Final Essay

Logic and Love: C.S. Lewis’s approach to God Nolan Worstell

01/16/10

DCM C.S. Lewis

“Let there be Light!” (International) and, with a flash, light came into existence and the creation of the universe had begun. This is the classic way that we, if we were raised in a Christian home, were taught that the world was created. This has been proved to be more of an almost poetic way of putting the creation of the world since science has explained, in our age, the much more likely method by which God created the universe. By the same token, we as Christians must always be trying to logically understand what our faith means and its effects. However, we cannot rely solely on logic to understand our faith and salvation in Jesus Christ because many of God’s actions cannot solely be explained in the sense of pure cold logic, but also require an understanding of God’s immense love for his creation. In Developing the Christian Mind: C.S. Lewis, we have used both the works of Cornelius Plantinga and C.S. Lewis to help further our understanding of what it means to be Christian.

First off, I think we must begin with the contamination of all things by sin. This is the necessary starting point for a talk about how to approach one’s faith in God because if all things were not twisted and warped by evil, then there would be no reason for Jesus to have come to this earth. Thus, we must come to the understanding that all things are contaminated by Evil. I think there is, as Lewis says in Mere Christianity, a Moral Law this is unlike almost everything else in the world in that it applies solely to humans. However, the odd thing is that, despite almost all humans having an internal sense of Morals that are all very similar and that are given to them by their unique parents and society, all humans fail to follow the Moral law and then try to explain how they didn't break the law or how the moral law didn't apply in their situation. This Moral Law and the cognizant constant breaking there of hints to the idea that all men realize that there is brokenness in our world. This brokenness is what Christians call evil and when a person commits evil knowingly then a sin has occurred. Now some people try to argue that the Moral Law does not exist, but then, shortly after, say that something is unfair, which in turn appeals to the idea that a Moral Law exists because if a Moral Law did not exist then there would not be a valid argument for someone treating you unfairly because there would not be a definition of fairness to say that the opposite there of had occurred. (Lewis, C.S. Mere Christianity) This is an attempt on the part of the one who is saying that there is no Moral Law to validate the idea that he is perfect and does not sin because if he acknowledges that he sins then he realizes that he must be punished for it in the end or otherwise there is no purpose of the Moral Law. Thus, each and every one of us has an innate understanding that things in the universe are not as they should be and that we are in need of salvation.

Now to go any farther, we must talk about how much God loves us as his creation. This is evident, to Christians, because God sent his son, who is part of God himself, to this earth to pay the price for our sins and die as a substitute for us. Now common wisdom tells us that if God was willing to send his son, which is part and parcel of God himself, then he must love us quite a lot. Think for a moment, if you will, what it would take for a human father to send his only son to die for several billion people who have slandered him, ignored all that he ever asked of them, and tried to say that he didn’t even exist even though the father had done many kind things for the several billion people. It seems rather ridiculous for the father to send his son who loves him and obeys him in all things to die for this sorry ingrate lot of slobs does it not? This is exactly what God did for us as humans that “while we were yet sinners (or for this example a sorry ingrate lot of slobs) Christ died for us.” (International) This helps us understand, as Christians, why God just hasn’t ended the world already because God wishes for all people to believe in him and accept the atonement for their sins that is given freely because of the sacrifice of Christ and thus be saved, which in Christian thought means to be able to join God in the new heaven and new earth that will be created after the passing away of our present age.

Now that we understand the two greatest components of Christianity, we must introduce the idea of logic. Logic is very important to the Christian faith because at any moment in time we could be called to “give reason for the faith we have in Christ Jesus.” (International) This is why, when we consider our faith, we must begin with the common logic, which all human beings have, to prove why we believe as we do. C.S. Lewis is very supportive of this idea and as such wrote Mere Christianity in order that people of all denominations would have a solid logical argument for their belief in Christ as their Lord and Savior and not just their own life experiences. This approach of having both real life experience and an objective look at why God must exist and why we believe in him is linked to C.S. Lewis’s “Meditation in a Tool shed” which says that we cannot simply look along or at, but we must do both, also known as experiencing what something is like and knowing facts about the experience as well when either is sensible or possible. However, Lewis did not limit himself solely to a logical defense of the Christian faith, but also wrote books for the Christian and his walk of faith. For instance in the Screwtape Letters, C.S. Lewis wrote letters supposedly between a elder demon and a younger demon that is tempting a devout Christian away from his faith. In this work, Lewis points out the importance of constant vigilance on the part of a Christian to ensure that his faith is not becoming simply an empty shell and, by extension, becoming a false Christian because the devil is out to get you every day and in every way that he can. He is patient and he does not sleep. This is a scary thought that the devil watching you all the time just waiting for you to slip up so he can capitalize on a moment’s hesitation to follow God so he can chip away at our faith. We say that the devil cannot steal our souls; we are God-fearing and church-going people. Dear Uncle Screwtape says, in essence, Great keep on thinking you are God fearing and that your church going will save you. It is absolutely ok that you think that I'll work in the back of your mind rotting your faith from the inside out.(C.S. Lewis Screwtape Letters) This is a valuable lesson that Lewis tries to teach us that when we think we are safe we are most vulnerable. Thus though our fallen condition and God’s Love form the foundation of our faith, we still must be thinking people to fulfill our calling as Christians.

