Why did Lewis? I don’t know. Maybe because the whole conversation collapses once we admit that we can’t assume that the character is real? The L/L/L thing is, it seems to me, specifically designed to bypass doubts about our confidence in the record and go straight to a jailhouse lineup of strawpeople.
2 Likes
So, here’s a recap so far. I start with saying that I doubt that the accounts of this guy are reliable. But I agree to go down this garden path and reluctantly choose “deluded, perhaps unwell.” And then BOOM here we are at “the Man was a loon.” Do you think that when I say “mixed bag” while expressing significant doubt about the construction of the character, I am choosing one of Lewis’ strawpeople? Do you think this is a healthy conversation?
If you are suggesting that a person cannot suffer delusion and also have wisdom or even moral brilliance, then we have a vast disagreement and a strangely discordant set of life experiences.
1 Like
Stephen
I think arguing logic about this subject will take us no where, because we lack sufficient evidence to decide anything. We have manuscripts, but there is no way of proving their authenticity in any number of ways, age, reliability of authorship, and the list goes on. We can make arguments based on the amazing nature of the Bible itself, but at the end of the day, that will not be sufficient to convince anyone who is legitimately skepticle.
When I was young and just married at 20, I had attended church my whole life, usually at least three times a week, twice on Sunday and once midweek. We were churched. My parents were hard working, kind and good people, generous, but far from well off. A good solid launching pad for any life.
Even after all that church, my faith was not my own; it was my parent’s. I had heard every Bible story a hundred times, and the plan of salvation 10,000 times. I was churched. We moved three hours from home for my job. For a short time, I was working days and my wife was working evenings, and I had no friends and a lot of time on my hands. For a compilation of reasons, I decided to read my Bible cover to cover for the first time in my life. I had never even contemplated that before because I HATED to read at that time. By that age, I had read only one to two adult level books cover to cover because I had some sort of reading issue all along.
As a younger person, I had decided to just be a kid until I was 21 and then I would get more serious about my spirituality. It was then at 20 that I decided to read the Bible completely and I asked G-d to help me overcome my hatred of reading, and I asked Him to convince me that what I had been taught was either good of off-base. I did generally trust the Bible, but I had nothing personal going on with G-d.
In the span of two to three weeks, I read the Bible cover to cover, Genesis to the Revelation of John. I was anything, but a fast reader, but oddly my comprehension had always been good. I can’t explain it, but that experience cemented my faith, and faith is what its all about. I decided then to begin living like the Bible is completely true, and see where that took me.
Christianity is not about knowing, its about believing. Jesus often said, “He who has ears to hear, let him hear.” This means to me that Jesus was acknowledging that what He came to say was not for everyone. What He had to say would be foolishness to some, and life giving to others. I found my way during that short span of time, and I somehow knew it then, for the first time in my life. It has allowed me to raise three children and remain married for 43 years. Nothing was easy. I can honestly say, that Jesus saved me in the here and now from myself. For sure, I would have veered off course if left to my own devices.
For me, there is nothing more substantive than this. G-d is real to me, and I am much more convinced today than I was back then. The more I pour over this same magnificent book, the more I see and know G-d as the ultimate designer and engineer and scientist and lover of human souls. There are many unanswered questions, but science also is loaded with unanswered questions. In my view, we must not stop looking and seeking for answers on both sides.
I wish you the best in your quest for answers.
Thanks. I was a Christian for about 30 adult years. Then I broke the spell. I know you mean well when you project onto me a “quest for answers,” but I will not do you the same discourtesy.
Hello Walms,
Let’s please not forget that scriptures interpret scriptures. They along with honest prayer are the checks and balances to keep from errors in scriptural interpretation and application. As we see Ohm’s law at work around us, so do we likewise see Biblical truth at work. Don’t we remember the phrase, “What goes around comes around?” That’s another way of repeating the scripture, “for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap (Galatians 6:6-7).” We see evidences of God all around us as we see evidences of scientific truth.
As for science and the Bible, aren’t we all scientists engaged in the experiment of life? We all as scientists thus have findings to share. Both the Bible and true science line up with each other.
