PHILOSOPHICAL WRITINGS
MERE CHRISTIANITY
INTRODUCTION TO C. S. LEWIS
Before looking at Mere Christianity, we would do well to look for a few moments first at Lewis' qualifications for writing the book.
First, C. S. Lewis was a first-rate scholar. By the age of 7 he was already learning Greek and Latin. By the time he was 17 his tutor (Kirkpatrick) claimed that Lewis was the finest translator and interpreter of the Greek plays he had ever met. This is important because the NT is written in Greek. In fact after Lewis became a Christian he took his daily devotions from the Greek NT. Moreover, he went on not only to graduate from Oxford University but also to teach at Oxford and later Cambridge where he became a full professor. Even though he never formally studied the NT at a seminary, he claimed that this did him more good than harm since the theological institutions of his day had for illogical reasons destroyed confidence in the Bible itself.
Second, his academic achievements though at Oxford prepared him for the impact he was going to have on Christianity. Lewis "received a First in Honour Moderations (Greek and Latin Literature) in 1920, a First in Greats (Philosophy and Ancient History) in 1922, and a First in English in 1923" from Oxford. Three major degrees in the areas he is addressing--all within a short period of 5 years, when it would normally take almost that amount of time to get ONE degree. Moreover, getting a "first" is no small achievement. It's the highest grade Oxford University, one of the world's five great universities, can bestow upon a person.
Even more impressive is that fact that he not only taught at Oxford but that Cambridge University (another one of the 5 greats) actually created a chair of full professorship specifically for him in order to lure him away from Oxford. These 2 great universities don't fight over anybody unless that person is an intellectual giant.
What does all the above matter? First, the fact that Lewis was as smart as he was means that we should probably give him a fair hearing and not just dismiss him because he is Christian in his thinking. Second, the fact that the person this smart believed that Christianity was both philosophically and logically true means that we should not dismiss Christianity so lightly. You might reject Christianity; however, you dismiss it when one of the great minds of the 20th century firmly believed it to be true, logically and philosophically. It's OK to be a thinker and a Christian. At least Lewis proved that much to be true.
INTRODUCTION TO Mere Christianity
Lewis prepared a series of speeches which the BBC broadcasted during the middle of WW2. By the time he wrote Mere Christianity, the Germans had leveled London. Things were so bad in London that parents had sent their children out of London to live in the country with strangers willing to care for them. Lewis actually housed children from the city in his home at the Kilns. The BBC wanted some kind of word from God to the British people during these troubled times when faith in God would naturally wane. What it got was a masterpiece in Christian apologetics, the defense of the Christian faith.
Now Lewis is not interested in defending one Christian denomination over another Christian denomination in Mere Christianity. In fact he really preferred no denomination over another. The only reason he attended the Church of England at Headington Quarry was that it was nearer to his home than any other church. Rather he was interested in basic Christianity, the major Christian beliefs which run through each and every orthodox Christian denomination. In this book he will first defend the existence of God, then defend the Christian claim that Jesus Himself is God, and finally declare how this should affect our lives.
BOOK ONE: THERE IS A GOD
Is there such a thing as right and wrong? Not just what you think is right and wrong but is there an absolute standard of right and wrong which is appropriate for all people at all times? If there is, then Lewis says this has tremendous implications for our understanding about the nature of life and reality itself. He will seek to demonstrate that if there is an absolute standard of right and wrong, then God Himself must exist.
CHAPTER ONE: THE LAW OF HUMAN NATURE
Theme of this chapter:
First read the entire chapter before answering any questions. Then before answering any question, please number each paragraph in the chapter. Since there are 11 paragraphs in this chapter, please number the paragraphs, 1-11.
Paragraphs 1 and 2: Whenever people argue, what happens which shows that they believe in right and wrong?
Paragraph 3: What did the older writers use to call The Law of Human Nature?
What is the difference between the Law of Human Nature and the Law of Nature?
Paragraph 4: Why did the older writers use to call this awareness of right and wrong "the Law of Nature"?
In Paragraph 6 Lewis says that some people claim that the Law of Human Nature is NOT true. What evidence does he present in Paragraph 7 which argues that the Law of Human Nature in fact IS true?
Paragraph 8: Some people will persist in claiming that there is no such thing as right or wrong. What happens though which shows they in fact do believe in right and wrong?
Two classic examples of this kind of person are Albert Camus, famous French existentialist, and H. G. Wells, noted British author of such books as "The Time Machine," "War of the Worlds," and "The Invisible Man." Camus was inconsistent when in 1953 he criticized Soviet methods to crush a workers' strike in East Berlin. Moreover, in 1956 he protested against similar methods in Poland (protests in Poznań) and the Soviet repression of the Hungarian revolution in October (from BookJive). H. G. Wells, on the other hand, decried Nazism as evil. These men were unable to live consistently with their claims that there is no such thing as right or wrong. (Another famous atheist and existentialist, Jean Paul Sartre, again proved inconsistent when he criticized Camus for accepting the Nobel Prize for Literature. If there is no right and wrong, then why would Satre even care?)
Paragraph 9: Now that Lewis has established the fact of the Law of Human Nature, a universal awareness of right and wrong, what other claim does he make here? "I go on to my next point, which is this. _______________ of us are really keeping the Law of Nature."
Paragraph 10: Whenever we fail to keep the Law of Nature, what do we do? "There may be all sorts of _______________ for us." What are some examples he lists? What are some of the examples YOU would list?
Why do we make these excuses according to Lewis?
Paragraph 11: What 2 points has Lewis been trying to establish in this chapter?
Introduction to C. S. Lewis
Introduction to Mere Christianity
Book One
Chapter 1
C. S. Lewis is making 2 points in this chapter. First, he is presenting evidence that the Law of Human Nature in fact DOES exist, and second, he is presenting evidence that we all break that Law of Human Nature. These 2 "facts" will end up being compelling evidence that God does exist.