To be Christian is to be sons and daughters of God. This is a high and important calling and cannot be separated from our everyday life, but must be integrated in all we say and do. Also we must be able to defend our faith if called to account for it. To do these things, we must believe we are sinful and that God loves us. Then using logic, we can see that if God shows such extreme love to us then we must show the same extreme amount of love to others. Also logic teaches us why we are sinful and why God is not merely a story made up to make us feel better about ourselves, but is a true and the only foundational force in the universe.

Bibliography

International Bible Society. Holy Bible New International Version. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2002. 1. Print.

Lewis, C S. Mere Christianity. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Calvin College. Web. 14 Jan. 2010. .

Lewis, C S. Meditiation in a Toolshed. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Calvin College, Grand Rapids Michigan. Web. 16 Jan. 2010. .

Lewis, C S. Screwtape Letters. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Calvin College, Grand Rapids Michigan. Web. 16 Jan. 2010. .

Problem of Pain

In chapter 6, Lewis talks about human pain. In this he notes that there are two types of pain, that of cognizant Pain and that can be either physical or mental and biological pain that is the result of synapses of special nerve fibers. The first type of pain is called the B sense in Chapter 6 and Lewis comments that this type of pain is mostly caused by one person on another and at the same time this pain is also felt by people when they surrender their lives to God which is a kind of death for the self-will, the desire of a person to control his own life and not surrender it to its true owner, God.

Lewis goes on to say that Pain is an evil, but not the subtle and smooth evils that lurk in our hearts, but an evil that is "unmasked and unmistakable". Thus the idea of punishment for the good of the perpetrator so that he will recognize that he is committing evil and thus shattering his illusion of being good or ok is a useful thing, but it can be warped into vengefulness which is to punish for the sake of punishing not for the improvement of the person. Lewis then shows how this type of correction is what God uses on us daily lest we fall into deluding ourselves that we are Good and have no need of him because our lives are going so well, which is especially common amongst the "good" people of this world. However this is not to say that all following of God's will is painful, but rather that a good portion of it becomes less and less painful the close to God that we get unless you are referring to the pain of self-surrender which will always be an unpleasant experience, but ever more beneficial to the one who under goes it.

I think that we can find examples of this in all things. For instance, how does a dog learn to sit or to not go into the house? by kind words of the master or by the master kicking the dog out of the house or forcing the dog to sit down despite its will to resist, but if no action is taken then the dog will never sit and will freely roam the house despite the master's thundering thoughts that he should not that are never vocalized. Much the same, God wishes to train us and teach us to conform to the innate rightness of his will. We can choose either to resist and keep going where we should not or we can listen and move closer to being right.

Man or Rabbit

It is just like Lewis to begin talking about whether Christianity is necessary to live a good life and end up with the question of whether one is a man or a rabbit. Lewis's basic point in this selection is that in order to answer the question of whether or not Christianity is necessary to lead a Good Life is a question that each person must answer for themselves. Some may seriously look into Christianity and say this is a lie and others will confront Christianity and say this is the great secret of the Universe. Neither conclusion is necessary for proving that you are a man. The necessary question is were you willing to honestly stand up to the question and look into all the facts and logic behind Christianity and its relationship to a Good life and decide for yourself. To avoid the facts or to remain purposefully ignorant of what Christianity is and try to get some one else to tell you what you should believe is to be, as Lewis says, a rabbit, a creature who lives its life in fear of almost all things and does not stand up to anything lest it might die.

How often do we as Christians and as people act like rabbits? We are always looking for the easy way out. The way that involves us being as passive as possible and get the most reward. This is a corruption of our humanity. We are given innate desires to explore and to learn and above all to be moderately skeptical, to challenge all that is presented to us. We must learn to act much like the Spartans of 300 and face our Persian empires not cower in fear. After all if the question must be answered eventually would it not be better to find out the answer as soon as possible and face what is rumored to be coming and find out if the rumors are true or false rather than let our fear take away the dignity we have and turn us into lowly rabbits?

Vocation

Vocation...this seems like a never ending theme here at Calvin College. Our professors are obsessed with it. It seems to Calvin that perhaps this is the end all and be all purpose of a college. This is a problem in my view. I hold with C.S. Lewis that college is about a human pursuing knowledge because he has interest in it. The important thing is that a person has to find on his own the what he enjoys the most because, while an institution can possibly introduce the person to a thing which he loves, the institution can only show him some of his chosen field of study and should not teach the person as one would do on the job training. When you are at college you are there to learn for the sake of learning and to learn how to be a better man not do a prolonged four or more year training for a job.

