Hello Edgar,

Thanks for writing this piece.

You set out to display a flaw in Lewis' Trilemma argument, but you don't even attempt to do so.

Lewis' Trilemma deals with the logical implications of someone claiming to be God. If a person does claim to be God, there are only three logical possibilities:

- They're knowingly lying

- They're crazy

- They really are God

You claim this is "special pleading," given that Jesus could be a "complicated person."

But this doesn't do anything to address the logic of the trilemma.

Even if Jesus is a complicated person, there are still only three logical possibilities for Him claiming to be God. Either He is, He's lying, or He's crazy. No matter how complicated a person He is, those are the only three possibilities.

(Note: I'm avoiding the "legend" possibility, as you seem to grant that Jesus did exist).

You try to say that some of Jesus' teachings contract each other. I disagree, but even if we grant this, it still doesn't affect the trilemma. There are still only three logical possibilities for Jesus' claim to be God.

You try to say that people view Jesus differently at different periods of history. Yet this still doesn't touch the trilemma. Regardless of how people view Jesus, there are still only three logical possibilities to Jesus' claim to be God.

If Jesus did indeed claim to be God (as all the Gospels present clearly, and as even extra-biblical historical accounts corroborate), then there are only three logical possibilities.

If Jesus claims to be God, either He's willfully lying, crazy, or He is genuinely God.

It's clear that you don't like Lewis' Trilemma. But you haven't done anything to upset its logic. Regardless of how complex Jesus is, or how views of Him have shifted over the years, there are still only three logical possibilities for a real person claiming to be God.