• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

What was wrong with C.S. Lewis's argument that Jesus had to be either Lord, liar, or lunatic?

tonychanyt

24/7 Christian
Oct 2, 2011
6,061
2,238
Toronto
Visit site
✟196,410.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Lewis’s argument that Jesus must be either Lord, Liar, or Lunatic—often referred to as the trilemma—appears in Mere Christianity (1952). This kind of breakdown in reasoning often fails because it oversimplifies real-world possibilities to just three. It constitutes a false trichotomy.

Here is a fourth possibility. From a non-believer's perspective, the story could be regarded as a legend. If the divine claims were later additions by followers, Jesus might have been a profound legendary teacher without being God, a liar, or a lunatic. Judaism views him as a rabbi and not God, while Islam regards him as a prophet. Fundamentally, non-Christians do not perceive the gospels as entirely historically reliable.

There are more possibilities. Lewis oversimplified psychology and mental illness. Again, from an atheist perspective, someone might be delusional about their identity yet coherent in their speech. Jesus could have had a messianic self-conception—common in 1st-century Judea—without exhibiting full-blown insanity or deceit.

Wiki:

Sathya Sai Baba was an Indian godman.[2][3] … His followers have attributed to him a range of miraculous abilities, including the materialisation of Vibhuti (holy ash) and other small objects such as rings, necklaces, and watches. He was also believed to have performed spontaneous healings, resurrections, and exhibited clairvoyant abilities. Additionally, claims were made regarding his ability to be in multiple places simultaneously (bilocation), as well as his omnipresence, omnipotence, and omniscience.[9][10]
Sathya Sai Baba may not have been the Lord, a liar, or a lunatic (in the simplistic sense). From the atheists' perspective, he might have been genuinely self-deceived.

Another example, Wiki:

Apollo Carreon Quiboloy is a Filipino pastor and the leader of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ (KOJC or KJC), a Restorationist church based in the Philippines.[6][7] He founded the KOJC in 1985, proclaiming himself the "Appointed Son of God" and the "Owner of the Universe".
Apollo's followers do not think he is a liar or lunatic, even though non-followers may. Psychological reality is more complex than Lewis' simple delineation.

C.S. Lewis's trilemma is a memorable argument for Christians, but it has limitations for non-Christians, including Judaism and Islam. It works well within a Christian framework and for those who accept the Gospels as historically reliable. However, it does not fully address the complexities of historical criticism, cultural context, or alternative interpretations of Jesus' identity. It made assumptions that atheists would not accept. His argument is more celebrated in Christian circles than among skeptical ones. In the end, logic alone almost never converts anyone because different people use different kinds of subjective reasoning.
 
Last edited:

seeking.IAM

A View From The Pew
Site Supporter
Feb 29, 2004
4,852
5,607
Indiana
✟1,142,638.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
From a non-beliver's point of view, the story could be a legend. If the divine claims were later additions by followers, Jesus could’ve been a profound legendary teacher without being God, a liar, or a lunatic
Lewis' actual words negate Jesus as merely a great moral teacher:

“A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic—on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg—or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice.”​

 
Upvote 0

RoBo1988

Well-Known Member
Sep 3, 2021
1,377
968
64
Dayton OH
✟145,848.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Lewis' actual words negate Jesus as merely a great moral teacher:

“A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic—on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg—or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice.”​

Someone like Jordan Peterson would be a moral teacher IMO. Good advice, counsel, but not directing to any authority. Just teaching you to become an "acceptable slave," in the words of Derek Prince.
 
  • Useful
Reactions: tonychanyt
Upvote 0

tonychanyt

24/7 Christian
Oct 2, 2011
6,061
2,238
Toronto
Visit site
✟196,410.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Lewis' actual words negate Jesus as merely a great moral teacher:

“A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic—on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg—or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice.”​

This logic makes reasonable sense only if one believes that the gospels are accurate recordings. An atheist or Muslim could make the choice that Jesus didn't say what the gospels said he did say. Lewis oversimplified the number of choices.
 
  • Love
Reactions: jamiec
Upvote 0

tonychanyt

24/7 Christian
Oct 2, 2011
6,061
2,238
Toronto
Visit site
✟196,410.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
CS Lewis is proving a point. Many believe that Jesus was not the Son of God so if he wasn't, he has to be either a liar or a lunatic. We as Christians know the correct answer however.
He was not trying to convince Christians to believe in Jesus.
 
Upvote 0

Kensie

Theology Matters
Nov 18, 2024
29
14
Anderson
✟8,103.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
If you were an atheist, would Lewis' trilemma argument be convincing to you?
If I didn't believe in the divinity of Christ and his identity of the Son of God, I would presume that yes, either he was a lair or lunatic. I don't however.
 
Upvote 0

Kensie

Theology Matters
Nov 18, 2024
29
14
Anderson
✟8,103.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
This logic makes reasonable sense only if one believes that the gospels are accurate recordings. An atheist or Muslim could make the choice that Jesus didn't say what the gospels said he did say. Lewis oversimplified the number of choices.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hvizsgyak
Upvote 0

Kensie

Theology Matters
Nov 18, 2024
29
14
Anderson
✟8,103.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
I do see the point you are looking to make. I will say, though, I don't believe that Lewis' point is necessarily meant for us to think so deeply. As I said above, he was trying to "prove a point," if you will. Ultimately it is not up to man to decide what the atheist or Muslim chooses to believe. We are called to share the Gospel nonetheless and Lord will work in their hearts to either accept or reject the truth.
 
  • Useful
Reactions: tonychanyt
Upvote 0

tonychanyt

24/7 Christian
Oct 2, 2011
6,061
2,238
Toronto
Visit site
✟196,410.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Ultimately it is not up to man to decide what the atheist or Muslim chooses to believe.
Right, however, Lewis addressed his trilemma argument to them, not to Christians. His argument failed logically to convince them because it wasn't airtight. It’s more celebrated in Christian circles than among skeptical ones.
 
Upvote 0

okay

Active Member
Apr 10, 2023
352
330
New England
✟57,665.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Private
If you were an atheist, would Lewis' trilemma argument be convincing to you?
Not at all. Even for those who believe Jesus probably existed, the gospels were written at least a decade after he was crucified, so it would be easy to discount the words attributed to Jesus as being inventions of the authors. Given what we know about the unreliability of eye-witness testimony these days (and all those convicted by such testimony who have eventually been freed from prison through DNA evidence), Lewis' argument is even weaker now than it was when he wrote it.
 
  • Useful
Reactions: tonychanyt
Upvote 0

okay

Active Member
Apr 10, 2023
352
330
New England
✟57,665.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Private
Or , we (abiding IN UNION TODAY WITH JESUS) hear (today) Jesus' Voice and Believe Jesus.
The question was what I would think of the argument if I were an atheist. Given the way my brain works, and the conversations I have had with atheist friends and family, I think I would find the argument to be completely uncompelling.

I do abide in union with Christ today and believe. But that is not the topic of this thread.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tonychanyt
Upvote 0