@yurihbss Hi, did you have a question?

Is C.S. Lewis's Liar-Lord-or-Lunatic Argument Unsound? | TGC

@Mr.Bultitude I kind of think it's a false trichotomy. When I was younger I used to add a fourth L-named element, "legend". I think this shows that there are more than those three reasons that the story may be false.

However, using it as a base to organize your apologetics makes sense to me. If you can show that the story is not a legend, not made up intentionally, and that Jesus was not a crazy man, then you have a solid basis for arguing that he just may be Lord.

@fredsbend I'm trying to figure out if you read it, because the author talks about that exact fourth option: legend, and quotes C.S. Lewis in debunking it.

@El'endiaStarman I'm reading it now.

I came back for a quick swipe at the author. I think he's conflating validity with soundness.

Or rather, it seems I've been conflating them for many years. lol. quora.com/…

@El'endiaStarman and @Mr.Bultitude I see a comment suggesting that Jesus could have made an honest mistake, thinking he was an incarnate God. If he possessed abilities that were remarkable, yet exist not because he was incarnate God, he could wrongly, but honestly, conclude that he was incarnate God.

I find that a little silly, but seems logical.

Another comment notes that the argument is not meant to prove that Jesus is Lord, but rather than Jesus cannot be a good and moral teacher without also being Lord. After all, the quote does start:

> I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God. That is the one thing we must not say.