C. S. Lewis’s Use of Scripture in the ‘Liar, Lunatic, Lord’ Argument

2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 27-66
Author(s):  
Leslie Baynes
Keyword(s):  
First Century ◽  
Son Of God ◽  
Scriptural Interpretation ◽  
The Liar

C. S. Lewis’s ‘Liar, Lunatic, Lord’ argument elicits important questions about Jesus and scriptural interpretation that need addressing, not least because of its immense popularity in some Christian circles. Did Jesus really go about saying that he was God, or the Son of God, or that he had always existed? After examining the biblical record, must one conclude that Jesus was either a liar, a lunatic, or God? Are there really no alternatives? The point of this paper is most emphatically not to attempt to disprove Jesus’ divinity, but rather to demonstrate that Lewis’s use of the gospels is insufficient to prove it. The paper argues that even without deeming the gospels ‘legends,’ but rather accepting them as a reliable portrayal of the words of Jesus, Lewis’s argument falls short because he fails to put the gospels into their first-century context. He instead reads post-Nicene Christology into Hellenistic Judeo-Christian documents.

The Son of God and Son of the Most High in the Daniel Apocryphon from Qumran

2020 ◽  
pp. 38-44
Author(s):  
Peter Schäfer
Keyword(s):  
First Century ◽  
The Other ◽  
Son Of God ◽  
Son Of Man ◽  
Book Of Daniel ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter covers another text from Qumran, the so-called Daniel Apocryphon. It refers directly to the Son of Man in the biblical Book of Daniel and has drawn attention from numerous scholars. The chapter describes Daniel Apocryphon as a fragment of an Aramaic scroll dating from the late Herodian period, which is the last third of the first century BCE. Its particular significance comes from its unique, straightforward way of mentioning a “Son of God” and “Son of the Most High.” The chapter also points out the relationship between the most high God El and Elohim-Melchizedek. Although Psalm 82:1 states that Elohim-Melchizedek holds judgment in the midst of the other gods, the judgment at the end of days is actually reserved for the Most High God El, as becomes clear from Psalm 7:8–9.

scholarly journals Jesus as Lord

1911 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 204-228 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Wisner Bacon
Keyword(s):  
First Century ◽  
Original Form ◽  
Primitive Form ◽  
Son Of God ◽  
Son Of Man ◽  
Pauline Epistles ◽  
The Ideal ◽  
Second Coming

In successive discussions of the title Son of God, which seems to have been Jesus' own self-designation, and Son of Man, which would seem to have been applied to him after his death by the primitive Aramaic-speaking community of believers in his second coming, we have sought to disentangle primitive from secondary tradition. We have particularly emphasized the fact that in its distinctive principles Jesus' own teaching attaches itself to the primitive form of the messianic ideal—Israel as Yahweh's son; not the later theocratic—the Davidic heir to the throne as Son of God; nor the still later apocalyptic—the supernatural deliverer coming on the clouds of heaven as the fulfilment of the promise. In agreement with this view of the teaching of Jesus, our earliest documents, the Pauline epistles, make sonship in the ethical and religious sense the essence of the glad tidings. Since the publication of our argument our conclusions have been confirmed by the important newly-discovered document, the Odes of Solomon. The confirmation is especially strong if the view of Harnack be taken, that the Odes in their original form are Jewish, rather than the view of their discoverer, J. Rendel Harris, who regards them as Christian. The Odes give irrefutable evidence of the existence in first-century Judaism, or at least in primitive Christian circles, of a doctrine of sonship in the ethical and religious sense closely in line with what we have urged as the distinctive element in the messianic consciousness of Jesus. The ideal of the odist for Israel is an ideal of spiritual sonship. By the knowledge and love of the Beloved, “the Most High and Merciful,” Israel is guaranteed not only sonship to God, but immortality, an eternal dwelling in God's presence.

Managing Networks of Twenty-First Century Organisations

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Perri Six ◽  
Nick Goodwin ◽  
Edward Peck ◽  
Tim Freeman
Keyword(s):  
First Century ◽  
Twenty First Century
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document