The Trilemma: Useless

The so-called trilemma is a popular evangelism and apologetics crutch. As Josh McDowell puts, Jesus was either a liar, a lunatic, or Lord. The originator of the idea, C.S. Lewis, put it this way in Mere Christianity:

"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 one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of thing Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic – on a 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 patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to."

I’m a big fan of Lewis and his writings were instrumental to my return to faith, but I cannot accept this argument. It is fallacious and essentially useless for converting a non-believer.

  • Assumptions and Objections
    • The Old Testament contains divinely inspired texts that completely and accurately represent both pre-Christian Judaism and the will of God.
      • Since the OT records the prophesies that must be fulfilled by the Messiah, we cannot beg this question if we are speaking to non-believers. If the OT is believed to be either innaccurate or inunspired, it is of limited apologetic use.
      • God may not be entirely good and truthful.
      • The Israelites might not be the only chosen people.
      • The authors of the OT may not have had sufficient intellects and/or education to fully comprehend and accurately record God’s will.
      • History is written by victors. Perhaps heresy superceded orthodoxy and OT Scriptures are edited, missing books, or entirely bogus.
    • The OT texts referred to as Messianic prophesies actually are and were fulfilled by Jesus of Nazareth.
      • If it is believed that New Testament authors played fast and loose with OT texts in an effort to shore up Jesus’ claims, putative Messianic prophesies come under suspicion. In other words, if one distrusts apostolic hermeneutics and exegesis, saying that Jesus fulfilled OT prophesies is moot.
    • The New Testament contains divinely inspired texts that completely and accurately represent both early Christian beliefs and the person of Jesus of Nazareth.
      • The apostles may have been lying, in part or whole.
      • The apostles may have neglected to record anything detracting about Jesus.
      • The apostles may have embellished or romanticized the sayings and/or deeds of Jesus
      • The apostles may have been heretics that twisted the teachings of Jesus who was just a popular rabbi.

The take home message from this short list of assumptions and possible objections is that before one can prove the veracity of Jesus’ claims, we must prove the veracity of Scripture. If one considers Scripture to be a mix of truth, lies, mistakes, and pious fiction, one is not forced into any of the three proposed conclusions. Even if one accepts Scripture as mostly or entirely reliable, there are still problems.

  • Assumptions and Objections
    • Jesus was a liar.
      • The most convincing lies contain elements of truth.
      • To lie about one thing does not necessitate that one lie about everything.
    • Jesus was a lunatic.
      • Do mental defects entirely negate wisdom? There is ample historical evidence that genius often borders and sometimes blurs into insanity.
      • If a mad man says something true, is it no longer true.
      • If Jesus was mad, he might not have been so for his whole life. He may have taught wisely and lucidly for a couple years before beginning to believe he was God.
      • Belief in one falsehood is not mutually exclusive with belief in all truths. Futhermore, while mental instability or stubborn belief in a wrong idea may harm one’s reputation, they do not necessarily mean one is insane or wrong in all matters.
    • Jesus is Lord
      • This conclusion follows logically, but is not obviously or trivially true. There are enough holes in the ther options that one is not forced to accept this conclusion.

Obviously, as a Catholic Christian, the objections I presented are not ones that I believe or promote. I was merely playing devil’s advocate. These objections are far from exhaustive. They’re merely what I pulled off the top of my head. I’m sure they could be worded convincingly. In fact, it is my confidence in that fact that seals my belief in the uselessness of the trilemma. It will only convince those who want to be convinced, the naive, and those of weak intellect.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , on by .

