Mere Christianity
- Thread starter Willie-T
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
That was a tough read. But, you do realize he was trying to rationally describe the natural thought primeval man would have had toward considering a god/creator figure in those particular pages, don't you? Those people didn't have any religion to be taught nor any Scriptures to read. All they had was an awe of "something" they had no reference for describing.
I totally agree. The author takes the words right out of my mouth in some chapters. One of my favorite chapter is the invasion where Lewis says: "If we ask for something more than simplicity, it is silly then to complain that the something is more is not simple" In reference to those who have complains about Christianity. He also has a way of simplifying things that seem too complicated for believers and non believers. I definitely recommend you guys pick up this book.
I read Mere Christianity when I was first saved, and it really helped me undertand various doctrinal truths. I re-read it when my second son was away at university. I remember one chapter was so astounding, I photocopied it and sent it to him. That was in the days before home photocopiers, and scanners so you could just email them. The chapter really answered some major objections he had to Christianity. Sadly, he is still not saved.
I read it again in Seminary. I did find a few things were dated, but still a good book. I have read most of C.S. Lewis's other books. They take up a couple of shelves in my book case.
I like the strong images he presents. I think one of my favourite all time memories from any book was in Screwtape letters. The big demon was writing about the problem of trying to harass Christians who were walking so close with "Him" that you couldn't even see them let alone tempt them. That was profound.
Since then, I have focused my walk on trying to be as close to Jesus as I can, all day long. I'm not always successful, but I do know that the devil has no power over me, because Jesus is totally in control.
I read it again in Seminary. I did find a few things were dated, but still a good book. I have read most of C.S. Lewis's other books. They take up a couple of shelves in my book case.
I like the strong images he presents. I think one of my favourite all time memories from any book was in Screwtape letters. The big demon was writing about the problem of trying to harass Christians who were walking so close with "Him" that you couldn't even see them let alone tempt them. That was profound.
Since then, I have focused my walk on trying to be as close to Jesus as I can, all day long. I'm not always successful, but I do know that the devil has no power over me, because Jesus is totally in control.
If anyone would like it, I have just finished downloading and reformatting into WORD, a PDF version of this neat little book. It was originally written in 1943, but this revised edition was done in '52, I think, and he has broken many of the long, long paragraphs into more easily readable shorter ones.
I've changed many of the British spellings into American English, but not all of them.. (I got lazy, since it already took three days to copy all this, paragraph-by-paragraph.)
It is too long to PM, or even to just simply email... so it would have to be emailed to you in "ZIPPED" format, and you would need to "UNZIP" it.
Let me know....
I've changed many of the British spellings into American English, but not all of them.. (I got lazy, since it already took three days to copy all this, paragraph-by-paragraph.)
It is too long to PM, or even to just simply email... so it would have to be emailed to you in "ZIPPED" format, and you would need to "UNZIP" it.
Let me know....
C
I tried to read "The Screwtape Letters" when I was 12 and I thought the writer was crazy.
U.K. residents get offended with me when I say this but C.S. Lewis didn't believe all the doctrines of the Bible and it is one of those kind of hard things to prove because all of his books aren't in print or available to read. On top of that, he was converting to Catholicism at the end of his life.
U.K. residents get offended with me when I say this but C.S. Lewis didn't believe all the doctrines of the Bible and it is one of those kind of hard things to prove because all of his books aren't in print or available to read. On top of that, he was converting to Catholicism at the end of his life.
C
C.S. Lewis was very popular and did a lot of great things. He is remembered in the United States for the books that he wrote and the ideas he gives to apologetics but no one quotes him as an exegetical scholar. He had a lot of success and is quoted by a lot of well known and well respected Apologists like Josh McDowell and Dr. Ravi Zacherias.
I'm not the only one questioning C.S. Lewis:
http://www.equip.org/free/JAL400.htm
Dr. Norman Geisler says a lot of great things about Clive Staples Lewis in the Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics. I think Lewis' problem starts with his view on Inspiration. Geisler says that Lewis is neither Orthodox or Neo-Orthodox but calls Lewis a Liberal-evangelical and Geisler says that he uses the term as a paradoxical one.
