In the first four chapters of his book "Engaging God's World: A Christian Vision of Faith, Learning, and Living" Mr. Plantinga talks about creation, fall, and redemption. Anyone who is familiar with the Bible will see the connection between the three. God created the earth good. Sin and evil were introduced by the disobediance of Adam and Eve in the garden, and the once good creation was filled with death and suffereing. However, from that very first day of the fall, God made a promise to Adam and Eve of one who would come to restore and redeem. Years later, in Bethlehem, the Son of God is born as a baby boy, whose life and ministry brought healing to hearts scarred by sin, and whose crusifiction is the victory over sin and death.
It is not difficult to understand why Plantinga would choose to address the topics of creation, fall and redemption together, but there is one more chapter that is included with these three. Plantinga begins his book with a chapter titled "Longing and Hope". He talks about some of the joys, hopes and desires that we experiance on this earth but goes on to explain that the beauty and pleasure we can expriance on this earth are nothing compared to the glory we will see when our earthly pilgrimage is over. Basically, the idea of this first chapter is to direct our thougts toward heaven. Why did Plantinga think that is was so important to start by considering heaven? I would guess it is because heaven is the fulfillment of the creation, fall, redemption story. Although we can only see heaven "through a glass darkly" as the apostle Paul puts it (I Corinthians 13:12 KJV) we will one day experiance it in its full glory. Our longing for that day helps us understand the purpose of creation, fall and redemption, and it influences how we will live our lives here on earth.
Sadly, because of our old sinful natures, we often look only at the pleasures this world can offer us rather than "laying up our treasures in heaven." Plantinga uses a quote from C.S. Lewis that illustrates this misplaced longing. Lewis declares that when we let our hearts be captured by the things of this earth, we are experiancing a desire that is not too strong, but rather, too weak. We tend to think that we give into temptation because it is to strong to resist, but Lewis says that we give in because we are satisfied with something that cannot even compare to the joy that we should be looking forward to. He gives the example of a child playing in the mud who is unwilling to leave it for a trip to the beach because he does not understand how wonderful the beach will be in comparison. If we are in the right mindset, we will hardly feel the attraction of this world because our hearts will be set on something so much greater.
As I read through several of Lewis' writings, I realized that this theme of heaven appears both subtly and obviously as theme in many of them. Lewis addresses some of the same issues as Plantinga, especially dealing with the effects of the fall, but in the end, heaven is also the hope that he comes back to again and again. I think that this is most clearly expressed in my favorite quote by him that says "Our Father refreshes us on the journey with some pleasant inns, but will not encourage us to mistake them for home." This earth is only a temporary home. We may not become too comfortable with it because we have a home that is much geater with our Father in heaven.
In one of Lewis' pieces, "The Weight of Glory," I found the theme of heaven especially apperant. In this essay, Lewis gave many illustrations and ideas that relate to the christian life and help us to understand what it is to look forward to heaven. He starts with the example of a schoolboy studying Greek. The schoolboy, says Lewis, has no way to understand the joy he will later find from reading Greek poetry. His only experiance is the present struggle of studying the language, but he has the hope that in the end, his study will bring him to a place of enjoyment. Lewis makes a comparison to the Christan life, by acknowledging that we cannot now see the joy of heaven, but we can hope for it, and we can grow in that hope more and more by lives of faithful obediance.
In this piece, Lewis also uses the example of a starving man. Although the man's hunger does not prove that he will get bread, Lewis suggests that it does prove that bread exists. If bread did not exist, the man's body would not need it for sustainance, and he could not therefor hunger for it. Connecting this to the Christian life, Lewis believes that our longing for the kind of joy that we cannot experiance here promises us that this joy does exist, it is simply beyond our reach. This longing is expressed in Psalm 63 where the psalmist says, "O God, thou art my God; early will I seek thee: my soul thirsteth for thee, my flesh longeth for thee in a dry and thirsty land where no water is." He understands that this present life holds nothing that can truly satisfy, and that it is in heaven, when we experiance perfect fellowship with God that we will be satisfied.
From the Weight of Glory, Lewis also brings up the idea that eternity begins now. Although, on this earth, we are unable to experince fellowship with God perfectly, it is something we can strive for and it gives us the beginings of that heavenly joy. We must realize, too, that our fellow human beings will also exist eternally. None of us will simply cease to exist when we die. We are all on the road leading to either eternal life or eternal death. Lewis puts it this way, "But it is immortals whom we joke with, work with, marry, snub, and exploit-immortal horrors or everlasting splendors." This makes us aware of the seriousness of our actions on this earth. We are not simply interacting with the neighbors of our earthly life, but possibly with our neighbors of all eternity. This gives us some extra motivation to live our earthly lives with the goal of helping eachother along the difficult road to heaven.
I very much enjoyed the glimpses of heaven that C.S. Lewis brought out in his "Weight of Glory", however, there is another work that I prefer in connection to the topic of heaven. This is his seven book series about the fictional land of Narnia. I prefer the Narnia books to the "Weight of Glory" because, taken together, they give the complete picture, not only of heaven, but of creation, fall, and redemption with heaven as their goal. C.S. Lewis said himself that he did not write this series only for the purpose of connecting it to scripture, and we cannot take the comparison too far without finding some errors. However, Lewis does a really beautiful job of showing the relationship of Christ to his church throughout the history of the world and into eternity.
There are some ideas especially from The Last Battle that help us to understand the idea of heaven as it relates to life here on this earth. The Last Battle is the story of the end of Naria. It begins when a false Aslan decieves the people, and they are pursuaded to believe that he is the same as Tash, the cruel god of a different nation. The few who are not decieved are outnumbered, and most of them are killed. This story runs a parallel to the rise of the Antichrist and the final judgment spoken of in Revelation. In the end, Aslan calls the giant named Time to bring the world to its end, and all the creatures who love Aslan are brought into his own land, which, of course, is a picture of heaven.
There were several things I liked about Lewis illustration of the end of time. One is that it helps us to realize that God really is in charge of the end. In the story, Aslan calls on Time to bring the world to its end. Just so, we know that time is only a creature of God. It does not limmit him or bind him in any way. Time serves God and his purpose, and it does not have its begining or its ending outside his will. In fact, in Revelation, God calls himself Alpha and Omega-the begining and end of all things.
I also appreciated the way in which Lewis describes Aslan's country (a picture of heaven.) It is described as beautiful and colorful, but also as something that cannot be quite understood without personally eperiancing it. I Corinthians tells us of heaven that "Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him." We know that heaven will be wonderful and beautiful, and that the glory of God will be there, but while we are yet on this earth, we cannot fully know what it will be like.
There is one more quote from the end of "The Last Battle" that I think really helps us to understand how the joy of heaven will be perfect and complete, and how we will not wish for the things of our earthly life anymore. After watching the end of Narnia, Lucy is sad and begins to cry for what she believes is lost to her. But she is told by one of her companions, "You need not mourn over Narnia, Lucy. All of the old Narnia that mattered, all the dear creatures,have been drawn into the rea Narnia through the door. And of course it is different; as different as a real thing is from a shadow or as waking life is from a dream." What we can understand from this is that heaven will be so much greater and more wonderful than anything this earthly life can offer, because this life is only the picture of a reality. In heaven, we will be free of our sins, free of suffering and sorrow. Revelation 21: 4 tells us, "And God shal wipe aay all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any pain: for the former things are passed away." The only things that will be missing in heaven are sin and sorrow. We will no longer feel the effects of the fall. Our sinful nature will be completely defeated. All this is cause not for sorrow, but for joy. Who could miss the pleasant inns of their jouney when they finally reach their destination and are home at last?
Bibliography
Holy Bible KJV. N.p.: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1989. Print.
Lewis, C.S. The Last Battle. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers, Inc., 1956. Print
Lewis, C.S. "The Weight of Glory." Church of St Mary the Virgin, Oxford. 8 June 1941. Lecture.
Plantinga, Cornelius. Engaging God's World: A Christian Vision of Faith, Learning, and Living . Grandrapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2002. Print
Monday, January 25, 2010
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Paradise Now
Last night I went to see the movie Paradise Now. The movie was about two Palestinian men who are chosen for the mission of a suicide bombing in Israel. The movie especially follows Said, one of these two men. Although he is oviously unhappy to be chosen, he does not refuse because he believes it is an honor, and that it would be shamefull of him not to go. His hesitance is obvious by the way he acts around his family and especially around Suha, the girl he likes.
Said is supposed to carry out his mission with his close friend, Khaled. Khaled is more committed to the mission than Said, and is continually trying to assure him that they will be rewarded in the afterlife. The men in charge of the bombing also try to convince Khaled and Said that there will be an eternal reward for them. Said accepts this on the surface but does not seem very convinced of it.
