Jesus - Liar, Lunatic, Lord or Legend?

[Red Sky at Morning]

CS Lewis once framed the famous trilemma “liar, lunatic or Lord” with reference to the stance you are forced to take on Jesus:

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 was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic—on the 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 patronising nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to. . . . Now it seems to me obvious that He was neither a lunatic nor a fiend: and consequently, however strange or terrifying or unlikely it may seem, I have to accept the view that He was and is God. (Mere Christianity, 55-56)​

Subsequently, this question has been challenged by the introduction of a fourth “l”, that of legend. It would seem that that fourth “l” would require one more “l” by way of “late” since legends take time to develop.

Accordingly, evidence that points to the early and non-legendary character of the gospels is the ground on which these mythic grounds are destroyed…

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLi4ss0ivyfWyaGla1KNO6io62rR6M8mYT&si=GikeO0M-9BaMi7qi

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

I put a link to a playlist in the first post but I don’t think that’s always the most accessible format.

This is the video that got me started on the topic - it’s significant as much of the anti-Christian argument comes from the claim that the Bible was corrupted and written by late authors…

Synopsis

“In this 5-part documentary, we explore one of the most contested claims in the Bible, namely, that Luke used eyewitness testimony in crafting his Gospel. Join us as we explore ground-breaking research that might just prove that Luke was telling the truth.

In episode 1, we provide an overview of the case for eyewitness testimony in the Gospels and, in doing so, touch on the question of whether the Gospels were written anonymously.”​

For further reading:

LUUK VAN DE WEGHE

Author site of Luuk Vandeweghe, New Testament researcher in the Gospel of Luke and Acts

www.luukvandeweghe.com

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

​

In episode 2 of our documentary, we reveal the first two "tells" that support Luke's use of eyewitnesses when crafting his account of Jesus and the early Church.​

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

In episode 3 of our documentary, we discuss how specific language used in the Gospels (referred to a "Semitisms") supports the idea that Luke relied on eyewitnesses when crafting his account.​

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

In episode 4 of our documentary, we discuss how subtle connections between Luke and John reveal that Luke relied on the "Beloved Disciple" as an eyewitness of Jesus.​

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

In the 5th and final episode of our documentary, we address the implications of accepting the reliability of the Gospels.​

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

Hi @llleopard - I have posted each segment of discussion up to allow people to look at and reference various elements of this analysis. For me, I didn’t realise I had such strong grounds for claiming that the gospels were written within the eye-witness period, so I will listen again to Luke’s gospel with renewed interest!

 

[Lizard King]

All evangelicals should be sent to Israel and Ukraine.

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

All evangelicals should be sent to Israel and Ukraine.

I’m struggling to make the connection between the fact that the gospels represent a historically verifiable record, which if believed to be true true would likely lead a thinking person to become an “evangelical” and that somehow people who hold to that truth should receive an arbitrary punishment.

Is truth less important than political utility?

Can you explain?

 

[llleopard]

Hi @llleopard - I have posted each segment of discussion up to allow people to look at and reference various elements of this analysis. For me, I didn’t realise I had such strong grounds for claiming that the gospels were written within the eye-witness period, so I will listen again to Luke’s gospel with renewed interest!

Thank you not sure when I'll get time to look at this, but I'll get to it. A couple of years back you introduced me to Michael Heiser's work which was life changing and I'm now reading a fourth book of his. I am in awe of how much material you get through!