By: Brian G. Chilton, M.Div., Ph.D. | March 9, 2025
The majority of the world’s population accepts that Jesus was an exceptional person. Christians believe that Jesus is the Son of God. Muslims accept that Jesus was a prophet. Buddhists maintain that Jesus was an enlightened person. Skeptics, like John Dominick Crossan, argue that Jesus was a social reformer.[1] However, many do not recognize Jesus’s tremendous intellectualism in his messages.
Why is it that people do not recognize the genius of Jesus? Dallas Willard observed, “Few today will have seen the words ‘Jesus’ and ‘logician’ put together to form a phrase or sentence, unless it would be to deny any connection between them all … There is in our culture an uneasy relation between Jesus and intelligence.”[2] Willard notices an oddity in culture, saying, “… among Christian and non-Christians alike, Jesus Christ is automatically disassociated from brilliance or intellectual capacity.”[3] This mindset is unfortunate because Jesus was intellectually brilliant in the way he taught. Let us consider a few of the astonishing intricacies of Jesus’s teachings.
The Use of Inductive Logic
Inductive logic is a form of argumentation that begins with the data of the senses. It takes specific information and makes broader generalizations. Since the observed data is repeatable, then the conclusion is likely to be true, as well. In other words, inductive argumentation begins with specific observations, recognizes patterns, and makes general conclusions based on those observations. These conclusions are based more on probabilities than certainties. Before you discount inductive logic due to its probabilities, know that most historical studies are based on inductive logic.
Jesus used inductive logic in his message in Matthew 7:17-18. Jesus said the following:
“Be on your guard against false prophets who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravaging wolves. You’ll recognize them by their fruit. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes or figs from thistles? In the same way, every good tree produces good fruit, but a bad tree produces bad fruit. A good tree can’t produce bad fruit; neither can a bad tree produce good fruit. Every tree that doesn’t produce good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. So you’ll recognize them by their fruit” (Matt. 7:15–20, CSB).
Inductive Layout of Jesus’s Teaching
Jesus’s argument can be broken down into the following syllogism:
- If it is true that the quality of the goodness and badness of a being’s character is revealed by the actions of that being, then this truth should be exhibited in the world.
- If this truth is evident in nature, then it should be evident in people.
- The character of a tree’s quality is demonstrated by the fruit it produces.
- Likewise, the character of a person is demonstrated by the works they produce.
- Therefore, this truth is exhibited in the world.
- Therefore, it is normally true that the quality of the goodness and badness of a being’s character is revealed by the actions of that being.
Inductive arguments can have exceptions. For instance, it could be that someone with bad character tries to do good things to earn people’s trust with bad intentions in mind. Nonetheless, the principle would still apply, given the eventual revelation of the person’s bad intent.
The Use of Deductive Logic
Jesus also used deductive logic in his teachings. Deductive logic begins with self-evident first principles and then reaches a more certain conclusion using structured patterns and observations. If the premises of the argument are true, then the conclusion must also be true. Deductive logic is especially pertinent in mathematics, formal logic, and philosophical thinking.
Jesus also excelled with his use of deductive logic. For instance, take his message in Matthew 22:37–40. When asked by a religious leader of his day about the greatest commandment, Jesus replied, “He said to him, ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind., This is the greatest and most important command. 39 The second is like it: Love your neighbor as yourself., 40 All the Law and the Prophets depend on these two commands'” (Matt. 22:37–40, CSB).
Deductive Syllogism of Jesus’s Teaching
For Jesus to have answered this question, he must have had a mastery of the entire Law of God. Thus, his argument would flow as follows:
- The greatest commandments are those on which the entire Law is based.
- The entire Law depends on the commandments to love God with all one’s being and to love one’s neighbor as oneself.
- Therefore, the greatest commandments in the Law are to love God with all one’s being and to love one’s neighbor as oneself.
The first premise is self-evident. If the second premise is true, then the conclusion follows. The second premise would have been where the debate would have occurred. However, the religious leaders accepted Jesus’s teachings as valid and true concerning the Law.
The Use of Antithetic Parallelisms and Reductio Ad Absurdum
Jesus used numerous other logical forms in his teachings. Among those he used the most were antithetic parallelism and reductio ad absurdum.