Now this is not to say that a college does not manage to prepare us for a job in four or more years, but to say that this preparation is not the primary purpose. Thus, I do not think we can say that making people find a Vocation is a plausible goal of a college. Rather the purpose of a college in this respect should be to provide a place in which one can learn more about a field one already enjoys and provide a place that a person who has many can varied interests can come and learn more about each and use that information to decide for himself what his vocation should be. The professors, while they should help the students, should not be primarily focused on the students careers but rather helping the students learn more about a subject that they enjoy which as a by-product will be beneficial to their careers. I am sure that by now you have noticed two things, One that this is very similar to "Our English Syllabus" and, two, that both points of thought give the same information, but the difference between the two schools of thought is the way in which the student and the professor engage the subject matter. On one hand, the student sits in class and gets lectured at and on the side of learning alongside one another, both student and professor engage the subject matter because of their enjoyment there of not under the coercion of the Board of Trustees or because a Core requirement says they should.

My Precious (a Lesson from Golem)

C.S. Lewis remarks in, The inner ring, about a phenomenon that each of us can find examples in our every day lives. This phenomenon is that of, what C.S. Lewis calls, the Inner Ring or more commonly known in High Schools throughout the United States as the In crowd. This is a group of people that band together and spend lots of time together.

The concept of an Inner ring is not a new one nor is it a bad one. As a matter of fact it is perhaps one of the most natural things for a person do to in that a person will always tend to spend time with people that are most like that person. The Inner Ring can be quite good when it is used to protect the members involved from persecution or to protect other people. For instance, the early church was like an inner ring in many respects, especially during the Nero's persecution of the Christian church, because to allow people who were not part of the church to know all of it's members would be much like signing a death warrant for all who were there and would destroy the church.

However the Inner ring can also be used for bad purposes. This most often, at least in Lewis's mind, occurred when the purpose of the exclusivity of the ring is to intentionally make it hard for new people to join the ring. This begets a cycle of remorse and false or undeserved privilege toward or for, respectively, the members of the inner ring. In this type of inner ring, the focus is control and vying for power, neither of which are satisfying or permanent.

Still we humans have an innate desire to be part of the inner workings of all things and be an integral part of whatever we are a part of. Perhaps this is a sign of our design according to God's plan. For indeed as C.S. Lewis says in the "Weight of Glory" that the ultimate thing that can happen to us humans is that God recognizes us and thus we are an ingredient, a necessary part of the divine happiness.

Eros

One of C.S. Lewis's defined four loves is Eros. Eros is the love of a lover. For these reason it is perhaps the closest to Agape, or God to human, love. The Bible even uses this type of imagery when it says that Jesus is the lover of my soul. However unlike Agape love, Eros easily becomes manipulative, controlling, and harmful to the lover and the one who is loved, the lovee so to speak. Now Lewis makes a point of separating Eros from sexual desire that Lewis defines as Venus, in reference to the Roman God of sensual desire because he is speaking only of a lovers love and not the desire for the pleasure that is found in having sexual relations with a woman.

Eros is a hard thing to grasp for me although I have had many glimpses of it. This is because I am cautious, perhaps too cautious, about when and how my relationships form. The side effect of this is that I am not so sure that I have ever really fallen in love more like looked over the edge into the pool of love and stepped back rather than leaping. From what Lewis says, this seems to be a blessing, for the most part anyways, because if Eros is so strong I feel that a strong friendship should be there to support him and work as a balance to prevent Eros from becoming corrupt. Also Lewis says that Eros is perhaps the most mortal of all the Loves and this, to me, also supports the idea that one needs to have a foundational relationship for Eros to rest on otherwise he will be like a seed that is left out on the ground that has not been tilled. At the first rain, Eros will grow into a seedling, but will be unable to really break into the earth and so soon dies from a lack of the nutrients required to sustain itself. This is also an apt metaphor for Eros that has a strong relational foundation, but is not controlled and guided because it leads into C.S. Lewis's own saying that Eros is much like a garden that needs tending.

However we must not be too grave when dealing with such fickle things as emotions because emotions cannot and do not last as such we should be happy when they arrive and regard them as true, but not to believe their fickle promises of everlasting perseverance. If we want Eros to remain as much as possible, we cannot rely on him and him alone, as Lewis says, but it involves us fulfilling the promises we make while he whispers what to say in our ears. This is the truest expression of love. That of acting it out on a daily basis without any positive emotions to help nudge us along.

Chapter 4

Redemption. Such a pregnant term in modern day Christian theology especially amongst the church denominations that sprung out of the Reformation. Certainly as a Christian one knows that one needs redemption, but what is the essence of it? Plantinga says that it is the act of atonement for sins, that is to make us one with God. Now we must not be lulled into a false sense of security that says, "O Christ died for my sins so it does not matter what I do anymore because God will forgive me" this is a classic thing that Paul warns against when he says in Romans 6:1 "What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? By no means! We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer?" Plantinga says it this way, that when we were still in slavery in Egypt, a parallel for sin, that God did not give us the Ten Commandments, but after we were freed from since then God gave the Ten Commandments to us so that we might not become slaves to sin once again.

