- RSS FeedSubscribe
- « Previous PostA La Carte (1/29)
- Next Post »A La Carte (1/30)
Reading Classics - Mere Christianity (VII)
- 01/29/09
- 32
Today brings us to our final reading in C.S. Lewis’ Mere Christianity. We’ve gone through it quite quickly but this has worked well, I think, as the book lends itself to a quick reading. This week we come to the final pages—chapters seven through eleven of Book 4. There was not a whole lot of discussion last week, but the consensus seemed to be that this is not the strongest section in the book. Lewis has lost a little bit of steam. Having said that, I think this week’s reading improves upon the last one.
Discussion
Then again, though I think that this week’s reading was better than last week’s, it was not without it’s troubling portions.
In these five chapters, Lewis focuses on sanctification, on putting aside the old man and on becoming sons of God. I found a lot of great quotes that were worthy of some highlighting. Because there were so many, I think I’ll focus on simply sharing a few of them today. Here are some favorites:
“We begin to notice, besides our particular sinful acts, our sinfulness; begin to be alarmed not only about what we do, but about what we are.”
“Surely what a man does when he is taken off his guard is the best evidence for what sort of a man he is? Surely what pops out before the man has time to put on a disguise is the truth? If there are rats in a cellar you are most likely to see them if you go in very suddenly. But the suddenness does not create the rats; it only prevents them from hiding.”
“[Putting on Christ] is not a sort of special exercise for the top class. It is the whole of Christianity. Christianity offers nothing else at all.”
“Christ says ‘Give me all. I don’t want to much of your time and so much of your money and so much of your work: I want You. I have not come to torment your natural self, but to kill it.’”
“As long as Dick does not turn to God, he thinks his niceness is his own, and just as long as he thinks that, it is not his own. It is when Dick realises that his niceness is not his own but a gift from God, and when he offers it back to God—it is just then that it begins to be really his own.”
“If you are a nice person—if virtue comes easily to you—beware!”
“We must not suppose that even if we succeeded in making everyone nice we should have saved their souls. A world of nice people, content in their own niceness, looking no further, turned away from God, would be just as desperately in need of salvation as a miserable world—and might even be more difficult to save.”
But there were some areas of the chapter that were not so good. for example, in the final pages he writes about evolution and seems to have drunk deeply of that explanation to man’s origins. I find it hard to believe that a man of his insight could have believed in evolution without seeing that it is almost a religion unto itself. And yet he seems to have believed in it wholeheartedly. It certainly puts a damper on the book to have all of that in the final chapter.
There is more. I realize that this statement could be taken two ways, but from what I know of Lewis, he may mean exactly what it seems he means here: “There are people in other religions who are being led by God’s secret influence to concentrate on those parts of their religion which are in agreement with Christianity, and who thus belong to Christ without knowing it.” Lewis seems to have believed that other religions could lead people to enough of God’s truth that they could be saved. He does not articulate much further in Mere Christianity but apparently does so elsewhere. Obviously we need to set aside such unbiblical talk, realizing that it simply cannot be supported by Scripture.
So I guess in this last chapter we see again Lewis at his best and his worst. For every five or ten great insights (and many of them truly are great) there is one or two strange and unbiblical beliefs. And it’s too bad, really. I can see why Mere Christianity is regarded as a classic but it seems to me that this must depend largely on Books 2 and 3. It is here that we see Lewis at his finest and it is here that he is at times unparalleled. While there are moments of brilliance in the rest of the book, there are also quite a few moments I think we could do without.
Having said all of that, I am glad that we took the time to read this book and to read it together. It has fed both my mind and my soul.
Your Turn
The purpose of this program is to read these classics together. So if there is something you’d like to share about what you read, please feel free to do so. You can leave a comment or a link to your blog and we’ll make this a collaborative effort.
Next Up…
I guess we will wait just a couple of weeks and then start to think about the next classic we will read together. Feel free to share your suggestions in the comments.
