3 ms·
This reminds me of the "Liar, Lunatic, or Lord" argument that religious people use regarding Jesus. Let's not railroad the options, here. There's room for nuanc
by jredwards 3y ago
This reminds me of the "Liar, Lunatic, or Lord" argument that religious people use regarding Jesus. Let's not railroad the options, here. There's room for nuance (like combinations or, frankly, just misunderstandings).
- spywaregorilla 3y agowhat kind of nuanced compromise exists that does not paint jesus as a liar, lunatic, or lord exclusively?
- jredwards 3y agoThat he believed a falsehood? Does that make him a lunatic? Would that not necessarily make billions of people lunatics?
- prawn 3y agoThat he was misrepresented?
- spywaregorilla 3y agoI do think believing that you are a deity is a sufficiently far fetched falsehood to justify calling you a lunatic. For the sake of argument I suppose I'm willing to accept "profoundly confused individual" as a fourth alternative. But I don't think it helps the rhetorical point against painting arguments for "lord lunatic or liar" as an unjustified demand for absolute beliefs. And no, you're not a lunatic for believing someone else's bullshit.
- TechBro8615 3y agoThat's a convenient argument and a good analogy for the UFO phenomenon, because it omits the fourth option, which is that Jesus never existed outside of a carefully constructed narrative distributed by institutional authorities with the goal of manipulating their taxpaying population.