15

Christian author and apologist C.S. Lewis, is famous, among other things, for posing the Lord, Liar, or Lunatic argument, in favor of the divinity of Christ.

The cliff-notes version is:

Jesus said he was God (see here for a summary of verses to this effect). This leaves three logical possibilities:

  1. Jesus was a lunatic, on par with someone who believes they are a slice of cheddar cheese.
  2. Jesus was a liar, knowing full well he was not God, but trying to convince people that he was.
  3. Jesus really was who he said he was, and he was God.

Given that Islam holds both Jewish and Christian religious texts in high esteem, and Islam believes Jesus was a prophet of Allah, how does Islam reconcile its concept of Jesus with these three possibilities? Would Allah send a prophet who was a pathological liar, or a lunatic?

I see also a fourth logical possibility, and that is that the scripture record is wildly inaccurate, and Jesus never actually claimed to be God. This possibility, of course, raises other issues, beyond the scope of this particular question.

Flimzy
  • 3,391
  • 5
  • 31
  • 41
  • +1 Excellent question. Interesting theory.. –  Jul 06 '12 at 21:08
  • 2
    There's some very nasty abelism in Lewis. "Lunacy" doesn't quite work like that. – TRiG Jul 06 '12 at 21:26
  • 1
    And Islam's idea is exactly the fourth probability that you counted for but passed over it! So better to address the issues that this fourth probability arise in ;) – owari Dec 05 '12 at 18:22

6 Answers6

15

I think you just answered your own question:

I see also a fourth logical possibility, and that is that the scripture record is wildly inaccurate, and Jesus never actually claimed to be God.

This is exactly the Islamic view on this issue. While Islam does hold the holy scriptures of Christianity and Judaism in high regard, it also holds the view that these texts were corrupted by human meddling. The Christian version of the crucifixion is believed by Muslims to be a corrupted version of the true story.

See this answer for further insight on how Islam views Jesus Christ.

Community
  • 1
System Down
  • 5,373
  • 24
  • 43
  • 1
    Thank you for your answer. I would be interested in reading more about the Muslim view of the Christian and Jewish scriptures... I will ponder posting another question along those lines later. – Flimzy Jul 06 '12 at 21:24
  • 1
    @Flimzy - Please do! :) – System Down Jul 06 '12 at 21:25
1

Muslims do not consider Jesus as a lord, lunatic or liar - any of these statements would lead to denial of Jesus as a Messiah and True Messenger of God. I am shocked to hear this expounded by a atheist albeit later a Christian apologetic. The fourth possibility is commonly held by Muslims that the scripture (Bible) and let me specifically add interpretation is inaccurate, and Jesus never actually claimed to be God. Therefore one needs to refer to issues that arise therein.

Regarding Jesus and Muslims: Muslim believe Jesus is the Messiah, a Messenger and a Spirit from God. Muslims love him and hold great respect for him and his mother Mary. Muslims believe Jesus did not act nor claim to be God or his Son. He had miraculous birth and difficult life despite the power God had vested in him e.g. miracles which he never abused and acted righteously. A great deal can be learnt from his life. Any text which refers to Muslim understanding of Jesus is relevant to this question e.g. Quranic or Prophetic traditions etc. Therefore, the above Quranic verse is relevant. It refers to a conversation between God and Jesus (2 separate entities) which of course would not be in the New Testament...a text not revealed or ratified by Jesus or revealed to Muhammad.

@Filmzy suggestion that no Christian scripture claims Jesus said 'Take me and my mother as Gods" or anything of the sort - only suggest that he is stating direct omission in one source leads to refutation of another and the derived meaning and interpretation.

Let's state personal beliefs from both sides, not what one reflects on the other. Muslims believe Qur'an is God's Word revealed to Muhammad. Christians believe The New Testament is book written by Gospel authors inspired by life of Jesus.

Now we have cleared the 'room' of believer's who project their own understanding of other peoples belief. Fact: The general message of Christian theologians is that the scriptures support Jesus is God and his mother at least in certain denominations e.g.Roman Catholicism is venerated. Jesus is part of the Trinity. Fact: Muslims believe God is Only One, no Trinity.