When the time comes for Khaled and Said to carry out their mission, things to not work out according to plan. The men are not able to go through with the bombing, and the get separated from eachother. Khaled returns to the men in charge of the mission, but when he realises Said is not there, he goes in search of him. Durring this time, Said and Khaled are separated from eachother and from the men in charge, they have some time to reflect on what they are really doing and why.
Towards the end of the movie, Khaled finds Said and they go together to carry out their mission. However, by this time they are both having second thoughts. Khaled decides not to go through with it and asks his friend to do the same. Said agrees, but once Khaled is on his way to safety, he goes back and blows up a bus with Israeli soldiers and civilians on it.
By the time that Said got around to carrying out his mission, it was obvious that it had nothing to do anymore with what he believed was right and wrong. He did not complete the bombing because he truly belived it was pleasing to Alah or because he expected some eternal reward. He simply did it because he felt he had no other option. All his earthly life had to offer him was poverty and, of course, shame if he failed to go through with the bombing. He ended up being more enslaved by his own pride than by anything else.
I hope I did a decent job of describing this movie. It was a little difficult for me to understand because it wasn't in English :)
Said is supposed to carry out his mission with his close friend, Khaled. Khaled is more committed to the mission than Said, and is continually trying to assure him that they will be rewarded in the afterlife. The men in charge of the bombing also try to convince Khaled and Said that there will be an eternal reward for them. Said accepts this on the surface but does not seem very convinced of it.
When the time comes for Khaled and Said to carry out their mission, things to not work out according to plan. The men are not able to go through with the bombing, and the get separated from eachother. Khaled returns to the men in charge of the mission, but when he realises Said is not there, he goes in search of him. Durring this time, Said and Khaled are separated from eachother and from the men in charge, they have some time to reflect on what they are really doing and why.
Towards the end of the movie, Khaled finds Said and they go together to carry out their mission. However, by this time they are both having second thoughts. Khaled decides not to go through with it and asks his friend to do the same. Said agrees, but once Khaled is on his way to safety, he goes back and blows up a bus with Israeli soldiers and civilians on it.
By the time that Said got around to carrying out his mission, it was obvious that it had nothing to do anymore with what he believed was right and wrong. He did not complete the bombing because he truly belived it was pleasing to Alah or because he expected some eternal reward. He simply did it because he felt he had no other option. All his earthly life had to offer him was poverty and, of course, shame if he failed to go through with the bombing. He ended up being more enslaved by his own pride than by anything else.
I hope I did a decent job of describing this movie. It was a little difficult for me to understand because it wasn't in English :)
Man or Rabbit?
I thought C. Lewis made several interesting ponts in his piece "Man or Rabbit?" This article is addressing the man who wonders whether or not it is important for him to be a Christian as long as he leads a good life. Lewis points out that the person who asks such a question is admitting that they do not care what is truth and what is not. He suggests that they would choose beliefs, not based on conviction, but simply because they will be benificial or profitable in some way. Lewis says that a man who would choose a to believe something without searching to find out if it is true has become like an animal which does not search out knowledge for the sake of knowing.
Lewis then addresses those who would admit to not caring much about truth and who simply hope that good actions and good intentions will be good enough. Of this type of person, Lewis writes, "he is really asking to be allowed to get on with being 'good' before he has done his best to discover what good is." Lewis' aswer to this person is that, although he does not yet know whether he ought to be a Christian, he knows that he needs to be a man and search for the answer. He also writes that "Knowledge of the facts must make a difference to one's actons." He says that if Christianity is to be believed, then those who are Christians and know the truth are better equipped for a life of good works than those who are not Christian.
Finally, Lewis brings up some errors concerning the idea of leading a 'good life' without Christ. First of all, as all Christians realize, we are not able to lead that good life on our own. We depend on Christ for all the good works that we can do. They are imposible without him. Secondly, if our purpose in life is to be a 'good' person, we have missed the much broader point in life that the truths of Christianity explain to us. Good work are the fruit of a purpose that is much greater. As we cast aside the 'rabbit' inside us that wants to do the minimum requirement, we will see more and more the purpose that God has for us and it will be our desire to live for it.
Lewis then addresses those who would admit to not caring much about truth and who simply hope that good actions and good intentions will be good enough. Of this type of person, Lewis writes, "he is really asking to be allowed to get on with being 'good' before he has done his best to discover what good is." Lewis' aswer to this person is that, although he does not yet know whether he ought to be a Christian, he knows that he needs to be a man and search for the answer. He also writes that "Knowledge of the facts must make a difference to one's actons." He says that if Christianity is to be believed, then those who are Christians and know the truth are better equipped for a life of good works than those who are not Christian.
Finally, Lewis brings up some errors concerning the idea of leading a 'good life' without Christ. First of all, as all Christians realize, we are not able to lead that good life on our own. We depend on Christ for all the good works that we can do. They are imposible without him. Secondly, if our purpose in life is to be a 'good' person, we have missed the much broader point in life that the truths of Christianity explain to us. Good work are the fruit of a purpose that is much greater. As we cast aside the 'rabbit' inside us that wants to do the minimum requirement, we will see more and more the purpose that God has for us and it will be our desire to live for it.
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Vocation
Talking about vocation in class today really made me think about my calling in life starting today rather than after I graduate and have a "real" job. I realized that fulfilling what God's calling for us has just as much to do with our attitude as it does with the work we are actually doing. I also realised that this is harder at some times than it is at others. For example, I feel like this interim is making it easy for me to serve God. It isn't difficult to be dilligent in my work when that work is in a subject that interests me. It is fun to participate in class when my fellow students care about the topic being discussed and respect eachothers opinions. I don't mind that the class is a long one when my professors are excited about what they are teaching and help us aply it to real life. The first semester of college was a different story.
I had been excited to leave high school behind and start college, but I soon found out that it didn't live up to my expectations. It wasn't the classes themselves that I didn't like. Rather, it was other things, things I had never anticipated that disapointed me and led to a negative attitude concering my calling as a college student. First of all, I am a commuter. I had never dreamed of how much this would make me feel like an outsider. Everyone from my classes talked about their floor activities, their midnight study parties, their roommates, suitemates, etc, etc. I felt like I didn't even belong. To make things worse, my schedule was awfull. I had huge breaks throughout my day and no where to go. I usually ended up in the liberary-alone- doing homework. I was also getting used to new standards, new expectations, new profs. I was completely overwhelmed.
My dad thought that my being at college was the greatest thing ever. Every day he would say, "Just take minute to look round you and think 'Hey, I'm in college.'" Every day I would tell him that I didn't even like college and I would gladly trade places with him. After the first month, things got better. I found people to hang out with durring my breaks. I got used to my profs and my classes. I found out that I even enjoyed being at college. At that point I was able to look back and see how my negative attitude had made that first month so much worse than it needed to be. If I had trusted God a little more and tried a little harder to please him, I would have made things lot better for myself. I was so caught up in my own misery that I hardly even noticed what a pathetic job I was doing of fulfilling my calling as a student.
Even in the difficult circumstances of our lives, we are called to glorify God. Colossonas 3:23 says "And whatsoever ye do, do it heartily as to the Lord..." We are not only called to serve when it is easy. However, I believe that when your calling is difficult, it will be easier to carry out if you do go in with the right attitude. When your purpose is to glorify God, it is him, and not your own suffering that will be at the forefront of your mind. I have definitly found this to be the case in my experiance, and I am glad of this reminder from Plantinga. It is not only what we do, but how we do it that fulfills our calling from God.
I had been excited to leave high school behind and start college, but I soon found out that it didn't live up to my expectations. It wasn't the classes themselves that I didn't like. Rather, it was other things, things I had never anticipated that disapointed me and led to a negative attitude concering my calling as a college student. First of all, I am a commuter. I had never dreamed of how much this would make me feel like an outsider. Everyone from my classes talked about their floor activities, their midnight study parties, their roommates, suitemates, etc, etc. I felt like I didn't even belong. To make things worse, my schedule was awfull. I had huge breaks throughout my day and no where to go. I usually ended up in the liberary-alone- doing homework. I was also getting used to new standards, new expectations, new profs. I was completely overwhelmed.
My dad thought that my being at college was the greatest thing ever. Every day he would say, "Just take minute to look round you and think 'Hey, I'm in college.'" Every day I would tell him that I didn't even like college and I would gladly trade places with him. After the first month, things got better. I found people to hang out with durring my breaks. I got used to my profs and my classes. I found out that I even enjoyed being at college. At that point I was able to look back and see how my negative attitude had made that first month so much worse than it needed to be. If I had trusted God a little more and tried a little harder to please him, I would have made things lot better for myself. I was so caught up in my own misery that I hardly even noticed what a pathetic job I was doing of fulfilling my calling as a student.