I am a follower of Jesus Christ, a husband to Aileen and a father to three young children. I worship and serve as a pastor at 
Releasing on April 1, The Next
Published in 2008, this book
This is a guide that calls men,
This review of the bestselling
New to the site? You can get
This is a guide written
Comments (32)
You say: “I find it hard to believe that a man of his insight could have believed in evolution without seeing that it is almost a religion unto itself.”
I find this statement a little troubling, as evolution is only one support to a different religion, atheistic naturalism. Your statement seems to imply that if you are wise and rooted in the Bible, you won’t subscribe to the theory of evolution. I think this is a misunderstanding, since evolution only has as much power to assault Biblical Christianity as we give it. If evolution from bacteria to man can only be part of atheistic naturalism, then of course it’s a threat. But many very intelligent and insightful Christians have found a way to incorporate evolution as it is understood by the modern scientific community into an orthodox, Biblical perspective on the Bible, and Lews is prominent among them.
If your feeling up for it I say we read Augustine’s The Confessions
Although I have rarely commented, I would like to express my appreciation. My copy of this book was purchased at a yard sale and has been sitting on my bookshelf for over two years. Having others read along with me gave me the impetus to keep going. It’s good for a stay-at-home mom with “littles” to have a bit of intellectual discussion on occasion; it keeps our brains from going to mush.
I expect the comments for this final section to be quite lively!
As for my thoughts, I read most of the book with an occasional raised eyebrow here and there. However, I could not seem to get those brows to go back down to their proper place for the final two chapters. As a Reformed believer, it is obvious that I take issue with Lewis’ thoughts on free will. But I found scripture taken out of context to be even more disturbing (“blessed are the poor” is not a statement regarding economics).
Also, I do realize that some Christians have wrestled with the whole Evolution/Creation, Young Earth/Old Earth debate, but Lewis does not seem to even acknowledge that there is a debate. He does parenthetically recognize the existence of an opposing view but seems to assume that most of his readers are evolutionists. This is an interesting assumption!
Again, I am grateful for the accountability and dialogue and hope to join you for the next round.
Tim,I have abandoned C.S. Lewis, for the moment, to read through Calvin’s Institutes through out the course of the year.
So far, it is a very lonely journey, as I have not yet found a discussion site that isn’t full of post-moderns.
I am aware that this would be a long, arduous task, but perhaps with all the interest that exists in Calvin, with this being his 500th B-day, you could do a great service to Christendom to lead the way through this text.
Your audience is large enough, that perhaps you alone could pull this off!
Here is my most recent post, from Calvin’s Institutes, where Calvin is arguing that any/all pictorial representation of God are sin: http://tinyurl.com/blqco6
If you decide not to tackle this monumental task, I guess I will have to catch up with you a year from now, or try to tackle many things at once. The later, probably not the best for me.
I miss the dialog!
Lewis was an inclusivist, yes. Perhaps not a flaming inclusivist, but he certainly did believe that salvation occasionally comes out of the blue to those who have never heard or never accepted the Gospel of Christ.
Re: Lewis and evolution.
Many Christians believe in evolution, or an Old Earth. So I don’t think this should be troubling at all.
Remember the time in which Lewis wrote. Don;t ascrobe the current state of evolution vs. creationism to his time. Many of the people, issues and rhetoric had yet to occur in this area at that particular time. There were Hamms or Dawkins ratcheting up the controversy.
To say that Lewis believed in evolution is not the same as as saying he had the attitude of current evolutionists.
oops…ignore my typos…and I meant “no” Hamm or Dawkins.
Just a note on C.S. Lewis and evolution—the idea of a literal interpretation of seven days of creation never actually occurred to him. You have to keep in mind that he was brought up in the European Anglican church which I believe has a evolutionary interpretation of the creation account. Much later in his life he became aware that there was considerable doubt among Christians as to evolution’s validity and he expressed regret that he had not looked more into it before forming his opinions. The following quote is from a letter he wrote in his later years.
