WHERE WE ARE
Premise (1) is a key premise of the Trilemma Argument:
1. Either (a) Jesus is God, or (b) Jesus lied about being God, or (c) Jesus was seriously mentally ill.
This premise is dubious because the argument supporting it is based on this historical assumption:
5. Jesus claimed to be God.
In Part 4, Part 5, and Part 6 of this series, I argued that premise (5) is false.
However, even if premise (5) were true, the argument supporting premise (1) would still fail, because there are other problems with the argument supporting premise (1).
In this post I will critically examine the part of the argument for (1) related to the alternative that "Jesus lied about being God".
THE SUB-ARGUMENT FOR PREMISE (1)
Here is the sub-argument in Evidence for Jesus by the McDowells supporting the key premise (1):
8. Either (a) Jesus' claim to be God was true, or (b) Jesus knew his claim to be God was false, or (c) Jesus did not know his claim to be God was false (though it was false).
9. If Jesus' claim to be God was true, then Jesus is God.
10. If Jesus knew his claim to be God was false, then Jesus lied about being God.
11. If Jesus did not know his claim to be God was false (though it was false), then Jesus was seriously mentally ill.
THEREFORE:
1. Either (a) Jesus is God, or (b) Jesus lied about being God, or (c) Jesus was seriously mentally ill.
Premise (8) is what I call their preliminary trilemma; it states a trilemma in terms of alternatives about the truth of falsehood of the claim that Jesus was God. The alternative I'm concerned with for now is based on premise (10). This premise allows for a shift from the idea that Jesus knew his claim to be God was false to the idea that Jesus lied about being God.
No comments:
Post a Comment