Even in the difficult circumstances of our lives, we are called to glorify God. Colossonas 3:23 says "And whatsoever ye do, do it heartily as to the Lord..." We are not only called to serve when it is easy. However, I believe that when your calling is difficult, it will be easier to carry out if you do go in with the right attitude. When your purpose is to glorify God, it is him, and not your own suffering that will be at the forefront of your mind. I have definitly found this to be the case in my experiance, and I am glad of this reminder from Plantinga. It is not only what we do, but how we do it that fulfills our calling from God.
The Inner Ring
In his piece "The Inner Ring" C.S. Lewis addresses a concept that is well-known to all of us. Everybody has, at one time or another, envied a certain group of people. It is not the people themselves that they so deeply care about. It is not the cause that unites the group about which they feel passionate. It is simply that they desire to be included an to feel the safety and security of being on the inside. Of course, sometime there are situations when belonging to the inner circle of a particular group can provide benifits besides just that feeling of acceptance. Priviledges and opportunities can be opened up by this association. However, I think that the most basic reason any of us has wanted to belong to some inner circle is nothing more than the desire to fit in- to not be an outsider.
I have an experiance with an inner ring in my life that I would like to share. It is nothing spectacular, but it is what I first think of when I consider the idea of an inner ring. I went to a small school from kindergarten through ninth grade. There were twelve girls in my class and we were all very close. We promised eachother that when we got to highschool nothing would change. It did though. Almost imediately, one of these girls became part of an inner ring of 'cool kids' and the rest of us felt excluded. By the time we graduated from 12th grade. We had all drifted apart and made new friends. Five or six of us still get together every once in a while, but we certainly arent as close as we used to be. Our lives have just taken different paths. As for the girls we never see any more, no one has anything negative to say about their absence, with one exception. I hear the resentment in my friends voices when they talk about that first girl to leave our group. Why do we still hold her leaving against her when we respect the fact that almost all of us have branched off and found new interests, new friends. Personally, I think it is because we were all a little jealous of her. She stopped hanging out with us to join an inner ring of which the rest of us remained outsiders. We saw her on the other side of an invisible line we couldn't cross and we resented her for it. For the rest of us, going our separate ways was just the natural thing to do, but we held it against her as an act of betrayal. I think by now, we could all look back and laugh at ourselves for letting that inner ring get the better of us, but at the time, we definately felt the pain of being left on the outside.
C.S. Lewis points out the power of an inner ring to pursuade people into any course of action. People will do a lot to avoid the feeling of being left out or left behind that my friends and I felt at the begining of high school. They will do even more when the possiblity of being included in the elite group of insiders is dangled in front of their face. Lewis puts it like this "Of all the passions, the passion for the Inner Ring is most skillful n making a man who is not yet a very bad man do very bad things." Of course, inner rings do not always motivate people to do bad things. They simply hold them to a certain standard for admittance. However, this standard can be a negative one and one that is very hard to resist with the promise of inclusion atatched to it.
After talking about how much man will do to be part of an inner ring, Lewis tells us that we should NOT be willing to conform to any ring's standards simply to be part of an inner ring. He points out that wanting to be in an inner ring for the sake of being an insider cannot satistfy. The inside is not as glamerous once you experiance it as you thought it would be before you had. Lewis says "By the very act of admitting you, it has lost its magic." Lewis goes on to explain that to be part of an inner ring that will actually benefit and satisfy you, you have to forget about looking for rings altogther. You simply need to be passionate about what you are interested in, diligent in the work you do, and associate with people you like. You will find that your friends, hobbies, and vocation are satisfying to you, and that you are surrounded by sincere people that you are comfortable with.
I think Lewis gives some great advice and insight into this topic. He has deffinitely given me something to think about and something to watch out for in my own life, especially when I am facing a new situation where I would be tempted to live up (or down) to someone elses standards for the sake of acceptance.
I have an experiance with an inner ring in my life that I would like to share. It is nothing spectacular, but it is what I first think of when I consider the idea of an inner ring. I went to a small school from kindergarten through ninth grade. There were twelve girls in my class and we were all very close. We promised eachother that when we got to highschool nothing would change. It did though. Almost imediately, one of these girls became part of an inner ring of 'cool kids' and the rest of us felt excluded. By the time we graduated from 12th grade. We had all drifted apart and made new friends. Five or six of us still get together every once in a while, but we certainly arent as close as we used to be. Our lives have just taken different paths. As for the girls we never see any more, no one has anything negative to say about their absence, with one exception. I hear the resentment in my friends voices when they talk about that first girl to leave our group. Why do we still hold her leaving against her when we respect the fact that almost all of us have branched off and found new interests, new friends. Personally, I think it is because we were all a little jealous of her. She stopped hanging out with us to join an inner ring of which the rest of us remained outsiders. We saw her on the other side of an invisible line we couldn't cross and we resented her for it. For the rest of us, going our separate ways was just the natural thing to do, but we held it against her as an act of betrayal. I think by now, we could all look back and laugh at ourselves for letting that inner ring get the better of us, but at the time, we definately felt the pain of being left on the outside.
C.S. Lewis points out the power of an inner ring to pursuade people into any course of action. People will do a lot to avoid the feeling of being left out or left behind that my friends and I felt at the begining of high school. They will do even more when the possiblity of being included in the elite group of insiders is dangled in front of their face. Lewis puts it like this "Of all the passions, the passion for the Inner Ring is most skillful n making a man who is not yet a very bad man do very bad things." Of course, inner rings do not always motivate people to do bad things. They simply hold them to a certain standard for admittance. However, this standard can be a negative one and one that is very hard to resist with the promise of inclusion atatched to it.
After talking about how much man will do to be part of an inner ring, Lewis tells us that we should NOT be willing to conform to any ring's standards simply to be part of an inner ring. He points out that wanting to be in an inner ring for the sake of being an insider cannot satistfy. The inside is not as glamerous once you experiance it as you thought it would be before you had. Lewis says "By the very act of admitting you, it has lost its magic." Lewis goes on to explain that to be part of an inner ring that will actually benefit and satisfy you, you have to forget about looking for rings altogther. You simply need to be passionate about what you are interested in, diligent in the work you do, and associate with people you like. You will find that your friends, hobbies, and vocation are satisfying to you, and that you are surrounded by sincere people that you are comfortable with.
I think Lewis gives some great advice and insight into this topic. He has deffinitely given me something to think about and something to watch out for in my own life, especially when I am facing a new situation where I would be tempted to live up (or down) to someone elses standards for the sake of acceptance.
Eros
In his book "The Four Loves" C.S. Lewis dicusses the four Greek words that specify different types of love. There is storge (affection), philia (the love between friendes), eros (the love between a man and a woman), and agape (eternal love-God's love). In our class discussion we mainly focused on eros. Lewis talks about eros as being the love that is both closest to agape and also the most fallen. Eros seems to make eternal promises to us when we fall in love. Indeed, if we are willing to work at a marriage, it can be a beautiful reflection of the love of Christ for his church. However, eros by itself has no power to fulfill its promise. Once the feeling of "falling in love" is past, eros can lead to divorce, neglect and sorrow.
I found it interesting when Lewis talked about making eros in itself an idol. He says this, "But Eros, honoured without reservation and obeyed unconditionally, becomes a demon." Sometimes, we are tempted to see eros as our 'fate' and follow after it regaurdless of God's law. Lewis points out that there have been God-honoring marriages without eros, and there have been times when lovers obeyed eros to God's dishonor. A God honoring marriage is one that is faithful and kind. It is not based on attraction and longing for the spouse. On the other hand. Eros cannot in any way justify the breaking of God's law.
Lewis also talks about the apostle Paul's take on eros. Paul wishes that all could be single like himself in order to focus more on God. However, Paul also suggests that, to avoid adultery, a person should marry. Lewis suggests that Paul takes this position, not because he thinks that the members of his church will be preoccupied with sex if they marry but rather, because eros puts the other before self. He understands that the fulltime duty in marriage of carring for another and maybe even for a family may take away from time that could be given to God. Even so, he understands that marriage is a good gift of God and that it is in God's plan that some members of the chrch should marry.
I found it interesting when Lewis talked about making eros in itself an idol. He says this, "But Eros, honoured without reservation and obeyed unconditionally, becomes a demon." Sometimes, we are tempted to see eros as our 'fate' and follow after it regaurdless of God's law. Lewis points out that there have been God-honoring marriages without eros, and there have been times when lovers obeyed eros to God's dishonor. A God honoring marriage is one that is faithful and kind. It is not based on attraction and longing for the spouse. On the other hand. Eros cannot in any way justify the breaking of God's law.