About Funky Dung

Who is Funky Dung? 29-year-old grad student in Intelligent Systems (A.I.) at the University of Pittsburgh. I consider myself to be politically moderate and independent and somewhere between a traditional and neo-traditional Catholic. I was raised Lutheran, spent a number of years as an agnostic, and joined the Catholic Church at the 2000 Easter Vigil. Why Funky Dung? I haven't been asked this question nearly as many times as you or I might expect. Funky Dung is a reference to an obscure Pink Floyd song. On the album Atom Heart Mother, there is a track called Atom Heart Mother Suite. It's broken up into movements, like a symphony, and one of the movements is called Funky Dung. I picked that nickname a long time ago (while I was still in high school I think), shortly after getting an internet connection for the first time. To me it means "cool/neat/groovy/spiffy stuff/crap/shiznit", as in "That's some cool stuff, dude!" Whence Ales Rarus? I used to enjoy making people guess what this means, but I've decided to relent and make it known to all. Ales Rarus is a Latin play on words. "Avis rarus" means "a rare bird" and carries similar meaning to "an odd fellow". "Ales" is another Latin word for bird that carries connotations of omens, signs of the times, and/or augery. If you want to get technical, both "avis" and "ales" are feminine (requiring "rara", but they can be made masculine in poetry (which tends to breaks lots of rules). I decided I'd rather have a masculine name in Latin. ;) Yeah, I'm a nerd. So what? :-P Wherefore blog? It is my intention to "teach in order to lead others to faith" by being always "on the lookout for occasions of announcing Christ by word, either to unbelievers . . . or to the faithful" through the "use of the communications media". I also act knowing that I "have the right and even at times a duty to manifest to the sacred pastors [my] opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church, and [I] have a right to make [my] opinion known to the other Christian faithful, with due regard to the integrity of faith and morals and reverence toward [my and their] pastors, and with consideration for the common good and the dignity of persons." (adapted from CCC 904-907) Statement of Faith I have been baptized and confirmed in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I, therefore, renounce Satan; I renounce all his works; I renounce all his allurements. I hold and profess all that is contained in the Apostles' Creed, the Niceno- Constantinopolitan Creed, and the Athanasian Creed. Having been buried with Christ unto death and raised up with him unto a new life, I promise to live no longer for myself or for that world which is the enemy of God but for him who died for me and rose again, serving God, my heavenly Father, faithfully and unto death in the holy Catholic Church. I am obedient to the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. That is, I promote and defend authentic Catholic Teaching and Faith in union with Christ and His Church and in union with the Holy Father, the Bishop of Rome, the Successor of St. Peter. Thanks be unto Thee, O my God, for all Thy infinite goodness, and, especially, for the love Thou hast shown unto me at my Confirmation. I Give Thee thanks that Thou didst then send down Thy Holy Spirit unto my soul with all His gifts and graces. May He take full possession of me for ever. May His divine unction cause my face to shine. May His heavenly wisdom reign in my heart. May His understanding enlighten my darkness. May His counsel guide me. May His knowledge instruct me. May His piety make me fervent. May His divine fear keep me from all evil. Drive from my soul, O Lord, all that may defile it. Give me grace to be Thy faithful soldier, that having fought the good fight of faith, I may be brought to the crown of everlasting life, through the merits of Thy dearly beloved Son, our Savior, Jesus Christ. Amen. Behind the Curtain: an Interview With Funky Dung (Thursday, March 03, 2005) I try to avoid most memes that make their way 'round the blogosphere (We really do need a better name, don't we?), but some are worth participating in. Take for instance the "interview game" that's the talk o' the 'sphere. I think it's a great way to get to know the people in neighborhood. Who are the people in your neighborhood? In your neighborhod? In your neigh-bor-hoo-ood...*smack* Sorry, Sesame Street flashback. Anyhow, I saw Jeff "Curt Jester" Miller's answers and figured since he's a regular reader of mine he'd be a good interviewer. Without further ado, here are my answers to his questions. 1. Being that your pseudonym Funky Dung was chosen from a Pink Floyd track on Atom Heart Mother, what is you favorite Pink Floyd song and why? Wow. That's a tuffy. It's hard to pick out a single favorite. Pink Floyd isn't really a band known for singles. They mostly did album rock and my appreciation of them is mostly of a gestalt nature. If I had to pick one, though, it'd be "Comfortably Numb". I get chills up my spine every time I hear it and if it's been long enough since the last time, I get midty-eyed. I really don't know why. That's a rather unsatisfying answer for an interview, so here are the lyrics to a Rush song. It's not their best piece of music, but the lyrics describe me pretty well.

