Today we will explore a very basic principle of apologetics: Lunatic Liar, or Lord. I like to add Legend to the list, for it to fits within this theory. This looks at the possibilities of Jesus’ story of being God’s son here in human form.
Lunatic
Theory: In this example, Jesus is just a crazy person that actually believes that He is God in human form but actually is not; He is merely a man.
Let’s play with this a little bit. OK so Jesus is just plain crazy. I am not an expert on crazy, despite what my friends say, but what do you think the chances are that a crazy person could live a sinless life? When Jesus asked ‘Which of you can convict me of Sin?’ and no one spoke, I would say that is near impossible for someone who is not in their right mind to pull off. That would be very hard to do indeed; especially when you have twelve people following you around all day observing you.
Speaking of the twelve disciples, do you not think that they would have noticed that this guy is crazy? Can you imagine what they would have been thinking if they would not have witnessed Jesus’ greatness for themselves? They would have had to have been a bit nutty themselves to follow him if He was crazy. When was the last time you saw a group for thirteen crazy people managing to go down the street and not get arrested or in their day stoned to death! When they witnessed Jesus making the blind see and the blind guy comes back going “Um…Jesus….it didn’t work…” they would have had a clue that Jesus was not all that He said He was.
Perhaps Judas was the only one that figured this out and came to his senses, but then why would he hang himself? If this was true, he did the correct thing and turned in a blasphemer.
It is so impossible for Jesus to have led the life He did and do the things He did if He was Crazy.
Liar
Theory: Jesus was a liar. He knew that he was not the messiah, but he just chose to say it to gain some fame and popularity.
This one is even harder to believe. Again how hard would it be for someone who knew he was not the son of God and lying about it to live a perfect life? And when it came to the crucifixion, don’t you think He would have piped up in there and said “Didn’t mean it! It was all a joke!” but He never did, instead He prayed for them. Think about it! A liar, with only self pride as motivation for making up this lie, is willing to be put to a very torturous death to maintain His lie. Not going to happen!
But let’s say he actually did manage to pull that off; how did he fool the disciples into believing it? Were they in on it too then? If so, don’t you think one of them would have cracked when they were being put to death or before they got to the point that Judas hung himself?
Bah, not a chance that no one would have spilled the beans when they were being tortured, so I am writing this one off and fiction too.
Legend
Theory: Jesus was merely a great man and teacher, however, during the years that followed his life the stories grew and he became a god through legend.
While this very subject is coming up in a ‘The Bible’ post, I will be happy to give a bit of a preview. Well simply it is just not true. The books of the bible and the first church began to form within a handful of years after His death. Yes, I did say handful, not decades or centuries. There is great time evidence that shows some of the first letters that became the gospels beginning to surface in churches and gatherings within three to five years after the crucifixion. The actual gospels were written in the decades to follow as the disciples traveled to spread the word. Even in those decades, the people who knew Jesus, and even those enemies of Jesus, that would have boldly stood up and debunked any legendary aspects of the gospels.
Did you know that the authoritative biography of Alexander the Great was written 500 years after the death of Alexander? 500 years! It is considered to be 100% accurate! Wow, that is some fine research! Funny thing is that we can accept that, but can’t accept books that were written 10-30 years later that were based on letters and information that was produced within 3-10 years after His death.
Lord
Well…I have run out of options. Jesus was not a crazed lunatic, a self promoting liar, or merely a legend created over time. No, He is none of those. So what’s left? Oh yes, LORD!
It has been nearly 2000 years since His death and no one has been able to prove anything different! Don’t you think that if someone would have found the proof that Christianity is off its rocker, that it would be the biggest news on the planet? 2000 years and nothing!
Guess we really only have one option then…
In His love,
Hunter
Great presentation Hunter. Keep up the good work and may God’s blessings abound to you in your ministry.
Tim
Well, at least one can give you partial credit for adding to the ridiculous “Lunatic, Liar or Lord” choices given by C.S. Lewis. Of course there are all kinds of options not included in that false “trilemma.”
Nonetheless, we do not really know when, or even if, there was really a Jesus. All we have are the NT accounts, and none of those can be demonstrated to have been written by eyewitnesses. We know Mark was not an eyewitness, and paradoxically the evidence indicates that both Matthew and Luke are simply revised and expanded versions of Mark, and John depicts quite a different Jesus from the Synoptics. Paul, who is considered the earliest NT writer, never knew an earthly Jesus at all, but only has his supposedly revelatory visions. He never places Jesus in an historical time frame.
Interestingly, we have no unquestionable, contemporary and “secular” outside evidence for the existence of Jesus. That does not mean that there might not have been some teacher who somehow sparked the eventual appearance of “Jesus” stories, but his name might not even have been Jesus — if in fact he existed.