This is when Redemption is truly evident. When human beings, who have been saved by the grace of God through Jesus Christ, take the initiative and begin living lives filled with the love of God because until that point, we are still unredeemed slave chained to a weight so great that we have no hope of dragging it along and unable to act as a free man should. When we begin to live lives like this, then we begin the work that God has set out for us, which is to help him redeem other lost sinners and all of creation. This is when redemption comes full circle and the redeemed becomes a part of the redeeming, which is much like what Lewis says in Weight of Glory, "The promise of glory is the promise, almost incredible and only possible by the work of Christ, that some of us, that any of us who really chooses... shall please God. To please God...to be a real ingredient in the divine happiness."

Learning in war-time

C.S. Lewis, himself a veteran, feels called during the second World War to talk about the role of learning and indeed all purely societal activities. This is because during a war, citizens of the nation at war often feel called to go into service. Lewis uses common sense to counter act that extreme notion in saying that not all can be or should be soldiers. A more recent example of this is the United States Army which has it set up such that for every single soldier on the battlefield, there are twenty more individuals as support for that soldier. Also one can sight the obvious fact that if all people were soldiers then who would make the ammunition, grow the food, and do all the other things that are necessary for running a successful war campaign.

Lewis also brings out the argument that people dying is not something new. As a matter of fact, all people die so "war does not increase the frequency of death" all it can do is alter the time of death. From there Lewis says that even soldiers are not constantly focused on the war because war is a finite thing and as such cannot occupy one's every waking minute. This is why one needs an eternal thing upon which to fix his thoughts and, for Christians, that is God. Thus we, as Christians, should live to serve God in all that we do, and that God can be served even by the most menial tasks and we are not called to live, which is to spend our every waking minute, for our country, for saving others lives, or for securing the safety of our country. This is an important thing and helps us understand why we may not be participating actively in the war effort even though our country is fighting for freedom, ours or otherwise, but we still are living in accordance with God's will.

I think Lewis has a good point that just because we, as a nation, are at war, does not mean that God calls us to drop all learning to suddenly become soldiers. However, this does not mean that no-one should become a soldier either. After all, Society must find a balance and not be swinging wildly between two extremes or she will fall, but, above all, one must always put God first before deciding whatever he will do for indeed even the most self-sacrificing or honorable acts in the world will do him no good unless they be lifted up as an offering before God.

Plantinga Chapter 3

Plantinga points out in this chapter that all humanity and indeed all of creation is fallen. This is a central teaching in the Christian faith and one well worth looking at in depth. First Plantinga talks about what it means to be fallen. It means that we sin each and every day and which is part of what the Christian Reformed Church would say is the total depravity of creation. The reason this connection applies is because Sin is, as Dr. Ribeiro would say, the d/d(t) of Evil (d/d(t)) is an attempt at putting a derivative in a blog if you couldn't tell) and Evil is what defines the total depravity of all creation.

Plantinga goes on to say that Evil is not a new invention purely of the devil's own design for the devil cannot create only attempt fake mockeries of what has already been created. In this case, the devil's mockery of good is evil for in order for evil to have an existence then good must exist, but even when there is no evil then Good still can exist which means that Good is a separate and stand alone entity from evil and should not be confused as such. However the devil is of the wily type and is quite good at parading about the twisted happiness-es and joys as the real deal and exempting the parts of them that prove that the apparent "good" that the devil would have us do is in reality an evil because it does not satisfy and does not accomplish the lasting joy and happiness that it promises, but rather a empty joy and a fleeting fulfilling happiness.

God has a response to the crafty manipulative evil that the devil has created for all humanity and that is common grace. Common grace is the little nougat of goodness that can be found in all institutions, reason, and people and if nurtured can flower into righteous prosperity for the institutions, heightened insight to reason, and faith in God for the people. Common grace also acts as a barrier to prevent evil from fooling the whole world and turning creation into a very benighted place empty of God's loving light and presence. Thus, it is our duty as Christians to encourage any application of this common grace where ever we see it, be it in Christians or non-Christians, for it is one of the driving forces that is preserving and can save our ever more benighted race.

the Poison of Subjectivism

Lewis feels very strongly about Subjectivism and says that it is a purely theoretical error that has removed the normal checks and balances that normally support good intentions and has allowed new "Power philosophies of totalitarian states." I think that Lewis is quite correct in his thinking here. The reason I think this is because the point of Subjectivism is to think about how the rational part of the mind thinks. The whole idea is quite unsound. After all how can one examine what he himself thinks about what one is thinking? It is quite a circular argument that leads no where.

