Threefer

[MajGenl.Meade]

On this day in 1963, the artist, theologian and towering Christian intellectual CS Lewis died.

It was a moment that was famously overshadowed by the passing of another icon – US President John F Kennedy was assassinated on the same day. Renowned English writer and philosopher Aldous Huxley died on the same day too. It was a sad and remarkable coincidence that inspired a novel by author Peter Kreeft imagining the three figures meeting in Purgatory.

Although his passing was at first eclipsed by the death of a president, CS Lewis's legacy has undoubtedly endured to this day – it wouldn't be an overstatement to call him the most influential Christian writer of the 20th century. A humble figure such as Lewis would probably have distanced himself from such adulation, but his special capacity to unite Christian traditions remains an impressive feat. He himself was an Anglican, but he's now as much as beloved in Roman Catholicism as he is among conservative evangelicals.

Part of Lewis' appeal may be due to the drama of his own life, wisely narrated by Lewis biographer and enthusiast Alister McGrath in his CS Lewis – A Life. The Englishman Clive Staples Lewis was first and for much of his youth a sceptical atheist, hardened by his experience of the First World War, and keen to disprove the surely far-fetched claims of Christianity. Yet over time, the Oxford literature professor experienced God's 'compelling embrace', and became as he would put it 'the most dejected and reluctant convert in all England'.

Lewis married his deep faith with his intellectual prowess in his most famous non-fiction work, the epochal apologetics book Mere Christianity, in which he lays out how Christian faith could not only stand up to scrutiny but provide the most profound and satisfying explanation for all of life. He told his more personal account of his faith journey in another classic: Surprised by Joy.

Lewis famously wrote: 'I believe in Christianity as I believe that the Sun has risen, not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else.' Against a depressing materialism, Lewis made the case for meaning, hope and wonder in the world – best seen through the eyes of faith.

Lewis was gifted not only with refined communicative skill and intellectual rigour, but an infectious imagination – something best seen by turning to Lewis's other most famous work: The Chronicles of Narnia novels, a seven-book series written for children but adored by adults too. In The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, he told an enchanting story that also served as a Christian allegory with profound theological insight – the image of the roaring lion Aslan – representing Christ – is one that still moves many today.

He also crafted more adult works like his Space Trilogy, which includes provocative social commentary about the future of humanity. Another standout work is The Screwtape Letters, in which he imagined this discourse of a senior demon Screwtape to his nephew Wormwood, advising him on how to bring about the damnation of a human soul. It created an entertaining and challenging device: the inverted, demonic lens provided a sharp satire on contemporary Christianity and a wealth of insight into the human condition.

Lewis married late in life to the American writer Joy Davidman, but he lost her four years late when she died of cancer. As McGrath writes, he 'had to think about life's great questions because they were forced on him by his own experiences. Lewis is no armchair philosopher. His ideas were forged in the heat of suffering and despair'.

He was never ordained, only a layman in the Church of England, which perhaps again is part of Lewis's appeal. He accomplished so much, but remained approachable, humble and unconsumed by his immense fame. At a decisive time in the 20<sup>th century, he offered a prophetic witness for the Church and to the world – an invitation to faith, hope and love in a war-ravaged reality that may have given up on such ideals. It's a testament to Lewis - and the wonder he pointed to - that he hasn't been forgotten.

From: Christianity Today, Nov 22, 2017

[RayThom]

On the other hand... The C.S. Lewis you never knew.

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/12/0 ... nt-page-2/

[ex-khobar Andy]

I am reading "The Inklings" - a book about an Oxford literary set in the 30s to 50s which included Lewis and Tolkien and others who drifted in and out. Lewis had a very weird relationship with the mother of one of his friends (Ray's link touches on that). If you want some basic Lewis I recommend The Screwtape Letters which takes the form of a correspondence between an elderly devil and his nephew with tips on how to best achieve the desired ends. I must admit that when I first read The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, the Christian symbolism was entirely lost on me which might just demonstrate how irreligious my parents were. For that I thank them almost daily.

Edited to correct the book title: it is actually The Fellowship: The Literary Lives of the Inklings. Also to correct spelling of Tolkien.

[BoSoxGal]

I read a lot of Lewis back in my religious, contemplating-seminary days; The Four Loves is still a favorite book.