Let’s not also forget that the holy ghost supernaturally guides us into and brings to our remembrance all truth (John 14:26). Spiritually revealed truth carries us beyond the grasp of the natural mind. Without this help, our natural minds are liable to lead us anywhere.
Should Christians throw away the teachings of God to embrace those of fallen man? Because we live in an advanced scientific age, are we now smart enough to change the value of pi to equal 4.13 instead of 3.14? That would be the equivalent of reinterpreting Genesis. Did our scientific knowledge make us gods?
Neither God’s promises, the Bible, man, the concept of right and wrong, nor has pi changed. Do you remember where God’s warning was “changed” to, “Ye shall not surely die (Genesis 3:4 )?” We all die as warned. Science is our servant for deepening our knowledge. But if made into our god, it becomes “scientism” that bucks God’s word.
Should we also throw away Jesus’ support for six-day creation? It reads, “Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, ( Matthew 19:4 )” What “beginning” was Jesus speaking of? Are His teachings also outdated?
A small mathematical calculation error may cause a major disaster. Scriptural error may cause adverse eternal consequences. Do we want that? What do the scriptures say to us about “rightly dividing the word of truth (2 Timothy 2:15).” ?
Will “modernizing” the message of Genesis keep us from dying?
But what about Jesus’ statement, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am (John 8:57-59 ).” ?
If we connect this with,
“And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. (Exodus 3:14)” ,
then what is our conclusion? Don’t we see Jesus, though in the flesh, as God that spoke to Moses, thus making Him the creator you spoke of though in the flesh? We thus see that faith based on God is faith based on Jesus and faith based on Jesus is faith based on God. Didn’t Jesus say, “I and my father are one (John 10:30)?”
As I said above, it it the spirit of truth, the holy ghost that guides us in understanding scripture that we may not wrestle with it. .
I will answer your post next, Klax.
Earl
Jesus doesn’t want us to follow him due to our fear of the consequences of not believing (though that may be the teachings of many churches) but by our understanding in our hearts that this is the only way to live. He wants all to be saved but knows that if we cannot know this within our hearts that we are doomed to death.
Mark 13
Though seeing they do not see
Though hearing they do not hear or understand
For this peoples heart has become calloused
Otherwise they might see with their eyes hear with their ears understand with their hearts and turn and I would heal them
It is not Jesus that is evil in any way just the opposite of that. Do you see what you are saying here is proof of what he is saying? How can one be saved that doesn’t desire that in their heart, intent not made of fear but made of love and faith.
Thanks Stephen.
I can’t believe that Lewis wasn’t fully conversant with higher criticism which had been in full swing for centuries. Did he ever address it? A new atheist friend, whose only flaw is that he is too postmodern, evoked it in me as follows after our first meeting as diarized below (after demolishing William Lane Craig’s Kalam Cosmological Argument with ‘order does not imply meaning’),
'I still had my favourite Jesus story: The Pericope Adulterae. To me that had unimpeachable divine emotional intelligence and courage utterly beyond the capability of 30 AD culture. The PPE’s response: it was made up by a priestly class a generation or more later. I inwardly dismissed that as absurd.
Until I found out, in my 64th year, that it is a late addition. That left my head spinning. Bereft. And the counter to C. S. Lewis’ false trichotomy that Jesus was either mad, bad or for real came to the fore. He was a myth. Made up by an initially post-Exilic Jewish, progressively Greco-Roman, humanist priestly class. Over centuries.’
So now all I have is,
‘Predominantly coming before the gospels, the epistles demonstrate that there was rapid growth in Christian belief within a generation of Jesus’ death. I hold on to that.’
and that still the quality of the Pericope Adulterae and much else in the Bible, despite the horrors, speaks of deep calling to deep, of the Holy Ghost yearning back.
If there is no purposeful ground of infinite being for eternity, then the genius of the Bible’s contributors is as great as any since. In good faith, over a millennium, from Second Temple Judaism with roots in the First and beyond, they made up what they wanted to be true.