I do however think the idea of Subjectivism spawns from an important idea that one should examine ones own base assumptions to see if those assumptions are valid. This is an important thing to do because it helps one to remove prejudices and to ensure that ones facts are not being effected by what one assumes. However this idea has a limit and that is that you have to assume that your logic is logical. This is as stated above because if you question your own logic, you fall prey to subjectivism and go around in circles sounding rather foolish to any philosopher who is worth his salt. Now this is not to say, of course, that logic cannot be flawed because after all we are humans that have been effected by sin and as such there will be flaws in our logic, but this is why we have our fellow man, in the sense of humanity for people who would choose to take my words and misconstrue them for those of you who would not I apologize, because it is often that no two people have the exact same problem and so when they discuss things together the flaws in each's logic are allieviated. This is what I think is meant when it is said that iron sharpens iron. So that one day we will be sharp enough to cut through the theoretical error that is Subjectivism and see truth as God intended it.

BBC Lewis Life

Lewis is read in Philosophy class and church bible studies all the time, but we seem to almost deify him. This is a grave mistake. I was very grateful to Professor Ribeiro for showing us this segment on Lewis life with people who knew him's descriptions of his actions and attitudes. This helps us put Lewis in his proper place. That of a man, a great thinker no doubt, but just a man all the same. One thing that particularly struck me during the documentary is what Lewis did when his apartment caught on fire. Lewis calmly strode over to his friends apartment and in a cool and collected voice said "My room is on fire what should I do?". This to me speaks of the classic scientist and philosopher so preoccupied with his own work that he forgets the obvious common sense things in life. This also shows how much Lewis loves learning and his commitment to it that he would not have time to pick up on the common sense of real life because of spending to much time studying subjects that he really enjoys. It also speaks about his genius because almost all geniuses are at least as scatter

This is an important thing to remember in a class studying C.S. Lewis and his take on Christianity and life as a whole. I say this because we must remember that no matter how smart Lewis is, he is subject to errors in his logic and misinterpretations and understandings just like the rest of us. However, I must emphasize that this is not to discount Lewis in any way, but just to keep our perspectives in order. The church has a history of almost deifying ordinary human beings just because of their extraordinary gifts. This I feel is wrong. The works of a great human often are great, but when you start talking about their creator almost as if he can do no wrong then I think you lose a critical element in the work, that of its creator's personality. Without that personality, the work looses what makes it friendly and relate-able to the common man. If we do this to Lewis I think we will lose not only the truest sense of his work, but also a great role model from history for future generations.

Merely a Christian, Nothing more Nothing less

Mere Christianity...that is rather a hard topic to pin down and when it becomes solidly defined down to the essentials of Christianity, it can be extremely powerful. The question is how would one go about explaining and defining the essentials of the Christian faith? C.S. Lewis approaches it from a logical perspective of the universal law of Right and Wrong, a.k.a. morals.

Lewis says that Morals are unlike almost everything else in the world in that they apply solely to humans. However, this the odd thing is that, despite almost all humans having an internal sense of Morals given to them by their parents and society, humans all have very similar Morals, but they all fail to follow the Moral law and then try to explain how they didn't break the law or how the moral law didn't apply in their situation. Lewis also differentiates between Morals and instincts that instincts give us the options we can pick, but Morals are a separate measuring mechanism that is used to judge which the instincts should be followed and the moral law is not an instinct because it doesn't steadily select the same type of instincts to follow every time a choice emerges where as an instinct selects the same type of decision every time. Thus, in order for Morals to be separate from humanity and only apply to humanity then it must be implemented by an outside force. This force, according to Lewis, is much like a mind and at this point Lewis begins to allude the realness of God.

We as Christians should take note of Lewis's mere Christianity because it hits on universal points shared between all Christian denominations. As such these things should be used when introducing someone to the Christian faith instead of the denominational rhetoric that man churches employ to win new converts to Christianity. This makes the fissures in the Christian church very apparent to the secular world which can give them a sense of falseness to our beliefs. The reasoning behind this is that if this group of believers cannot agree with other believers of the same faith it makes it appear as though Christians do not share a common bond which is perceived in the secular world as fragility and discord that point to flaws within the Christian faith itself. This is a problem.

Mere Christianity is very useful to the common believer as well. This is because it can help one see through all the entanglements and dross that get attached to faith over time. This helpsd us see where the Devil is beginning to undermine our faith. From the Screwtape Letters, Lewis warns us that the Devil is constantly trying to undermine our faith as Christians and we should use the essentials in Mere Christianity to affirm that we are still solid in our foundation in Christ.

The Screwy tape Letters

The Screwtape Letters have one simple and profound message. The devil is out to get you everyday and in every way that he can. He is patient and he does not sleep. He cares enough about getting your soul that he can and often will put a devil in charge of procuring it from you without you even knowing you sold it. This is a scary thought that there is a devil watching you all the time just waiting for you to slip up so he can capitalize on a moments hesitation to follow God. That is all the devil needs is an instant to begin to chip away at your faith.

We say that the devil cannot steal our souls, WE are God-fearing and church-going people. Dear Uncle Screwtape says, in essence, "Great keep on thinking you are God fearing and that your church going will save you. It is absolutely OK that you THINK that I'll work in the back of your mind rotting your faith from the inside out." Kind of scary isn't it? That just when we think we are most secure in our faith in God that the devil starts chipping away at the foundations of our faith. We see examples of this everyday. The friend who slights us not in a major way but simply so that the friend can have a small gain. The CEO that decides to cut some workers just so that he can avoid cutting his own salary. Each of these may go to church and do great works of charity, but the devil is beginning to worm his way into their hearts.