Lewis also talks about the apostle Paul's take on eros. Paul wishes that all could be single like himself in order to focus more on God. However, Paul also suggests that, to avoid adultery, a person should marry. Lewis suggests that Paul takes this position, not because he thinks that the members of his church will be preoccupied with sex if they marry but rather, because eros puts the other before self. He understands that the fulltime duty in marriage of carring for another and maybe even for a family may take away from time that could be given to God. Even so, he understands that marriage is a good gift of God and that it is in God's plan that some members of the chrch should marry.
Monday, January 18, 2010
Learning in War Time
I thought that C.S. Lewis' piece "Learning in War Time" was excellent. He bought up several differnt points which I thought were very worth taking note of. Lewis states, "War creates no absolutely new situation: it simply agrivates the peranent human situation so thatwe can no longer ignore it." He is saying that there is always some reason to put off learning. There is always something that needs to be set right in the world, some injustice that needs to be dealt with. If we waited for favorable conditions, we would never learn, because the conditions will never be favorable.
He also points out that it is impossible to just give up daily life in order to be involved in a war. Even in times of war, you will find yourself doing perfectly ordinary things like reading a book or playing an instrument. There is no way to isolate every activity in your life and dedicate it to the war alone. Lewis draws a parallel here to participating in a war and being a Christian. He points out that there is no way for a Christian to limit his activities to those things which can be labled as sacred. He needs to brush his teeth, pay his bills, and have a job, just like anyone else. The difference is that the motivation of every one of those things is or should be to the glory of God.
Lewis uses a couple of examples to make his meaning clearer. First, he talks about someone who lives by a dangerous coast and prepares himself to rescue swimmers who are in trouble. He has dedicated himself to this cause and may one day give up his life for it, however, it would be absurd for him to make that the center of his attention at every moment of every day. Secondly, he talks about the omnipresence of God. God is everywhere. But the fact that God is everywhere does not necessarily exclude something else from being there as well. When you look at a forest, you cannot say that God is everywhere except for where the trees stand. This is what the Christian life is like. God must be a part of everything, but that does not mean that we must avoid everything that is not specifically religious. Instead, we must seek to glorify Him through even the mundane things. Lewis even expressed how surprised he was that there was no drastic change in the routine of his life after he came to Christ. He could continue to be a scholar and to go about his daily activities. The changes were inward ones.
He also points out that it is impossible to just give up daily life in order to be involved in a war. Even in times of war, you will find yourself doing perfectly ordinary things like reading a book or playing an instrument. There is no way to isolate every activity in your life and dedicate it to the war alone. Lewis draws a parallel here to participating in a war and being a Christian. He points out that there is no way for a Christian to limit his activities to those things which can be labled as sacred. He needs to brush his teeth, pay his bills, and have a job, just like anyone else. The difference is that the motivation of every one of those things is or should be to the glory of God.
Lewis uses a couple of examples to make his meaning clearer. First, he talks about someone who lives by a dangerous coast and prepares himself to rescue swimmers who are in trouble. He has dedicated himself to this cause and may one day give up his life for it, however, it would be absurd for him to make that the center of his attention at every moment of every day. Secondly, he talks about the omnipresence of God. God is everywhere. But the fact that God is everywhere does not necessarily exclude something else from being there as well. When you look at a forest, you cannot say that God is everywhere except for where the trees stand. This is what the Christian life is like. God must be a part of everything, but that does not mean that we must avoid everything that is not specifically religious. Instead, we must seek to glorify Him through even the mundane things. Lewis even expressed how surprised he was that there was no drastic change in the routine of his life after he came to Christ. He could continue to be a scholar and to go about his daily activities. The changes were inward ones.
Redemption
While reading this chapter in Plantinga's book, I was struck by something he brought up regaurding the ten commandments. He asked his readers to imagine just one day in which every single person on earth followed the ten commandments perfectly. In that day, there would be not killing, no stealing, no lying, cheating, adultery, jealousy. On the other hand, there would be perfect worship of God and love shown towrds the neighbor. Out of an attitude of praise and thankfulness would come selflesness, kindness, and peace. What a day that would be!
As I looked back through that section, I saw that Plantinga had focused on the ten commandments as our guide to freedom and happiness. It shocked me to realize how often I forget to look at them in this light. Sometimes, doing the right thing seems like such a burden. I choose the right because we know it is God's will, but my hearts looks back wistfully at the things of this world. God's law seems to restrict rather than set free. I decide not to watch a movie because I know it has lot of sex scenes in it, but when I hear friends talking about it later, I feel like I have missed out. Or right before I go to sleep, I struggle between spending time in God's Word or reading another chapter in my book. Obiously, when I read bout God's law in such a different light, it gave me something to think about. I know that God's law gives us freedom, but sometimes it is hard for me to see it that way when I want so badly to make a choice for myself and not my God.
Looking at God's law through Plantinga's eyes did much more than make me feel guilty. It actually gave me a lot of hope for finding joy in doing God's law. It made me realize that sometimes I look at that law and feel deprived, when I should be feeling priviledged. God has given us a clear pattern for a joyful life. Think of all the trouble we would save ourselves if we never lied or cheated, if we were always kind, patient and forgiving. I thought of all the times I caved in to sin and realized that they had only served to make my life miserable. Was putting myself first ever worth the guilt of knowing that I was disappointing my heavenly Father? I realized that the pleasure had been only for a moment but had given me no lasting joy. I also realized that it was much easier for me to follow God's Word when I was serving him with excitement rather than grudgingly. When I skipped out on a movie to go to bible study, or when I put my book down to visit an old lady, I bearly noticed my scacrifice because I thirsting after God. When I was looking at all the positive posibilities God's law opens up for us, I didn't desire to do anything but please him.
All this actually reminded me of Lewis' piece "No Right to Happiness" and our class discussion about it. With this piece, we spent a lot of time talking about the emptiness of earthly pleasures. They do not satisfy. Only heavenly joy can truly fill us and bring us peace. And following the law of God is a great first step to finding that joy!
I wish that this positive attitude was something I would never loose sight of. I have experianced the difference between seeing the law as a leash and seeing it as a guide to loving service and the second is far more pleasant. However, I know that because I still struggle with a sinful nature, I am not likely to keep it up perfectly. I am very glad that Plantinga brought this up in the book though, because it is a good motivation to find joy in doing God's will.
As I looked back through that section, I saw that Plantinga had focused on the ten commandments as our guide to freedom and happiness. It shocked me to realize how often I forget to look at them in this light. Sometimes, doing the right thing seems like such a burden. I choose the right because we know it is God's will, but my hearts looks back wistfully at the things of this world. God's law seems to restrict rather than set free. I decide not to watch a movie because I know it has lot of sex scenes in it, but when I hear friends talking about it later, I feel like I have missed out. Or right before I go to sleep, I struggle between spending time in God's Word or reading another chapter in my book. Obiously, when I read bout God's law in such a different light, it gave me something to think about. I know that God's law gives us freedom, but sometimes it is hard for me to see it that way when I want so badly to make a choice for myself and not my God.
Looking at God's law through Plantinga's eyes did much more than make me feel guilty. It actually gave me a lot of hope for finding joy in doing God's law. It made me realize that sometimes I look at that law and feel deprived, when I should be feeling priviledged. God has given us a clear pattern for a joyful life. Think of all the trouble we would save ourselves if we never lied or cheated, if we were always kind, patient and forgiving. I thought of all the times I caved in to sin and realized that they had only served to make my life miserable. Was putting myself first ever worth the guilt of knowing that I was disappointing my heavenly Father? I realized that the pleasure had been only for a moment but had given me no lasting joy. I also realized that it was much easier for me to follow God's Word when I was serving him with excitement rather than grudgingly. When I skipped out on a movie to go to bible study, or when I put my book down to visit an old lady, I bearly noticed my scacrifice because I thirsting after God. When I was looking at all the positive posibilities God's law opens up for us, I didn't desire to do anything but please him.
All this actually reminded me of Lewis' piece "No Right to Happiness" and our class discussion about it. With this piece, we spent a lot of time talking about the emptiness of earthly pleasures. They do not satisfy. Only heavenly joy can truly fill us and bring us peace. And following the law of God is a great first step to finding that joy!
I wish that this positive attitude was something I would never loose sight of. I have experianced the difference between seeing the law as a leash and seeing it as a guide to loving service and the second is far more pleasant. However, I know that because I still struggle with a sinful nature, I am not likely to keep it up perfectly. I am very glad that Plantinga brought this up in the book though, because it is a good motivation to find joy in doing God's will.
Saturday, January 16, 2010
The Poison of Subjectivism
Although, for me, this was not one of the easiest essays to understand, I think it is one of the best exmples of C.S. Lewis use of logic. One of his quotes that was brought up in class said this, "The scientist has to assume the validity of his own logic even in order to prove that it is merely subjective". The way Lewis puts it makes the scientist sound ridiculous. Even if he disovers things that discredit the validity of human reason, he has no ground other than his own human reason to present them with.