I enjoyed this comment to the linked article:

Colin says:
December 1, 2013 at 9:17 am
There are some pretty fundamental objections to Christianity that I find vvery hard to get around. I was brought up a Christian, but the more I asked and honestly probed my own faith, the more difficult it came to believe. This got to the point where I was lying to myself or burying my head in the sand to keep my faith. I soon realized I didn’t TRULY believe, I just desperately WANTED to believe.

1. At its most fundamental level, Christianity requires a belief that an all-knowing, all-powerful, immortal being created the entire Universe and its billions of galaxies 13,700,000,000 years ago (the age of the current iteration of the Universe) sat back and waited 10,000,000,000 years for the Earth to form, then waited another 3,700,000,000 years for h.o.mo sapiens to gradually evolve from ho.mo erectus, then, at some point gave them eternal life and, about 150,000 years later, sent its son to Earth to talk about sheep and goats in the Middle East.

While here, this divine visitor exhibits no knowledge of ANYTHING outside of the Iron Age Middle East, including disease and germs, basic health, the other continents, 99% of the human race, and the aforementioned galaxies.

Either that, or it all started 6,000 years ago with one man, one woman and a talking snake. Either way “oh come on” just doesn’t quite capture it.

2. This ‘all loving’ god spends his time running the Universe and observing the approximately 7 billion human beings on planet Earth 24 hours a day, seven days a week. He even reads their minds (or “hears their prayers”, if you see any difference) using some kind of magic telepathic powers. He also keeps his telepathic eye on them when they are not praying, so as to know if they think bad thoughts (such as lusting after their hot neighbor) so he knows whether to reward or punish them after they die.

3. Having withheld any evidence of his existence, this god will then punish those who doubt him with an eternity burning in hell. I don’t have to kill, I don’t have to steal, I don’t even have to litter. All I have to do is harbor an honest, reasonable and rational disbelief in the Christian god and he will inflict a grotesque, eternal punishment on me a billion times worse than the death penalty – and he loves me.

4. The above beliefs are based on nothing more than a collection of Bronze Age and Greco-Roman Middle Eastern mythology, much of it discredited, that was cobbled together into a book called the “Bible” by people we know virtually nothing about, before the Dark Ages.

5. The stories of Christianity are not even original. They are borrowed directly from earlier mythology from the Middle East. Genesis and Exodus, for example, are clearly based on earlier Babylonian myths such as The Epic of Gilgamesh, and the Jesus story itself is straight from the stories about Apollonius of Tyana, Horus and Dionysus (including virgin birth, the three wise men, the star in the East, birth at the Winter solstice, a baptism by another prophet, turning water into wine, crucifixion and rising from the dead).

6. The Bible is also literally infested with contradictions, outdated morality, and open support for the most barbarous acts of cruelty. All of this is due to when and where it was written, the morality of the times and the motives of its authors and compilers. While this may be exculpatory from a literary point of view, it also screams out the fact that it is a pure product of man, bereft of any divine inspiration.

7. A rejection of the supernatural elements of Christianity does not require a rejection of its morality. Most atheists and secular humanists share a large amount of the morality taught today by mainstream Christianity. To the extent we reject Christian morality, it is where it is outdated or mean spirited – such as in the way it seeks to curtail freedoms or oppose the rights of $exual minorities. In most other respects, our basic moral outlook is indistinguishable from that of the liberal Christian – we just don’t need the mother of all carrots and sticks hanging over our head in order to act in a manner that we consider moral.

Falsely linking morality to a belief in the supernatural is a time-tested “three card trick” religion uses to stop its adherents from asking the hard questions. So is telling them it is “wrong to doubt.” This is probably why there is not one passage in the Bible in support of intelligence and healthy skepticism, but literally hundreds in support of blind acceptance and blatant gullibility.

8. We have no idea of who wrote the four Gospels, how credible or trustworthy they were, what ulterior motives they had (other than to promote their religion) or what they based their views on. We know that the traditional story of it being Matthew, Mark, Luke and John is almost certainly wrong. For example, the Gospel of Matthew includes a scene in which Jesus meets Matthew, recounted entirely in the third person!! Nevertheless, we are called upon to accept the most extraordinary claims by these unknown people, who wrote between 35 to 65 years after Christ died and do not even claim to have been witnesses. It is like taking the word of an unknown Branch Davidian about what happened to David Koresh at Waco – who wrote 35 years after the fact and wasn’t there.