God cautions against this laxity. He says in the Bible that we must guard our hearts and our minds lest our own human nature over run our spiritual defenses. After all, who knows our weaknesses better than ourselves, our true selves that cannot be deluded with all the "white" lies. Now I say this as one who has a tendency to think of himself as much better than others and to get wrapped up in whatever I happen to work on and neglect his spiritual life. It reminds me that when I start building up that pride of mine the devil sees a great opportunity to begin to undermine my faith and tries to keep me over-fascinated with the small wonders of this world and forgetting all about its amazing creator and savior.

what it means to be Created

Creation is, as Plantinga put it, a fallen masterpiece that can be repaired. He compares it to a Banged-up, badly repaired, out-of-tune Stradivarius violin that would be unmistakable to a trained eye and ear much as we are unmistakable pieces of God's workmanship and as sure we retain some part of its goodness and promise. This idea is also interconnected with the idea that humanity and all things have been created by God from nothing or as Mr. Paulo Ribeiro put it
"(0)^God=(universe)."

This is an important thing when we look at the world today because it would be hypocritical of us to say we love God and yet exploit God's other creations. This would be much the same as a man saying he loves his wife and his wife loves to paint, but instead of appreciating and respecting the paintings, he takes a knife and begins to cut holes in the paintings. This action would of course greatly anger his wife and rightly so. Thus why do we do harm to our neighbors and act as if God would not care? I think this points to our own fallen natures and explains why humanity cannot of its own accord fix creation. We need God to renew creation and mend the holes we have cut into the tapestries of our own and others' lives So that we can reach the purpose of our creation which is to imitate the oneness of God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Another important corollary that we can draw from God having created the universe of his own will and desire and nothing more is that nothing was created accidentally. This means that our life's must have purpose. Now we can choose whether or not to follow this purpose during this life, but I believe in the end all things must praise God and give him glory in their own fashion because we are his creation the testament to his mastery of all things there is nothing that we can do that God cannot use to further his glory and his greatest reward is to have us be known as ones who played a part in furthering God's glory. All other honors are finite and amount to nothing in comparison so there is no difference between he who has God and everything else and he who has only God which shows that God does not favor old or recent believers, but rather all that are believers.

The Glory on our shoulders.

In C.S. Lewis's "Weight of Glory", he emphasizes two kinds of glory, that of God and that of others. That of God is the supreme power of a creator in which that which God shows recognition to the created which is the ultimate fulfillment of the created or God shows no recognition of the created and the created finds its ultimate despair. The other kind of glory is that of others. This stems from the glory of God in that when one is known by God one is as a God or Goddess or, in the case of being unknown, to be a Demon. Each of these two fates to us now would be a thing that we would have to respect and awe and would nigh on destroy our minds in our present state.

To me the idea that all humans are immortal is validated by Christ's resurrection and by extension his destruction of a final and complete death. This seems to also play into Lewis's reasoning when he says that "it is immortals whom we joke with, work with, marry, snub, and exploit--immortal horrors or everlasting splendours." This I think is something all of us must keep in mind as we carry out our daily lives that we have no escape that we will continue et infinitum and so are always accountable to our Creator for our actions and thoughts. This is very humbling when you realize that when you deal falsely with another that person is an equally powerful immortal who can plead against you to the Almighty and although the Creator could destroy you, he will not, but he will do far worse in making you exist beyond all knowing of any. What a terrifying thing to be sent from God to a place where you who is defined by the Creator is forced to find definition in yourself and of course there is no definition in yourself so you are inextricably lost and alone in the Dark.

Thus life is not a simple game. Life is a constant battle warring around us in which there is no small action because each action or inaction you take has a profound effect on the war waged by the other immortals around you. This creates the meaning behind the song Slow Fade by Casting Crowns which says
"Be careful little eyes what you see
It's the second glance that ties your hands as darkness pulls the strings
Be careful little feet where you go
For it's the little feet behind you that are sure to follow."
That speaks about how parents actions can lead their children astray and the same idea is applicable to all our relationships.

our english Syllabus or a call to learning

At first glance, one can quickly tell that C.S. Lewis is less than enthusiastic about writing a syllabus and this comes out in the point he makes within the Syllabus itself. Namely as Lewis puts it, "Do not tell me that you would sooner have a nice composite menu of dishes from half the world drawn up for you. You are too old for that. It is time you learned to wrestle with nature for yourself... Our selection would be an effort to bind the future within our present knowledge and taste: nothing could be worse; it would be a kind of propaganda... Is it really true that you would prefer that to the run of your teeth over the whole country? Have you no incredulity, no skepticism, left?" By this Lewis, is using food in place of knowledge, which is an apt metaphor because food is nourishment for the body and knowledge is nourishment for the mind, to suggest that it would be wrong to write up a Syllabus that tells the student what he or she must learn, but that it would be far better to let the students each pursue his or her own interests and tendencies to learn, in this case, English.

