Integrative Essay

“Calvin understood that God created human beings to hunt and gather truth, and that, as a matter of fact the capacity for doing so amounts to one feature of the image of God in them.” (Plantinga preface x). What Plantinga is speaking of here is learning—about getting an education as citizens of God’s kingdom. Through our Developing the Christian Mind class this interim, I really learned a lot about learning. In class, we considered the works of both C.S. Lewis and Cornelius Plantinga, but I also found myself blessed to be taught by the examples of both Professors Paulo and Adrianna Ribiero, who showed me why it is important that I learn.
To truly understand how and why we learn, it is first important to realize the change that has overcome learning since we were created. Plantinga begins his book, and rightly so, with the creation of all things in the beginning. We are creatures made to learn, and we seek after knowledge. Lewis stated in Our English Syllabus that “knowledge is the natural food of the mind” and that we humans “thirst for knowledge” (84). It was created in us to crave knowledge and understanding. Prof Adrianna stated that we must learn so that we can better “love God with all our mind and strength” (in reference to Matthew 22:37). This means learning in such a way that glorifies God and shows my love for Him through how I learn.
Plantinga also points out that man was given “dominion, not in the sense of conquest” (Plantinga 31) over creation. Rather, our dominion is one of stewardship, in which we take care of the creation around us. This also involves the development of creation, expanding it to its fullest capacities. To do this, it is important to really understand all aspects of creation and really explore the inner workings of creation. Lewis himself stated in his work Our English Syllabus that “a perfect study of anything requires a knowledge of everything” (Lewis 90). Lewis taught me that everything in creation is infinitely connected, and that we cannot perfectly understand one part of creation without understanding everything else as well. It is vital, therefore, to learn as much as we can about the world around us so that we can serve as better stewards in our time here.
Something happened to this creation that we are striving to learn about, however. More specifically, the fall happened. That which was “very good” in the beginning is now distorted and fallen, including our own minds. We are no longer able to learn to the same capacity as we once did. Our “thirst for knowledge” is not so that we can learn more about God and glorify Him through creation, but rather one of personal gain. Our learning is affected by the fall in ways that we cannot ignore or dismiss.
The story, however, does not end there. The fall is not the end. Rather, we can find our hope in the redemption found through Jesus Christ. This redemption must be applied even to the fallen act of learning and gaining knowledge. To be fully one with Christ in this redemption, we have to “die to ourselves” in every aspect of our lives. This means denying the “thirst for knowledge” that exists for only personal gain. We have to strive instead to die to our “old man of sin” and through the grace of God, learn for the glory of God. Lewis states that “admitting that we cannot study it whole, but determined to neglect outlying provinces and remote connections rather than to break up the central unity” (Our English Syllabus 90). Here, Lewis taught me to realize that although I have no hope of ever fully understanding any one subject or aspect in creation because of my fallen mind, I should not just give up. I have instead learn as much as I can about how everything and see the connections between them, even when that means only learning small parts of each.
After reading the Our English Syllabus in class, I realized how much I have to value my liberal arts education. When I came to Calvin, I did not put very much emphasis on my liberal arts courses, but instead, I focused on only those required for my major. I was not too keen on English 101, because I decided it was not necessary for me. I thought, “I am a pre-nursing student, why do I care about English? I’ll never use it.” It was with this fallen mindset that I went to English class every day last semester. After reading Lewis’s work, I look back on this attitude and I am ashamed. I realize I was not redeeming my learning, as Plantinga said we should. I had succumbed to the depraved mindset that core classes were not important for my learning any more, and so I put little effort into the class and got little learning out of it. Lewis and the discussions in my DCM class enlightened me to the fact that all subjects are important, because they are all connected in such a way that they teach us about each other. I realize in hindsight how wrong this really was. If I could only go back and change the way I approached English, I know that I could have gotten so much more benefit out of it. I cannot change the past, but now I can go forward into the future with this new knowledge and change my attitude on all other core classes.
But what is my end in all of this? I know that I will never come close to knowing all there is too know, so why bother? Is it not more important to focus on the spiritual battle we are facing, and deal with our eternal state? After all, this life seemingly lasts but a moment. The answer that I have found lies in the importance of my vocation here on earth. God has brought me to this moment and has called me to learn within it. Lewis brings out our need for learning in his essay Learning in Wartime. I blogged the following in response to what Lewis wrote:
“When I read this sermon, I immediately thought about the Thessalonians. Paul admonishes them in the second letter because they are in a sense forsaking their life on earth. Some of them had quit their jobs because they were convinced the Lord’s return was imminent. With the prospect of something that was higher in importance, they had forgotten that they lived in the here and now. Those Thessalonians had forgotten about the calling and life that God had seen fit to give them here on earth, and had wasted that time in the name of religion. We must be careful that we do not follow in their footsteps, and ignoring the time and life we have been given here.”
I struggle with finding a balance between remembering that this is not my eternal home and remembering that I do live in the here and now. Learning is a good thing. It is a God glorifying thing, when used in the right way. Although this life is ultimately not as important as my eternal state, this does not mean what I do here and now does not matter. I cannot be as the Thessalonians, dismissing the time I have been given here on earth while I wait for heavenly glory. Instead, I have use the time I have been given to carry out the vocation God willed for me. At this point in my life, I believe that this calling is dominated by the need to continue my education here at Calvin College.
I was very blessed this past interim when I took the DCM C.S. Lewis class. I was blessed both by the material that was used and by the strong faith that both of my Professors exuded. Paulo and Adrianna are two really beautiful people who really embodied the fact that we must “love the Lord with all our heart, mind, soul, and strength.” They really showed how much I can learn from others, whether that was through the reading selections or the class discussions they started. More importantly, however, was that fact that they taught me how to learn humbly and how to better learn to the glory of God. Their love for Christ first and foremost, but also for each other and for learning really spoke to me more than anything that we read or discussed. It showed me that there is never a point when we can fall too deeply in love with Christ, and therefore, there is never a point where we have learned too much about Him. It was very obvious that they both had a hunger for knowledge, one which was infectious. Lewis states that “an appetite for these things exists in the human mind, and God makes not appetite in vain.” I have an appetite for knowledge, one that after my DMC class, I am able better able to sate to the glory of God.