Antithetic Parallelism
Antithetic parallelism is a poetic structure used by biblical writers, especially in Wisdom Literature, where two parallel lines are contrasted.[4] Jesus uses antithetic parallelism so much in the teachings of Jesus that C. F. Burney observed that the poetic device “characterizes our Lord’s teachings in all the Gospel-sources.”[5] Joachim Jeremias counted no less than 100 occurrences of antithetic parallelisms in the teachings of Jesus across all four Gospels.[6] Some examples of Jesus’s use of this poetic logical device are found in Matt. 5:17–22; Mark 2:17; 10:45: and Lk. 6:20–23.[7]
Reductio ad Absurdum
Reductio ad absurdum (literally, “reducing to the absurd”) is a form of argumentation that shows the logical absurdity of a claim by following the argument to its logical conclusion. [8] Jesus showed his mastery of this form of argumentation in his response to the Sadducees who challenged the theological coherency of the resurrection in Matthew 22. They posed a situation where a woman had been married to seven men. Each man subsequently died before she married another brother in the family. They asked which of the men would be her husband in the resurrection.
For Jesus to respond to their objection, he had to employ the use of reductio ad absurdum and show the logical incoherency of their claim. First, he showed the Sadducees’ misunderstanding of the resurrection. Because in the resurrection, people neither marry nor are given in marriage (Matt. 22:30). Second, Jesus showed that he took time to understand the Sadducees’ theological system because he used Exodus 3:6 to show that God is a God of the living, not the dead (Matt. 22:31–32). For Jesus to respond to the accusations of the Sadducees, he was required to have mastered the logical practice of reductio ad absurdum, the theological beliefs of the Sadducees, the teachings of the Hebrew Bible (i.e., the Old Testament), and applications from biblical texts. There was no wonder why the people were so amazed at Jesus’s teachings. And it shows why the religious leaders eventually stopped challenging Jesus on an intellectual level, because they couldn’t seem to win.
Conclusion
By all accounts, Jesus was an intellectual giant. Unfortunately, many people seem to only think of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle when thinking of people who mastered logic and intellectual prowess. However, Jesus deserves to be on that list even more so. Jesus’s teachings offer hope that is not found in nihilism, strength that is not found in postmodernism, and love that is not found in many political ideologies. As previously noted, Jesus taught that the greatest commandment was to love God with all our being—from Deuteronomy 6:5. Part of that commandment means that we love God with our minds. Jesus not only serves as an example of how to live, but he also serves as an example of how we should think logically.
About the Author
Brian G. Chilton is the founder of Bellator Christi Ministries and the co-host of the Bellator Christi Podcast. Dr. Chilton earned a Ph.D. in the Theology and Apologetics at Liberty University (with high distinction), a M.Div. in Theology from Liberty University (with high distinction); his B.S. in Religious Studies and Philosophy from Gardner-Webb University (with honors); earned a Certificate in Christian Apologetics from Biola University, and completed Unit 1 of Clinical Pastoral Education at Wake Forest University’s School of Medicine. Dr. Chilton is a member of the Evangelical Theological Society and the Evangelical Philosophical Society.
In his spare time, he enjoys reading, working out in his home gym, and watching football. Brian has served in pastoral ministry for over 20 years, works as a clinical hospice chaplain, is an Adjunct Professor of Apologetics at Carolina College of Biblical Studies (https://www.CCBS.edu), and serves as the Editor-in-Chief of Acquisitions for Illative House Press (https://illativehousepress.com).
https://www.amazon.com/Laymans-Manual-Christian-Apologetics-Essentials/dp/1532697104
https://www.amazon.com/Conversations-about-Heaven-Difficult-Questions/dp/1666762687
[1] See John Dominic Crossan, Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography (New York: HarperCollins, 1994).
[2] Dallas Willard, “Jesus the Logician,” Christian Scholar’s Review 28.4 (1999): 605.
[3] Dallas Willard, The Divine Conspiracy: Rediscovering Our Hidden Life in God (New York: HarperCollins, 1998), 134.
[4] Andreas J. Kostenberger and Richard D. Patterson, Invitation ot Biblical Interpretation: Exploring the Hermeneutical Triad of History, Literature, and Theology, Invitation to Theological Studies Series (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Academic, 2011), 834.
[5] C. F. Burney, The Poetry of Our Lord (Oxford: Oxford University Press,1925), 83.
[6] Joachim Jeremias, New Testament Theology (London: SCM, 1971), 14.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Travis Dickerson, Logic and the Way of Jesus: Thinking Critically and Christianly (Nashville: B&H Academic, 2022), 38.