This point of we as college students and, as Lewis calls us, mature humans should no longer be taught as we were in Grade school in which facts were thrown at us in lectures and very little real world applications or imagination was applied we simply regurgitated what was taught will little or no processing. Now as college students we should be pursuing our own interests in knowledge and processing it and finding meaning, not just accepting what we are told by "elder students" (as Lewis aptly calls them). This is not to say that we should not work with and spend time in classes, but rather that the classes themselves should be structured more with the exploration of the subject by both the "students" and the "teacher" so that they would be junior and senior partners, so to speak, in a collective attempt to better understand how the world works.

This throws a wrench in how many colleges and universities teach because the majority of classes, especially at the reshmen and Sophomore level, are taught as lecture with little or no laboratory experience. The even worse part is that more and more so the labs are being treated as do what I tell you lecture style classes than the co-operative learning amongst fellow students that should be occurring. This, Lewis argues, is merely vocational training. I have to hold with this sentiment because, while it can arguably lead to very applicable real world situations, the student is not learning because he desires to learn that subject matter necessarily, but the student is learning because the student is told that he or she must learn that and so the whole "education" is more of a job or vocation and not so much creating an "interesting and interested person" that Lewis says that education should be doing.

Hope and Longing: a reflection

Hope and Longing are related, as Plantinga says, in that longing helps to create hope. Now I think it is safe to assume that everyone knows what longing is and has an idea of what hope is. So let us begin with longing. Longing is a want so ingrained and so desired that it captivates the longer's (the person who is longing's) heart. We see this all the time in our everyday life be it as a lover longs for his beloved or as a thirsty worker out in the hot sun longs for a cool refreshing drink of water. Hope is much the same except for it involves looking forward to something that is not yet or a state of being that has not yet been achieved but has only been talked about and involves the same longing for these things to come about.

These emotions tend to, but not always, be linked to things that are good for us or bring us happiness. However, often what one longs or hopes for disappoints. Thus, the question of why do these emotions exist if they only serve to torment us comes about. To answer this question, we must think about the creator of humanity and the fall of the human race. God, as the creator of mankind and all things, would want them to know him on a personal level and to attempt to facilitate that he bestowed humanity with the emotions of longing which would lead the person to want to find a thing or being that could satisfy their innate desire to be loved which could only be totally satisfied by God, their loving creator. After all, who loves a child greater than the child's parents? So the same applies to God. After the fall, the ability to be extremely intimate with God was impaired and so the longing what we experienced for God's ultimate love became a hope because it required a renewal of humanity to a higher state of being that has not yet come about. Thus both hope and longing are tools that are meant to point to God. However, too often humanity settles for small fleeting unsatisfactory earthly loves to fill the need for love that can only be filled by God. This sadly means that many of us humans never come to meet God and so it falls to us, Christians, to help reveal to others that they need not ever feel unloved but instead can lavish all their love on God who loves them impossibly more than can be comprehended.

No Right to Happiness

C.S. Lewis begins "No Right to Happiness" with the classical story of two married individuals falling in "love" and then divorcing their respective spouses to marry each other for the sake of happiness. This tale is precluded by an acquaintance of Lewis saying "After all, they had a right to happiness." Lewis then continues on to explain how such a notion as a Right to anything as transitory and circumstantial as happiness is folly.

I have to agree with Lewis in this sentiment. The main reason for this is that having a Right is much the same thing as a person or society as a whole has an obligation to give you whatever you have a right to if you should so choose to request it. This seems very wrong to me in the case of happiness because one person's happiness can be another person's hell and if all person's have the same right to happiness then would not these rights void each other out and leave us in the exact same place we started? The other possibility is that some people have a greater right to happiness than others which is against the Constitution and what God says in the Bible and leaves the question of who arbitrates who the more worthy individuals are.

Now this does not presume that an individual cannot be happy. That would make for a dull and dreary world indeed. Rather it means that one can pursue happiness, but like any desire must restrain the pursuit to means which do not infringe on one's neighbors pursuit of happiness or upon the moral obligations of stewardship of earth or caring and loving all things. This should in turn lead an individual to a type of happiness that is superior to earthly happiness and is found when one finds and seeks to become one with God which is not transitory or illusory happiness but is more permanent and is more akin to a life style and that is Joy to which every person has a right and nigh on an obligation to pursue.

Babette's Feast

The movie opens with a young french officer who takes official leave to Jutland for some relaxation and to re-think his life. While on this sabbatical, the officer fell in love with one Fredrickhaven's priest's daughter. However, the officer feels rejected by both the priest and his daughter who value a life of simplicity and leaves to choose a life of fame and fortune in a military career. Then a famous opera singer comes to Fredrickhaven and teaches the priest's other daughter to sing "like an angel." While the Scandinavian opera singer is teaching the other (second) daughter, He falls in love with her. However his love is not returned and so he leaves to return to Paris.

