Quote:
|
Jesus believed that he was one with god and that god was within him. I do not see how that would make him crazy?
|
The problem with this and similar views (Jesus as guru) is that it's anachronistic. He was not a Buddhist philosopher, he was a Jew, and so was raised in a culture that firmly believed in the oneness of God. For a Jew to claim to be one with God can only mean one in the sense of identical with.
Chavos (rightly) questions the LLL argument. It's not an airtight argument, and it's not meant to be. But he goes a bit too far saying that it's a bunch of crap. Firstly, it's not meant to denigrate persons with mental illness, just to point out that we don't consider such persons to be good role models. Not that we should ignore everything they say, or anything like that, but that we don't consider such people to be prophets. Secondly, it's not true that it misrepresents the text. It is true that Christ nowhere says "I'm God". But he says as much.
I've already mentioned the forgiveness argument (which is also from Lewis). But there are other places. The most compelling is the fact that Christ applies the divine name (I AM) to himself. Before you object that he could hardly avoid saying I am in ordinary conversation, let me point out that the Greek used to render Christ's "I am" sayings is not the normal way of saying I am in the language. He also applies the name "Son of Man" to himself, which is
not, as it is often taken to be, an affirmation of his humanity, but rather his divinity. It is a reference to a passage in the Old Testament (which I can't find right now) that fairly clearly refers to God.
Regarding Chavos's objection to the forgiveness argument: what you say is well and good, but it doesn't really fit with the text. It's clear that, when Christ claims to forgive sins,
he's claiming to forgive them, and in doing so, claiming to be God. Why else would his audience pick up stones to kill him for blasphemy otherwise?