Are you religious/ superstitious?

[doodab]

That comment by C S Lewis makes not an ounce of sense.

I think he's arguing that you either have to accept Jesus claim to be the son of god or dismiss him as a mental case. It made me think of this

[xoggoth]

Obviously anyone who claims to be god (assuming they are not) might be mad but Lewis appears to be saying that of anyone who preached any of Christ teachings.

[d000hg]

Obviously anyone who claims to be god (assuming they are not) might be mad but Lewis appears to be saying that of anyone who preached any of Christ teachings.

You've mis-read it, or you missed the context. From the same wiki page:

Lewis's trilemma is based on the view that, in his words and deeds, Jesus was asserting a claim to be God

Doodab's summary is correct.

[doodab]

Obviously anyone who claims to be god (assuming they are not) might be mad but Lewis appears to be saying that of anyone who preached any of Christ teachings.

His argument relies on the unstated premise that because everything lunatics and liars say is unreliable it must also be false, and by reductio ad absurdum infers that because some of what he said is "true" it cannot have come from a lunatic or liar, therefore all of it must be true.

Reject the unstated premise and the argument falls apart.

[d000hg]

The premise is not that nothing a lunatic or fraud says can be valid but that their character is so muddied by it, it's crazy to suggest they can be a role model.

This argument doesn't imply that Jesus is God. You're making your own extrapolation... no doubt that's an intention but it's not stated as part of the argument. If you want to decide Jesus was mad, that's your call.

[doodab]

This argument certainly doesn't even try to imply that Jesus is God. That's not the point; you're making your own extrapolation.

Lewis states clearly that if Jesus wasn't a lunatic or a fiend then he (and by extension anyone else following his line of argument) has to accept the view that Jesus was and is god.

Now it seems to me obvious that He was neither a lunatic nor a fiend: and consequently, however strange or terrifying or unlikely it may seem, I have to accept the view that He was and is God

Now, Lewis doesn't give his reasons for believing Jesus was "neither a lunatic or a fiend" except to state that it "seems obvious", so I've had to guess as to why he might think that, but the conclusion is all his.

[d000hg]

Yes, but it's your own choice whether you agree Jesus isn't a lunatic/fiend part. He's only adding his own personal thoughts on the end.

Anyway this is simply one person's argument anyway, I posted it to answer Mich since it's probably the most well-known "sound-bite" answer that doesn't require several pages of theology, and can be understood by just about anyone.

I certainly wouldn't put much stock in the words of someone who claimed the things about themself Jesus did, if I didn't belief those things. It'd be like a political leader announcing they're a space alien.

[Wodewick]

Yes, but it's your own choice whether you agree about the lunatic/fiend part. He's only adding his own personal thoughts on the end... and this is simply one person's argument anyway, regardless if it's popular, not holy writ. Lots of Christians dislike the argument too, but to me it's a decent one, and I posted it to answer Mich since it's probably the most well-known "sound-bite" answer that doesn't require 3 chapters

I certainly wouldn't put much stock in the words of someone who claimed the things about themself Jesus did, if I didn't belief those things. It'd be political leader announcing they're a space alien.

Given the thread topic that just made me laugh!!!

[xoggoth]

I wonder if we can put much stock in the pronouncements of a guy whose character travels in space with no vessel or space suit and gets a bit sun burnt down one side.


PS Assuming I am recalling That Hideous Strength correctly. It was about 50 years ago I read it.

[kandr]

Yes, but it's your own choice whether you agree Jesus isn't a lunatic/fiend part. He's only adding his own personal thoughts on the end.

Anyway this is simply one person's argument anyway, I posted it to answer Mich since it's probably the most well-known "sound-bite" answer that doesn't require several pages of theology, and can be understood by just about anyone.

I certainly wouldn't put much stock in the words of someone who claimed the things about themself Jesus did, if I didn't belief those things. It'd be like a political leader announcing they're a space alien.

Or perhaps Jesus never claimed to be the Son Of God, but was just a gifted moralist ahead of his time, and those claims where stiched on by a commitee of people afterwords?. CS Lewis seemed to take the New Testament as Gospel!