Lewis dilemma

[Humph Warden Bennett]

This is as big and steaming a pile of horseshit as the trilemma.

He should have stuck to mediaeval literature. Apparently he was quite good at that, once.

You are being unfair, try reading That Hideous Strength it is genuinely creepy, and with modern CGI it could be filmed.

[Robbie]

You're certainly right there, Humph. I've read it four or five times. His best!

[Nearly Sane]

You are being unfair, try reading That Hideous Strength it is genuinely creepy, and with modern CGI it could be filmed.

Not sure that that was why Shaker was on about, but you are right. It would make an interesting adaptation

[Rhiannon]

Finding it rather touching that anyone thinks that Lewis' dilemma is worth considering these days.

[Sassy]

Given the gist of the first few posts I took it that the reference was to Lewis the writer. His fiction and his Christian books like Mere Christianity and the Screwtape Letters.

Again, another thread where the 'personal opinion' outweighs the literary or logical and intelligent aspects of arguments from a learned man to consider Christ being true or false.


Which of you have had books published?

Which of you will be remembered long after their death for personal achievements.

Christ and Lewis have this in common. The things they said and what has been written remain.

Instead of personal opinions based solely on your beliefs let us have arguments concerning what Lewis wrote and evidence to dismiss them.  Dilemma in the making.

Belief is personal choice...isn't it?

Just as your personal opinion and choice decides what you think of others.

[Aruntraveller]

Christ and Lewis have this in common. The things they said and what has been written remain.

The same applies to Hitler and Stalin. So?

Jackie Collins gets books published by the gazillion. It is proof of nothing other than a section of the reading public like a good romp.

[Stranger]

Instead of personal opinions based solely on your beliefs let us have arguments concerning what Lewis wrote and evidence to dismiss them.

Arguments about what he wrote and the evidence for it and rationality of it (or lack thereof) is exactly what is being discussed.

Belief is personal choice...isn't it?

No.

[floo]

Given the gist of the first few posts I took it that the reference was to Lewis the writer. His fiction and his Christian books like Mere Christianity and the Screwtape Letters.

Again, another thread where the 'personal opinion' outweighs the literary or logical and intelligent aspects of arguments from a learned man to consider Christ being true or false.


Which of you have had books published?

Which of you will be remembered long after their death for personal achievements.

Christ and Lewis have this in common. The things they said and what has been written remain.

Instead of personal opinions based solely on your beliefs let us have arguments concerning what Lewis wrote and evidence to dismiss them.  Dilemma in the making.

Belief is personal choice...isn't it?

Just as your personal opinion and choice decides what you think of others.

Actually I have had quite a bit of my written work published over the years, famously my 9/11 poem, which the Chief fire officer of the Pentagon Fire Service saw on-line and contacted me to get my permission so he could print it out and display it in their fire office. Maybe I will be remembered in a few thousand years time and worshipped. YEH RIGHT 

[Humph Warden Bennett]

Given the gist of the first few posts I took it that the reference was to Lewis the writer. His fiction and his Christian books like Mere Christianity and the Screwtape Letters.

Again, another thread where the 'personal opinion' outweighs the literary or logical and intelligent aspects of arguments from a learned man to consider Christ being true or false.


Which of you have had books published?

Which of you will be remembered long after their death for personal achievements.

Christ and Lewis have this in common. The things they said and what has been written remain.

Instead of personal opinions based solely on your beliefs let us have arguments concerning what Lewis wrote and evidence to dismiss them.  Dilemma in the making.

Belief is personal choice...isn't it?

Just as your personal opinion and choice decides what you think of others.

FTR I have had some poetry published, albeit it was on the understanding that any profits would go towards the costs of the next edition, and Mrs Bennett has had three books published, which can be purchased on Amazon. And YES Mrs Bennett has been paid & received profits, although I am not giving our names for obvious reasons.

[floo]

FTR I have had some poetry published, albeit it was on the understanding that any profits would go towards the costs of the next edition, and Mrs Bennett has had three books published, which can be purchased on Amazon. And YES Mrs Bennett has been paid & received profits, although I am not giving our names for obvious reasons.

Nice one!

[Humph Warden Bennett]

You're certainly right there, Humph. I've read it four or five times. His best!

The revelation that The Head of the N.I.C.E (who are anything but) really is a head, is a glorious piece of thrilling macabre writing!

[Dicky Underpants]

You are being unfair, try reading That Hideous Strength it is genuinely creepy, and with modern CGI it could be filmed.

Yes, Lewis could be a very imaginative writer of fiction, and the Cosmic Trilogy (inc THS) is some of the best in the fantasy genre (though I could do without some of the pompous sermonising and bombastic prose in Perelandra). Till We Have Faces is, I think, a masterpiece.

However, that is not what the main topic of this thread is about, which is Lewis' simplistic theological propositions. If his trilemma could be demolished by an intelligent 13 year old (it could), then his dilemma, is as Rhiannon suggests, a source of amusement at best.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Yes, Lewis could be a very imaginative writer of fiction, and the Cosmic Trilogy (inc THS) is some of the best in the fantasy genre (though I could do without some of the pompous sermonising and bombastic prose in Perelandra). Till We Have Faces is, I think, a masterpiece.

However, that is not what the main topic of this thread is about, which is Lewis' simplistic theological propositions. If his trilemma could be demolished by an intelligent 13 year old (it could), then his dilemma, is as Rhiannon suggests, a source of amusement at best.