Fact: Jesus said he was the Son of Man numerous times in the New Testament. Self proclamation of divinity is surprisingly scarce from Jesus' Opinion: the most fundamental belief in Christianity Jesus saying he is Son of God is not central to the founders message. Son of Man could refer to Jesus humanity, messianic quality or possible reference son of first man (Adam). Fact: Qur'an refer to Jesus as Son of Mary and Messiah and refer to the similarity of creation of Adam to Jesus being born without one or two parents in the former (3:59) Fact: Jesus said 'Why hast though forsaken me' Matthew 27:46 Opinion: Messengers and prophets have suffered a great deal and rebuke e.g. Abraham when he was thrown in the fire. I cannot imagine a messenger, let alone a god to say this Before someone says Abraham trial is not as bad as Jesus' in Islam...Fact: Muslims believe in the ascension of Jesus, not the crucifixion.

References: studied Christianity by Christians and Islam by Christians and Muslims

Guest
  • 11
  • 1
0

Their response is the “last possibility that you have brought out “that the scripture record is wildly inaccurate, and Jesus never actually claimed to be God”. Without this assertion it is like self denial for them.

The speck of doubt on Bible and the idea that Bible is changed, emanates from our brethren in arms who are trying to portray that they are worshipping God of Abraham and yet wants to remain separate from us. Their identity as a separate religion is possible and could be maintained only by casting aspiration on the word of God. Islam cannot change its views on the Bible without admitting that Koran is erroneous. Without changing its views on Divinity of Jesus, it cannot admit that Koran is without error,. Islam cannot cease to oppose the important doctrines of Christianity without ceasing to call themselves Muslims.

user426
  • 805
  • 1
  • 9
  • 18
0

Firstly, as you aptly pointed out, it's possible that the scriptures incorrectly recorded Jesus' claims about his own status as the Son of God. Ignoring error, let's assume that Jesus really did claim to be the Son of God. We will assume he is neither a liar nor a lunatic. Lewis posits that the only remaining possibility is that he must be the Son of God. But is it not possible that he is simply incorrect? Jesus may even have been justified (or rational) in assuming he is the Son of God given the parameters available to him when forming such a judgement. Would one consider Newton to be a lunatic for his belief in the existence of aether?

Neither argument is proof that Jesus is definitively not the Son of God. But shows that Lewis's argument is rather weaker than it appears on the surface.

James Bender
  • 101
  • 1
-2

This is view of Islam:

وَإِذْ قَالَ اللَّهُ يَا عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ أَأَنتَ قُلْتَ لِلنَّاسِ اتَّخِذُونِي وَأُمِّيَ إِلَٰهَيْنِ مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ قَالَ سُبْحَانَكَ مَا يَكُونُ لِي أَنْ أَقُولَ مَا لَيْسَ لِي بِحَقٍّ إِن كُنتُ قُلْتُهُ فَقَدْ عَلِمْتَهُ تَعْلَمُ مَا فِي نَفْسِي وَلَا أَعْلَمُ مَا فِي نَفْسِكَ إِنَّكَ أَنتَ عَلَّامُ الْغُيُوبِ ﴿المائدة: ١١٦﴾

And when Allah said, 'O Jesus son of Mary, didst thou say unto men, "Take me and my mother as Gods, apart from Allah"?' He said, 'To Thee be glory! It is not mine to say what I have no right to. If I indeed said it, Thou knowest it, knowing what is within my soul, and I know not what is within Thy soul; Thou knowest the things unseen

Bhribayli
  • 946
  • 6
  • 9
  • That doesn't answer the question. It only provides a (rather confusing) verse that is tangentially related. – Flimzy Jul 07 '12 at 19:15
  • @Flimzy The verse clearly states that Jesus was not lunatic, was not liar and was not God but scripture record is not correct. – Bhribayli Jul 08 '12 at 05:46
  • That is not clear to me at all. – Flimzy Jul 08 '12 at 05:58
  • No Christian scripture even claims that Jesus said "Take me and my mother as Gods" or anything of the sort. So I don't really understand why refuting that statement, which no Christian scripture ever claims was made, is meaningful. And that's even assuming this verse does refute that statement. I see that as only one possible reading of the verse. – Flimzy Jul 08 '12 at 06:01
-3

Christianity was an underground minority movement until the Roman State embraced it. The Roman State habitually raised its emperors to divine status, in order that the public viewed the state & its laws with suitable awe & majesty.

