Mere Christianity

Discussion in 'Religion & Philosophy' started by FutureTrackStar, May 16, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. FutureTrackStar

    FutureTrackStar Registered Member

    Mere Christianity is a book adapted from a series of B.B.C. radio talks by C. S. Lewis during WWII while at Oxford. It is a defense for the Christian faith, and is quite logical, rational and simple... quite more ingenious than something I could have written. I highly recommend any debater of Christianity, or of any religion, for or against, to read this book... or at least the first two sub-books. It's a rather quick and easy read; you can get through the first two books in only a couple hours if you're a slow reader. I read them over the course of two nights, about an hour each night... more or less, I can't remember. Regardless, it is a book that brings Christianity into a logical light, and arguing against his assertions are quite difficult, mainly because he goes ahead and disproves most counter arguments without your asking.

    So... Chaos, Wade, EI, MiT, kcdad, Pretzel, julio2, Constantine, Corona... the whole gang... I recommend you read it... if not for your own benefit then for discussion.

    I'm basically presenting Lewis' work as an argument which I adhere to and am presenting it to you now, here:

    http://usminc.org/FLASHGIFS/MereChristianitybyCSLewis.pdf

    (I only recommended the first two books because that's all I've read so far... the others may be just as good)

    I await the discussion...
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2009

  2. Wade8813

    Wade8813 Registered Member

    I've read it (and most books by Lewis, except the Perelandra series)
     
  3. FutureTrackStar

    FutureTrackStar Registered Member

    - And what do you think of it? Is his argument flawed?
     
  4. Wade8813

    Wade8813 Registered Member

    It's been a little while, but from what I remember, most of what he said made sense.
     
  5. MenInTights

    MenInTights not a plastic bag

    I've read it. Its the best apologetic book that's ever been written. Any true agnostic that doesn't read Mere Christianity (at least the first 2 books as you suggest), is doing themselves a huge disservice.
    ------
    thanks for the link btw, I will reread it as time allows.
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2009
  6. kcdad

    kcdad Registered Member

    Read it... yes? What did you want to discuss?
     
  7. FutureTrackStar

    FutureTrackStar Registered Member

    I would actually argue against Lewis' assertions in the fifth chapter of book two. He basically says that belief, baptism and communion are all necessary for salvation, but this is not Biblical:

    8for by grace have ye been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9not of works, that no man should glory. 10For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God afore prepared that we should walk in them. - American Standard Version. 1995 (Eph 2:8)

    The Bible clearly states that it is by God's grace that somebody is saved through faith. It's not the works or deeds that gets somebody into heaven, just faith.
    ------
    - Where are his flaws? How is his argument incorrect? Where does he go wrong? I apologize, but I can't recall if you are a Christian or not, so these questions may not be directed at you, they are merely directed at any who do not believe in Christ's redemptive work.
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2009
  8. Wade8813

    Wade8813 Registered Member

    Anyone can point out flaws in reasoning, saved or not.

    Also, if a book is about apologetics, the unsaved are a target audience.
     
  9. FutureTrackStar

    FutureTrackStar Registered Member

    Interesting.... nobody seems to want to discuss C. S. Lewis' work. Is this because the reading is too difficult, or there is not enough time in the day to read it, or is it just so logical and rational that you refuse to read it, lest you actually discover an argument you cannot refute?
     
  10. kcdad

    kcdad Registered Member

    "Now this Law or Rule about Right and Wrong used to be called the Law of Nature"

    OK, I'll take a shot at his universal morality argument. All mores or norms are socially constructed. There are many that tend to appear in most cultures... that is certainly arguable, although I hesitate to suggest one that might appears in all cultures. Since even basic things like incest, cannibalism, infanticide and even murder are not consistent throughout all societies how can one argue a universal morality?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page