Re: Chris, Chris and Chris

Christopher B Wright wrote:


> _Your_ statement is illogical. Being God* on earth is boolean**; there's
> no middle ground. If Jesus was confused about being the Son of God, then
> He couldn't have been the Son of God.

ObQuibble: Any Jew may rightly call himself the son of God, as is
mentioned in the Talmud.

> You're saying that Jesus might have been confused about His godhood?

In error, rather than confused.

> He
> sounded pretty certain: "Are you then the Son of God?" "You are right in
> saying I am." (Luke 22:70)

ObLang: This is one of those verses whose translation is tendentious.
Clearly the court interpreted it as an affirmation (since it then
charged him with blasphemy), but it is not quite a straightforward
affirmation either.

The KJV renders the verse:

        Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said
         unto them, Ye say that I am.

which is neatly ambiguous.

Each of the Synoptic Gospels has Jesus say something slightly different
here:  Mark "I am", Luke "You (rightly or not) say that I am", Matthew
"You have said it".

> Anyway, I was considering "lie" = "any untrue
> statement", whether intentional or not.

I don't think that definition is very usual, and it certainly is
confusing.  I don't want to say that Aristotle lied when he said
that heavy things fall faster than light ones in proportion to
their weight.

--
Not to perambulate             || John Cowan <jcowan@...>
    the corridors               || http://www.reutershealth.com
during the hours of repose     || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
    in the boots of ascension.  \\ Sign in Austrian ski-resort hotel