“I wish I were younger. What inclines me now to think you may be right in regarding [evolution] as the central and radical lie in the whole web of falsehood that now governs our lives is not so much your arguments against it as the fanatical and twisted attitudes of its defenders.”
Also, his poem “Evolutionary Hymn” is a great insight as to his views towards Naturalists like Dawkins:
Evolutionary Hymnby C.S. Lewis
Lead us, Evolution, lead usUp the future’s endless stair;Chop us, change us, prod us, weed us.For stagnation is despair:Groping, guessing, yet progressing,Lead us nobody knows where.
Wrong or justice in the present,Joy or sorrow, what are theyWhile there’s always jam to-morrow,While we tread the onward way?Never knowing where we’re going,We can never go astray.
To whatever variationOur posterity may turnHairy, squashy, or crustacean,Bulbous-eyed or square of stern,Tusked or toothless, mild or ruthless,Towards that unknown god we yearn.
Ask not if it’s god or devil,Brethren, lest your words implyStatic norms of good and evil(As in Plato) throned on high;Such scholastic, inelastic,Abstract yardsticks we deny.
Far too long have sages vainlyGlossed great Nature’s simple text;He who runs can read it plainly,’Goodness=what comes next.’By evolving, Life is solvingAll the questions we perplexed.
On then! Value means survival-Value. If our progenySpreads and spawns and licks each rival,That will prove its deity(Far from pleasant, by our presentStandards, though it well may be).
Tim: How about reading William Wilberforce’s “A Practical View of Christianity” next? Ever since watching the movie “Amazing Grace,” I’ve been wanting to know more about Wilberforce and what he believed.
Tim,Good collection of quotes and observations. Glad we read this together.
I would second “Confessions of St. Augustine” because I do want to read the same this year.
David, I will stop by your blog and check on your progress in Institutes. I’m also reading this book with a few friends. We are trying to have a discussion over athttp://taste-that-which-is-good.blogspot.com/ Feel free to check it out. You are probably also following the “Blogging the Institutes with Ref21 - I’ve enjoyed their comments.
To ascribe to evolution as a scientific theory in no way requires ascription to evolutionism as a philosophy/pseudo-religion. We really, really need to get over this one, I think. Matthew (comment 1) says it well: “evolution only has as much power to assault Biblical Christianity as we give it.” And we give it entirely too much!
I think Lewis’s comments in the chapter “Let’s Pretend” concerning who we are vs. what we do are extremely biblical and insightful. He says,”if what we are matters even more than what we do—if, indeed, what we do matters chiefly as evidence of what we are—then it follows that the chnage which I most need to undergo is a change that my own direct, voluntary efforts cannot bring about. And this applies to my good actions too. How many of them were done for the right motive? How many for fear of public opinion, or a desire to show off? How many from a sort of obstinancy or sense of superiority which, in different circumstances, might equally have led to some very bad act? But I cannot, by direct moral effort, give myself new moties.” Aye, and there’s the rub. “Blessed are the poor in spirit…” Seems that Christ taught the first attitude of a new convert is one who realizes the bankruptcy or inadequacy of his spiritual condition. When we come to this point, Christ says we are blessed, for then He becomes sweet to us as the only balm for our souls. Lewis was spot on at this point.
re: Lewis/Evolution
I think there is a legitimate reason why Christians have such a resistance against evolution.
