Jesus Who?

5

Now it’s time for a new series. In the spirit of the holidays, we’ll be looking at what little we know about Jesus, if there even was such a person.

While I obviously haven’t believed in the virgin birth, miracles, or resurrection for quite a while, I withheld judgment on whether or not there was an historical Jesus until just a few months ago when I became convinced of the evidence that Jesus is not a historical character.

C.S. Lewis had something interesting to say about this in Mere Christianity:

I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: “I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept His claim to be God.” That is the one thing we must not say. A man who said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.

So Jesus is God, a liar, or insane…seriously? I can think of a few other options, how about legendary exaggeration of an historical character or a completely mythic fabrication.

Hopefully I’ll get the first piece of this up today, if not you can expect it soon.

5 Comments


  1. Looking forward to your series on the historicity of jebus. Most of what I've found on line is pro, in a pathetic and unsatisfying attempt at verificatiion. Fill us in.
    Never was able to get thru the entirety of any of C.S. His paragraph you printed is a good example of why. Typically, of the pious, he gives you two, set in stone, choices. 1) a lunatic or 2) a "fall at his feet" diety.
    I do agree with C.S. that he was no "great human teacher".
    The last thing I clung to, as a child, in trying to justify his existence was his (supposedly) uttering the Golden Rule. Quite profound, huh? You know how that turned out with a little research! That fat lady hath sung.
    Sure, this jubus dude is based on something, all the illusionary messiahs and pagan mythology that preceeded him. We still have them altho they now find it a bit more difficult convincing the gullible with that damnable science in their way.


  2. Yes, Lewis's options are childishly simple, and are meant to steer his readers to the choice he wants them to choose. Only a simpleton cannot think of many more than the three choices he gives. One must remember that Lewis was an apologist. That means, in english, that he was a salesman for Christian supernaturalism.

    Cheers! RichGriese.NET


  3. Grasshoppa – I have read a few C.S. Lewis books, granted that was when I was a Christian. When I agreed with him, I found the books quite enjoyable. However, when I was trying to use Mere Christianity to restore my faith and help me develop an apologetic model for reaching atheists it failed. Miserably. His arguments are based on some rather unsubstantiated logical jumps that he even acknowledges, but in such away that he hopes you'll keep going until you reach the punch line and accept it.

    Rich – Very well said.


  4. Looking forward to your series on the historicity of jebus. Most of what I've found on line is pro, in a pathetic and unsatisfying attempt at verificatiion. Fill us in.
    Never was able to get thru the entirety of any of C.S. His paragraph you printed is a good example of why. Typically, of the pious, he gives you two, set in stone, choices. 1) a lunatic or 2) a "fall at his feet" diety.
    I do agree with C.S. that he was no "great human teacher".
    The last thing I clung to, as a child, in trying to justify his existence was his (supposedly) uttering the Golden Rule. Quite profound, huh? You know how that turned out with a little research! That fat lady hath sung.
    Sure, this jubus dude is based on something, all the illusionary messiahs and pagan mythology that preceeded him. We still have them altho they now find it a bit more difficult convincing the gullible with that damnable science in their way.


  5. Yes, Lewis's options are childishly simple, and are meant to steer his readers to the choice he wants them to choose. Only a simpleton cannot think of many more than the three choices he gives. One must remember that Lewis was an apologist. That means, in english, that he was a salesman for Christian supernaturalism.

    Cheers! RichGriese.NET

Comments are closed.