Then, Babette comes to live with the two sisters, whose father, the priest, has since passed away and are now older women who are taking care of their father's congregation as matriarchal leaders, because of a civil war in Paris that has destroyed her family. To help pay for her room and board, Babette takes over cooking for the two sisters and for providing meals for the poor and elderly of the village. This is reminiscent of a literary archetype in which the character is fleeing from destruction in their past.

This arrangement continues until one day Babette wins 10,000 francs in the Parisian lottery. This prompts the two sisters to believe that Babette will soon leave them. This is not the case however because Babette insists on cooking a true French dinner for the sisters and their congregation not leaving. This dinner seems to symbolize a sinful excess for the sisters, but they consent as a parting give to Babette. After the meal, the first sister thanks Babette for cooking such a wonderful meal that turned out not to be a sinful excess, but rather a spiritual soothing for the entire congregation. As the sisters are offering their farewells, Babette is confused because she does not plan to leave, but rather gave all of her 10,000 francs to provide the meal as an honorable sacrifice to God out of love for the sisters. This gives us all an important lesson that friends are much more important than fame or fortune and by sharing our fortunes and talents we build lasting relationships and get lasting enjoyment from both.

Bulverism

C.S. Lewis makes a great argument against a style of argumentation that he calls "Bulverism" in his essay called "Bulverism." What C.S. Lewis says, in essence, is that Bulverism is founded on the idea that in order to discredit another person's ideas because they disagree with yours all one has to do is explain what is wrong with the person that either makes him unreliable on the given topic or that the person is biased in one way or another. This is perhaps the easiest way of rendering the speakers argument invalid because it does not inherently require any prior knowledge on the given subject and does not require one to prove the speaker wrong, but rather a knowledge about the speaker.

The problem now with Bulverism should now become quite apparent. Bulverism focuses on the innate human desire to be correct and does not focus on the search for truth. However when one closely examines Bulverism, as C.S. Lewis does in his essay you find:

"Until Bulverism is crushed, reason can play no effective part in human affairs.
Each side snatches it early as a weapon against the other; but between the two
reason itself is discredited. And why should reason not be discredited? It would
be easy, in answer, to point to the present state of the world, but the real answer is
even more immediate. The forces discrediting reason, themselves depend on
reasoning. You must reason even to Bulverize. You are trying to prove that all
proofs are invalid. If you fail, you fail. If you succeed, then you fail even more -
for the proof that all proofs are invalid must also be invalid itself."

Thus, Bulverism is circular logic that leads nowhere and should be discarded in favor of the pursuit of truth by first trying to determine if the speaker is indeed wrong and then upon finding and proving the existence of an error can we, as C.S. Lewis puts it, "go on and discover the psychological causes of the error."

This leaves us with only one solid reed of hope left, which is that the taint or the reason for discrediting the speaker that is given by the Bulverist does not invalidate the reasoning behind the speaker's words. The validity of human reason now being assumed as a fact leads one to the inevitable conclusion that either events simply happen to have occurred in a particular fashion, a.k.a. random, or there is a Supernatural pre-existant being that is the cause of everything. To me, the Supernatural being is the only viable option because if everything is a series of random events then there is no rhyme or reason to the universe therefore reason cannot be applied, but if there is a Supernatural being then the exact opposite is true and reason is applicable.

Meditiation in a Toolshed

I enjoyed how C.S. Lewis opened "Meditation in a Toolshed" with a down to earth experience that almost anyone who has a garden or worked on a farm can resonate with. That is C.S. Lewis talks about how in older tool sheds one can often see shafts of light penetrating the darkness therein, kind of an apt metaphor for the revelation C.S. Lewis wishes to give to our benighted selves, and on first glance at the light one only sees a beam of light with bits of dust floating through it, but when one looks along the beam, one sees the sun and green leaves. Then C.S. Lewis, like any great teacher or philosopher, takes the familiar experience and relates it to the two basic types of perspective, looking at or looking along. To further illustrate his point Lewis applies these same perspectives to a male lover, a mathematicians contemplations, a ancient ritual dance, and a girl crying over her broken doll. Almost all of these are experiences people normally experience, ancient ritual dances for the most part excluded, which Lewis dissects according to physiologists and psychologists standards that look at what is occurring chemically or how people are thinking which is breaking down a complex system and saying it is nothing more than its parts. I concur with Lewis in that this is a bad thing. After all do not we see in cells that as groups of similar cells amass tissues form which have properties none of the individual cells have alone? Likewise one must, according to Lewis, look along the beam of light which is to experience something. However, this too leads to issues because one can lose a firm grip on what is actually occurring and can make false connections. Thus, we are left with Lewis's thought that we must use both to understand what is truly occurring because each has properties that can be misleading and those that can be revealing. This means that we cannot solely rely on even first-hand accounts of what something is like nor can we rely solely on an experts advice, but to truly comprehend we must take the plunge and dive in without fear, when sensible and possible, trusting in God to guide us and protect us which in turn deepens our faith in God.