1) Genesis never mentions it2) The “young-earth” view of a 6,000 year old earth (or at least of mankind) not only comes from the 7-day creation, but the Biblical geneologies of the Old and New Testament3) Genesis says that man was created in its full form out of the dust (not by way of common ancestors with other primates)4) Genesis 2 says animals were created after humans in contrast to evolutionary theory (although Genesis 1 does say that animals were created before humans)5) Evolution explains the phenomenon of animals being isolated on certain land-locked areas such as kangaroos in Australia or Llamas in South America. This contradicts the story of Noah’s flood, otherwise it would have to be believed that the kangaroos and Llamas and many of animals had to swim to get to the ark all the way in the middle east6) Evolution explains why the human body has certain parts that are not useful, such as appendices or wisdom teeth or nipples on men. This would imply God designed the human body imperfectly.7) Just in general, evolution would imply that God took a very hands-off (almost like deistic) approach to natural human, animal, and plant design. This is not consistent with the impression one gets from reading Genesis.
At the very least, Christians who accept evolution must in some sense not take the Bible literally. I am guessing that this is what Lewis realized and is probably why later in life he rejected it.
My suggestion for the next classic to read together: The Atonement: It’s Meaning and Significance by Leon Morris.
It is, by and large, a forgotten classic, but it’s a very, very good book on the atonement that is very accessible for the lay person, and recently I’ve been seeing it recommended frequently by other people whose judgment I trust. What it is, basically, is Morris’s The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross summed up for the non-scholar.
I think that you should take 5 or 6 options and make it into an online poll and whichever gets the most votes will be the winner!
I think everyone here who has been following this thread knows my views on Lewis up until this point, and they remain the same. I’m more confused now than anything, not about what Lewis wrote, I know there is much error mingled with the good, but that so many people who would have picked this work apart had it been written by any other person. I mean, if this was written by a more liberal current author, of which many have and would write simular statements, it seems people would have dissected it until every theological point was placed next to scripture. But with Lewis, not so much. Sad really, I though more of the biblical discernment I have seen in the past on this blog.
RE, Evolution…You realize that to believe in theisticevolution you must say the bible is wrong, right?If the world has been evolving then there must have been death prior to the first man , Adam, if that is so then God lied in the scriptures when He said that death came by the first man Adam. Also it undermines all that is taught about the atonement and the fact that Christ referes to creation and Adam, is He wrong too? Theisticevolution is a lie from Satan himself and is yet another compromise within the church body, if they are saved at all.
Is there something by Spurgeon we could go through? Is Packer’s “Knowing God” not old enough to be a classic?
I also like the idea of doing a poll for the next classic.
Curtis-
I think you make a good point, Evolution and the Bible are mutually exclusive.
But since there is a tremendous amount of evidence for evolution in all sorts of independent ways: Genetics (we are 1/2 chromosome different from chimpamzees), Archeology (we find fossils all the time showing a gradual change in animals/humans - e.g. “Lucy” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucy_(Australopithecus) , Geology (the earth is very very old- you can see that Africa and South America fit together at one time long ago!), kangaroos on an island, men with nipples and appendix, etc., etc.
And since there is no independent evidence for the divinity of the Bible and plenty of evidences that it is not divine: (e.g.: why would God say he created animals before humans in Genesis Chapter 1 and after humans in Genesis Chapter 2)…..
Wouldn’t we be “loving God with all our minds” if we accept evolution and reject the Bible as the Word of God?
@NiftyDrewFifty
When you post comments like yours on a site like this, I know that you’re baiting an argument. Apologies to everyone for taking the bait.
I humbly submit that if you accept evolution as fact (especially based on the erroneous evidence you’ve listed), you are not “loving God with all your mind”. I encourage you to look beyond the cloud of rhetoric present in today’s science community and do some research that goes beyond Wikipedia. Maybe you know more on the subject then your comment would lead me to believe but the sophomoric arguments you’ve presented are hardly more than hot air. If you reject the Bible as the word of God, I hope you do not do so on such poorly reasoned (and researched) grounds.
Levi-Well how else am I supposed to undertand that discrepancy in Genesis 1 & 2? It’s a simple contradiction.
PS My daughter and I are LOVING memorizing together! Highly recommended.
Now, how about “The Holy War” by Bunyan? Or maybe even “Pilgrim’s Progress”?
Thank you so much for your ministry. Just finished your book; excellent! Thank you! I Corinthians 15:58.
