What was wrong with C.S. Lewis's argument that Jesus had to be either Lord, liar, or lunatic?

[TonyChanYT]

There are several assumptions, but what does that have to do with anything?

But, his argument is predicated on the truthfulness of what Jesus says in the gospel accounts.

How do you reconcile the above?

 

[Free]

How do you reconcile the above?

What is there to reconcile?

 

[Christ_empowered]

God gives the increase…

The sheep know my voice…

I lean Calvinist. Everyone is commanded to repent and believe upon Christ but only the elect are given the divine intervention required to make it happen.

I like cs Lewis overall. Szasz…makes valid points about mental illness etc , so I don’t find much value in the lunatic aspect of Lewis’s argument.

 

[jonathanbrickman0000]

First, where is your evidence?

So, you are not familiar with the great and terrible infamy of the "Christian", among the unbelievers of the last thousand years plus?

Second, what does any of this have to do with Lewis's argument, which is based on what Jesus said and the NT states?

Lewis' argument has the presumption, that people called "Christian" can be trusted with their reports of history.

 

[Free]

So, you are not familiar with the great and terrible infamy of the "Christian", among the unbelievers of the last thousand years plus?

I have no idea what this has to do with this discussion.

Lewis' argument has the presumption, that people called "Christian" can be trusted with their reports of history.

Lewis's argument is based on what the gospel accounts record. You don't believe the gospels are true or accurate history?

 

[jonathanbrickman0000]

Lewis' argument is based on what the Gospel accounts record. I believe them, because God has caused me to believe them. Before He did that, I had very good cause to disbelieve them, because of the nature of a great many mouths which spoke of them.