Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Sephiroth · 03-13-2002, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DRFseven:


Oh, Sephiroth, don't you realize that it's just all beyond us? God works in mysterious ways! It only APPEARS irrational because we're stuck with human brains that are incapable of figuring out God-stuff. And, anyway, we're probably just bitter because we've been hurt very badly in some way, and that is what is preventing us from accepting God. This is evident in the way we are obsessed with discussing God; if we really didn't believe, we wouldn't care enough to discuss it. We have a very negative view of life!

Spoken like a true Christian

.

luvluv · 03-13-2002, 03:57 PM

Umm... what's the trilema?

Mike I guess you've read the book then?

And is the book online? I can't find it.

[ March 13, 2002: Message edited by: luvluv ]

Pomp · 03-13-2002, 04:05 PM

luvluv,

Umm... what's the trilema?

The Trilemma (also know as the Liar-Lunatic-Lord argument)is the pseudo-argument that, taking the Gospels at face value, Jesus said he was God, and, therefore, one of these three things must be true:

He really was God.
He was a liar.
He was a lunatic

The apologist then goes on to present various arguments regarding why he could not have been lying or deranged. These usually deal with the notion that Jesus was a "great moral teacher" and that such a person could not possibly be a liar or a lunatic. Having eliminated these two choices, the apologist goes on to conclude that Jesus really was God, thus proving Christianity to be the One True Faith.

Rather than dissecting the argument myself, I want to ask you if you can see the glaring holes in it? I've got three broad categories of objections to the Trilemma in mind. I'm not being rude (or pompous), by the way, I honestly want to know what you think of it.

Edit: PS - I'd still like to see how you respond to the latest posts in the other thread on Lewis.

[ March 13, 2002: Message edited by: Pompous Bastard ]

luvluv · 03-13-2002, 04:42 PM

I just gave my overly-verbose response.

I never gave a lot of thought to the Trilema. I guess one of the ways you guys find around it is just to claim that Jesus never existed, or to say he never said the things atributed to him.

It's not really of much interest to me, the Trilema is not even close to the main argument of this book. Micheal, I hope you got further than that.

Again, does anyone know if the book is online?

luvluv · 03-13-2002, 04:46 PM

By the way, thanks Michael I'll look those up.

Vorkosigan · 03-13-2002, 10:57 PM

Originally posted by luvluv:
.

I never gave a lot of thought to the Trilema. I guess one of the ways you guys find around it is just to claim that Jesus never existed, or to say he never said the things atributed to him.

Now you're thinkin' like a skeptic. Next thing you know, you'll be ordering our t-shirt...

It's not really of much interest to me, the Trilema is not even close to the main argument of this book.

Yes, but when the author starts out with an argument that bad, you know the rest isn't going anywhere. Lewis is like Josh McDowell, only with better diction.

Michael, I hope you got further than that.

Yes, years ago. I read it after Screwtape, a book I have always liked. But I bopped around the web and skimmed some reviews of the Problem of Pain, just to double check.

[b]Again, does anyone know if the book is online?[/QB]

I couldn't find it.

Michael

Michael

[ March 14, 2002: Message edited by: turtonm ]

luvluv · 03-15-2002, 11:25 AM

I just re-read the first few opening chapeters, and there is no mention of the Trilmea, by the way. You may be confusing it with another book.

Vorkosigan · 03-15-2002, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by luvluv:
I just re-read the first few opening chapeters, and there is no mention of the Trilmea, by the way. You may be confusing it with another book.

The Trilemma is here, on the chapter called something like "The Experience of the Numinous. My mistake!

"In Christianity, a historical component is added: an extraordinary man walking about in Palestine, claiming to be "one with" the Numinous and the Moral. Lewis develops a theme from Chesterton [5], the stupefying argument for the divinity of Jesus. "Either He was a raving lunatic of an unusually abominable type, or else He was, and is, precisely what He said". Many regard Jesus as a holy man, a wise teacher: a thoroughly good man. Yet, this is precisely what cannot be held about him: sooner a lunatic or a deceiver than a mere good man — or else God himself. Aut Deus, aut homo malus. [6]"

This is a really dumb argument. Lord, Liar or Lunatic? Or maybe Man, Myth, or Misunderstood.

And that's just the tip of the possibilities.