Lewis also strongly applied the use of logic when addressing those who think they can create a new value system. He points out that their values must be based on something- preservation, promotion of comunity, etc.- and in the end, why should anyone really bother about these things. What makes a value system based on these supperior to the traditional system of morality that has existed in every other culture?
Lewis also points out that a truly new system of values cannot be created. Any attempt to do this is simply emphasising one idea and letting the tradtional value syste reflect it. Lewis gives several exmples of people who thought they had creae their own value system, but whose actions relected those of traditional morality. Basically, every one of these groups is sticking to the same code of values but under a different name. He points out that if we were to truly throw away the traditional value system and start over, there would be no where to start from. What good is any system without values to back it up, and who can say which values are worth building the system on?
Lewis brings out an answer that is compatible to what he says in "Mere Christianity." We do not set out own standards. They are set for us. This is proven by the fact that people argue. You cannot argue without a standard against which to judge your actions. This standard is universal because the knowledge of what is right and wrong is found in the conscience of man.
I think it would be really difficult to read this essay and not see the problems connected to the ideas of subjective reason and subjective morality. Lewis did not just say, "I don't agree with these ideas" he said "They simply don't work."
Lewis also strongly applied the use of logic when addressing those who think they can create a new value system. He points out that their values must be based on something- preservation, promotion of comunity, etc.- and in the end, why should anyone really bother about these things. What makes a value system based on these supperior to the traditional system of morality that has existed in every other culture?
Lewis also points out that a truly new system of values cannot be created. Any attempt to do this is simply emphasising one idea and letting the tradtional value syste reflect it. Lewis gives several exmples of people who thought they had creae their own value system, but whose actions relected those of traditional morality. Basically, every one of these groups is sticking to the same code of values but under a different name. He points out that if we were to truly throw away the traditional value system and start over, there would be no where to start from. What good is any system without values to back it up, and who can say which values are worth building the system on?
Lewis brings out an answer that is compatible to what he says in "Mere Christianity." We do not set out own standards. They are set for us. This is proven by the fact that people argue. You cannot argue without a standard against which to judge your actions. This standard is universal because the knowledge of what is right and wrong is found in the conscience of man.
I think it would be really difficult to read this essay and not see the problems connected to the ideas of subjective reason and subjective morality. Lewis did not just say, "I don't agree with these ideas" he said "They simply don't work."
Fall
In his third chapter, Plantinga discusses the sad reality that creation did not remain as God had created it, "very good". He talks about the first sin of Adam and Eve and of the consequences of that sin for all that God had created. Through this first sin, death and evil were given a place in this world.
When we think of evil, it is usual to separate it into two categories. We think of natural evil when we think of the distruction caused by earthquakes, hurricanes, famine, and other, naturally occuring disasters. We think of moral evil when we think of sin, evil caused by willful action. Plantinga spends alot of time on moral evil in this chapter in relating it to the Reformed doctrine of total depravity.
In Romans 3, the apostle Paul is talking to the Jews and asking them why they think that they are better the Gentiles. He says this,
Paul explains here that by nature, no one can, or indeed desires to serve God. This is the doctrine of total depravity, not only that we do not turn to God, but that rather, we turn away from him. Our human nature is a slave to sin and the devil.
Paul goes on in the chapter to talk about the redemption found in Jesus Christ. Without the grace of God, our redempion would be impossible. We can neither save ourselves, nor desire to be turned from our sin apart from the work of the Holy Spirit. We also know that we will not feel the fulness of our freedom from sin until we reach heaven. While on this earth, it is still a constant struggle with the "old man" of sin that remains in us.
Talking about this concept of total depravity in class reminded me of a book called "Lord of the Flies". My cousin had to read this book for school and she told me all about it. The story is about a group of British schoolboys who are stranded on a desert island. For a little while, they get along, but eventually, a struggle for power and leadership begins. The boys break up into different parties, and, rather than help eachother survive, they sabotage and fight with eachother. In the end, it turns into an all out war and some of the boys are killed. The idea of total depravity is clear in this book. "Inocent" children who have not been exposed to this sort of violence before get caught up in the greedy stuggle for power and are willing even to kill one another. It is human nature to think about ME and what I want rather than looking for the good of my neighbor, and it is obviously the trap these boys fell into.
When we think of evil, it is usual to separate it into two categories. We think of natural evil when we think of the distruction caused by earthquakes, hurricanes, famine, and other, naturally occuring disasters. We think of moral evil when we think of sin, evil caused by willful action. Plantinga spends alot of time on moral evil in this chapter in relating it to the Reformed doctrine of total depravity.
In Romans 3, the apostle Paul is talking to the Jews and asking them why they think that they are better the Gentiles. He says this,
What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin; As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness:Their feet are swift to shed blood: Destruction and misery are in their ways:And the way of peace have they not known: There is no fear of God before their eyes.(Romans 3:9-18 KJV)
Paul explains here that by nature, no one can, or indeed desires to serve God. This is the doctrine of total depravity, not only that we do not turn to God, but that rather, we turn away from him. Our human nature is a slave to sin and the devil.
Paul goes on in the chapter to talk about the redemption found in Jesus Christ. Without the grace of God, our redempion would be impossible. We can neither save ourselves, nor desire to be turned from our sin apart from the work of the Holy Spirit. We also know that we will not feel the fulness of our freedom from sin until we reach heaven. While on this earth, it is still a constant struggle with the "old man" of sin that remains in us.
Talking about this concept of total depravity in class reminded me of a book called "Lord of the Flies". My cousin had to read this book for school and she told me all about it. The story is about a group of British schoolboys who are stranded on a desert island. For a little while, they get along, but eventually, a struggle for power and leadership begins. The boys break up into different parties, and, rather than help eachother survive, they sabotage and fight with eachother. In the end, it turns into an all out war and some of the boys are killed. The idea of total depravity is clear in this book. "Inocent" children who have not been exposed to this sort of violence before get caught up in the greedy stuggle for power and are willing even to kill one another. It is human nature to think about ME and what I want rather than looking for the good of my neighbor, and it is obviously the trap these boys fell into.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Mere Christianity
"Mere Christianity" is another of C.S. Lewis' works that I had often heard mentioned, but had not actually taken the time to read until this class. I think the part that I appreciated most was the preface and the goal that Lewis brings out there. Lewis makes clear that he is not writing a book that will dig into the many specific doctrines of the Christian faith. He is just going to be covering the basics, leaving the more detailed aspects to learned theologians. Lewis also makes clear that he is not writing from the perspective of any specific denomination. Rather, he is writing as a Christian, one who follows Christ.
I think that Lewis approach is a wise one. Even ammong the same denomination, disagreements often arise. This is why it is necessary to have elders to watch over what is being taught in the church, and it is also the reason for having clasis and synod, which help a denomination stay unified. Lewis, rather than brining out differences, emphaises the things that Christians agree about. This way, someone who reads through "Mere Christianity" and then goes to a Christian neighbor, or a Christian church will not be getting a mixed message about what it means to be Chrisitan. If this person is convinced of the truths that Lewis brings out, he will want to seach for more, and by reading God's Word, he will be able to find a denomination where he believes the preaching is as accurate as posible to that Word.
Even though I like Lewis approach to witnessing, I still belive denominations are important. Although love of God unites us, I would not feel comfortable in every Christian church. There are important doctrinal reason why seperate denominations exist. These can have a huge effect on how we understand God and his Word, how we serve him, and how we live our daily lives. There are also the factors of how the service is conducted. Are there female office bearers? Is there instrumental music? This sort of thing can also be a factor in deciding which denomination seems to be most accurate to the Word of God.
I think that Lewis approach is a wise one. Even ammong the same denomination, disagreements often arise. This is why it is necessary to have elders to watch over what is being taught in the church, and it is also the reason for having clasis and synod, which help a denomination stay unified. Lewis, rather than brining out differences, emphaises the things that Christians agree about. This way, someone who reads through "Mere Christianity" and then goes to a Christian neighbor, or a Christian church will not be getting a mixed message about what it means to be Chrisitan. If this person is convinced of the truths that Lewis brings out, he will want to seach for more, and by reading God's Word, he will be able to find a denomination where he believes the preaching is as accurate as posible to that Word.
Even though I like Lewis approach to witnessing, I still belive denominations are important. Although love of God unites us, I would not feel comfortable in every Christian church. There are important doctrinal reason why seperate denominations exist. These can have a huge effect on how we understand God and his Word, how we serve him, and how we live our daily lives. There are also the factors of how the service is conducted. Are there female office bearers? Is there instrumental music? This sort of thing can also be a factor in deciding which denomination seems to be most accurate to the Word of God.
