There is an option beyond Lewis trilemma God/Madman/Fraud which is that Jesus, Paul etc. were sane and genuinely believed the things they say, but they believed

There is an option beyond Lewis trilemma God/Madman/Fraud which is that Jesus, Paul etc. were sane and genuinely believed the things they say, but they believed it based on worldview build on religion and therefore not connected to reality. (Like Newton researching alchemy - he was sane and honest, he just worked from faulty premises.) Add to this that the Gospels are not genuine first-hand accounts but rather express the gradual building of a myth among the early Christians based on second-hand accounts (written down a generation after the events) and a growing body of legends. Clearly the Gospels are not 100% trustworthy (since they contain contradictions), so unless you want to reject everything, you have to make some kind of effort to discern the believable parts from the legends. For example in the Mark, the oldest version, Jesus does not talk a lot about himself, and there is no reason to consider him anymore than a human preacher. In John the myth have grow to the level that he more of less proclaims himself a God. This clearly illustrates how the story Jesus the preacher over a few decades turns into Jesus Christ the Son of God (or even God himself).