Quote:
Originally Posted by thejeff
With all due respect to CS Lewis, the "Liar, Lunatic or Lord" argument falls apart if you do not accept the Bible as, at least, a fairly accurate description of Jesus's ministry.
If you do accept the Bible's claims then there is little point in making the argument. If not, then the argument falls apart: perhaps he never claimed divinity.
|
That's true as far as it goes, but it doesn't go far enough.
If you reject the Bible, why would you believe that Jesus was a prophet of God? For that matter, why would you believe that Jesus was anyone special at all?
Perhaps one would choose to accept parts of the Bible, but not others. For obvious reasons, I think that approach is fatally flawed. Still, let's accept it for now. If you want to accept parts of the Bible, but not other parts, then how do you choose which parts? The divinity of Jesus is a central theme of Scripture, from Genesis right through Revelation. Christ's place as the second Person of the Trinity is not merely a side-issue; it's the core issue.
As I wrote, I understand other doctrinal disputes. I started my Christian walk in a Lutheran church. Lutherans are a sacramental denomination who practice infant baptism. Now I'm a Southern Baptist, and we don't baptize babies. I can see arguments in Scripture for both positions, and I truly wish that Christians would not divide ourselves over it. (For the most part, we
don't, but there are always exceptions.) We can disagree over these points of doctrine, and the core truths of Christianity are not threatened.
If Jesus was merely a prophet, there's no point in Christianity. A prophet can't save you from your sins. He can't heal your broken spirit. He can't walk with you throughout your life. And he can't bring you into Heaven when you die. Only God can do that.