Primitive, Pretender, or Paranoid vs. Lord, Liar, or Lunatic

[SquirleyWurley]

In a non-perjorative sense, what is primitive is simply that which is ancient.  Jesus was an ancient person, along with that came some behaviors and attitudes which seem strange to us today.  There is much that is primitive in the Gospels, that's all.  People get weird about it sometimes, but back then things were a bit different.  To judge Jesus without considering how different his times were, would be wrong-headed.

But if one wishes to consider other options, when assessing Jesus...

Perhaps he was a pretender, that is, someone of bad-faith who proclaimed insincerely all sorts of things out of arrogance or con-artistry.  I reject this option because I don't like to presume insincerity without enough of some sort of compelling evidence.

Perhaps he was a paranoid, given his bouts with visions/demons/megalomania.  I reject this option for several reasons.  One of the reasons is that I don't think some weird and brief episodes of visions/demons/megalomania need to make one 'a paranoid' per se, we all have our moments of weirdness.

I think this paradigm is superior to C.S.Lewis' in that it is more forgiving, less simplistically judgmental, more nuanced.

As I said on another thread "by default, claiming to give special healing powers to followers without having a clue about bacteria or saying anything about washing hands and growing antibiotics on bread at the very least, is very primitive.  Even at that, the Egyptians knew that bread mold was a good thing to put in wounds, though it took centuries for the West to figure it out, no thanks to religion. ... for such reasons (and others) Jesus wasn't either Lord, Liar, or Lunatic,  so much as he was either a Primitive, a Pretender, or a Paranoid, and I'd prefer to simply refer to him as 'a primitive' in an objective and non-perjorative sense."

[Acumen]

There is all sorts of conceptual baggage that comes with the word "primitive", which includes the earlier stages of development.  I think you would be better served by using the word "ancient" rather than primitive.

[SquirleyWurley]

Hm, alliteration versus baggage.  I'll consider it.   

I wish Lewis considered accuracy over rhetoric on this subject, so I suppose in order not to be a hypocrite and preserve alliteration, I'd want to consider other letters of the alphabet.

Ancient, Actor, Absurd?

[Acumen]

Hm, alliteration versus baggage.  I'll consider it.   

I wish Lewis considered accuracy over rhetoric on this subject, so I suppose in order not to be a hypocrite and preserve alliteration, I'd want to consider other letters of the alphabet.

Ancient, Actor, Absurd?

Personally, I don't care too much about C.S. Lewis.  When the term "primitive" is applied to my Lord, it evokes a negative emotional response.  I mean, it's not offensive to me personally because I knew the term has more than one meaning, but still.

I see the same sort of knee jerk response when people talk about the creation story as a myth.  Yes, the term myth can mean a story designed to explain origins of a natural phenomena, but it can also mean a fictitious or fantastic story. 

[jacknky]

"I see the same sort of knee jerk response when people talk about the creation story as a myth.  Yes, the term myth can mean a story designed to explain origins of a natural phenomena, but it can also mean a fictitious or fantastic story."

Some people have a challenge distinguishing between myth and knowledge. I live about 100 miles from the Creation Museum, a multi-million dollar "museum" that uses animatronics to illustrate the Creation story (myth) including humans alongside dinosaurs so the earth could have been created 6000 years ago.

[SquirleyWurley]

I suppose part of my point is that C.S.Lewis forces things into a very negative mold, just to try to explain his belief that that Jesus must be Lord, and part of my point is that there is much written and believed about Jesus that is very very different from today's world simply because it is from long, long ago, and people get caught up in such stories in their fantasy and don't necessarily imagine things the way things really were in the first century.