Did Jesus commit a logical fallacy?

I do not see any fallacy here. A fallacy is a misconception resulting from incorrect reasoning in argumentation. I do not see any in this account.

Jesus asked the beggar what he wanted because the beggar needed to express his faith. The only way he could do this was by making a demand from the Lord. (you would never ask anything from someone you thought incapable of doing it for you)

Are you suggesting that Jesus--an all-knowing God--by "asking" the guy what he wanted committed a logical fallacy? I'm not sure I follow, but that's all I can think of.

Jesus didn't ask the guy what he wanted, because HE didn't know the answer. I assume He asked for all of those in attendance. Imagine it playing out as it could have and as you seem to suggest that it should have.

Guy walks up--in this case, the guy was blind, but what if he had a heart condition or cancer or whatever?--and Jesus simply says, I know your heart and by your faith you are healed.

Everyone would be like, "Great ... but what did He do for the guy?"

Again, Jesus was letting everyone know: This is what the guy needs me to do. This is what I did for him.

Does that make sense?

Lord bless

I understand the joke, and the allusion to the Begging the question fallacy. I didn't laugh, but I can at least, to some degree, appreciate your creativity. That being said, Jesus was perfect, so he never would have committed a faux pas in logic. Leave that to the realm of mortals.

Sutcliffe commited criminal acts based of fantasy not faith. Bush on the different hand trusted faith, yet additionally on British and American intellience that presumed Saddam had WMDs, and additionally had the concent from Republicans and Democrats in congress to pursue agressive movements against the seventeen violations Saddam committed against the sanctions from the 1st Gulf conflict (WMDs have been basically one out of the seventeen violations he commited, to boot the the main reported reason to bypass to conflict. even however o WMDs have been chanced on there have been sixteen different violations on which united statesa. can declare conflict upon Iraq, which isn't reported bythe "Bush Hating" media. President Bush had a rustic to shelter in, and Sutcliffe killed on his very own self aggrandizement. Bush observed the intelligence he had on the time to guard the rustic from yet another attack. If Saddam would had enable the UN inspectors in to his centers from the Clinton era on there would have been no reason to suspect he had something to conceal. Dawkins compares an hassle-free citizen who takes justice into his very own hands to somebody who's charged with keeping the rustic from yet another attack alongside with congressional approval based off of intelligence which ma or will possibly not handbook presidential judgements in situations of conflict..

LOL.

This is definitely a logical fallacy inverse of begging the question. Good catch.

No. You cannot see the Bible message as an historical information...

The blind are our conscience... and Jesus is the original source that must be born inside each one.

When Jesus is inside we begin seeing the real meaning of life.

do you remember the lynn anderson song I beg your question i never promised you a rose garden

Jesus is a logical fallacy.

you need to get more honest,it is not a virtue of yours,what you really need also is a higher watage light bulb.

No, but the people who believe in him do all of the time.