But, like the superb film interpretation of Contact, the better ending than the book opens a gap.
Which is why I’m not a complete atheist. I’m deist but for Jesus and the ineffable working of the Spirit. Otherwise there is no divine intervention and no warrant for the unimaginable purposeful ground of being, at all.
1 Like
That’s a good thought, Weims. But “if someone asks” or says “prove it” — which occasionally happens, there is always the reality that the Universe is too young ---- at 13.8 billion years (or is it now thought to be 12-point something B?) — for all of the levels of complexity to have happened by chance. The earliest objections to the Big Bang were because it showed the universe had a beginning — which complicated things for some scientists at the time. By “complicated,” I mean that a “beginning” raised teleological questions that were unwelcome – and for many still are…
Of course, some YEC people also object to the Big Bang, but for other reasons.
That sort of argument (re the complexity of it in such a short time period) is interesting — got it from Polkinghorne, but others have said similar — and there are probably others. It is not “why” I personally believe. But as you say, this becomes a personal issue.
However, the Bible does say that people are “without excuse” in this area. I did read somewhere that there is a tiny detail in the history of the development of a certain atom that “shook” the atheism of Fred Hoyle. I am firmly convinced that Fred is even more of a believer now. So, yes, I grant your point that arguing for the existence of God is complex. However, the ball is not “in God’s court,” it is in ours.
Thanks for the thoughts.
No. That’s bonkers.
I think you are eager to share your beliefs with me, and that you are not considering the other person in the conversation (that would be me) who doesn’t believe that Jesus is a god and who strongly doubts the trustworthiness of the record of what he said or did. You may think I am disparaging your beliefs, and I do not intend that at all. I am saying (for the last time) that yakking about your beliefs is not a constructive response to an atheist’s critique of what Jesus is reported to have said.
1 Like
Thanks, Scott…I am glad you are pondering all these sorts of issues. There are some subjects that people have to “agree to disagree” on. You are right. Jesus did take some well-known (at the time) concepts or teachings from the Hebrew Bible/ Old Testament (they were called the Scriptures at the time) and elaborated. Some of them became so intensely difficult for human beings to EVER feel they have successfully “obeyed” or “followed” that it left His hearers frustrated — consider their response that it is just better not to marry, in that case!! with regard to one remark He made. You might say that that one teaching or elaboration of Jesus has left us with about 2,000 years of debates on what He meant or how that could be followed.
When you say “From a scientific basis what is life and why is there death?” If you want a scientific response, then ask a biologist somewhere. I am sure this is one of those “nonessentials” where people are free to agree/disagree without being labelled something…although sometimes the debates can be quite heated!!
My understanding of the “why” of life and death comes from the biblical text. At this point, death is a consequence of human rebellion. It affected all of nature. There is biblical text that leans this way. I know this idea butts heads with a number of other things, including what is known of the evolutionary development of life (all kinds of life) on earth…and sometimes it impacts our view of our place in the scheme of things.
These are all subjects for long papers and books — “four views on the scientific basis for life and death” and other such titles. But the Bible does give primacy to the creation of human beings. And our actions do affect others…we know this on a smaller scale (why are we all sheltering in place these days?) so the biblical idea is that our actions at some point in the past affected all of nature…hmmmm, come to think of it, they still do (global warming anyone?? OK…another hot topic)
I can think of a couple modern speakers/debaters who have noted that in societies that are more overtly atheistic/agnostic (today that is) the regard for the value of human life has suffered as a result. It is hard to have a high view of humanity (evidently) if you do not ultimately see human beings as having intrinsic value as created beings). And this leads into other discussions related to that matter.
So OK … that is all I can say on this! Lots of interesting ideas on this blog!!
Earl,
Social Evolution and Christian Theology
I am responding here to your first two comments.
First and foremost… In my view, the Bible in it present form and with its imperfections is the standard from G-d. It is the unchanging PI. (love the analogy) My quarrels are not with the Bible, but with the we way humans interpret the Bible. And, I am not really unhappy with our past in this regard. We are where we are because that is how we got here in our social evolutionary path. I am advocating for us (the real theologians of the world, not me) to awaken and take a new fresh look at what we believe based on new evidence and the implications it creates.