And strangely enough, in the letters of Paul we can already see there was disagreement about doctrine. Paul bickers with the “Jerusalem” church and even with those in Christian congregations who do not believe as he believes — for example, those who did not believe in resurrection. Paul never mentions a virgin birth, and never mentions an empty tomb, both very pertinent topics.
Welcome Hokku,
So you contend that everyone is wrong and Jesus did not even exist or that the legend or some teacher is what we now call Jesus Christ.
Why would 10 of the disciples be willing to be put to death for a legendary person that they did not know first hand, but yet said they did? Or why would Judas hang himself in betrayal over a figment of moden legend imagination? I find that very hard to believe.
Even the Jewish faith, which does not call Jesus the messiah, has record of a man named Jesus and they agree with almost all the known facts of his life and death. Admittidly they do not accept the resurection, but the evidence that there was a person named Jesus who acted in a certain manor and belief hold quite true. Jewish text can be found by Flavius Josephus which names Jesus dated around 93 AD, a mere 60 years after the death of Jesus.
I just find it a little hard to believe that the man did not exist at all, and if he did, with all the remaining facts, I find it hard to believe that he was a liar, lunatic, or legend.
God bless,
Hunter
Hunter wrote:
“Why would 10 of the disciples be willing to be put to death for a legendary person that they did not know first hand, but yet said they did? Or why would Judas hang himself in betrayal over a figment of moden legend imagination? I find that very hard to believe.”
We do not really know who was or was not put to death. But nonetheless your question deserves an answer. People are quite willing to die for illusions and fantasies; consider the Jim Jones cult, or even those who died for early Mormonism. The simple fact that someone is willing to die for a belief says nothing at all about the validity of that belief.
You added:
“Even the Jewish faith, which does not call Jesus the messiah, has record of a man named Jesus and they agree with almost all the known facts of his life and death.”
Not really. Early Jewish stories depict a Jesus figure who was the illegitimate son of a Roman soldier named Panthera. He is depicted as a sorcerer who hid a parchment inside a cut in his leg. This all supposedly took place in a time when Israel was ruled by a woman named Helene [not historical]. There is no evidence at all that any of it is historical.
Jewish text can be found by Flavius Josephus which name Jesus. These texts are dated around 93 AD, a mere 60 years after the death of Jesus.
Scholars have known for years that the “Testimonium Flavianum” is the result of Christian interpolation. One can see that simply from the fact that Josephus says Jesus “was the Christ.” Josephus was not a Christian and would not have said such a thing. Evidence for the presence of the full interpolation first appears in Eusebius in the 4th century — so it really has no bearing on matter — it cannot be trusted at all.
It is true that men have died for what they believe to be fact which really wasn’t. But when you compare the actions of the disciples vs. the “norm” of crazy suicidal for a cause people, I just don’t see how we can really compare the two that way. Take for example the suicide bombers. It is very true they are dying for their cause, but that is not what God wants or the disciples did. And you can throw in the tales of the suicide cults that are going to meet the mother ship that we hear about, but that too is not what the disciples did.
Sorry my friend, with all the information out there and the new information that archeology is uncovering, I just don’t think I can buy into your fact that there is no actual evidence that Jesus truly existed and so we should not believe.
Good luck though and God Bless,
Hunter
You wrote:
“…with all the information out there and the new information that archeology is uncovering, I just don’t think I can buy into your fact that there is no actual evidence that Jesus truly existed and so we should not believe.”
I note that you have presented no valid evidence in support of your claim, so it remains simply your will to believe, unsupported by evidence.
Hokku,
There is a vast number of materials and formats that you can view to get into further research. The more popular names that come to mind is Lee Strobel and Josh McDowell. McDowell’s ‘The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict’ might be a great place for you to start if you have not looked it over yet.
I invite you to come visit this site and keep in touch. I hope in time that the facts posted here will answer the questions you have.
It is clear that you have done a good amount of reading already. I am sure you will be able to find what you are looking for.
God bless,
Hunter
You wrote:
“There is a vast number of materials and formats that you can view to get into further research. The more popular names that come to mind is Lee Strobel and Josh McDowell. McDowell’s ‘The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict’ might be a great place for you to start if you have not looked it over yet.”
You are getting a very distorted picture from those books. McDowells arguments have long been discredited, and Strobel, the more recent favorite flavor in Christian bookstores, presents no stronger arguments (by the way, I have read both authors).
If you really want to see what archeology says, read books such as The Bible Unearthed, by Finkelstein and Silberman, an archeologist and a historican. You cannot just read fundamentalist books and expect them to tell you the truth, because their purpose is to promote dogma, not to reveal the facts.
