"The most probable explanation is that I was made for another world": Lewis on How To Satisfy Our Thirsts

No one could say it like CS Lewis. Sunday we will be discussing the wonderful truth of God's forgiveness from Isaiah 55. In that chapter, God calls on us to come to him. If we are thirsty (and we are), come to the waters and be quenched. If we are hungry (and we are), come and partake in Him.

This is really the point Lewis is making in the following quote taken from Mere Christianity:

The Christian says, 'Creatures are not born with desires unless satisfaction for those desires exists. A baby feels hunger: well, there is such a thing as food. A duckling wants to swim: well, there is such a thing as water. Men feel sexual desire: well, there is such a thing as sex. if I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world. If none of my earthly pleasures satisfy it, that does not prove that the universe is a fraud. Probably earthly pleasures were never meant to satisfy it, but only to arouse it, to suggest the real thing. If that is so, I must take care, on the one hand, never to despise, or be unthankful for, these earthly blessings, and on the other, never to mistake them for the something else of which they are only a kind of copy, or echo, or mirage. I must keep alive in myself the desire for my true country, which I shall not find till after death; I must never let it get snowed under or turned aside; I must make it the main object of life to press on to that other country and to help others to do the same.’-135-136

Amen and Amen!


For more:
Blogizomai - "Screwtape Letters" by CS Lewis: A Review
Blogizomai - Theology As a Map: Lewis, Practical Theology, and the Trinity
Blogizomai - He is Not a Tame Lion:  Aslan, Jesus, and the Limits of Postmodern Inclusivism  
Blogizomai - To Be Undragoned:  Aslan, Christ, and the Gift of Regeneration 
Blogizomai - Lewis on Practical Theology  
Blogizomai - Lewis on the Why of Democracy
Blogizomai - From Uncle Screwtape:  Christianity and Politics     
Short-Blogizomai - Beyond Narnia:  A Great Documentary 
Reviews - "Surprised by Joy" by Lewis
Reviews - "Jack:  A Life of CS Lewis"  
Reviews - "The Great Divorce" by Lewis
Reviews - "Finding God in the Land of Narnia"
GBC - Christianity And . . .: The Subtle Formula of Idolatry
GBC - Lewis on the Accident of Evolution
GBC - Theodicy as Evidence of a Theos
GBC - Weekly Recommendation - "A Grief Observed"
GBC - The Miracle of the New Creation: CS Lewis on the Resurrction
GBC - Weekly Recommendation: "Mere Christianity"

Christianity And . . .: The Subtle Formula of Idolatry

The best book I read last year was without a doubt Tullian Tchividjian's wonderful book "Jesus + Nothing = Everything." In one very helpful section, quoted at left below, Tchividjian reminds us of CS Lewis' book Screwtape Letters where Lewis, through the mouth of Screwtape, shows us how subtle idolatry can be even for the Christian.  Please read the following in full.

So if we aren’t naturally prone to look to the finished work of Jesus for us as it’s presented in the gospel for the ‘everything’ – where are we looking?
 
Typically, it’s not that Christians seek to blatantly replace the gospel. What we try to do is simply add to it. . . .
 
Maybe you recall how this ‘addition’ concept is brought out in C. S. Lewis’s famous work The Screwtape Letters.  As the high-ranking demon Screwtape trains his protege Wormwood in satanic strategies against Christians, he discusses how (in Screwtape’s words) ‘to keep them in the state of mind I call “Christianity And.”’ Screwtape gives a few examples (reflecting some fads from Lewis’s time . . .): ‘Christianity and the New Psychology, Christianity and the New Order, Christianity and Faith Healing,’ and even ‘Christianity and Vegetarianism.’ These were all various manifestations of the urgent, Devil-fostered temptation believers face to add something else to our faith in Jesus and the gospel – all b/c of those deficiencies we sense in our own experience.
 
Today, Screwtape’s list would doubtless look different.  The currently tempting formulas might include ‘Christian and coolness,’ ‘Christianity and self-affirmation,’ ‘Christianity and self-improvement,’ ‘Christianity and personal progress,’ or ‘Christianity and spiritual formation.’ There’s a host of causes that might crop up: ‘Christianity and environmentalism,’ ‘Christianity and home schooling,’ ‘Christianity and social justice,’ ‘Christianity and diversity and tolerance,’ not to mention abundant ‘Christianity and political action’ variations –liberal conservative, libertarian, hope-and-change, take-back-America, whatever.
 
Besides those, there are plenty of extras that have timeless appeal for any and all generations: ‘Christianity and popularity,’ ‘Christianity and success,’ ‘Christianity and power,’ ‘Christianity and social status,’ ‘Christianity and reform,’ even ‘Christianity and tradition.’
 
The list could go on and on.  It will include whatever we’re clinging to, whatever we won’t let go of b/c we’re using it to fill the void only God can fill.
 
Screwtape is telling the demon Wormwood that if he wants to distract Christians, if he wants to debilitate them, if he wants to keep them off course, powerless, and ineffective, simply make sure they never come to a place of believing that ‘mere Christianity’ is enough.  Make them feel god about affixing something further to the faith. It could be the latest fad; though perhaps far more likely it’s a more personal fixation or obsession that grips us b/c of our endless, aching search to fill our inner hollowness.
 
Christianity an . . . For many of us, it may be Jesus and our achievements, Jesus and our strengths, Jesus and our reputation, Jesus and our relationships, Jesus and our family’s prosperity, Jesus and our ambitions and goals and dreams, Jesus and our personal preferences and tastes and style, Jesus and our spiritual growth, Jesus and our hobbies and recreational pursuits and entertainment habits – and, especially, Jesus and our personal set of life rules.
 
Whatever it is our heart is drawn to – a cultural trend, a cause, a diversion, a personal ‘passion,’ a relationship, a pursuit, a venture, a comfortable routine – and however subtly it pulls us in, the cold, hard truth is that almost immediately it becomes an idol, and our heart grabs hold.  As Martin Luther once said, ‘Whatever your heart clings to and confides in, that is really your God’ – your functional savior.   -38-40


From "Jesus + Nothing = Everything" by Tullian Tchividjian


For more:
Reviews - "Jesus + Nothing = Everything" by Tullian Tchividjian
Reviews - Top 11 Reads of 2011  

Lewis on the Accident of Evolution

I was doing some studying on creation for this Sunday morning as we look at day four of the Creation account in Genesis. I came across the following quote by C.S. Lewis regarding the accident of evolution:

If the solar system was brought about by an accidental collission, then the appearance of organic life on this planet was also an accident, and the whole evolution of Man was an acdient too. If so, then all our present thoughts are accidents - the accidental by-product of the movement of atoms. Adn this holds for the thoughts of the materialists and astronomers as well as for anyone else's. But if their thoughts are merely accidental by-products, why should we believe them to be true? I see no reason for believing that one accident should be able to give me a correct account of all the other accidents. -Lewis, God on the Dock, 52-53

Lewis makes an excellent point. Evolution is built around an entire series of accidents. If everything is an accident, then our very thoughts are accidents. Therefore, how can I trust the accidental thoughts of a biochemist over the accidental thoughts of a factory worker? In one paragraph, Lewis raises an incredible challenge to the evolutionary worldview.

Theodicy as Evidence of a Theos

I have been studying, in great detail, the question of God's goodness. If God is good, then why is there so much evil and suffering in the world? The common riddle goes something like this: If God is good, He cannot be All-Powerful because He cannot prevent evil and suffering in the world. If God is All-Powerful, He cannot be good because He refused to prevent evil and suffering. God therefore, is either good or All-Powerful, He cannot be both.

I have sat in secular university philosophy classes and listened to this argument. To most Christians, they are left stunned by this predicament. The Bible clearly teaches that God is good and All-Powerful. So how can these two concepts be true if there is so much evil and suffering in the world? The answer goes beyond this post. To begin, the Christian worldview must go back to Genesis 1-3. In chapters 1-2, God created everything and saw that it was good. It was good because it came from He who defines good; God. But in Genesis 3, the Fall took place and destroyed the goodness of the Earth. Death, suffering, evil, violence, natural disasters, and pain are the result of Genesis 3.

But does the problem of theodicy disprove God? Interestingly, even the most hardened atheist are not running to the problem of theodicy as they used to. The world's best known atheist, Richard Dawkins, in his book, The God Delusion, points out that this issue does not necessarily disprove God, it only disproves the goodness of God. Though I disagree with his conclusion, one cannot miss what Dawkins is saying. Evil and suffering does not disprove God.

