Q. I don't know what to say to be honest... It just sounds like a stretch...
A. What sounds like a stretch?
Q. The whole Jesus-is-God thing...
A. Then if Jesus is not God, as Christians say he is, then who is he?
Q. That's precisely it! He must have been some good guy at most. As in maybe the God-part of him was not a myth cooked up by the early Christians as you've just argued. But that doesn't mean that He was God. Proving He is not a myth does not prove He is God.
A. From where I stand there are only five possible answers to the question "If Jesus is not God, what is he?"
Q. What five answers?
A. Jesus was either Lord, liar, lunatic, guru or myth.
Q. So if He's not a myth He could be one of the other four, right?
A. Theoretically. But I'd argue that He could not possibly be a liar, lunatic, guru or myth and therefore "Jesus is Lord" (the earliest Christian creed).
Q. Take me slowly through this...
A. Let's start with the simplest form of the argument.
1. Jesus was either God (if He did not lie about who He was) or a bad man (if He did).
2. But Jesus was not a bad man.
3. Therefore Jesus was (is) God.
Few would challenge the second premise. But if the first premise is added, the conclusion necessarily follows. Therefore, non-Christians must challenge the first premise.
Q. Exactly! What justifies this premise?
A. Common sense. Someone who claims to be God and is not, is not a good man but a bad man. Merely a "good man" is one thing Jesus could not possibly be. By claiming to be God He eliminated that possibility. For a liar is not a good man, and one who lies about his essential identity is a liar, and a mere man who claims to be God lies about his essential identity.
It is attractive and comfortable to say that Jesus was neither a bad man nor God, but a good man. To say He was a bad man offends Christians, and to say He was God offends non-Christians. To say neither offends no one. Therefore non-Christians want to say neither.
But that position offends logic.
Happy Madaraka Day!
1stJune 2017