Is Jesus God?
This is part 2 to a 7 part series: Questions About God – Canadian philosopher Michael Horner responds to seven of the most commonly asked questions about God and Christianity.
Question 2: Is Jesus God?
There are only four options for the identity of Jesus Christ. He is either a legend, a liar, a lunatic or He is Lord and God. There is little likelihood that Jesus’s claims are legend. There just wasn’t enough time for any legendary development of the story to replace what really happened. Also, if the claims Jesus made for Himself are legendary, the early Jewish opponents of Christianity would surely have charged that these claims never happened. Unlike modern skeptics, the rabbis apparently never denied that Jesus made such claims for Himself. Instead, they called Him a liar.
Jesus thought of Himself as divine. According to the various gospel accounts, Jesus believed He had the power to perform miracles and the power to forgive sins. He even claimed, “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30).
Since Jesus claimed to be God, His claims are either true or false. If false, He must have been a liar, deliberately misleading the multitudes. Or, He was a lunatic, sincerely believing Himself to be God, when in reality He was just a man.
Jesus’ moral character and His willingness to die for His claim to be God have convinced most people that Jesus was not lying. Jesus’ humility and unselfish love, His intelligent communication with the crowds, and His amazing self control and composure amidst the tremendous physical and emotional stress fo His betrayal and crucifixion, all point to His contact with reality. Jesus was no lunatic.
Since the evidence shows that He is neither a liar nor a lunatic, then the only other alternative left is that His claim is true. Jesus is Lord and God. And that conclusion is further supported by the remarkable evidence that Jesus rose physically from the grave.
For further reading: Knowing the Truth About the Resurrection by W. L. Craig (Servant Books, 1988)
Next: How Could Jesus Be the Only Way to God?
7 Responses to “Is Jesus God?”
Leave a Reply
Start a Conversation
Media
Connecting Through Technology
Do you use technology to stay in touch with family and friends?
>Watch
Latest Comments
- Freedom said: When i listearn to such words soul craving i just feel that... Read More »
- Melissa said: This is what I needed today. God hears us in our time of... Read More »
- Christy said: I can totally relate to this piece. I wanted to change my... Read More »
I think its true. Jesus is a real boy.
I belive in jesus. He made all the people in the wold!
…”He is either a legend, a liar, a lunatic or He is Lord and God”…
Why are there only four options concerning Jesus’ identity? Maybe he was something entirely different, a myth, a focal personality, an archetype (I’m for that one myself), or just a guy. Maybe the guys who wrote the Bible just picked a name for a character?
But really, why only the four options?
…”Since the evidence shows…”
What evidence? Speculation on 2000 year old unsubstantiated circumstance isn’t really “evidence”; it’s speculation.
“Why are there only four options concerning Jesus’ identity? Maybe he was something entirely different, a myth …”
Historians (except for a few that you could count on one hand) don’t believe Jesus is merely a myth, he is considered to have been a real historical person.
“… a focal personality …”
Not sure what that means exactly.
“… an archetype …”
Why do you favor that one in particular? What archetype does Jesus fit?
“… or just a guy.”
Does “just a guy” claim to be the God who created the universe? This would fit under the “lunatic” heading.
These four options are predicated on the assumption that the biblical record is essentially accurate regarding what Jesus taught and thought about himself. For reasons to trust what the NT says as being historically reliable, see for example here:
http://whyfaith.com/nt/
We can’t prove the NT is historically true with 100% certainty (just as we cannot prove any historical fact to 100% certainty) but we can give reasons to believe it is accurate.
There are lots of people named Jesus. Who are these “historians”?
“What archetype does Jesus fit?”
Are you really asking that question? Or are you just being sarcastic?
And then:
…”These four options are predicated on the assumption that the biblical record is essentially accurate”…
It’s a fictional work that intones poetically as metaphore. It’s not a historical record that denotes certainty. I advise not to “assume” any ‘essential accuracy’ from anything not credited to an author. Do you believe everything you read?
…”We can’t prove the NT is historically true with 100% certainty (just as we cannot prove any historical fact to 100% certainty) but we can give reasons to believe it is accurate.”…
Fact and truth are not the same, you are confusing the issue with words; sneaky.
Truth is subjective. Love is a truth.
Fact is the basic irrefutably observed details. That Pres. Kennedy was shot is a fact.
Hi Ozrik,
“There are lots of people named Jesus. Who are these “historians”?
There are also lots of people with the last name Kennedy ;) As I said above, all historians, with the exception of a handful, believe Jesus is a historical figure. This does not mean they believe the Bible is 100% true, it just means that they don’t think he is just a mythical figure.
“I advise not to “assume” any ‘essential accuracy’ from anything not credited to an author. Do you believe everything you read?”
Sorry, I should have been more clear. I am not assuming the accuracy of anything. However, what I meant is that these options are the only ones available IF the Bible is essentially accurate. Of course, if the Bible is not essentially accurate, then we are free to make up whatever stories we want.
“Fact is the basic irrefutably observed details. That Pres. Kennedy was shot is a fact.”
Is it? Can it be proven in the same way that we can do a scientific experiment to prove scientific facts? Do we know with 100% certainty who shot Kennedy? No, to both of these questions. History is not that sort of thing. Historians take all of the available data, analyze it, and make inference to the best explanation.
If you have a chance, please take a look at the short ebook I linked above! (It’s free ;))
“what I meant is that these options are the only ones available IF the Bible is essentially accurate. Of course, if the Bible is not essentially accurate, then we are free to make up whatever stories we want.”
…”If”…, that’s a pretty shakey grounding for trying to assert your “truth”
“Can it be proven in the same way that we can do a scientific experiment to prove scientific facts?”
…yes, we have witnesses, film, medical records and television broadcasts. It is irrefutable.
“Do we know with 100% certainty who shot Kennedy?”
…but I never asked that. We have very circumstantial evidence of who shot Kennedy. The real history is that Kennedy was shot and killed, not who did it. Reasons are speculative at best, but actions can be reported and recorded with great accuracy.
Sounds to me that by “historians” you mean revisionist historians. Like American history textbooks. I put little trust in history as a construct other than to know what events occured.
Hi Orzik,
“yes, we have witnesses, film, medical records and television broadcasts. It is irrefutable.”
I agree the evidence is very strong; but it is not provable in the same sense that a scientific fact is provable. History is not repeatable, which is a condition for doing scientific experiments. The procedure for history is to collect & evaluate the available evidence.
“Sounds to me that by “historians” you mean revisionist historians. Like American history textbooks. I put little trust in history as a construct other than to know what events occured.”
I’m not sure why you would come to this conclusion. You’re essentially dismissing the entire academic profession of history. I’m not referring just to “revisionist” historians, but all of them.
I was wondering, have you studied the evidence available? I haven’t been a Christian all my life, in fact for a long time I was quite derisive towards Christians and religious people in general, but after reading the NT for myself, I started to become interested, and started doing some research.
Years later, I decided to put together my little ebook that explains some reasons for trusting what the NT has to say. It’s here if you’re interested:
http://whyfaith.com/nt/