So, how does such an issue prove God? C.S. Lewis explains in the clearest and most powerful language:

My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of ‘just’ and ‘unjust’? . . . What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust? . . . Of course I could have given up my idea of justice by saying it was nothing but a private idea of my own. But if I did that, then my argument against God collapsed too – for the argument depended on saying that the world was really unjust, not simply that it did not happen to please my private fancies . . . Consequently atheism turns out to be too simple. -Lewis, Mere Christianity, 38

Lewis is right. The very idea that we speak of evil and suffering implies that we have an inherit standard of evil and good. Where does this inherit idea come from? Why is murder, death, destruction, violence, abuse, and natural disasters bad? By what standard do we measure these things? Evolution implies (though many naturalists may deny it) that death and suffering brings forth the fruit of evolution. Things improve when the weaker become extinct and die. Death is good. And yet naturally, we are repulsed by this. Evolution morality implies relativism. What is true? What is right? What is moral? Without a Divine standard such questions are determined by culture and opinion polls.

Let us remember Lewis' words. When we see suffering and pain, we ought to weep and mourn, not because God seems non-existent, but because we know that God is present. In a world of pain and sorrows, God reminds us of His standard of good. When we see such pain God is calling us to heal what has been wounded, to fix what has been broken, and to united what has been separated. We do this because that is what God has done for us. Upon the cross Christ took upon Himself our evil and sin. On the cross, Christ fixed what we broke, united what we separated, and healed what we wounded.

But the beauty of the cross isn't just in Christ suffering on our account. The beauty of the cross takes us to the empty tomb. Their is always hope and restoration on the other side of pain, suffering, and evil. Christ conquered and so can we.

Weekly Recommendation - "A Grief Observed"

This Sunday we will be looking at Psalm 23:4, "even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil. For you are with me, your rod and your staff, they comfort me." The fact is, we all will face the valley of the shadow of death. Whenever we get that diagnosis, get betrayed by a best friend, our spouse files for divorce, our children disappoint us, or we fail. We will all suffer. We will all grieve. We will all need comfort.

As I have studied this week, I have re-read a classic CS Lewis book entitled, "A Grief Observed." Most will know Lewis and the legacy of his life. He is perhaps most famous for his fictional series, "The Chronicles of Narnia," which have been turned into film multiple times. He is also well known for volumes of nonfictional books including Mere Christianity, Screwtape Letters, The Problem of Pain, Miracles, Reflections on the Psalms, The Four Loves, and many more. I have read many of these and Lewis continues to make me think, reevaluate what I believe, and challenge me to be a better Christian. His ability to make the complex simple, yet profound is unsurpassed by any writer in the past century.

His book, A Grief Observed, is unlike his others. As the title suggests, the author is observing his process of grief. Lewis is mourning over the death of his wife. Each chapter is another faze in the grieving process. Lewis writes openly and honestly. The book is short (only about 75 pages) and yet the reader is drawn into the pain and emotions of the author. At some point in our lives, we have all asked the same questions and said the same things as Lewis. He boldly asks where God is in all of this? Why did God allow his wife to get cancer and suffer the way she did? We can all certainly relate. Perhaps no other question has been asked more than that.

One of the things Lewis raises in the book regards his faith as a house of cards. As the book continues, Lewis lays out that prior to his wife's death, he thought he had a house built firmly on the rock that was solid and secure, but God has taken the tragedy of his wife's death and showed him that really his faith was like a house of cards. Upon the smallest of blows, the whole thing crumbles. This resonates with me because like Lewis during the good times, I convince myself that my faith is secure and strong, but then once adversity or tragedy comes, I find myself faltering in my faith and questioning God's goodness.

The goodness of God is another thing that comes up. If God is good, then how could He have let this happen. Lewis has written a book on the subject (The Problem of Pain) and does not go into much detail here. By the end, Lewis makes his case that all though he is hurting, God remains good and is good.

As you read the book, you might find yourself asking, "why did he recommend this again?" Why? Because Lewis is so honest that at times you feel as though he has lost his faith. But keep reading. As each page turns, so does his faith. Though Lewis is honest about his struggles, by the end, he finds himself almost healed and then ends with these words: "How wicked it would be, if we could, to call the dead back! She said not to me but to the chaplain, ‘I am at peace with God.’ She smiled, but not at me." -76

A fitting conclusion.