9. When backed into a corner, Christianity admits it requires a “leap of faith” to believe it. However, once one accepts that pure faith is a legitimate reason to believe in something (which it most certainly is not, any more than “faith” that pixies exists is) one has to accept all other gods based on exactly the same reasoning. One cannot be a Christian based on the “leap of faith” – and then turn around and say those who believe in, for example, the Hindu gods, based on the same leap, got it wrong. In a dark room without features, any groping guess by a blind man at the direction of the door is as valid as the other 359 degrees.

Geography and birthplace dictates what god(s) one believes in. Every culture that has ever existed has had its own gods and they all seem to favor that particular culture, its hopes, dreams, and prejudices. Do you think they all exist? If not, why only yours?

Given the complete absence of evidence for the existence of God, Christian “faith” is not belief in a god. It is a mere hope for a god, a wish for a god, no more substantial than the hope for a good future and no more universal than the language you speak or the baseball team you support.

[MajGenl.Meade]

Yes, anyone who has the ability to think and write can mock almost anything, including the irrational belief that a series of accidents produced rationality.

One does not need to issue a lengthy refutation of such drivel when the poverty of thinking is clearly displayed in this:

While here, this divine visitor exhibits no knowledge of ANYTHING outside of the Iron Age Middle East, including disease and germs, basic health, the other continents, 99% of the human race, and the aforementioned galaxies.

The critic assumes that the divine visitor should rather speak to Iron Age Middle Eastern people about disease vectors and Australia than about sheep and goats.

Of course, he wasn't speaking of sheep and goats at all but about differences between ethics and the consequences of them. And all this as a lesson about the absolute necessity to care for the least members of society.... a terrible notion for a divine visitor to espouse (about 100% of the human race)!

Rather a poor effort, Colin

[Big RR]

A poor effort indeed, using a rather childish view od Christian teachings and somehow presuming this is what all Christians believe. Modern Christianity does not require blind faith, does not state that people shouldn't doubt, and does not even require a belief that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John wrote the books named after them (and even a shallow dive into NT theology shows that this is likely not the case, with the synoptic gospels likely coming from an earlier document). It does not require a belief in hell and eternal punishment for an honest doubt. Certainly some claiming to be Christian might believe any or all of that, but it is far from universal.

Nor, I would maintain, doe the Christian "need the mother of all carrots and sticks hanging over our head in order to act in a manner that we consider moral", anymoere than a child would cease to behave morally because his parent(s) died. Granted one can act morally without a belief in god, but even one professing such belief would not act immorally if they didn't think a vengeful god was watching them--they are moral because they choose to be moral.

Yes, I agree that geography plays a big part in the religion you are exposed to, but in many parts of the world people can learn about other religions and make their choices as to what to believe or not believe in--just as the author of the piece made his own choice and didn't automatically embrace the "faith of his fathers". If I looked at Christianity the way he does, I would reject it as well. But IMHO it is much, much more.

[MajGenl.Meade]

Well said... er, "wroted"

I also suspect that "Colin" was never a church attendee or Christian in his/her/its life, but is instead a dyed-in-the-wool atheist masquerading as a suitably enlightened former believer. So much more credible, don't you know?

[Crackpot]

Not really. The problem with most churches is they don’t encourage critical thought and leave teaching to people who recite dogma rather than understand theology.

Most religious teaching is taught by rote and encouraged to be taken on faith especially at a young age. (Something I can understand since trying to discuss abstractions with a child is an exercise in futility) Furthermore once the groundwork is laid at a young age many find it counterproductive to employ critical theology later as it may lead to questions that can’t be answered by the instructor.

Thus we are in a world littered with “former believers” simply because they were never taught how to look at thier beliefs and faith critically.

Take for example my mother born and raised catholic and former catechism teacher. At some point in my teens she had an awakening to all of the problems with the RC church and ceased her affiliation. After years of searching she has ended up in some pseudo Christian spirituality that has even less of a basis in sound theology but suits her because it addresses the issues she had with Roman Catholicism.