For example, you bring up Jesus mentioning a 6-day creation. In the era of faith, could Jesus mention an 18 billion year old universe in AD 30? No, He would have spilled the beans about something no one knew at that time. It’s not that He didn’t know. When children ask where babies come from, what do we say? Most people don’t tell them accurately, and that doesn’t mean they are lying. To preserve what He worked so hard to create, He chose not to mention that. And let’s also bear in mind that the 6 days of creation do capture a rather accurate ordering of evolutionary events, so mentioning it does not really conflict. (The Genesis Enigma, by Andrew Parker) A more accurate view is that the Bible is additionally amazing because it spoke appropirately to us when humanity was young and it speaks more deeply now that we are culturally older and its all captured in the poetry of a rather short chapter. Amazing!
The Fairness of G-d in Salvation
One of the first questions that come from the mouths of almost anyone who hears about salvation is, what about the people who never knew about Jesus? All of my younger life, the answer to that question was not very satisfying to me. There are times, when I feel the need to take a stand for what seems right based on the totality of my life and times with G-d. I am confident that G-d is fair to everyone, based on knowing G-d. My reading of Romans 2 is that this is where G-d’s fairness is explained. There could be good reasons for not making it plainer. Jesus hid lots of information from people who weren’t worthy of it or ready for it. But, I rest on the fairness of G-d and on my understanding of what this earthly reality was created to accomplish with every human heart. I don’t believe that G-d went to all this work to throw the majority of humanity in the trash bin. Far be it from G-d to do so, even though there are clues in Scripture that may lead us to think otherwise. G-d is not constrained by our rules for Biblical interpretation. G-d has written the Bible to accomplish His purposes which are profound and are continuing actively to play out over time. At the end of all things, we will see just how cleverly the Bible has been written to stay relevant and to keep speaking new things actively over the millennia. We need to wake up and recognize that natural revelation through science is also from G-d, sent to teach us important truths appropriate to our cultural and technological maturity.
I have a very high view of Scripture and that is why it receives an S in my writing, just to remind me.
And I fully admit, I could be wrong about almost anything. I write here to receive excellent feedback from folks like you. I am listening and thinking about what you said. It does change me.
Jack
Even if it’s 11.4 Ga, that’s too young for what? And complexity is a function of necessity at least as much as chance.
Fred’s dead. And his coincidence is the nucleosynthesis of carbon-12.
And where does the Bible say that people are “without excuse” in the area of rational enquiry about the cosmos? It’s certainly not in Romans 1:20
First pass, it doesn’t take a biologist to see that reproduction without death = an infinity of impossibility.
Second pass, the only biological “reason” I have seen for death is from an evolutionary standpoint: without death, in general, generations of the same species will compete against each other. Colloquially speaking, parents and grandparents must make way for their offspring in order to have “success” in evolution. This is related to the first and most obvious problem, which is the well-described finitude of the earth.
4 Likes
Whoa there Deepak. Could you better explain what you mean by the impossibilities for the unenlightened initiates?
I am looking for a fundimental reason that all life must die. Are you suggesting that life can be immortal ? How can life be immortal and not die?
One way or the other What he is saying about those that will not follow Him is defacto true. As you have said that if someone knew it to be true then they would certainly choose to follow out of fear for their own benefit and we both acknowledge that cannot be a true decision. Jesus demands that we follow with our heart. The heart is the truth of ones spirit.
Just the same there is Matt 18:10
If a man owns a hundred sheep, and one wonders away will he not leave the ninety-nine on the hills and go to look for the one that wandered off? In the same way your Father in heaven is not willing that any of these little ones should perish
In this situation I think of the fallen angels of Genesis 6 and in the book of Enoch they beg God for forgiveness but God would not and can not forgive them as they had been of a higher spiritual domain and had known that descending to the lower level showed that their hearts were corrupt with evil that cannot be allowed at the higher domain. These fallen sons of God condemned themselves having known the consequences and made their choice irrespective of those consequences.
