Apologetics Exposed

Lord, Liar, or Lunatic

"Did Jesus exist? If not, then there's not much to talk about. If he did, he called himself Lord. This means that either:
  • He was Lord,
  • He was a liar, or
  • He was a lunatic.
It's unlikely he was a liar, given his morals as described in the Bible, and his behavior doesn't sound like that of a lunatic. So surely we must conclude that he was Lord?"
Argument by C.S. Lewis in Mere Christianity, popularized by Josh McDowell.

First off it is most likely that Jesus Christ never existed, hence why there is no actual historical evidence to suggest that he existed. And why in the earliest accounts of Jesus ,which all later known accounts are based off of, Paul says his knowledge of the figure Jesus is based on scriptures instead of an actual person.

Even if the stories of the figure Jesus Christ were originally based on an actual person, "Lord, liar, or lunatic" are not the only options. There is another option that is far more common throughout history. The story of Jesus Christ could have also just been a legend, over exaggerated tales loosely based on a real person that was neither Lord, a liar, or a lunatic. Take for example the legends of Hercules. Hercules was a real person who was simply stronger than your average person. Over time people exaggerated stories of how strong he actually was and even credited his strength to have been given by the gods.