Geisler gives a list of the various views on inspiration:
Extreme Fundamentalism - Verbal dictation through secretaries
Orthodox - Verbal inspiration through prophets
Liberals - Human intuition through natural process
Liberal-Evangelical - Divine elevation of human literature
Neo-Orthodox - Human recording of revelational events
Neo-Evangelicals - Inspiration of only redemptive truths or purpose
"According to Lewis,'the voice of God [is heard] in the cursing Psalms through all the horrible distortions of the human medium." p.176, "A General Introduction to the bible" by Dr. Norman Geisler (C.S. Lewis, Reflections on the Psalms, pp. 111-12, 114-15. In this volume there are extensive quotations of Herman Bavinck. Also see Geisler, Decide for Yourself, pp. 91-102.
If God's word is heard through all of the horrible distortions through the human medium then how do we know that we are getting God's word? Do you see what I'm getting at? People can remain an athiest and think that they are a Christian by believing in nothing.
Lewis writes,"I have therefore no difficulty in accepting, say, the view of those scholars who tell us that the account of Creation in Genesis is derived from earlier Semitic stores which were Pagan and mytical.", p177, "A General Introduction to the bible" by Dr. Norman Geisler (Cited by Clyde A.S. Kilby, The Christian World of C.S. Lewis, p. 153.)
I'll save you a lot of quotes and get to the point ->
In Geisler's summary, ""Lewis believed in a fallible Bible that manifests varying degrees of inspiration. He saw a process of development whereby myth becomes history. God providentially guided the natural and errant literaary productions of the past. Then, at the appropriate moment, God adopted that natural myth and elevated it into the service of the Word of God. He now speaks through it to the edification of believers."-p. 177, "A General Introduction to the Bible" (Contemporary Theories of Revelation and Inspiration).
C.S. Lewis is reported to not hold to an Orthodox position on the Trinity that only a scholar like Dr. Norman Geisler would point out.
I'm not the only one questioning C.S. Lewis:
http://www.equip.org/free/JAL400.htm
Dr. Norman Geisler says a lot of great things about Clive Staples Lewis in the Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics. I think Lewis' problem starts with his view on Inspiration. Geisler says that Lewis is neither Orthodox or Neo-Orthodox but calls Lewis a Liberal-evangelical and Geisler says that he uses the term as a paradoxical one.
Geisler gives a list of the various views on inspiration:
Extreme Fundamentalism - Verbal dictation through secretaries
Orthodox - Verbal inspiration through prophets
Liberals - Human intuition through natural process
Liberal-Evangelical - Divine elevation of human literature
Neo-Orthodox - Human recording of revelational events
Neo-Evangelicals - Inspiration of only redemptive truths or purpose
"According to Lewis,'the voice of God [is heard] in the cursing Psalms through all the horrible distortions of the human medium." p.176, "A General Introduction to the bible" by Dr. Norman Geisler (C.S. Lewis, Reflections on the Psalms, pp. 111-12, 114-15. In this volume there are extensive quotations of Herman Bavinck. Also see Geisler, Decide for Yourself, pp. 91-102.
If God's word is heard through all of the horrible distortions through the human medium then how do we know that we are getting God's word? Do you see what I'm getting at? People can remain an athiest and think that they are a Christian by believing in nothing.
Lewis writes,"I have therefore no difficulty in accepting, say, the view of those scholars who tell us that the account of Creation in Genesis is derived from earlier Semitic stores which were Pagan and mytical.", p177, "A General Introduction to the bible" by Dr. Norman Geisler (Cited by Clyde A.S. Kilby, The Christian World of C.S. Lewis, p. 153.)
I'll save you a lot of quotes and get to the point ->
In Geisler's summary, ""Lewis believed in a fallible Bible that manifests varying degrees of inspiration. He saw a process of development whereby myth becomes history. God providentially guided the natural and errant literaary productions of the past. Then, at the appropriate moment, God adopted that natural myth and elevated it into the service of the Word of God. He now speaks through it to the edification of believers."-p. 177, "A General Introduction to the Bible" (Contemporary Theories of Revelation and Inspiration).
C.S. Lewis is reported to not hold to an Orthodox position on the Trinity that only a scholar like Dr. Norman Geisler would point out.
C
CLIVE STAPLES LEWIS (1898-1963), distinguished professor of English literature at England's Cambridge University, went to a priest regularly for confession (C. S. Lewis: A Biography, p. 198). The sacrament of Extreme Unction was administered to Lewis on July 16, 1964 (Ibid., p. 301). He also prayed for the dead: "Of course I pray for the dead" (Letters to Malcomb, p. 107).