In short one can not employ an analytical view of thier religion if they were never taught how. I blame this on the minor deification of Peter in most Christian traditions. He who was praised for his faith. But what has been overlooked is he was just as often rebuked for applying that faith wrongly. Because of that omission Christians see faith alone as being important to the detriment of theology.

[Big RR]

Thus we are in a world littered with “former believers” simply because they were never taught how to look at thier beliefs critically.

true, but that's the fault of individual churches and teacher/ministers, not religion or even christianity in general. Personally, when I went to look for a church to attend when my kids were younger, the most important thing I looked for was the children's programs and how the teachers encouraged discussions and questioning rather than rote memorization or unquestioning belief. When they were confirmed, each child had to write his or her own faith statement, and they were published for reading; I was always surprised by the critical thought that went into these, and the diversity of opinions on many issues.

Re your RC example, that is unfortunate; the R church has some of the deepest and most researched theology, from Thomas Aquinas to St Francis, to Thomas Moore, etc. even the early protestant reformation is rooted heavily in RC theology--one need only read Luther, e.g., to see this. Sadly, many churches take the easy way out by telling the youngsters what to believe, rather than to encourage discover, knowledge, and understanding, and this often leads to adolescents and young adults eschewing religion as a whole. Religion is, or should be, a spiritual quest for knowledge, not something one enters to hide in but something one confronts again and again to result in a better understanding.

[Crackpot]

That’s my point speaking broadly churches fail at teaching theology. The ones that do it well are the minority. This failure is so broad that the former Christian story can be reduced it the same talking points.

[Big RR]

True, but then the same is true in any subject; I could teach you easily the basics of classical physics (or the basics of any other science for that matter) by rote, and you would be able to do mechanical and dynamic calculations without understanding why. However, true science demands more and encourages confrontation and questioning, to lead to a deeper understanding. Indeed, the early scientists often called themselves natural philosophers more often than scientists, and they were in a quest for understanding the universe; however, the questioning and exploration has brought us far more, from relativistic physics to compounds (of a sort) formed by a noble gases, to viruses, etc. True, science is based on experimentation and not faith, but it is taught as if it were based on faith with basic principles being learned by rote without any understanding--but that does not define the bounds of the science, anymore than the talking points define the bounds of Christianity (or any other religion).

[Burning Petard]

"true, but that's the fault of individual churches and teacher/ministers, not religion or even christianity in general."

Huh? just what is religion or christianity in general? How does it exist, except as a meaningless generality without those individuals?

My own specific religious tradition is going through a hard-nosed self-examination on just what we are and should become. It is now our dogma that the bible does not say or tell anything. "The Bible has no mouth." It is a collection of books, accumulated over thousands of years reflecting the thinking of many individual human writers and each writer has been modified by many human editors. What does our church believe? is a question that we within this community of believers ask ourselves and outsiders ask us. Our answer is a work in progress, reflecting a human consensus. We have faith that the creator of the universe is involved in this human process of sharing our human experience. In fact, we don't even call ourselves a church, even though we firmly agree that the highest calling an individual can have is to be a disciple of Jesus.

snailgate

[Big RR]

Meaningless generality? I don't understand; IMHO it exists within the individual, not the group, so one cannot make a broad based claim that "all chrisitians believe" whatever in the way the quoted article did. A group of like minded individuals can help to spur the discovery on, but IMHO in the end it comes down to the individual, not the group.

[Gob]

Maybe you're in a "world of former believers" as people are realising that all religion is a total hoax, and a way of extracting money from people.

This is more likely to be one of the reasons why you have so many ex believers, the sheer bigotry and stupidity of religion;

A number of parents have pulled their children from Brindabella Christian School since the "no" letter was sent. Two families Fairfax Media spoke with said their children had been subjected to lectures on the same-sex marriage survey and felt alienated after expressing dissenting views.

A letter sent by Mr Zwajgenberg this week confirmed one family's decision to remove their children from the school. The memo asked the school community to keep Brindabella Christian College in its prayers as the devil circled on Christian schools.

"There is a perfect storm coming for Christian education in Australia by way of differing views on clarifications with respect to religious freedoms and the devil has his sights set on Christian education through changing legislation and secular attitudes," Mr Zwajgenberg's letter said.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-new ... zuwrw.html