Works Cited:
Lewis, C.S. Learning in Wartime. January 2010.
Lewis, C. S. Our English Syllabus. January 2010.
Plantinga, Cornelius Jr. Engaging God’s World: A Reformed Vision of Faith, Learning,
and Living. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002.

Pain

Not surprisingly, Lewis speaks in this book The Problem of Pain about pain. He begins by describing that there are two types of pain, the first “A particular kind of sensation, probably conveyed by specialized nerve fibers, and recognizable by the patient as that kind of sensation whether he dislikes it or not” the other is “Any experience, whether physical or mental, which the patient dislikes.” Lewis states that for the purposes of his work, he will be using pain in the sense of the second definition.
Lewis says that when everything is going well for us, we think we have “all we need” and yet there are so many times we are far from God, meaning that we do not have “all we need” because we do not have God. I really identified with this because I can see this pattern in my own life. When life seems good, I often forget to thank God for the gifts He has given me. In fact, I forget God all together until this “good” time in my life changes into a “valley” or low time in my life. It is only then that I seem to remember God, and I seem only to remember Him because I need something from Him. I am ashamed to admit how often this happens to me. I think the quote Lewis mentions from his friend sums it up the best. He states "We regard God as an airman regards his parachute; it's there for emergencies but he hopes he'll never have to use it."
I also have realized that I need to thank God for even these low times. It is these times of pain—the spiritual deserts that I go through that really bring me closer to Him in the end. Although I do not realize or understand why God has sent me a pain or a “thorn in the flesh” as Paul dubs it, I have learned to find comfort in that fact. Having this comfort does not, however, take the pain away. The pain is still very much present in my life.

Man or Rabbit

In this section of Lewis’s Man or Rabbit? Lewis tackles the question ‘Can’t you lead a good life without Christianity?’. First off, he makes a distinction between those who know about Christianity and those who do not know. Obviously, Lewis says, one who is posing such a question knows about Christianity because they are asking about it. One who does this is looking for a religion of convenience. They want to find out whether Christianity will bring them happiness in the end and if it is worth the effort needed to be put into it. He ends by saying that ultimately, those who know about Christianity and reject it cannot live a good life. The last sentences really sum up his idea on the matter. “Morality is a mountain which we cannot climb by our own efforts; and if we could we should only perish in the ice and unbreathable air of the summit, lacking those wings with which the rest of the journey has to be accomplished. For it is from there that the real ascent begins. The ropes and axes are ‘done away’ and the rest is a matter of flying.” Without Christianity, we cannot climb to the top of the mountain of morality, and even if it were possible, we would not have the wings to fly up and ascend from it.
I did have a question about this, however. Lewis makes a distinction from those that know about Christianity and those that don’t. What exactly is his opinion of those that do not “know”? This idea made me think of Romans 1: 18-21 “For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened.” If my interpretation of this verse is correct, there are not any that simply “don’t know.”