The recent work on the trilemma by contemporary atheists is a bit sad because it is at best an attempt via categorory buggeration to turn three into four or five or whatever .i.e. Pathetic and then rounding of with more bolt holes through which to evade.

Dismissal of the dilemma is a necessity if you've declared Christians stupid.After all how could a Christian possibly run the biggest scam in history.

[Shaker]

The recent work on the trilemma by contemporary atheists is a bit sad because it is at best an attempt via categorory buggeration to turn three into four or five or whatever .i.e. Pathetic and then rounding of with more bolt holes through which to evade.

Are you categororically sure about that?

[Sebastian Toe]

Dismissal of the dilemma is a necessity if you've declared Christians stupid.After all how could a Christian possibly run the biggest scam in history.

Could a Muslim possibly run the 2nd biggest scam in history?
You seem to be hiding in your own nuclear bunker on that one!
I wonder why?

[Robbie]

You are being unfair, try reading That Hideous Strength it is genuinely creepy, and with modern CGI it could be filmed.

It has been considered:  http://www.imdb.com/list/ls008000807/

[Stranger]

The recent work on the trilemma by contemporary atheists is a bit sad because it is at best an attempt via categorory buggeration to turn three into four or five or whatever .i.e. Pathetic and then rounding of with more bolt holes through which to evade.

Dismissal of the dilemma is a necessity if you've declared Christians stupid.After all how could a Christian possibly run the biggest scam in history.

Many other options have been pointed out, both for the dilemma and trilemma. Instead of spluttering out incoherent insults, why not try to explain how you think they can be ruled out?

[Humph Warden Bennett]

It has been considered:  http://www.imdb.com/list/ls008000807/

Thanks for that. I am not so sure about Helena Bonham Carter, I would have gone for Pam Ferris.

[jeremyp]

The recent work on the trilemma by contemporary atheists is a bit sad because it is at best an attempt via categorory buggeration to turn three into four or five or whatever .i.e. Pathetic and then rounding of with more bolt holes through which to evade.

Dismissal of the dilemma is a necessity if you've declared Christians stupid.After all how could a Christian possibly run the biggest scam in history.

Either you let the atheists add more categories or you force them to choose one of the two unpalatable (to Christians) options. I think that is the real flaw in his argument: he relies on the generally Christian sensibilities of the time that cause people to recoil from the liar and lunatic options.

If Jesus was a liar or a lunatic, what of it? If he was anything like modern cult leaders, he was probably a bit of both.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Either you let the atheists add more categories or you force them to choose one of the two unpalatable (to Christians) options. I think that is the real flaw in his argument: he relies on the generally Christian sensibilities of the time that cause people to recoil from the liar and lunatic options.

If Jesus was a liar or a lunatic, what of it? If he was anything like modern cult leaders, he was probably a bit of both.

Though Lewis was writing at a time when there was a greater religious knowledge at the time Jeremy you have to demonstrate that the general vagueness, religious ignorance, reduced understanding or will to understand religion, and general apatheism is the better position from which to assess the dilemma or trilemma.
It seems as only Chris Hutchins realised the force of the trilemma and dilemma and certainly was not afraid to come down in favour of 'bad'

[jeremyp]

Though Lewis was writing at a time when there was a greater religious knowledge at the time Jeremy you have to demonstrate that the general vagueness, religious ignorance, reduced understanding or will to understand religion, and general apatheism is the better position from which to assess the dilemma or trilemma.
It seems as only Chris Hutchins realised the force of the trilemma and dilemma and certainly was not afraid to come down in favour of 'bad'

The force of the trilemma comes from people have social taboos against thinking bad things off Jesus. It's not a good argument in favour of him being God.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The force of the trilemma comes from people have social taboos against thinking bad things off Jesus. It's not a good argument in favour of him being God.

I completely disagree.
The force is in focussing the person onto the alternatives.
As I say only Chris Hutchins apparently realised the commitments which the dilemma and trilemma focus people onto.

[jeremyp]

I completely disagree.
The force is in focussing the person onto the alternatives.
As I say only Chris Hutchins apparently realised the commitments which the dilemma and trilemma focus people onto.

OK so Jesus was either a liar or a lunatic and Christianity is the biggest con job in history. Time to start arresting all the people using it to extort money out of the marks. We should start with the Pope and the Arch Bish. of C.

[Enki]

The trilemma was a totally naive or disingenuous statement(or indeed a bit of both). Its proposition is particularly limiting and, because of this, I find it of little significance. There is no reason to think that Jesus couldn't have been both deranged and a liar(or any combination of both). Indeed, if one believes in the idea of a god, then I suggest that he could have been a combination of all three. Only if you start off by believing in the Christian idea of a God, can you possibly discount the first two by favouring the third, in which case it is particularly useless proposition as it relies heavily on faith rather than any rational approach. I have no such commitments.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The trilemma was a totally naive or disingenuous statement(or indeed a bit of both). Its proposition is particularly limiting and, because of this, I find it of little significance. There is no reason to think that Jesus couldn't have been both deranged and a liar(or any combination of both). Indeed, if one believes in the idea of a god, then I suggest that he could have been a combination of all three. Only if you start off by believing in the Christian idea of a God, can you possibly discount the first two by favouring the third, in which case it is particularly useless proposition as it relies heavily on faith rather than any rational approach. I have no such commitments.

Is that the rational approach that has led us to the illusion of self?