Michael

[ March 15, 2002: Message edited by: turtonm ]

ManM · 03-16-2002, 08:14 AM

We seem to forget what Christianiy says: God died. God Himself was a victim of the evil that everyone is so quick to pin on Him.

"The idea of an omnipotence blocks every passage to the future." -Paul Evdokimov

Pomp · 03-16-2002, 10:44 AM

ManM,

We seem to forget what Christianiy says: God died. God Himself was a victim of the evil that everyone is so quick to pin on Him.

"The idea of an omnipotence blocks every passage to the future." -Paul Evdokimov

I'm not sure what you're saying. Do you believe in a non-omnipotent god?

03-13-2002, 03:57 PM	#12
luvluv Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Planet Lovetron Posts: 3,919	Umm... what's the trilema? Mike I guess you've read the book then? And is the book online? I can't find it. [ March 13, 2002: Message edited by: luvluv ]</p>

03-13-2002, 04:05 PM	#13
Pomp Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Indianapolis area Posts: 3,468	luvluv, Umm... what's the trilema? The Trilemma (also know as the Liar-Lunatic-Lord argument)is the pseudo-argument that, taking the Gospels at face value, Jesus said he was God, and, therefore, one of these three things must be true: He really was God. He was a liar. He was a lunatic The apologist then goes on to present various arguments regarding why he could not have been lying or deranged. These usually deal with the notion that Jesus was a "great moral teacher" and that such a person could not possibly be a liar or a lunatic. Having eliminated these two choices, the apologist goes on to conclude that Jesus really was God, thus proving Christianity to be the One True Faith. Rather than dissecting the argument myself, I want to ask you if you can see the glaring holes in it? I've got three broad categories of objections to the Trilemma in mind. I'm not being rude (or pompous), by the way, I honestly want to know what you think of it. Edit: PS - I'd still like to see how you respond to the latest posts in the other thread on Lewis. [ March 13, 2002: Message edited by: Pompous Bastard ]</p>

03-13-2002, 10:57 PM	#16
Vorkosigan Contributor Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Barrayar Posts: 11,866	Originally posted by luvluv: . I never gave a lot of thought to the Trilema. I guess one of the ways you guys find around it is just to claim that Jesus never existed, or to say he never said the things atributed to him. Now you're thinkin' like a skeptic. Next thing you know, you'll be ordering our t-shirt... It's not really of much interest to me, the Trilema is not even close to the main argument of this book. Yes, but when the author starts out with an argument that bad, you know the rest isn't going anywhere. Lewis is like Josh McDowell, only with better diction. Michael, I hope you got further than that. Yes, years ago. I read it after Screwtape, a book I have always liked. But I bopped around the web and skimmed some reviews of the Problem of Pain, just to double check. [b]Again, does anyone know if the book is online?[/QB] I couldn't find it. Michael Michael [ March 14, 2002: Message edited by: turtonm ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-13-2002, 04:42 PM	#14
luvluv Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Planet Lovetron Posts: 3,919	I just gave my overly-verbose response. I never gave a lot of thought to the Trilema. I guess one of the ways you guys find around it is just to claim that Jesus never existed, or to say he never said the things atributed to him. It's not really of much interest to me, the Trilema is not even close to the main argument of this book. Micheal, I hope you got further than that. Again, does anyone know if the book is online?

03-13-2002, 04:46 PM	#15
luvluv Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Planet Lovetron Posts: 3,919	By the way, thanks Michael I'll look those up.

03-15-2002, 11:25 AM	#17
luvluv Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Planet Lovetron Posts: 3,919	I just re-read the first few opening chapeters, and there is no mention of the Trilmea, by the way. You may be confusing it with another book.

03-16-2002, 08:14 AM	#19
ManM Veteran Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: NW Florida, USA Posts: 1,279	We seem to forget what Christianiy says: God died. God Himself was a victim of the evil that everyone is so quick to pin on Him. "The idea of an omnipotence blocks every passage to the future." -Paul Evdokimov

03-16-2002, 10:44 AM	#20
Pomp Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Indianapolis area Posts: 3,468	ManM, We seem to forget what Christianiy says: God died. God Himself was a victim of the evil that everyone is so quick to pin on Him. "The idea of an omnipotence blocks every passage to the future." -Paul Evdokimov I'm not sure what you're saying. Do you believe in a non-omnipotent god?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.