Lewis held strongly to an evolutionary animal ancestry of man. "For long centuries God perfected the animal form which was to become the vehicle of humanity and the image of Himself" (The Problem of Pain, p. 177).
He held that the Genesis account came from pagan mythical sources. "I have therefore no difficulty accepting the view of those scholars who tell us that the account of Creation in Genesis is derived from earlier Semitic stories which were pagan and mythical" (Reflections on the Psalms, p. 110).
Dr. Lewis did not believe in a bodily resurrection (C.S. Lewis: A Biography, p. 234). He rejected the doctrine of the total depravity of man. "I disbelieve that doctrine" (The Problem of Pain, p. 66).
His view of Scripture was lamentable. He said the Book of Job is "unhistorical." He also said the Bible contained "error," and asserted the Neo-orthodox concept that the Bible "carries" the Word of God and is "human material" (The Problem of Pain, pp. 110,112).
Taken From the website http://withchrist.org/MJS/ click on polemic/persons, and underneath a list of persons, of which C.S.Lewis is included.)
Lewis held strongly to an evolutionary animal ancestry of man. "For long centuries God perfected the animal form which was to become the vehicle of humanity and the image of Himself" (The Problem of Pain, p. 177).
He held that the Genesis account came from pagan mythical sources. "I have therefore no difficulty accepting the view of those scholars who tell us that the account of Creation in Genesis is derived from earlier Semitic stories which were pagan and mythical" (Reflections on the Psalms, p. 110).
Dr. Lewis did not believe in a bodily resurrection (C.S. Lewis: A Biography, p. 234). He rejected the doctrine of the total depravity of man. "I disbelieve that doctrine" (The Problem of Pain, p. 66).
His view of Scripture was lamentable. He said the Book of Job is "unhistorical." He also said the Bible contained "error," and asserted the Neo-orthodox concept that the Bible "carries" the Word of God and is "human material" (The Problem of Pain, pp. 110,112).
Taken From the website http://withchrist.org/MJS/ click on polemic/persons, and underneath a list of persons, of which C.S.Lewis is included.)
Your copy/paste assumptions come up against problems when someone knows the material you try to tag as Lewis' preaching. Please refrain from crediting the derived writings of others as a doctrine he was preaching.
Here are the very words, right out of that book:
" I offer the following picture - a "myth" in the Socratic sense, a not unlikely tale."
"For long centuries God perfected the animal form which was to become the vehicle of humanity and the image of Himself. He gave it hands whose thumb could be applied to each. of the fingers, and jaws and teeth and throat capable of articulation, and a brain sufficiently complex to execute all the material motions whereby rational thought is incarnated. The creature may have existed for ages in this state before it became man:" (and it goes on for quite a while)
Almost the whole format of Lewis' books was exploring hypothetical imaginings that man came up with.
Here are the very words, right out of that book:
" I offer the following picture - a "myth" in the Socratic sense, a not unlikely tale."
"For long centuries God perfected the animal form which was to become the vehicle of humanity and the image of Himself. He gave it hands whose thumb could be applied to each. of the fingers, and jaws and teeth and throat capable of articulation, and a brain sufficiently complex to execute all the material motions whereby rational thought is incarnated. The creature may have existed for ages in this state before it became man:" (and it goes on for quite a while)
Almost the whole format of Lewis' books was exploring hypothetical imaginings that man came up with.
Last edited:
Here's his quotation about disbelieving.
"This chapter will have been misunderstood if anyone describes it as a reinstatement of the doctrine of Total Depravity. I disbelieve that doctrine, partly on the logical ground that if our depravity were total we should not know ourselves to be depraved, and partly because experience shows us much goodness in human nature. Nor am I commending universal gloom."
Not hard to see why he can't go along just because someone says it is a sacred dogma.
"This chapter will have been misunderstood if anyone describes it as a reinstatement of the doctrine of Total Depravity. I disbelieve that doctrine, partly on the logical ground that if our depravity were total we should not know ourselves to be depraved, and partly because experience shows us much goodness in human nature. Nor am I commending universal gloom."
Not hard to see why he can't go along just because someone says it is a sacred dogma.
I have to admit that I get quite tired of people of limited knowledge about certain authors and their writings, reading a few negative quips some "exposer" writes, and concluding the author must be a demon from Hell sent to corrupt mankind.
Read Lewis for who he freely admits he is, (certainly no theologian) and what his writing was intended to illustrate.
Read Lewis for who he freely admits he is, (certainly no theologian) and what his writing was intended to illustrate.
