Don’t just say ‘Jesus’, smartypants.
This series is about a guy, Jesus, and a word, “god”. Consider this argument:
1. Jesus is divine.
2. There is only one god.
3. Therefore, Jesus is the one god.
This argument, as it stands, is invalid. But, not to worry: when we add an obviously true premise, the resulting argument is valid.
1. Jesus is divine.
2. There is only one god.
3. Something is a god if and only if it is divine.
4. Therefore, Jesus is the one god.
The argument is valid, because if all the premises are true, then the conclusion must be true as well. But validity isn’t enough - lots of valid arguments are bad arguments (e.g. 1. The moon is made of cheese, 2. All things made of cheese are delicious. 3. Therefore, the moon is delicious.)
So the question is: Is it not only valid, but also a sound argument? It’ll be sound if all the premises are true.
3 is true by definition. A divine thing just is a god. The terms “god” and “divine” are related like these pairs of terms are related: “human being”/”human”, “cat”/”feline”. The argument will be sound then, if both 1 and 2 are true as well. Are they? It would seem that both have impeccable biblical credentials.
Trackbacks & Pingbacks 4
[...] Last time we looked at a famous argument about Jesus. (If you’ve never had a course in logic, or if it’s been a while, you should review the linked definitions there of “valid”, “invalid”, and “sound” before proceeding – this discussion presupposes that you understand their meanings.) [...]
[...] this series, we first set out an important argument from Christian theology and apologetics about Jesus. In the second installment, we simplified the [...]
[...] does this have to do with evaluating the argument which we started this series, and refined in part 2? Here’s are two refined versions from [...]
[...] up this long in the tooth series with a summary, and a few extra thoughts along the way.In parts one and two, we laid out simple arguments that Christ is divine, or that he is the one God. Careful [...]
Post a Comment