For More:

Weekly Recommendation: "Mere Christianity"

The Miracle of the New Creation: CS Lewis on the Resurrction

The Miracle of the New Creation: CS Lewis on the Resurrction

I have been reading a number of books in preparation for Resurrection Sunday's message and I came across of number of good quotes from Clive Stables Lewis. Cs Lewis is one of my favorite authors and I have read all of his signature classics. Although I disagree with some of his theological views, Lewis' influence on me is profound. I have enjoyed reading his Narnia series as well as many of his letters, essays, biography, and nonfiction writings. I highly recommend him.

But in his book, Miracles, Lewis sees the two greatest miracles in Scripture to be the Incarnation and the Resurrection. Regarding the resurrection, Lewis had this to say:

. . . to preach Christianity meant primarily to preach the Resurrection. Thus people who had heard only fragments of St. Paul’s teaching at Athens got the impression that he was talking about two new gods, Jesus and Anastasis (i.e., Resurrection) (Acts 17:18). The Resurrection is the central theme in every Christian sermon reported in Acts. The Resurrection, and its consequences, were the ‘gospel’ or good news which the Christians brought: what we call the ‘gospels’, the narratives of Our Lord’s life and death, were composed later for the benefit of those who had already accepted the gospel. They were in no sense the basis of Christianity: they were written for those already converted. The miracle of the Resurrection, and the theology of that miracle, comes first: the biography comes alter as a comment on it. Nothing could be more unhistorical than to pick out selected sayings of Christ from the gospels and to regard those as the datum and the rest of the NT as a construction upon it. The first fact in the history of Christendom is a number of people who say that they have seen the Resurrection. If they had died without making anyone else believe this ‘gospel’ no gospels would ever have been written. (234-235)

What I like about what Lewis says here is that he equates the gospel with the Resurrection. It is all too common today to buy books on the gospel that speak only of the atonement, i.e., the cross. The cross is foundational to the gospel, however too many overlook the resurrection of Christ. If Jesus had died, we would still be in our sins. But because Jesus died as our substitute and then was raised from the dead, we can be saved. As Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 15, if Christ has not risen, we remain in our sins and to be most pitied.

Note another quote from Lewis:

The NT writers speak as if Christ’s achievement in rising from the dead was the first event of its kind in the whole history of the universe. He is the ‘first fruits’, the ‘pioneer of life’. He has forced open a door that has been locked since the death of the first man. He has met, fought, and beaten the King of Death. Everything is different because He has done so. This is the beginning of the New Creation: a new chapter in cosmic history has opened (237).

I love this quote: He has met, fought, and beaten the King of Death." As Paul wrote, "O Death, where is your sting!"

Weekly Recommendation: "Mere Christianity"

As we continue to walk through the final week of Christ, one of the most influential books in all of Christianity is CS Lewis' "Mere Christianity." This is perhaps Lewis' most famous non-fiction book. In it, Lewis lays out his basic defense for his faith in Christ.

Lewis faith from atheism to Christianity begins with a look at the moral law. Lewis began to wonder why everyone has a moral conscience and where did it come from if there was no God. As Lewis began to think about this issue, and as he lays the argument out in the book, there must be a divine law giver; one that has revealed His moral law to man.

From there, Lewis lays out his defense for God and eventually, for Christianity. One of the best points he makes regards Christ and how we must consider Him. Jesus is either Liar, Lunatic, or Lord. He cannot be just a moral teacher. This is a profound argument. If Christ was a good man and not the Messiah, then His life and ministry was based on a lie. We cannot have both. He is either a liar or Lord. And if Lord, then subject to worship and obedience.

There is one unfortunate argument laid out in the book that must be brought up: inclusivism. Inclusivism is the argument that some outside Christianity will be saved in the end. Lewis embraces this heresy. He embraced it so much that he included it in his Chronicles of Narnia series, namely, in the last book, "The Last Battle." There we see Aslan, representing Christ, allowing those who rejected him but embraced other faiths into heaven.

This is perhaps the most unfortunate part of Lewis' life and theology. "Mere Christianity" is so influential, it is sad to see such an important issue to have to be raised. But nonetheless, I recommend this book based on its philosophical influence and logical conclusions (outside of the inclusivist argument which runs against Biblical revelation). For those wanting a good introduction to Lewis' non-fictional writings, this is a great place to turn.