In his book Mere Christianity, CS Lewis popularised the argument that Jesus was either a liar, a lunatic, or the Lord. It’s a logically valid argument. But is it sound? Many would quickly respond with a resounding “no”. That's because there's another option that Lewis apparently didn't consider. Modern biblical criticism has shown that the Gospels are a mix of fact and legend. In a thread criticising Lewis' trilemma, comedian Rhett McLaughlin proposed a dilemma of his own: "Lewis was either not as well-versed in these matters as many thought, or he figured his readers were not well-versed enough to raise this seemingly obvious objection." Here, I show that Lewis was familiar with the legend option and wasn't impressed by it at all. Lewis spoke out against modern biblical criticism in an essay titled Fernseeds and Elephants, which you can find here.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are subject to deletion if they are not germane. I have no problem with a bit of colourful language, but blasphemy or depraved profanity will not be allowed. Attacks on the Catholic Faith will not be tolerated. Comments will be deleted that are republican (Yanks! Note the lower case 'r'!), attacks on the legitimacy of Pope Leo XIV as the Vicar of Christ, the legitimacy of the House of Windsor or of the claims of the Elder Line of the House of France, or attacks on the legitimacy of any of the currently ruling Houses of Europe.