Freethought & Rationalism Archive

xeren · 09-25-2002, 10:43 AM

Okay, most people have heard of C.S. Lewis' trilemna, popularized by Josh McDowell, who made it more clear be asking Lord, Liar, or Lunatic?

This trilemna bugs me, because i know there are other options, but i can't think of them, so can anyone else present me with some options to this supposed trilemna that Christians don't want us thinking about?

Darwin's Finch · 09-25-2002, 10:51 AM

How about "mistaken", "misunderstood" or "misrepresented"?

[ September 25, 2002: Message edited by: Darwin's Finch ]

Undercurrent · 09-25-2002, 10:54 AM

"inaccurately reported", "embellished", "fictional".

Josh McDowell expects us to be as short on ideas as he is.

m.

Grumpy · 09-25-2002, 01:56 PM

"Mistaken, Misquoted, or Mythical"

Personally, I think the case for Liar or Lunatic are a lot stronger than Lewis or McDowell let on.

Hobbs · 09-25-2002, 05:33 PM

It is really a quadlemma (at least): liar, lunatic, lord, or legend. From all I've seen and studied, 'legend' seems by far the most likely.

Brian63 · 09-25-2002, 06:54 PM

My understanding of the more "sophisticated" versions of the Trilemma argument is that all the objections raised thus far in this thread are resolved by historical evidence that Jesus did actually exist and that Jesus did make the claims that are recorded in the Gospel regarding his diety.

So, for the sake of argument, let's say that Jesus did exist and did claim to be God. Is the trilemma still an invalid argument?

Brian

Veil of Fire · 09-25-2002, 08:41 PM

Liar, Lunatic, Lord, or "Life of Brian" Situation.

Eudaimonist · 09-26-2002, 03:25 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Brian63:
So, for the sake of argument, let's say that Jesus did exist and did claim to be God. Is the trilemma still an invalid argument?

It's invalid precisely because this questionable assumption is being made. But, sure, if we make this assumption, the argument seems okay to me.

Steven Carr · 09-26-2002, 03:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by xeren:
Okay, most people have heard of C.S. Lewis' trilemna, popularized by Josh McDowell, who made it more clear be asking Lord, Liar, or Lunatic?

This trilemna bugs me, because i know there are other options, but i can't think of them, so can anyone else present me with some options to this supposed trilemna that Christians don't want us thinking about?

A lot depends upon whether or not you think there is a prima facie case that somebody claiming to be God is mentally unbalanced.

Nobody has ever accused *me* of being mentally unbalanced, after I threaten to strike them down with thunderbolts for their blasphemy. They just seem to walk (or sometimes run) away.

Skid · 09-26-2002, 05:14 AM

Here's a relevant article from the II Library:

<a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jim_perry/trilemma.shtml" target="_blank">The Trilemma-- Lord, Liar Or Lunatic?</a>

Quote:

One way to judge the logical quality of an argument like this is to consider a similar argument about someone one feels differently about, for instance Muhammad: liar, lunatic, or prophet of God? One can find muslims making essentially similar arguments to those cited by McDowell about his sterling honesty and clarity of mind. The same again for Baha'ullah and other religious figures.

09-25-2002, 10:43 AM	#1
xeren Regular Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Place Posts: 285	That stupid Trilemna Okay, most people have heard of C.S. Lewis' trilemna, popularized by Josh McDowell, who made it more clear be asking Lord, Liar, or Lunatic? This trilemna bugs me, because i know there are other options, but i can't think of them, so can anyone else present me with some options to this supposed trilemna that Christians don't want us thinking about?

09-25-2002, 10:51 AM	#2
Darwin's Finch Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Gardnerville, NV Posts: 666	How about "mistaken", "misunderstood" or "misrepresented"? [ September 25, 2002: Message edited by: Darwin's Finch ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-25-2002, 10:54 AM	#3
Undercurrent Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Santa Fe, NM Posts: 2,362	"inaccurately reported", "embellished", "fictional". Josh McDowell expects us to be as short on ideas as he is. m.

09-25-2002, 01:56 PM	#4
Grumpy Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Alaska, USA Posts: 1,535	"Mistaken, Misquoted, or Mythical" Personally, I think the case for Liar or Lunatic are a lot stronger than Lewis or McDowell let on.

09-25-2002, 05:33 PM	#5
Hobbs Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2000 Posts: 929	It is really a quadlemma (at least): liar, lunatic, lord, or legend. From all I've seen and studied, 'legend' seems by far the most likely.

09-25-2002, 06:54 PM	#6
Brian63 Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: My own little fantasy world Posts: 8,911	My understanding of the more "sophisticated" versions of the Trilemma argument is that all the objections raised thus far in this thread are resolved by historical evidence that Jesus did actually exist and that Jesus did make the claims that are recorded in the Gospel regarding his diety. So, for the sake of argument, let's say that Jesus did exist and did claim to be God. Is the trilemma still an invalid argument? Brian

09-25-2002, 08:41 PM	#7
Veil of Fire Regular Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: South Carolina Posts: 451	Liar, Lunatic, Lord, or "Life of Brian" Situation.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.