New World Man He's a rebel and a runner He's a signal turning green He's a restless young romantic Wants to run the big machine He's got a problem with his poisons But you know he'll find a cure He's cleaning up his systems To keep his nature pure Learning to match the beat of the old world man Learning to catch the heat of the third world man He's got to make his own mistakes And learn to mend the mess he makes He's old enough to know what's right But young enough not to choose it He's noble enough to win the world But weak enough to lose it --- He's a new world man... He's a radio receiver Tuned to factories and farms He's a writer and arranger And a young boy bearing arms He's got a problem with his power With weapons on patrol He's got to walk a fine line And keep his self-control Trying to save the day for the old world man Trying to pave the way for the third world man He's not concerned with yesterday He knows constant change is here today He's noble enough to know what's right But weak enough not to choose it He's wise enough to win the world But fool enough to lose it --- He's a new world man...
2. What do you consider your most important turning point from agnosticism to the Catholic Church. At some point in '99, I started attending RCIA at the Pittsburgh Oratory. I mostly went to ask a lot of obnoxious Protestant questions. Or at least that's what I told myself. I think deep down I wanted desperately to have faith again. At that point I think I'd decided that if any variety of Christianity had the Truth, the Catholic Church did. Protestantism's wholesale rejection of 1500 years of tradition didn't sit well with me, even as a former Lutheran. During class one week, Sister Bernadette Young (who runs the program) passed out thin booklet called "Handbook for Today's Catholic". One paragraph in that book spoke to me and I nearly cried as I read it.
"A person who is seeking deeper insight into reality may sometimes have doubts, even about God himself. Such doubts do not necessarily indicate lack of faith. They may be just the opposite - a sign of growing faith. Faith is alive and dynamic. It seeks, through grace, to penetrate into the very mystery of God. If a particular doctrine of faith no longer 'makes sense' to a person, the person should go right on seeking. To know what a doctrine says is one thing. To gain insight into its meaning through the gift of understanding is something else. When in doubt, 'Seek and you will find.' The person who seeks y reading, discussing, thinking, or praying eventually sees the light. The person who talks to God even when God is 'not there' is alive with faith."
At the end of class I told Sr. Bernadette that I wanted to enter the Church at the next Easter vigil. 3. If you were a tree what kind of, oh sorry about that .. what is the PODest thing you have ever done? I set up WikiIndex, a clearinghouse for reviews of theological books, good, bad, and ugly. It has a long way to go, but it'll be cool when it's finished. :) 4. What is your favorite quote from Venerable John Henry Newman? "Ten thousand difficulties do not make one doubt." 5. If you could ban one hymn from existence, what would it be? That's a tough one. As a member of the Society for a Moratorium on the Music of Marty Haugen and David Haas, there are obviously a lot of songs that grate on my nerves. If I had to pick one, though, I'd probably pick "Sing of the Lord's Goodness" by Ernie Sands.

11 thoughts on “The Trilemma: Useless

  1. Tom Smith

    Before we all go and trash this argument (and although I’ve already said this), remember that it works for a good many people who already accept the necessary premises, and who were the target of the Trilemma.

  2. sibert

    I don’t trust the “sources” (editors, translators, transcribers, various committees, etc) of the claims of Jesus transmitted to us in scripture, yet I do believe what He says. I trust that Holy Spirit has kept and delivered the Word to us in full sufficiency for the purpose of salvation and nourishment to the ends of holiness and relationship with God… I disagree with Augustine and you on this point.

  3. Tom Smith

    I haven’t missed the point; we’re in agreement. The take-home message isn’t that Scriptural veracity must be proven. It’s that we must prove the veracity of all sources, including Scripture. I merely wished to indicate that I think it is false to limit the whole of evidence of Christ’s historicity to Scripture, which is only a part of Tradition.

  4. John

    my concern was that you were going to support that piece of rhetorical nonsense.

    Regardless of ones beliefs about Jesus, that line of arguement is worthless.

  5. Tom Smith

    One must remember Lewis’ primary audience: mid-twentieth century Anglicans, people who, for the most part, already accept Scripture. This is an argument against Anglican broad-churchers, not out-and-out atheists.

    also —

    “The take home message from this short list of assumptions and possible objections is that before one can prove the veracity of Jesus’ claims, we must prove the veracity of Scripture.”

    I think that’s a real mistake, Eric — we have all of Holy Tradition telling us that Christ is divine from the beginning. Remember that Scripture is only a small portion of Tradition.

  6. sibert

    Ultimately, if we intend to come to God, but only on our own terms (intellectually or otherwise) we are not really coming to God. Holy Spirit prepares the heart of the convert. He does this by showing the convert to himself, perhaps for the first time, in relation to what God is. The trilemma is useful and convincing to and for those not so convinced of their own mental agility that they attempt to distill Holy Spirit out of the equation completely. Or, as you put it, the naive and tose posessed of weak intellect. I suppose I probably fall into both of those catagories.

  7. Funky Dung

    You’ve missed my point. One cannot trust the veracity of Jesus’ claims until one trusts the sources of those claims. In order to trust the source, one must trust the authors, editors, and transmitters of that source. As Augustine said, “I would not believe in the Gospel if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.”

  8. Pingback: Ales Rarus - A Rare Bird, A Strange Duck, One Funky Blog » Apologetics and Conversion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *