C. S. Lewis's Liar/Lunatic/Lord: can it be applied elsewhere?

[Edris]

cute2904:

From a person that said “but please think before you speak, don’t let your brain be like an extra weight.” Those words were so comforting we do should go out for a beer Edris

Mind you to explain the other verses I quoted?..

why not saying THE FIRST OF THE MUSLIM directly?

1. Why every prophet claimed to be the first of the believer while they should have known others before them? Sound strange to me to indicate the word Muslim → Believer → Strong faith. Meanwhile, we who have strong faith also can be called muslim or it doesnt imply for people of the book or jews? 2) How many heavens does God provide? If people would be placed according to their levels.

   I'm not surprised that you didn't understand a word of what i said.    I'm gonna save my self  re-explaining what i already explained.   

     there is just that last point you mentioned on how many heavens does God provide,  i think i have to explain it,  cause i know it's very hard for you to grasp from the first time :)

      Allah provides one heaven,  but this heaven is divided into levels,  based on your faith, good deeds, etc......In one of the ahadith the Prophet pbuh said  what means that some of the believers in heaven will look at other believers,  like you look at the stars.

Peace

 

[cute2904]

Edris:

I’m not surprised that you didn’t understand a word of what i said. I’m gonna save my self re-explaining what i already explained.

that because what you explain unreasonable to my sense

In one of the ahadith the Prophet pbuh said what means that some of the believers in heaven will look at other believers, like you look at the stars.

Peace

what??

 

[Faith101]

cute2904:

that because what you explain unreasonable to my sense

what??

All of those who believed in the messenger that was sent to them from God are Muslims. All the Prophets are Muslims.

When Jesus found Unbelief on their part He said: “Who will be My helpers to (the work of) Allah.” Said the disciples: "We are Allah.s helpers: We believe in Allah,** and do thou bear witness that we are muslims**. (Chapter #3, Verse #52)

 

[jcaz]

WOW. And backwards. WOW.

One can swim in the ignorance on this thread.

Originally posted by cute2904, thus showing she has NO KNOWLEDGE even of Christianity:

According to our bible Abraham (pbuh) was a Jew. Yes we also never claimed that he was a Christian though…nor following Budha (pbuh) or Confusius (pbuh).

ABRAHAM WAS NOT A JEW. This is even according to the CATHOLIC FAITH!

Posted by Booklover, also proving to be ignorant on this subject:

Abraham was a JEW so his religion would have been Judaism, and the Jews were the chosen people of God!

The word Jew was used to identify the Isrealite tribe of Judah. Judah was one of the twelve sons of Jacob. Jacob was the son of Isaac. And Isaac the son of Abrahaam. So we see that Abraham was the great Grandfather of those who were named Jews, who were named so AFTER THE TRIBE OF JUDAH, which was MUCH LATER.

Abraham was a Semite (descendent of Shem) and he was a Hebrew (descendent of Eber or Heber), but to saw he was a Judahite is to say that he descended from his own Grandson!

How do you people expect to hold dialogue with others when you are going to be so openly ignorant on such obvious and clear subjects? Subjects that CATHOLICS do not disagree upon!

WOW. And backwards. WOW.

 

[jcaz]

And cute2904,

IF, key word, IF, you are truly seeking an explanation of those verses, then here is the explanation by Ibn Katheer, who is accpeted as one of the best authorities for explanation of the Quraan:

Islam is the Religion of all Prophets

The Ayah,

وَأَنَاْ أَوَّلُ الْمُسْلِمِينَ]

(and I am the first of the Muslims.) means, from this Ummah, according to Qatadah. This is a sound meaning, because all Prophets before our Prophet were calling to Islam, which commands worshipping Allah alone without partners. Allah said in another Ayah,

وَمَآ أَرْسَلْنَا مِن قَبْلِكَ مِن رَّسُولٍ إِلاَّ نُوحِى إِلَيْهِ أَنَّهُ لا إِلَـهَ إِلاَّ أَنَاْ فَاعْبُدُونِ ]

(And We did not send any Messenger before you but We revealed to him (saying): "None has the right to be worshipped but I, so worship Me.’’) [21:25] Allah informed us that Nuh said to his people,

فَإِن تَوَلَّيْتُمْ فَمَا سَأَلْتُكُمْ مِّنْ أَجْرٍ إِنْ أَجْرِىَ إِلاَّ عَلَى اللَّهِ وَأُمِرْتُ أَنْ أَكُونَ مِنَ الْمُسْلِمِينَ ]

(But if you turn away, then no reward have I asked of you, my reward is only from Allah, and I have been commanded to be of the Muslims.) [10:72] Allah said,

وَمَن يَرْغَبُ عَن مِّلَّةِ إِبْرَهِيمَ إِلاَّ مَن سَفِهَ نَفْسَهُ وَلَقَدِ اصْطَفَيْنَـهُ فِي الدُّنْيَا وَإِنَّهُ فِى الاٌّخِرَةِ لَمِنَ الصَّـلِحِينَ - إِذْ قَالَ لَهُ رَبُّهُ أَسْلِمْ قَالَ أَسْلَمْتُ لِرَبِّ الْعَـلَمِينَ - وَوَصَّى بِهَآ إِبْرَهِيمُ بَنِيهِ وَيَعْقُوبُ يَـبَنِىَّ إِنَّ اللَّهَ اصْطَفَى لَكُمُ الدِّينَ فَلاَ تَمُوتُنَّ إَلاَّ وَأَنتُم مُّسْلِمُونَ ]

(And who turns away from the religion of Ibrahim except him who deludes himself Truly, We chose him in this world and verily, in the Hereafter he will be among the righteous. When his Lord said to him, "Submit (i.e. be a Muslim)!’’ He said, "I have submitted myself (as a Muslim) to the Lord of the all that exists.’’ And this was enjoined by Ibrahim upon his sons and by Ya`qub (saying), “O my sons! Allah has chosen for you the (true) religion, then die not except as Muslims.”)[2:130-132]. Yusuf, peace be upon him, said,

رَبِّ قَدْ آتَيْتَنِى مِنَ الْمُلْكِ وَعَلَّمْتَنِى مِن تَأْوِيلِ الاٌّحَادِيثِ فَاطِرَ السَّمَـوَتِ وَالاٌّرْضِ أَنتَ وَلِىِّ فِى الدُّنُيَا وَالاٌّخِرَةِ تَوَفَّنِى مُسْلِمًا وَأَلْحِقْنِى بِالصَّـلِحِينَ ]

(My Lord! You have indeed bestowed on me of the sovereignty, and taught me something of the interpretation of dreams – the (Only) Creator of the heavens and the earth! You are my Wali (Protector) in this world and in the Hereafter. Cause me to die as a Muslim, and join me with the righteous.) [12:101] Musa said,

وَقَالَ مُوسَى يقَوْمِ إِن كُنتُمْ ءامَنْتُمْ بِاللَّهِ فَعَلَيْهِ تَوَكَّلُواْ إِن كُنْتُم مُّسْلِمِينَ - فَقَالُواْ عَلَى اللَّهِ تَوَكَّلْنَا رَبَّنَا لاَ تَجْعَلْنَا فِتْنَةً لِّلْقَوْمِ الظَّـلِمِينَ - وَنَجِّنَا بِرَحْمَتِكَ مِنَ الْقَوْمِ الْكَـفِرِينَ ]

(And Musa said: “O my people! If you have believed in Allah, then put your trust in Him if you are Muslims.” They said: "In Allah we put our trust. Our Lord! Make us not a trial for the folk who are wrongdoers. And save us by your mercy from the disbelieving folk’’) [10:84-86] Allah said,

إِنَّآ أَنزَلْنَا التَّوْرَاةَ فِيهَا هُدًى وَنُورٌ يَحْكُمُ بِهَا النَّبِيُّونَ الَّذِينَ أَسْلَمُواْ لِلَّذِينَ هَادُواْ وَالرَّبَّانِيُّونَ وَالاٌّحْبَارُ]

(Verily, We did send down the Tawrah, therein was guidance and light, by which the Prophets, who submitted themselves to Allah’s will, judged for the Jews. And the rabbis and the priests [did also].) [5:44], and,

وَإِذْ أَوْحَيْتُ إِلَى الْحَوَارِيِّينَ أَنْ ءَامِنُواْ بِى وَبِرَسُولِى قَالُواْ ءَامَنَّا وَاشْهَدْ بِأَنَّنَا مُسْلِمُونَ ]

(And when I (Allah) inspired Al-Hawariyyun (the disciples) [of `Isa] to believe in Me and My Messenger, they said: “We believe. And bear witness that we are Muslims.”) [5:111] Therefore, Allah states that He sent all His Messengers with the religion of Islam, although their respective laws differed from each other, and some of them abrogated others. Later on, the Law sent with Muhammad abrogated all previous laws and nothing will ever abrogate it, forever. Certainly, Muhammad’s Law will always be apparent and its flags raised high, until the Day of Resurrection.

 

[jcaz]

The Prophet said, C

«نَحْنُ مَعَاشِرُ الْأَنْبِيَاءِ أَوْلَادُ عَلَّاتٍ دِينُنَا وَاحِد»

(We, the Prophets, are half brothers, but our religion is one.) Half brothers, mentioned in the Hadith, refers to the brothers to one father, but different mothers. Therefore, the religion, representing the one father, is one; worshipping Allah alone without partners, even though the laws which are like the different mothers in this parable, are different. Allah the Most High knows best. Imam Ahmad recorded that `Ali said that when the Messenger of Allah used to start the prayer with Takbir [saying, "Allahu Akbar’’ (Allah is the Great)] he would then supplicate,

«وَجَّهْتُ وَجْهِيَ لِلَّذِي فَطَرَ السَّمَوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضَ حَنِيفًا وَمَا أَنَا مِنَ الْمُشْرِكِينَ، إِنَّ صَلَاتِي وَنُسُكِي وَمَحْيَايَ وَمَمَاتِي للهِ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِين»

(I have directed my face towards He Who has created the heavens and earth, Hanifan and I am not among the Mushrikin. Certainly, my prayer, sacrifice, living and dying are all for Allah, Lord of the worlds.)

«اللَّهُمَّ أَنْتَ الْمَلِكُ لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا أَنْتَ، أَنْتَ رَبِّي وَأَنَا عَبْدُكَ ظَلَمْتُ نَفْسِي وَاعْتَرَفْتُ بِذَنْبِي فَاغْفِرْ لِي ذُنُوبِي جَمِيعًا لَا يَغْفِرُ الذُّنُوبَ إِلَّا أَنْتَ، وَاهْدِنِي لِأَحْسَنِ الْأَخْلَاقِ لَا يَهْدِي لِأَحْسَنِهَا إِلَّا أَنْتَ، وَاصْرِفْ عَنِّي سَيِّئَهَا لَا يَصْرِفُ عَنِّي سَيِّئَهَا إِلَّا أَنْتَ، تَبَارَكْتَ وَتَعَالَيْتَ، أَسْتَغْفِرُكَ وَأَتُوبُ إِلَيْك»

(O Allah! You are the King, there is no deity worthy of worship except You. You are my Lord and I am Your servant. I have committed wrong against myself and admitted to my error, so forgive me all my sins. Verily, You, only You forgive the sins. (O Allah!) Direct me to the best conduct, for none except You directs to the best conduct. Divert me from the worst conduct, for only You divert from the worst conduct. Glorified and Exalted You are. I seek Your forgiveness and repent to You.) This Hadith, which was also recorded by Muslim in the Sahih, continues and mentions the Prophet’s supplication in his bowing, prostrating and final sitting positions.

قُلْ أَغَيْرَ اللَّهِ أَبْغِى رَبًّا وَهُوَ رَبُّ كُلِّ شَىْءٍ وَلاَ تَكْسِبُ كُلُّ نَفْسٍ إِلاَّ عَلَيْهَا وَلاَ تَزِرُ وَازِرَةٌ وِزْرَ أُخْرَى ثُمَّ إِلَى رَبِّكُمْ مَّرْجِعُكُمْ فَيُنَبِّئُكُم بِمَا كُنتُمْ فِيهِ تَخْتَلِفُونَ ]

(164. Say: “Shall I seek a lord other than Allah, while He is the Lord of all things No person earns any (sin) except against himself (only), and no bearer of burdens shall bear the burden of another. Then unto your Lord is your return, so He will tell you that wherein you have been differing.”)

 

[cute2904]

jcaz:

WOW. And backwards. WOW.

:yawn:

One can swim in the ignorance on this thread.

Originally posted by cute2904, thus showing she has NO KNOWLEDGE even of Christianity:

ABRAHAM WAS NOT A JEW. This is even according to the CATHOLIC FAITH!

Posted by Booklover, also proving to be ignorant on this subject:

The word Jew was used to identify the Isrealite tribe of Judah. Judah was one of the twelve sons of Jacob. Jacob was the son of Isaac. And Isaac the son of Abrahaam. So we see that Abraham was the great Grandfather of those who were named Jews, who were named so AFTER THE TRIBE OF JUDAH, which was MUCH LATER.

Abraham was a Semite (descendent of Shem) and he was a Hebrew (descendent of Eber or Heber), but to saw he was a Judahite is to say that he descended from his own Grandson!

How do you people expect to hold dialogue with others when you are going to be so openly ignorant on such obvious and clear subjects? Subjects that CATHOLICS do not disagree upon!

WOW. And backwards. WOW.

again…:yawn:

 

[jcaz]

Posted by ME after cute2409 and Booklover IGNORANTLY claimed that Abraham was a Jew

ABRAHAM WAS NOT A JEW. This is even according to the CATHOLIC FAITH!

The word Jew was used to identify the Isrealite tribe of Judah. Judah was one of the twelve sons of Jacob. Jacob was the son of Isaac. And Isaac the son of Abrahaam. So we see that Abraham was the great Grandfather of those who were named Jews, who were named so AFTER THE TRIBE OF JUDAH, which was MUCH LATER.

Abraham was a Semite (descendent of Shem) and he was a Hebrew (descendent of Eber or Heber), but to saw he was a Judahite is to say that he descended from his own Grandson!

How do you people expect to hold dialogue with others when you are going to be so openly ignorant on such obvious and clear subjects? Subjects that CATHOLICS do not disagree upon!

WOW. And backwards. WOW.

cute’s response:

again… :yawn:

At LEAST come admit your ignorance, admit you were wrong, and then we can attempt the discussion again. What does it mean to simply “yawn” after you make a stupid statement and then someone refutes you. YOU ARE JUST AS BAD AS THE TERRORISTS. You have some stupid belief that goes AGAINST EVEN YOUR FAITH, yet when i prove you wrong, you have the arrogance to yawn.

:tsktsk:

 

[cardenio]

Oh, dear. I didn’t mean for it to turn into this. It’s fine to debate, but please read my post here.

 

[dranzal]

First, by definition, Christians and Jews do not believe in the authority or validity of the Quran and they have their reasons for not believing it. If they believe it, they would likely convert.

Likewise, Muslims do not believe in the authority or validity of the Bible in its current and available form and they have their reasons.

Therefore, it is safe to say that, from each religions own perspective, yes, the C. S. Lewis idea can be applied.

Generally speaking, when anyone makes a claim of any sort, they are either telling the truth, lying, or delusional.

Truth: a biological father making the claim that he is a father

Lie: Clinton making the claim that he did not have …

Delusional: a person claiming to be a fish

Of course, Christians do not believe that Muhammed is really a prophet based on claims made in the Quran (which they don’t believe) just as Muslims don’t believe Jesus is divine based on claims made in the Bible (which Muslims don’t believe-in its current form).

Debating the validity of either book is for another thread. Muslims think the current Bible is corrupted and Christians think the Quran was made up. Again-that is a debate for another thread.

I don’t know all of Muhammed’s claims, but in the Bible, Jesus’ claims are quite obvious.

 

[Faith101]

dranzal:

**I don’t know all of Muhammed’s claims, but in the Bible, Jesus’ claims are quite obvious./**QUOTE]

peace dranzal

I have to disagree with you. Jesus’ (peace be upon him) claims in the Bible are not obvoius. we have phrases like “i am” and “in the begining…”…these are not obvious to me and require much in depth assumptions and “thinking” to get to the conclusion “Jesus is god/son”

That is why the lewis guys foundation is not correct. I’ve said this before and i think its appropriate to say it again here.

For every verse that points to the idea that Jesus is god/son there is a verse that points to the idea that Jesus is ONLY a messenger. At the end, no CLEAR conclusion can be made from the Bible. So, as a Muslim, i can say there is no case for Jesus as god in the Bible. And you, as a Christian, can say there is no case for Jesus to be just a prophet in the Bible.

And we would both have our proofs. So, in the end, the Bible is inconclusive about this matter.

 

[MichaelTDoyle]

have to disagree with you. Jesus’ (peace be upon him) claims in the Bible are not obvoius. we have phrases like “i am” and “in the begining…”…these are not obvious to me and require much in depth assumptions and “thinking” to get to the conclusion “Jesus is god/son”

They are obvious. I AM is most obvious; the ressurection and ascension are most obvious. Plainly it does not require deep thought. It is a clear statement of divinity. No clearer statement could be made and still reflect the mystery of the Trinity. I am all for ecumenism, but let’s not distort the clear message of divine scripture.

Jesus came to them and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to me in heaven and on earth. Therefore go, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” – Matthew.

Alterations and redefinitions to the Gospel have been tried by many to suit itching ears, but the Catholic Church has promulgated the same faith and fought back the same old heresies since Christ founded it. It’s one thing to say you don’t believe, it’s perhaps self-disingenuous to say the message is not clear.

You may want to read the following prayerfully.

vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s1c2a1.htm#III

Peace

 

[manualman]

I confess, I got tired of reading and skipped a bunch of posts.

Back to the original topic.

Lewis’ argument applies to Jesus, but not to Mohammed. Why?

Because Jesus clearly foresaw that what he preached would lead him to crucifixtion. Death. If he were a liar, why? Why lie? What gain? None for him.

I don’t mean to be personally offensive to our muslim members. But I don’t believe Islam. You don’t believe Christianty. Let’s agree on that and be blunt in our criticisms of doctrine while being personally charitable to each other.

 

[jcaz]

Okay Manualman.

You need to leave your ignorance of Islamic history and go read. You say Muhammad had much to gain. Are you crazy? You obviously do not know the persecution that they received…ON A DAILY BASIS.

Muhammad’s followers were turtored. His message, peace be upon him, went against everything in his society since it was based on pagans. Even the economy was based on the pagan gods, as other tribes made ritual pilgrimages to Makkah to visit these gods. Muhammad, peace be upon him, became an outcast and was immediately persecuted.

And despite the persecution, the following increased and as the numbers of Muslims increased, the highest people of Makkah came to him and offered him money, power, prestige, ANYTHING so he would leave his message. The were willing to give him anything he wanted if he would leave his message, because they knew that if more and more people became Muslims, their economy and way of life would be forever changed.

His beloved uncle Abu Taalib, came to him and pleaded with him, on behalf of the powerful of Quraish, and Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, replied:
“O my uncle, if they placed the sun in my right hand and the moon in my left, to force me to renounce my work, verily I would not desist thereform until Allah made manifest His cause, or I perished in the attempt.”

So get your facts straight before you jump to conclusions.

 

[Abd_al-Haqq]

cardenio:

I’m sure most of you are familiar with CSL’s argument that Jesus could not be just a good man because he claimed to be God.

But, my friend asked me, can’t we apply the same to any religion? Mohammed claimed to be God’s prophet. Therefore, either he is God’s prophet, or he is lying, or he is insane.

I know almost nothing about Islam, so I told him I would do some research and get back with him. But now I am lost. Can somebody help me?

Greetings.
First off, the CS Lewis argument is flawed, as he attempts to construct a fallacy that is related to the popularly known “false dichotomy”. In this case, he tries to push only “three” choices. For a Christian, the argument might be sound as they will accept the given “limitations”.