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Screwtape Letters
I have heard of "The Screwtape Letters" but they are not a work of C.S. Lewis' that I had actually read before coming to this class. I think Lewis had a very creative way of approaching the problem of temptation to sin. He writes from the angle of one who would seek to pull us away from God, and this perspective helps us to be more aware of the devices and traps that cause us to stumble in our own lives.
Lewis' focus in chapter XII was the dilema of a Christian caught between the discomfort of a guilty conscience and an ignorance of the desperate spiritual state they are in. In this letter, Screwtape advises Wormwood not to let his "patient" realise how far he has strayed from God, but he also advises him not to take away all of the patient's guilt. He goes on to explain how this will ensure that the patient will be uncomfortable facing his Lord and will tend to avoid contact with him as much as possible without realizing how deep is his NEED for the Lord. I think this is a very real-life situation which almost every Christian has faced. When you know that you haven't been faithful in your devotions, or that you have been spending your time immersed in the fun of this world rather than seeking to glorify God, it is uncomfortable to face him and admit to that. We have to realize, though, that this is the time that we really need it. If we allow ourselves to go astray, we will only be setting ourselves on the path that leads away from him.
There was something that Screwtape said while giving his advice to Wormwood that really caught my attention. Screwtape does not often talk about the "Enemy" (God), and when he does, it is usually a vague refference to him as the one from whom the "patients" must be dragged away. However, when Screwtape is suggesting to Wormwood the degree to which his patient's conscience must be dulled, he says this. "On the other hand, if you suppress it entirely- whih,by the by, the Enemy will probably not allow you to do-we lose an element in the situation which can be turned to goodaccount." Here, he reffers to fact that God will not let his children fall away from him comletely. Though they may walk in sin for a time, he will not give them peace in such a life. The Holy Spirit will testify in their heart that they have chosen the path leading away from God. Eventually, though the process may be painful, he will bring them back to himself, and when they repent, he will be as a Father, ready with open arms to forgive them.
Lewis' focus in chapter XII was the dilema of a Christian caught between the discomfort of a guilty conscience and an ignorance of the desperate spiritual state they are in. In this letter, Screwtape advises Wormwood not to let his "patient" realise how far he has strayed from God, but he also advises him not to take away all of the patient's guilt. He goes on to explain how this will ensure that the patient will be uncomfortable facing his Lord and will tend to avoid contact with him as much as possible without realizing how deep is his NEED for the Lord. I think this is a very real-life situation which almost every Christian has faced. When you know that you haven't been faithful in your devotions, or that you have been spending your time immersed in the fun of this world rather than seeking to glorify God, it is uncomfortable to face him and admit to that. We have to realize, though, that this is the time that we really need it. If we allow ourselves to go astray, we will only be setting ourselves on the path that leads away from him.
There was something that Screwtape said while giving his advice to Wormwood that really caught my attention. Screwtape does not often talk about the "Enemy" (God), and when he does, it is usually a vague refference to him as the one from whom the "patients" must be dragged away. However, when Screwtape is suggesting to Wormwood the degree to which his patient's conscience must be dulled, he says this. "On the other hand, if you suppress it entirely- whih,by the by, the Enemy will probably not allow you to do-we lose an element in the situation which can be turned to goodaccount." Here, he reffers to fact that God will not let his children fall away from him comletely. Though they may walk in sin for a time, he will not give them peace in such a life. The Holy Spirit will testify in their heart that they have chosen the path leading away from God. Eventually, though the process may be painful, he will bring them back to himself, and when they repent, he will be as a Father, ready with open arms to forgive them.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Weight of Glory
I thought that the "Weight of Glory" by C.S. Lewis had a number of interesting and beautiful quotes in it. My favorite is found on page 3, where Lewis says, "These things-the beauty, the memory of our own past-are good images of what we really desire; but if they are mistakenfor the thing itself they turn into dumb idols, breaking the hearts of their worshippers." This quote reminded me of a quote that was presented the other day(again, one of C.S. Lewis') that finished by stating, "Our Father refreshes us on the journey with some pleasant inns, but will not encourage us to mistake them for home." This quote also dealt with the happineses,the pleasant, and the beautiful things of this life. It does not point to them as the goal that we must achieve but rather as stops along the way to something better. The first quote predicts the result of forgetting that the inns of the second quote are only inns. Earthly beauty and pleasure can not truly satisfy us by itself. If we expect that it will, we will be heartbroken when it leaves us longing for something that it cannot fulful.
Another quote that I really liked was "Perfet humility dispenses with modesty." We talked a little bit in class about what this quote means. The connection was made between this kind of humility, and a child who brings a picture to his parent, so delighted in the work he has put into it for them. It is hard for us to really understand and experiance what this quote means because, like Lewis admits, praise and appreciation can quickly lead us down the path of self-admiration. The only way to continue in this true humility is to constantly looking to God and giving him the glory, the credit, and the thanks for anything we are able to do. Ephesians 2:10 says "For we are his workmanship, created in Jesus Christ unto good works, that God hath before ordained that we should walk in them." This passage reminds us that even the most wonderful good deeds that we can give to our heavenly Father would not be possible in our own strenght, but require his grace. When we remember this, we are able to have joy in our works without falling into the pride of crediting them to ourselves.
Another quote that I really liked was "Perfet humility dispenses with modesty." We talked a little bit in class about what this quote means. The connection was made between this kind of humility, and a child who brings a picture to his parent, so delighted in the work he has put into it for them. It is hard for us to really understand and experiance what this quote means because, like Lewis admits, praise and appreciation can quickly lead us down the path of self-admiration. The only way to continue in this true humility is to constantly looking to God and giving him the glory, the credit, and the thanks for anything we are able to do. Ephesians 2:10 says "For we are his workmanship, created in Jesus Christ unto good works, that God hath before ordained that we should walk in them." This passage reminds us that even the most wonderful good deeds that we can give to our heavenly Father would not be possible in our own strenght, but require his grace. When we remember this, we are able to have joy in our works without falling into the pride of crediting them to ourselves.
Creation
In his second chapter, Plantinga considers God's glorious creation and what it is able to tell us about its Creator and even about ourselves as his image-bearers. He brings out many important aspects of the ways God created this world to be(interdependant, mysterious yet intelligible, GOOD) and talks about the implications for how we view the church,stewardship, eachother, etc. I agree with some of what Plantinga says, but there is especially one disagreement I have with him. This is the idea that, because man was created good in the image of God, every human being is potentially redeemable.
Although God created man in his image, that image is totally broken and distorted through sin. Man was no longer a perfect image bearer, he only retained what the Cannons of Dordt calls the "glimmerings of natural light". Man cannot restore himself or any other to the right state in which he was created. In fact, the only way this restoration is able to take place is purely by the grace of God. When God gives to us the gift of faith and puts his Spirit in our hearts, we are again able to begin to reflect his glory as we were created to do.
However, it is not the will of God that every man should be saved, and therefore restored to this image. Cannons of Dordt, First Head, Article 15:
Since it is only by the grace of God that man is able to be saved and restored to his image, and since it is clear from the his Word that it is not his purpose to save all men, it stands to reason that all men do not have the potential to be redeemed. An example of this is found in Romans 9. Verses 11-13 talking about the birth of Jacob and Esau say this:
Esau did not have the potential to be redeemed because it was not the purpose of God to redeem him.
I do not mean by any of this to discourage witnessing or evangelism. Just because all men do not have the potential to be redeemed does not mean we are not called to bring God's word to them. We do not know the heart. We may not judge who the elect are, that is God's job. And we may very well be the tools which God uses to bring others to him. We can also find comfort in this when our witnessing and our work for God do not seem to bring forth the results we wish they would. In I Kings 18& 19, God's prophet Elijah is facing this situation. In chapter 18, all of the prophets of Baal have seen the glory of God in Elijah's sacrifice on Mount Carmel, but by the very next chapter, Elijah is fleeing for his life. He comes to the Lord in a despairing prayer, saying look at all that I have done for you, and yet, I am the only one left who believes. God then tells him to go up into a mountain, where he sees a great wind, an earthquake, and a fire. But God is not in any of them. God comes to him in a still small voice. He is showing Elijah that He is not only present where there are amazing results. It is not his purpose that all those to whom Elijah has preached be redeemed. He is comforting Elijah by saying, don't worry about the results, just do what I have called you to do and I will make it work out as I see fit. We also can find comfort in this. We can love and serve our fellow humans, and we can do our best to be witnesses and teach them of Christ's love, but ulimatly, the results are in the hands of our heavenly Father, and everything will work out according to his will.
Although God created man in his image, that image is totally broken and distorted through sin. Man was no longer a perfect image bearer, he only retained what the Cannons of Dordt calls the "glimmerings of natural light". Man cannot restore himself or any other to the right state in which he was created. In fact, the only way this restoration is able to take place is purely by the grace of God. When God gives to us the gift of faith and puts his Spirit in our hearts, we are again able to begin to reflect his glory as we were created to do.
However, it is not the will of God that every man should be saved, and therefore restored to this image. Cannons of Dordt, First Head, Article 15:
Article 15. What peculiarly tends to illustrate and recommend to us the eternal and unmerited grace of election is the express testimony of sacred Scripture that not all, but some only, are elected, while others are passed by in the eternal election of God; whom God, out of His sovereign, most just, irreprehensible, and unchangeable good pleasure, hath decreed to leave in the common misery into which they have wilfully plunged themselves, and not to bestow upon them saving faith and the grace of conversion; but leaving them in His just judgment to follow their own ways, at last for the declaration of His justice, to condemn and punish them forever, not only on account of their unbelief, but also for all their other sins. And this is the decree of reprobation which by no means makes God the author of sin (the very thought of which is blasphemy), but declares Him to be an awful, irreprehensible, and righteous judge and avenger thereof.
Since it is only by the grace of God that man is able to be saved and restored to his image, and since it is clear from the his Word that it is not his purpose to save all men, it stands to reason that all men do not have the potential to be redeemed. An example of this is found in Romans 9. Verses 11-13 talking about the birth of Jacob and Esau say this:
(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;)It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
Esau did not have the potential to be redeemed because it was not the purpose of God to redeem him.
I do not mean by any of this to discourage witnessing or evangelism. Just because all men do not have the potential to be redeemed does not mean we are not called to bring God's word to them. We do not know the heart. We may not judge who the elect are, that is God's job. And we may very well be the tools which God uses to bring others to him. We can also find comfort in this when our witnessing and our work for God do not seem to bring forth the results we wish they would. In I Kings 18& 19, God's prophet Elijah is facing this situation. In chapter 18, all of the prophets of Baal have seen the glory of God in Elijah's sacrifice on Mount Carmel, but by the very next chapter, Elijah is fleeing for his life. He comes to the Lord in a despairing prayer, saying look at all that I have done for you, and yet, I am the only one left who believes. God then tells him to go up into a mountain, where he sees a great wind, an earthquake, and a fire. But God is not in any of them. God comes to him in a still small voice. He is showing Elijah that He is not only present where there are amazing results. It is not his purpose that all those to whom Elijah has preached be redeemed. He is comforting Elijah by saying, don't worry about the results, just do what I have called you to do and I will make it work out as I see fit. We also can find comfort in this. We can love and serve our fellow humans, and we can do our best to be witnesses and teach them of Christ's love, but ulimatly, the results are in the hands of our heavenly Father, and everything will work out according to his will.
Monday, January 11, 2010
Our English Syllabus
In his article "Our English Syllabus" C.S. Lewis is considering the method of education used in colleges and universities and discussing what type of an education is most valuable. He compares a vocational training or learning for the sake of gaining a particular skill to learning simply out of a thirst for knowledge. Lewis believes that the purpose of a university is centered around learning that will not only further students in a particular trade, but will also equip them for the rest of their lives and even allow them to get the most out of their leisure time. Lewis also talks about the difference between this sort of an education and the type of teaching and learning that happens before the university level. According to him, the purpose of this early learning is to prepare students to take control of their own quest for knowledge once they graduate. At the college level, professors are in the middle of studying and learning about something that is important to them, and the college students are encouraged to join them in their study, and get what they can out of the experiance.
During the class discussion, something was brought up concerning this topic that related it to our lives as Christians. Someone said that too often, children who are raised in a Christian environment are equiped with the knowledge necesarry for a godly life, but fail to grab hold of that themselves and really dig into all the questions surrounding the christian faith. They are content simply to be led. They are satisfied with what is handed to them. This causes problems when others question them about their faith because they are asked questions that they have never bothered to consider themselves. I think this is an important point. Paul tells us in I Peter 3:15 "....be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you...." If we truly love God we need to study his word and spend time learning more about him.
Althought I believe that Christians should be prepared to give an answer, I do not think that that answer will ever be able to prove God to anyone. It may be the tool that God uses to lead one of his children to him, but it is ultimately the work of the Holy Spirit in their hearts that turns God's children to him. This is also an encouragement when our answer fails to open someone's eyes to God. Our duty to God is to give that answer, and that is all we can do. We do not have the power to give the gift of faith. We can show Christ to someone, but only objectively. They can experiance or look along Christ and the salvation he has merrited only by the work of the Holy spirt. This shouldn't stop us from being ready to give our answer, though. If we can give an objective view of Christianity that is clear and logical, that may the means that God will use to open their heart to him.
I feel like I haven't really said much about the paper yet, so I will try to get back to that. I think that Lewis had a really great idea of what college learning could be. I am easily able to see this inturim class as a practical example. If you are not interested in C.S. Lewis, you will not get very much out of it at all. If you enjoy Lewis and Literature, you will be motivated to put time into studying the writings and you will benefit not only yourself, but the other students in the class. It would be nice if every college course could be taught this way, but that is not the case. As Lewis put it, "unfortunately, we have to make our livings." Some of our college classes will be core class requirements that are of little interest to us. Other classes, while interesting, will be limmited to teaching us one practical skill. These classes have their own benefits, and many of them are very important with regaurd to certain professions, however, we should realize that the goal of college is not only to prepare us for a job, but to prepare us for life.
During the class discussion, something was brought up concerning this topic that related it to our lives as Christians. Someone said that too often, children who are raised in a Christian environment are equiped with the knowledge necesarry for a godly life, but fail to grab hold of that themselves and really dig into all the questions surrounding the christian faith. They are content simply to be led. They are satisfied with what is handed to them. This causes problems when others question them about their faith because they are asked questions that they have never bothered to consider themselves. I think this is an important point. Paul tells us in I Peter 3:15 "....be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you...." If we truly love God we need to study his word and spend time learning more about him.
Althought I believe that Christians should be prepared to give an answer, I do not think that that answer will ever be able to prove God to anyone. It may be the tool that God uses to lead one of his children to him, but it is ultimately the work of the Holy Spirit in their hearts that turns God's children to him. This is also an encouragement when our answer fails to open someone's eyes to God. Our duty to God is to give that answer, and that is all we can do. We do not have the power to give the gift of faith. We can show Christ to someone, but only objectively. They can experiance or look along Christ and the salvation he has merrited only by the work of the Holy spirt. This shouldn't stop us from being ready to give our answer, though. If we can give an objective view of Christianity that is clear and logical, that may the means that God will use to open their heart to him.
I feel like I haven't really said much about the paper yet, so I will try to get back to that. I think that Lewis had a really great idea of what college learning could be. I am easily able to see this inturim class as a practical example. If you are not interested in C.S. Lewis, you will not get very much out of it at all. If you enjoy Lewis and Literature, you will be motivated to put time into studying the writings and you will benefit not only yourself, but the other students in the class. It would be nice if every college course could be taught this way, but that is not the case. As Lewis put it, "unfortunately, we have to make our livings." Some of our college classes will be core class requirements that are of little interest to us. Other classes, while interesting, will be limmited to teaching us one practical skill. These classes have their own benefits, and many of them are very important with regaurd to certain professions, however, we should realize that the goal of college is not only to prepare us for a job, but to prepare us for life.
Saturday, January 9, 2010
Longing and Hope
Planting starts out his first chapter by talking about the joy, hopes, and desires that we experiance in this earthly life. He gives several examples including nature and especially music that have the ability to bring on a feeling of yearning by expressing such beauty that we don't know how to feel it all. Sadly, while we are on this earth, some of the desires we feel are sinful desires. C.S. Lewis addresses this when he says that our earthly desires are not too strong, but too weak. What he means is that we are settling to be satisfied with what this earth has to offer, even though it is a hundred times outweighed by the beauty of heaven and the glory of God. He gives the example of a child playing in the mud who is unwilling to leave it for a trip to the beach, because he has no idea of how wonderful the beach will be. Lewis also had another quote which I think fits perfectly with what Plantinga is trying to say. This quote was shown in class the other day, and I do not remember all of it, but towards the end, it said that God gives us happiness in our lives like pleasent inns along our journey, but he will not allow us to mistake them for our true home. We need to remember this when we face the temptation to let ourselves be distracted with earthly desires. The one thing truly worth longing for awaits us at the end of our earthly pilgrimage.
Plantinga realizes that during this earthly life, we will never be completely fulfilled. Although we may be content with our lives, even full of joy, there is still a longing for something which we do not have yet. Also, durring our lives on earth we face the problem of our own sin, which gets in the way of complete happiness, and we face the consequences of sin on creation- death, disease, pain. These are discouraging, but they serve as reminders that we are only passing through. They turn our hearts towards God in the knowledge that one day we will be with him where there is no more death or sorrow or crying. This is the true home we long for.
Plantinga realizes that during this earthly life, we will never be completely fulfilled. Although we may be content with our lives, even full of joy, there is still a longing for something which we do not have yet. Also, durring our lives on earth we face the problem of our own sin, which gets in the way of complete happiness, and we face the consequences of sin on creation- death, disease, pain. These are discouraging, but they serve as reminders that we are only passing through. They turn our hearts towards God in the knowledge that one day we will be with him where there is no more death or sorrow or crying. This is the true home we long for.
No Right to Happiness
In his essay, "No Right to Happiness", C.S. Lewis argues against a common idea that happiness is a right possesed by all men. He brings up the subject by talking about the divorce and remarriage of some of his neighbors and a comment regaurding the situation suggesting that this behavior was excusable on the basis that he was seeking happiness, which after all, was his right. When we discussed this in class, there were arguements from both sides, some agreeing with Lewis and some disagreeing. I myself am in agreement with Lewis on this one. I believe that our happiness is a gift, not something we are entitled to.
My favorite part of this paper is when Lewis talks about the difference between speach and action regaurding sexual impulse. As he was growing up Lewis heard people say that sexual impulse should be treated just the same as any other impulse, but eventually, he realized that what they were doing was the exact opposite. Greed, pride, hatred, all of these are discouraged and held back as much as possible. People realize that they are powerfully distructive and for that reason they fight against them rather than letting them take hold. Sexual impulses on the other hand are given free reign, even encouraged. I find it amazing that people don't seem to realize how differently sexual impulse is treated from any other impulse, and that they don't see the destruction it causes. More than murder, more than stealing, more than disobediance to authority, sex outside of marriage is tearing our society apart. It targets families, which are societies' building blocks. Broken homes, and marriages with the scars of unfaithfulness are the crumbling bricks that we depending on to hold our society together. Once we realize this and deal with it, we will see its possitive effects agains many of the other problems our society faces.
One more thing I found really interesting about Lewis paper is were he talks about the laws of the state being affected by a Natural Law. This Natural Law is the law of God that is written into the conscience of every man. What is your most important reason for not killing someone? Is it simply because of the consequences of breaking the states law, or is it because you know in your hear that it is wrong, and because you would feel terribly guilty if you were to commit such a crime? In a society completly free of conscience, the laws of the state would be of little good. Something stronger than mans' laws is neccesary to reign in mans' sinfulness. Even those who do not believe in God realize this. They know the difference between right and wrong, and they have standards of morality even though they do not acknowledge that thoses standards are God's standards and they have their source in Him.
My favorite part of this paper is when Lewis talks about the difference between speach and action regaurding sexual impulse. As he was growing up Lewis heard people say that sexual impulse should be treated just the same as any other impulse, but eventually, he realized that what they were doing was the exact opposite. Greed, pride, hatred, all of these are discouraged and held back as much as possible. People realize that they are powerfully distructive and for that reason they fight against them rather than letting them take hold. Sexual impulses on the other hand are given free reign, even encouraged. I find it amazing that people don't seem to realize how differently sexual impulse is treated from any other impulse, and that they don't see the destruction it causes. More than murder, more than stealing, more than disobediance to authority, sex outside of marriage is tearing our society apart. It targets families, which are societies' building blocks. Broken homes, and marriages with the scars of unfaithfulness are the crumbling bricks that we depending on to hold our society together. Once we realize this and deal with it, we will see its possitive effects agains many of the other problems our society faces.
One more thing I found really interesting about Lewis paper is were he talks about the laws of the state being affected by a Natural Law. This Natural Law is the law of God that is written into the conscience of every man. What is your most important reason for not killing someone? Is it simply because of the consequences of breaking the states law, or is it because you know in your hear that it is wrong, and because you would feel terribly guilty if you were to commit such a crime? In a society completly free of conscience, the laws of the state would be of little good. Something stronger than mans' laws is neccesary to reign in mans' sinfulness. Even those who do not believe in God realize this. They know the difference between right and wrong, and they have standards of morality even though they do not acknowledge that thoses standards are God's standards and they have their source in Him.
Friday, January 8, 2010
"Bulverism"
I thought C.S. Lewis had a very unique way of addressing the problem of "Bulverism" in a society. Bulverism is basically assuming that your opponent is wrong and, rather than arguing the issue at hand, simply trying to explain why the opponant has such a confused perspective. This really avoids the issue altogether, but may give you an advantage over an opponant who seems to have a bias. Lewis could have just stated his thoughts like that, but rather, he coined his own term and presented it in an interesting and even a comical way. Someone brought up in class the bit where Lewis says, "You must reason even to Bulverize. You are trying to prove that all proof is invalid. If you fail, you fail. If you succeed, then you fail even more- for the proof that all proofs are invalid must be invalid itself." He uses his own logic to make the logic behind Bulverizing look silly. I think anyone who reads Lewis's article is easily able to see his point but without feeling like he is pointing a finger at them. It is easy to admit that it is a problem faced by almost all societies and individuals when it is presented so lightly, rather than if Lewis had started off with harsh words and accusations. This piece is a great example of his talent in the areas of both philosophy and writing.
I also was reminded of something someone said in class when Lewis talks about bulverism regaurding religion. This person talked about not being able to understand religion until you look at it from the inside.This definitly has to do with the looking at vs looking along perspectives. Until you look along Christ, you cannot truly understand the Christian perspective on a wide range of topics. Without that first hand experiance, it is easy for people to blow off arguements especially over moral issues as "Well, you're a Christian. Of course you're going to see it that way." Any point that the Christian makes is already void in the mind of the other before it has even been spoken. Of course, this is only one of many places where bulerism arises. You see it at school, at work, in society, government, basically everywhere. I'm glad it was an issue that Lewis chose to address.
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Meditation in a Toolshed
I was really impressed with C. S. Lewis's "Meditations in a Toolshed". His point in this writting was to illustrate that almost anything, including physical objects, ideas, emotions, actions, etc. has different appearences depending on the perspective from which you see it. Lewis brought out especially two ways of percieving things which he categorised as looking "at" and looking "along". Looking at reffers to an objective or and outsider's view. Looking along is personal experiance, the view of and insider. Lewis made the point that these very different views are both important, and cannot truly be separated from eachother.
We spent some time discussing in class how our perspective shifts throughout our lifetime. As children, we have little personal experiance, and so most of our understanding is simply based on observation. As we grow, we gain experiances that allow us to see things from the "along" perspective as well. As we were discussing, I realized that parents understand this and use it all the time. What is the best way to keep kids away from smoking, drinking, drugs? Start early. Talk to them before they have any experiance of their own. I remember that my brothers and I used to get frustrated with our mom because of how often she gave us the "don't drink and drive" lecture. This started long before any of us had even begun driver's training and continued to be brought up frequently throughout junior high and high school. At the time, it seemed so obvious- driving drunk is dangerous and illegal, so why would you do it? It was the only perspective we knew. What we didn't realize is that this objective black and white perspective learned in childhood can be a strong safegaurd. Of course things are going to look totally different in the moment. There isn't black and white anymore. Are you really gonna call your parents to come pick you up? It was only a little bit...really not a big deal. That's when you are forced to compare the your "at" and your "along" perspective. Parents know that this day will come, and that is why they warn their children again and again, so that the "at" perspective will stand strong even when the "along" perspective is so tempting.
I think my last paragraph sounds pretty strongly in favor of looking at things as an outsider,but that was not my purpose.I think their are definitly situations where one view or the other is more valid, but for the most part, they need to work together, and perspective based on experiance is definitly valuable in my oppinion.
We spent some time discussing in class how our perspective shifts throughout our lifetime. As children, we have little personal experiance, and so most of our understanding is simply based on observation. As we grow, we gain experiances that allow us to see things from the "along" perspective as well. As we were discussing, I realized that parents understand this and use it all the time. What is the best way to keep kids away from smoking, drinking, drugs? Start early. Talk to them before they have any experiance of their own. I remember that my brothers and I used to get frustrated with our mom because of how often she gave us the "don't drink and drive" lecture. This started long before any of us had even begun driver's training and continued to be brought up frequently throughout junior high and high school. At the time, it seemed so obvious- driving drunk is dangerous and illegal, so why would you do it? It was the only perspective we knew. What we didn't realize is that this objective black and white perspective learned in childhood can be a strong safegaurd. Of course things are going to look totally different in the moment. There isn't black and white anymore. Are you really gonna call your parents to come pick you up? It was only a little bit...really not a big deal. That's when you are forced to compare the your "at" and your "along" perspective. Parents know that this day will come, and that is why they warn their children again and again, so that the "at" perspective will stand strong even when the "along" perspective is so tempting.
I think my last paragraph sounds pretty strongly in favor of looking at things as an outsider,but that was not my purpose.I think their are definitly situations where one view or the other is more valid, but for the most part, they need to work together, and perspective based on experiance is definitly valuable in my oppinion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