On that same note, if we read authors who have other agendas, we will see a slant in the other direction. That is just common sense. I fully concede that there is a plethora of authors who do not agree with Christianity. This book falls squarely in that category, but does that mean that it is correct and all the Christian historians such as McRay are instantly wrong? That would be close-minded and foolish.
‘The Bible Unearthed’ opens with religion being “but a brilliant product of the human imagination.” you can quickly picture what Finkelstein and Silberman’s take is. As you like to state, just because it is written does not make it true. You have come and merely stated that Jesus cannot be proven and offer no real facts of your own to support your case. You appear to just want to debunk anything I state as fiction without proof of it being so.
I am not someone who has always believed in Christ, and I had some very valid arguments against believing; a few I still seek answers for today. However, when I began to look closer, with an open mind and heart, I had to change my view. I fear that you have come to argue to be proven right more than for spiritual growth, without the openness to see another point of view. My goal, while I would love to assist you in finding faith, is not to argue blindly over various books. It is to assist people who want to find answers and to assist Christians to be able to give them. In continuing, I fear that I will wander from that path.
I truly do hope you find what it is that you don’t even know you are looking for yet.
God bless,
Hunter
The solution to your problem is to read books on ALL points of view, to compare them, and to form hypotheses, and to test those hypotheses against the facts.
If you just read fundamentalist books you will only keep your mind filled with fundamentalist distortions, and will never get out of the morass. Their only purpose is to promote fundamentalism (and often to make cash off the gullible).
You can easily find online sites that discredit the arguments of McDowell and Strobel. Have you read them, as I have read the points of view of both authors?
You owe it to yourself (and to others you might influence).
And we both have something we agree on! 🙂
Like I said, I was not always a Christian and did my fair share of reading.
I wish you the best!
God bless,
Hunter
Just a quick note to add that point of view is very important it would be very unfair for Hokku to claim impartial objectivity when “Arguments” that he present are supported with things like “It has been well documented” or “this argument has been discredited” just remember that this is not the case simply because he said so there has to be actual reasonable evidence that can be examined and then confirmed if it is correct. On the Note of Josephus and addition to the text which says that Jesus is “Christ” whist number of scholars raise the same issue as you do non of them dismiss all references to Jesus that Josephus brings to the text. That is at the minimum misunderstanding at worst deliberate distortion what the books are saying.
On the points of Origins of Gospels I have to add it looks like you have only had one-sided presentation have not heard from the other side of the argument. There is no evidence that all sources used one particular text that is a presupposition which is frequently debated and whilst will prove to be interesting you would not expect me to argue Christianity the same way you argue against it.
On the point that Paul never mentioned Virgin Birth of Jesus of Empty tomb are both inaccurate statements first Paul clearly puts it that “If there is no bodily resurrection of Christ we are very said and deluded Christians” Secondly Paul mentions countless times in his epistles that Jesus was a son of God which has clear inference that he is not a son of Roman solder or Joseph but God’s Son. My question would be simple “How did you think he came to that conclusion” Whilst there is so much of you argument that is practicing faulty logic, I think it only fair to say I don’t blame you it is obvious that from your research your objective is primarily focusing on disproving the existence of Historical Jesus or would like to eliminate if at all possible option that this is historically verifiable.
There are numerous other non biblical sources of Jesus yes some are written post Jesus but this does not mean that they are not trustworthy and you should also remember fact that someone is a believer does not make him unsuitable to give evidence that can then be examined. If you look closely at the text that is given to us as a Bible you will find that names and events in the Bible are both historically and archeologically verifiable but I guess you would know that already it’s shame that one can claim to be rational, impartial and objective but then refuse to accept other peoples viewpoints simply because “there are other web sights that disprove Josh McDowell” that is not an argument just because someone does not like Josh or say things against Josh does not make them right. In the same way you would be disappointed if one was disputing your arguments based on something else or somebody else that may have said staff contrary to your statements.
In the same way you would like to encourage others to be honest in their search can I do the same to you, forsake you preconceived ideas, let your presuppositions rest on the altar of reason that you seam to worship and ask this question yourself, is Bible giving me a logical and reasonable information that I could analyze, understand and test the answer would have to be yes. And please there are many other great Christian writers that I would recommend.
Here is a small list for you:
• Tim Keller – The reason for God,
• Gary Habermas Doctor of Philosophy and theology http://www.garyhabermas.com/.
• FF Bruce on The new testament documents (Professor of Christian theology) and
• Writings of Ravi Zacharias you can find more about him under following web pages http://www.rzim.org/ .
Kind regards
Defend the word
[…] are links to articles that expand this line of thought: Beyond Faith Ministry, Apologetics 101: Lunatic, Liar, Legend, or Lord? Who is Jesus…Really, Claims: What did […]