1. Liar
2. Lunatic
3. Lord
   But there are other choices:
4. an error on part of early Christians who misqouted him or quoted him in context to their agenda: evangelising
5. the stories were exaggerated fictions narrated by third hand witnesses

You as a Christian will not take 4 or 5 into account and you will label them as false, but for non-Christians, 4 and 5 are valid points for non Christians, and even for some Christian intellectuals. So “trilam” is nice for believers and will make you feel warm and fuzzy, but it is a fallacy everywhere else. With that said, no, the trilam is not an argument that a Muslim should use for proof of the prophethood of Muhammad (saw), and such “dimestore” gimmicks are not commonly found in traditional Islam. I think there are enough “serious” arguments put forth in the volumes of Chirstian literature that you would better spend your time studying.

 

[Abd_al-Haqq]

MichaelTDoyle:

They are obvious. I AM is most obvious; the ressurection and ascension are most obvious. Plainly it does not require deep thought. It is a clear statement of divinity. No clearer statement could be made and still reflect the mystery of the Trinity. I am all for ecumenism, but let’s not distort the clear message of divine scripture.

Greetings.
I found this thread interesting and though it odd that someone could be branded as “disingenuous” for arguing that the evidence for the case of Jesus’s alleged divinity is not obvious.
If the divinity of Jesus is so obvious, then I am puzzled. The proofs are based upon the ambigous verses of the accepted Gospels that were amongst hundreds of other gospels and amongst countless groups who called themselves Christians who themsleves were in conflict about the nature of Jesus and his divinity. With such diverse views, I can hardly see how anyone can claim that the NT, a gift from the “proto-orthodox”, including its interpretation, is an obvious proof of his divinity. All I am saying is that it is not that simply to make this claim (it is obvious from the NT) which is boderline “handwaving”.

Jesus came to them and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to me in heaven and on earth. Therefore go, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” – Matthew.

John 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come [again] unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I. (KJV)
Mark 13:32 But of that day and that hour knows no man, no, not the angles which are in heaven, neither the son, but the Father.

Athanasian Creed: The divinity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is one, their glory equal, their majesty coeternal. What quality the Father has, the Son has, and the Holy Spirit.

You say that Jesus is obviously Gd, but John 14:38 and Mark 13:32, which in very clear terms states that Jesus is less than Gd, and even claims ignorance to Gd, the Father, yet Jesus is equal and co-eternal. This in my view, and many others who would reject the teachings of the church, would be a problem.
Obviously this will not convince you otherwise, nor am I trying to, but I am demonstrating that his divinity is anything but “obvious”.

Alterations and redefinitions to the Gospel have been tried by many to suit itching ears, but the Catholic Church has promulgated the same faith and fought back the same old heresies since Christ founded it. It’s one thing to say you don’t believe, it’s perhaps self-disingenuous to say the message is not clear.

Yes, this was also tried by the “proto-orthodox”, the very men that are the bases from which the church was founded. They were one group out of many “bickering” groups who could not agree on something as basic as the nature of Jesus, which is scholarly fact. Once can strongly argue that the faith promulgated by the church is that of the proto-orthodox, one group out of many who were competing to be the “straight thinking” path.

Once again, it is not my intention to try and convince you out of your faith, but I can make a very strong case to show that the “divinity” of Jesus is not so straight forward and obvious such that for someone to comment otherwise justifies being branded “disingenuous”.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

cardenio:

I’m sure most of you are familiar with CSL’s argument that Jesus could not be just a good man because he claimed to be God.

But, my friend asked me, can’t we apply the same to any religion? Mohammed claimed to be God’s prophet. Therefore, either he is God’s prophet, or he is lying, or he is insane.

Good thinking.​

I know almost nothing about Islam, so I told him I would do some research and get back with him. But now I am lost. Can somebody help me?

There is a fourth possibility - that the Gospels are based on garbled reporting, and that Jesus was indeed a mere man, though one used by God.​

Acts does not go beyond saying that Jesus was raised and will judge the nations: this is perfectly compatible with His being a created being, an instrument of God, yet not Himself God. It would fit rather cosily into Judaism; which is not true of saying that He is God. It is perfectly conceivable, purely as a matter of history, that when the Church was opened to Gentiles, the “Good News of the Kingdom” was obscured, by being decanted from Jewish forms of thought into Gentile ones. This change in cultural background would account for the belief in the Virgin Birth.