Rousseau in his Social Contract says:

"This is what has, in all ages, compelled the fathers of nations to have recourse to divine intervention and credit the gods with their own wisdom, in order that the peoples, submitting to the laws of the State as to those of nature, and recognising the same power in the formation of the city as in that of man, might obey freely, and bear with docility the yoke of the public happiness."

Simone Weil, a moral philosopher & mystic, believed that it was the tragedy of Christianity to have compromised with Roman State power, which she called the 'great beast'. She meant it corrupted its essential spirit.

If Christ said he was God (I haven't read the Bible closely), this may simply have been no different from Al-Hallaj saying 'ana al-haq' (I am the truth), one of the 99 names of Allah. Thus identifying himself with the divinity. He was executed, raising a fierce debate within Islam about the mystical path; only being rehabilitated several generations later.

According to Lord Jesus Christ, page 204 referenced on wikipedias article on Early Christianity, "Early Christians saw Jesus as the uniquely significant agent of the one God" (this doesn't sound disimilar to the relation between Muhammed & Allah); by the first Nicaea Council "he was identified as God in the fullest sense, being 'of the same substance, essence or being'."

I suggest it was the political class in Rome that actually installed Christ as God, and Mary as the Mother of God in a pale imitation of their polythiest past.

Mozibur Ullah
  • 1,496
  • 7
  • 23
  • 41
  • 1
    This is a (very poor, and substantially inaccurate) speculation on Christian history, and doesn't address the question itself, which is about Islam. – Flimzy Dec 06 '12 at 21:46
  • @Flimzy: I'm addressing point 3. I agree its speculation. But I am offering some backup for my speculation. Rousseau is a major european polical philosopher, and Simone Weil is an important figure too. – Mozibur Ullah Dec 06 '12 at 21:53
  • @Flimzy: Note, Al-Hallaj was put to death for claiming that he was God; Al-Haq (the truth), is one of the 99 names of God. – Mozibur Ullah Dec 06 '12 at 21:59
  • Jesus Christ was also put to death for claiming he was God. – Flimzy Dec 06 '12 at 22:01
  • It was clearly not the Roman political class that installed Christ as God. His own contemporary followers believed He was God as well (or at least the written accounts of the gospels claim as much). And there is no historical or literary evidence that the gospels were tampered with at the time of Rome's conversion to Christianity. Any possible textual corruption would have had to have happened much MUCH earlier (within a generation of the crucifixion). – Flimzy Dec 06 '12 at 22:04
  • @Flimzy: Yes, quite. That's why I made the comparison between Jesus & Al-Hallaj. He's seen as a major figure in the Sufi/Mystic tradition of Islam. It took a great deal of time for that to be recognised by the Ulema (Islamic clergy), several generations. A single generation is enough, surely? I wouldn't neccessarily call it corruption, the light of spiritual reality is not amenable to the pen. Its a pale shadow. – Mozibur Ullah Dec 06 '12 at 22:08
  • If Christ was executed for claiming he was God, that pretty well invalidates your entire point that it was Rome who elevated him to godhood... or am I missing something? – Flimzy Dec 06 '12 at 22:09
  • @Flimzy: The Rome that executed Christ, is not the same Rome that embraced him. My understanding of early christianity is slight, but from what I recall there was a lot of debate, presumably as there is now, as to what is meant by the divinity of Christ. – Mozibur Ullah Dec 06 '12 at 22:17
  • The Rome that executed Christ didn't care about his alleged divinity. The Rome that executed Christ did so to appease their Jewish subjects, who they feared were on the verge of rebellion. The Jews wanted Christ executed for blasphemy. Rome's view of Christ as a religious figure, at the time of his execution, was one of utter indifference. I still don't see how this is relevant, though. Christ claimed to be God. It got him killed. Rome clearly did not invent that concept. – Flimzy Dec 06 '12 at 22:20
  • @Flimzy: I mean that,as a rough analogy, as Jehovah is the God of Israel, Jesus became the God of Rome. Rousseau is very clear in distinguishing the divinity that a political class requires, to that of the divinity of spiritual reality. – Mozibur Ullah Dec 06 '12 at 22:29