The key word is “infinity.” Stay classy.
Hello Klax,
Thanks for your compliment.
I will cover the last part about the atheist first.
Where did the idea of a deity originate?
It is written, “In the beginning God… (Genesis 1:1)” Adam and Eve had fellowship with God before the fall. We see from Genesis that neither the universe nor man would have came into being without Deity.
History tells us that most of mankind all through the ages worshiped gods other than the true God. This shows that recognition of and worship of a deity is man’s innate nature. Even he that believes no deity exists makes self his deity.
But God to this day is bringing man back to fellowship with Him through the gospel. It is written,
“Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen (Matthew 28:20).”
Now the first part:
The Subject of Hell
God does not punish because He wants to. It’s because He has to! Neither did your parents want to punish you.
Hell was not meant for man, but “prepared for the devil and his angels (Matthew 25:41).”
Those that end up in hell only do so by choice. Think of a judge that puts his own son away for life because of his son’s choice to commit his crime. The son’s dad would go home weeping at the end of the day. What would you think of the judge if he excuses his son only because it’s his son?
God is in that same predicament when He has to turn a soul that He created into hell. It is thus written,
“…As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, … (Ezekiel 33:11)?”
Please note God’s pleading man to repent in this scripture. What would we think if our society would by “mercy” on criminals trash its system of justice to keep from bringing “evil” to its criminals? Would we still call it good? Aren’t we happy to see criminals on TV finally brought to justice?
Why is hell forever? Let’s try a little bit of logic. Maybe it’s because God lives forever and that He made us and the angels to live forever. How does that sound? He made us and the angels not to burn, but to have fellowship with and glorify and rejoice with Him forever. Once the angel or the soul is made eternal, the eternal status cannot be taken away.
Think about Lucifer (now called “Satan”) that gathered a third of the angels to join him in his effort to overthrow God and lost. The attempt was not made because God is bad, but strictly for selfish reasons. Lucifer’s choice to act against God forced God to act against His divine original choice for him (Lucifer). God had to punish. Didn’t your parents hate to punish you?
The indelible eternal stain from Lucifer’s gang’s rebellion made repentance impossible once their failed evil attempt was carried out. With God omnipresent, the rogue angelic gang cannot but remain in the presence of God forever even though their sin simply cannot stand in the presence of loving, peaceful God. That’s why God created hell. The rogue eternal angels will thus live the rest of eternity in the presence of God but under punishment. By rebelling against God they rebelled against His goodness. The fire is meant to take away God’s goodness that they hated and rebelled against.
Because of mankind’s fall and the consequent stubborn determination of so many to deviate from the righteousness of God, God was forced to annex hell for man. Thus,
"Therefore hell hath enlarged herself, and opened her mouth without measure (Isaiah 5:14). "
But what do we do with the scripture,
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life (John 3:16-17).”
Doesn’t this along with Ezekiel 33:11 show us that hell is the very least thing that God wants for us? Think of a banker willing to forgive us of trillions of dollars of debt! That’s what Jesus did on the cross for our souls. But do we accept the offer? A person that would want to disqualify himself from the offer would have to be far from his right mind! That’s what deception does.
As a society would cease to be good if it trashes its system of justice, so would God cease to be good if He fails to punish the eternal soul that enters eternity without having his sins washed away by the shed blood of Christ.
Earl
2 Likes
Thanks again Earl. And once again, I’m happy for you. Seriously. God bless you.
Martin
So what led you to your current position of no punishment? Is this a sense of rightness, or is there a passage that leads you to think that way?
Jack
Universalists believe that sinners must go through a painful purging of their evil by God (out of love) and this may take a long time - after all evil has been destroyed and they seek the good from God, He will extend His Grace to them and they will accept/choose salvation.
This outlook rejects eternal torment as pointless and without purpose.
Most Christians hope that all will repent and turn to God and be saved. I think this is correct as the final judgement is by God, and we cannot assume that role for ourselves - so we pray to God for the strength and understanding for repentance and have faith in His saving Grace.
2 Likes