earth were so amazing why did Paul, whose writings represents the earliest records of Christianity not include anything of Jesus's life or teaching or miracles? I would guess because those ideas about Jesus had not yet developed.

[@jonathanward3633]

It's been a while since you posted that, but I just got here. Here are a small number of occasions Jesus claimed to be God, most of these are not from John - www.equip.org/article/did-jesus-claim-to-be-god/ Also, here is a longer list, although most but not all of these come from John - bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/Divinity-Of-Christ I'm not wanting to start an argument, I respect your opinion even though I think you are mistaken on this point, and I hope you don't see this as me trying to force an alternative view or anything.

[@B.S._Lewis]

The Bible calls Satan a Lord too. Big whoop.

[@justinv6260]

Where did you find that? How you make a claim without providing facts

[@B.S._Lewis]

@@justinv6260 2 Cor 4:4.

[@justinv6260]

@@B.S._Lewis yes the Bible does call him the god of this world. Note the Lower case g. He has been given some authority by God himself. Not once does it mention him as Lord though. Lord is a positional title use to only describe the God and his authority of the universe and of heaven and earth. Even Satan knows and understands this.

[@B.S._Lewis]

@@justinv6260 Which is of higher authority, a lord or a god? Many men have been referred to as lord. Capitalization is a stupid apologetic excuse as the original Greek didn't use capital letters. Fact is the Bible says Satan has authority over all of this world. You asked for biblical evidence and I gave it. Now you want to argue semantics. Stop being childish.

[@justinv6260]

@@B.S._Lewis ok you gave biblical evidence without context. Yeah I know many men have called themselves lord as a positional use or title. To go off your base argument vowels were not use in the original hebrew language therefore YHWH was used either in all caps or lower caps. None the less it was referring to that of supreme higher position. Which is why some men use that term. YHWH was used only to describe God/Adonis creator Supreme being. The everlasting omnipotent, omniscience, omnipresent, holy ect God. The greeks wasnt the first to use the term Lord so not sure why you based your argument using the greek language as opposed to the Hebrew. The Old Testament use numerous different names and titles to refer to God, this was done to emphasize a certain parts of His character, person and attributes. Yes so again the Bible does refer to Satan as the god of this world but even he himself knows who reigns Supreme over him. Satan knows he is limited and he himself even needs to answer to God. That is also in the bible.

[@russelld2925]

What about legend? this is a purposefully deceitful argument, as is everything from Josh McDowell. he pretends to be a skeptic but shows no characteristics of ever being a skeptic and operates purely On Emotion.

[@michaelcarter7079]

Dates that we are taught of the Gospels is Way off. In fact you can go as far back as they were written while Jesus was alive and if the claims of the crucification, death and rising again we're not true, then they would have immediately been rebuttaled against. Instead no body was produced so the skeptics of that day had no Case. There is Roman documents of the troops being dispatched to the tomb and written records of what happened. This event was why we separated our calendars from BC to AC, while this is not attributed to any other figure in history. We also know of the accracy of the Gospels because of how many copies we have and that they read like what would be expected to be read from an investigators prespective in that they are telling the same stories yet taken from different angles and different purposes. Luke is trying to write a document to the Roman leaders about Jesus, Matthew is written to discribe to the Jews about a Jew Named Jesus who is the King that they were waiting for from old testament prophcies, Mark decribes Jesus as King by his acts of service and what he expects his followers to do, and John is seeking to address the gentiles the diety of Jesus Christ. It is much like what happens when a police officer gets reports after an accident takes place. Also when the dead sea scrolls we're rediscovered in the 1990's. They had complete text on the book of Isiaha and yes there were some differences like misspelled words but the context of the writing then matched up the context of what we have in today's Bible. The Bible is the true word of God, and has been critiqued over and over again, yet it still is standing when other historical text has fallen.

[@michaelcarter7079]

@@HoneybunMegapack, Yes, your comment in previous post are mostly correct. Of the books and religions listed, you could refute them with logic and and win the debate, however this is not true with authentic Christianity or the Bible for some of the reasons Inposted above and others. I could get you a link to a letter that proved your point on the book of mormon and refutes your point on the Bible, that was put out by the Smithsonian institution regarding archaeology. In the letter, it claimed that the places and times periods described in the Bible have been proven true, while in the book of mormon, archaeologists have not been able to validate locations or time periods mentioned in the book of mormon. In fact, the letter had a strong reference that as a beginning point to trying to find an ancient location, archeologist have used the bible as a reference point. The Bible has been criticized or critiqued many times in the past, yet has been able to stand up to scrutiny. One of the biggest proves of the accuracy of the Bible is that its filled with prophecies so detailed that the claims could be put to the test to be proven or falsified. No other book has this type of power. The bible as a whole was also written by at least 40 known authors writing 66 separate books, over the course of thousands of years and on four continents, and with different socio-economic backgrounds, from Kings all the way down to Shepards, yet their is no contridictions in its story and its views on who Jesus Christ was and is. 39 books found in old testiment, 27 found in new testiment. Compared to other religious books, they are usually written by one or two authors and do have contridictions in their books. The Koran is a great example of this. One area it deals with loving your enemies, and in other areas it tells the readers to kill or treat enemies as second class citizens.

[@michaelcarter7079]

@@HoneybunMegapack, what are a few contridictions have you found? Please post so we have something to go on. Read my other post to as I gave links to a list of prophecies fulfilled by Jesus Christ.

[@michaelcarter7079]

@@HoneybunMegapack, there is evidence for the flood. There are mutiple cities that are currently underwater. The pancake layers evidence at Grand Canyon and other location are formed by mud, land and marine fossils mixed together even on the highest mountains.

[@braxtonclaypool6147]

@@HoneybunMegapack Hi, I saw that you used the argument earlier, of leaders of certain world religions not recanting their beliefs before death, and thus their religions continued, but I would like to point out, (seeing as you have implied your atheism, which implies a belief in evolution) Charles Darwin did recant his belief in evolution, but people still held on to it, and it is still a belief today. Also, seeing as you are pulling (from what I've seen) from "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins, I would like to also rebuttal the belief that religion caused the major conflicts of the world. If we look historically, Eugenics was first brought up by Charles Darwin's Francis Galton, a cousin of Charles Darwin. He brought these things up, in light of his new-founded belief in Evolution. he believed that in order for humans to advance any further, we had to kill off the black and dark skinned races. This directly led to Hitler killing and torturing millions of people, and starting a world war. It also led to The American Birth Control League (now known as Planned Parenthood) , who would sterilize women against their will, and would promote abortion for purposes of eugenics. So, debatably, the worst world conflicts are actually caused by the lack of religion, and not by religion itself. Sorry for the long comment. I hope that you took the time to read it though. I would love to talk this through with you, hear any questions you may have, and try to understand why you believe what you believe also. I hope you have a nice day!

[@Sebastian_Gecko]

obviously, jesus isn't god... but i don't really understand why you are a demon when you tell people you are god... jesus was blilliant. he told people some shit and now, thousands of years later, he has billions of followers... whats wrong with that, he just wanted to make the world a better place.

[@upwk7]

Jezus isnt God.