  • @MoziburUllah Have you ever given a thought to the life lived by Mohammed and life lived by Jesus or did you any time pondered and compared the message preached by Jesus and Mohammed. If you compare them together then definitely it is difficult to put Mohammed ahead of Jesus and this I stress, is leaving aside the Divinity of Jesus, which is entirely a different domain of discussion and understanding. Unless Islam puts question marks on the accuracy of Bible and consequentially on the divinity of Jesus, it has no standing for its claim to be a separate religion. – user426 Dec 07 '12 at 04:20
  • @user426: How do you compare Red & Blue? You could on basis of their frequencies or wavelengths, and put one ahead of the other, or the other ahead of the one. But thats besides the point. As colours they stand on there own. Why are you insisting I should compare their lives, when I'm far from understanding my own; and thats my own lived experience. I've added a reference on the divinity of Christ in Early Christianity above. – Mozibur Ullah Dec 07 '12 at 04:53
  • @MoziburUllah Will you agree with me that if I have to take a decision to follow and practice the teachings of someone then definitely I need to check what he preached and how he lived himself and then come to a conclusion. If not then it is a blind following. The message of New Testament and teachings of Christ is diametrically opposite to that of Muhammad with particular reference to loving your neighbour, to the extent of even loving your enemy. Also the events of their life story are like that of chalk and cheese and that is what exactly you have said “Red & Blue”. – user426 Dec 07 '12 at 06:38
  • Regarding Divinity of Jesus , one cannot understand it just by reading a few articles like Wikipedia. If you are interested have a look at http://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/trinity but let me tell you this is just a tip of iceberg. There are many other indisputable references indicating this nature of Jesus, but as I have already said, even keeping this attribute of Jesus aside there is no comparison for His persona in this world. – user426 Dec 07 '12 at 06:39
  • @user426: Well yes, the life histories of the major world religious leaders are simply not comparable. At least we're agreed on that. Every verse in the quran starts with Allah, the most compassionate, the most merciful. I don't see how that differs from 'loving your neighbour'. And please recall that Jesus, is also seen as a prophet in the Islamic tradition. So what he said is of significance to the Islamic community too. To some extent, yes; we need to check. But we're also born into a religious community, and that has its own natural affections. – Mozibur Ullah Dec 07 '12 at 07:10
  • @user426: My family is muslim, but at school we sung hymns and celebrated xmas, and read parables. I do know a bit more about Christianity than just reading a couple of wikipedia articles. It was on the basis of that buried knowledge that I found a reference to back up what I was trying to say. – Mozibur Ullah Dec 07 '12 at 07:17
  • The Qur’an tells us far more about what Jesus is not than what He is. Most of its assertions appear to be corrective, such as when it says to the Jews that they did not crucify Him, and when it addresses the Christians to deny His deity and eternal Sonship. In all these matters the Qur’an misunderstands and misconstrues Christian theology. Christians never believed that Jesus alone is God, or that He shares His deity with Mary, that He ‘rose’ from humanity to deity, or that He is a physical son of God in the same sense as the demi-gods of the Greek pantheon. – user426 Dec 07 '12 at 10:42
  • @MoziburUllah Islam accepts the virgin birth, but never explains why it occurred, and it is clear from the attempts of later Muslims, like Yusuf Ali, to down-grade its importance by presenting an analogy with Adam that is alien to the tafsir of the Qur’an. Thus indicating how uncomfortable Muslims became when they encountered Christian Christology which had a definite reason for the event. – user426 Dec 07 '12 at 10:43
  • The narration of the infant Jesus in Quran belongs to apocryphal pseudo-gospels and as such unhistorical and not in supposed divine revelation. This is unlike to every other parable in Gospel which is like a minefield packed with wisdom and understanding. Any message displayed through parables is much more impressive & appealing then just saying a dull command. Only a person with full of wisdom can preach & communicate with his audience through parables explicit to everyday life and has more spell bounding effect on audience then a dull speech of do’s and don’ts. – user426 Dec 07 '12 at 11:31