IOW, the Lewisian trilemma is at least a tetralemma ##

 

[Petergee]

Abd al-Haqq:

Greetings.
First off, the CS Lewis argument is flawed, as he attempts to construct a fallacy that is related to the popularly known “false dichotomy”. In this case, he tries to push only “three” choices. For a Christian, the argument might be sound as they will accept the given “limitations”.

1. Liar
2. Lunatic
3. Lord
   But there are other choices:
4. an error on part of early Christians who misqouted him or quoted him in context to their agenda: evangelising
5. the stories were exaggerated fictions narrated by third hand witnesses

You as a Christian will not take 4 or 5 into account and you will label them as false, but for non-Christians, 4 and 5 are valid points for non Christians, and even for some Christian intellectuals. So “trilam” is nice for believers and will make you feel warm and fuzzy, but it is a fallacy everywhere else. With that said, no, the trilam is not an argument that a Muslim should use for proof of the prophethood of Muhammad (saw), and such “dimestore” gimmicks are not commonly found in traditional Islam. I think there are enough “serious” arguments put forth in the volumes of Chirstian literature that you would better spend your time studying.

You seem to say that Lewis was not “intellectual” enough for your “choices 4 & 5” to have occurred to him. You have obviously not read any of Lewis’ books. Your “choices 4 & 5” are extremely commonly expressed in books, films, TV and personal conversation throughout the West. Lewis would have been well aware of them, but did not include them precisely because as an “intellectual” he would have found them utterly ludicrous and not worth serious consideration.

As I said above, “Apart from anything else, ten of the apostles who spent 24/7 with Christ for 3 years chose to be put to horrible deaths rather than deny that He is the Son of God. (The 11th got to choose life imprisonment.) Would you die for something you knew was a massive lie?”

 

[Abd_al-Haqq]

Petergee:

You seem to say that Lewis was not “intellectual” enough for your “choices 4 & 5” to have occurred to him. You have obviously not read any of Lewis’ books.

No, I said his work does not consider it, as its intended audience are those who already believe. For the rest of the world, it is a fallacious argument. As far as his work being a mark of “intellectualism”, it is not intended for a scholarly review, but feel good literature, including the “sophomoric” Narnia series.

Your “choices 4 & 5” are extremely commonly expressed in books, films, TV and personal conversation throughout the West. Lewis would have been well aware of them, but did not include them precisely because as an “intellectual” he would have found them utterly ludicrous and not worth serious consideration.

HIs like or dislike of them does not invalidate them nor do his “feelings”, which you are speculating about, make 4 or 5 any more untrue. It still stands that there are not only three choices. It is a “false trichotomy”.

As I said above, “Apart from anything else, ten of the apostles who spent 24/7 with Christ for 3 years chose to be put to horrible deaths rather than deny that He is the Son of God. (The 11th got to choose life imprisonment.) Would you die for something you knew was a massive lie?”

And you know this due to the NT you have in your hands which was not cannonized or “agreed” upon for over two centuries? You know all this from unknown third hand eye witness accounts? Writings that were amongst other writings that were chosen by groups of Christians simply because it agreed with their theology, not because it agreed with what they truly knew?

People die for causes all the time. This does not validate the cause. I could give you numerous examples of people dying for causes that you would not agree on as being valid.

The bottom line: There are volumes of Christian writings that would are much better than the “easy” reads of CS Lewis ( interms of reasons to follow your faith). Why allow such a simple “argument” which will be cut to pieces by most thinkers to define your faith? Is not your faith better than that?

 

[kristyn]

Abd al-Haqq:

No, I said his work does not consider it, as its intended audience are those who already believe. For the rest of the world, it is a fallacious argument. As far as his work being a mark of “intellectualism”, it is not intended for a scholarly review, but feel good literature, including the “sophomoric” Narnia series.

Have you read “THe EVerlasting Many”, or 'THe Screwtape Letters" ( my favorite"), or perhaps “Mere Christianity”