Nifty Drew-“No it’s not!”:-)
Here’s a vote for William Gurnall’s The Christian in Complete Armour! Old, tough, long but awesome.
I’ll be an also-ran by the time I get my thoughts posted on my blog. I’ll just say, I’ve not finished this last part yet, but have absolutely loved what I’ve gone through so far. I’ve highlighted all the same portions you’ve quoted above.
This has been a challenging and fruitful endeavor for me. I’ve been blessed to have gotten a bit better acquainted with our brother C.S. Lewis, warts and all. His freedom, joy and honesty have left an impression on me. Certainly now, as he behold’s the Savior’s face, his doctrine is a lot purer than mine.
I’m so glad I joined in on rereading this book. Yes, I put a lot of question marks out in the margin in this last section, but there was so many great word pictures that touched my heart. One in particular really convicted me. You can read my post here:
http://tinyurl.com/bnovdu
I’m looking forward to our next book. B.
I’d love to do: Celebration of Discipline by Foster
Sorry I’m late to the party.
I second the Richard Foster nomination for the next study (any of his books)…
My favorite section was about “nice” not cutting it. It’s too natural to fall on “good people go to Heaven; bad people don’t.” But as Lewis points out, niceness isn’t enough. Nice people need saving just as much as anybody else.
But we must not suppose that even if we succeeded in making everyone nice we should have saved their souls. A world of nice people, content in their own niceness, looking no further, turned away from God, would be just as desperately in need of salvation as a miserable world—and might even be more difficult to save.
More thoughts here…http://lisanotes.blogspot.com/2009/01/ending-of-mere-christianity.html
I really enjoyed reading this and am glad that this week I caught up so I am able to comment in time! I shared a lot of the objections that many of the rest of you did but as someone else said it was worth trawling through to get at some of the nuggets.
EVOLUTION: Curtis I totally agree with you regarding theistic evolution. I was recently at an Anglican seminar about creation and the vicar said that he was starting to realise that evolution was on dodgy grounds from a scientific perspective but that there was no reason to doubt it from a theological point of view. In the questions and answers bit I raised the theological problem with theistic evolution that you gave in your comment 16 and the vicar then backtracked and said that there were some valid theological objections.
NEXT BOOK: For the next book I would second the requests to do either St Augustine’s Confessions or Bunyan’s Pilgrims progress.
I’ll second the vote for William Wilberforce’s “A Practical View of Christianity” next! I read J. Piper’s short bio on WW over Christmas which seemed to quote WW’s book profusely and make me hungry for more — it would give me a good excuse to pick it up. :)
I was thankful for the opportunity to reread “Mere Christianity”. Even without the comments and discussion each week, it’s nice having the deadline and accountability to read through a book.
Unashamedly, I am a fan of Lewis. Like all of us, he has his faults and his errors, but the richness that can be found in his writing is at times literally breathtaking. I will weed through the rubble to find the gems.
With regards to the evolution discussion, I feel if Lewis were to peer into this blog, he would be disappointed that that has been the focus of the end of his book and not the deep truth that God does not want to renovate our “cottages”, but rather transform us into “palaces” for His glory. Let’s remember: the book of Genesis takes 3 chapters to talk about the entire creation of the heavens and earth, and 47 chapters to talk about 4 generations of one family - what do you think God cares more about?
Thanks, Tim, for facilitating this reading of the classics. May I make a suggestion for our next book - what about a biography? Perhaps Aitken’s biography on John Newton, or Chesteron’s take on Augustine or St. Francis? I, too, favor the idea of having a poll (unless this blog is more of a dictatorship as opposed to a democracy!).
/j
Hi Tim, I don’t think a poll is a good idea. May I suggest you pray it over and then let us have whatever The Lord shows you.
My belated last thoughts on this reading are here: http://lauriemo.blogspot.com/2009/02/final-discussion-of-mere-christianity.html