January Series

I attended Richard Devos’s January Series on his new book Ten Powerful Phrases for Positive People. I thought that Mr. Devos did a very good job presenting himself and giving an overview of his book. I can distinctly remember Mr. Devos’s opening statement, that he was in fact, “only a sinner saved by grace.” I thought that a statement like that really conveyed his humble spirit, especially in light of what God has done through him. Most entrepreneurs in his position look at all they have and give only themselves the credit. It makes me glorify God when I hear someone such as him giving God the glory.
I want to highlight here my personal favorite phrases of the ten. The first is “I’m wrong, and I’m sorry.” I really appreciated this quote on a personal level because it is one of the hardest quotes for me to come to terms with and admit. I hate being wrong, and when I am, instead of admitting it, my pride kicks in. Sometimes even when I know that I am wrong, my pride still will not let me admit it. It is a daily struggle.
The next phrase that I really thought was important was “I love you.” Mr. Devos said that “to say ‘I love you’ with all of your heart and mean it has remarkable power.” I really believe that this is true. Consider the love of God. Because of the great love that he has for us, he chose to save us wretched sinners. Love is a powerful emotion, one that should not be taken lightly. Mr. Devos discussed the love that he and his wife share and the wonderful, faith-centered marriage that they share. He told us that he and his wife make sure to say “I love you” every day, and that it has made a big difference.
I really appreciated Mr. Devos’s speech and his application to his own life. It really showed me a side of him that I was not aware of.

Plantinga Chapter 5

Plantinga talks in this chapter about our vocation and how it applies to a creation that is fallen needs regeneration. We are citizens of the kingdom of God. There are two types of citizens—those who were prime citizens and those who are just good citizens. The prime citizens are those who are active in the kingdom, who are yeaning after the restoration of the kingdom. The good citizen on the other hand is one who is part of the kingdom, but is apathetic in its restoration. Plantinga brings up that God uses people to bring about the kingdom. But God does not just use one set group of people, but rather all different kinds of people.
Plantinga tells us that we need to act in our vocation as a prime citizen for the kingdom—always yearning. How does this apply to us as students? The Bible tells us that we must “love the Lord our God with all our minds,” which also means developing our minds to their full extent. We need to learn more about the kingdom in order to yearn for it at a greater capacity. Education is also important because we need to be prepared. We need to be ready to answer the questions of non-believers. The world does not stop learning, and we must be intellectually at the same level as them. What also is more important than what we do is how we do it.
Some problems can arise with trying work within our vocation if we try to do it on our own strength. The two problems that are most prominent are pride and desperation. When relying on our own strength, we find pride in ourselves, sinfully not giving the glory to God. When our strength fails, and we are not able to accomplish our goals, we despair in our vocation and in ourselves. We cannot truly do anything in our own strength, but rather must rely in the power of God.

The Inner Ring

Everyone has experienced the “inner ring” that Lewis describes in this oration. Many today call them “cliques” those social circles of people who are exclusive. We have all been a part of one or have been on the outside wanting in. Lewis tells us about the danger of these inner rings, and how “of all the passions, the passion for the Inner Ring is most skillful in making a man who is not yet a very bad man do very bad things.” Who has not experienced this? The peer pressure, the desire to be on the inside, to be accepted, is almost overwhelming, making one act in ways that he/she would never have before. The disappointment is, however, once we do make it into the inside of the ring, the inner ring totally loses its appeal, and we spend our time trying instead to exclude others from making it in.
One thing that I thought was an important point made in class was the fact that not all Inner Rings are bad. What can be bad, however, is our motivation for wanting in and the reasons that we exclude others from it. Do we exclude others simply because we ourselves were excluded and now since we are on the inside we feel we have an entitlement to be exclusive?
I also wanted to consider the idea that the church should be an exclusive Inner Ring. I think that when it comes to welcoming people to church, we should not exclude or discriminate. However, the same is NOT true about allowing all to become members. The church has to guard against the “wolves in sheep’s clothing” and protect the members inside. So many people can seem genuine in their commitment, but will be tools of the devil to tear apart the church from the inside out. We need to be welcoming to those on the outside, but exclusive when it comes to who we allow as members.

Eros

I was very intrigued Lewis’s Four Love’s work. We listened in class to the description of “eros” which is sometimes described as “being in love.” Lewis described eros as the most mortal and fallen type of love, but as we also say in class, although it is the most fallen, it is also the closest picture of agope love (the eternal love that God has for us). I really liked that point, because it shows me that God can use the most depraved, fallen type of love to be a picture for us of His greatest love. Continuing on in his description of love, Lewis said that eros does not act in happiness. We sometimes think that if we are in love, if we find someone to share this eros with, we will be happy. Rather, the opposite is true. “We would rather share unhappiness with our lover than happiness without them” states Lewis. Many times, the voice of eros works in a way of unhappiness. This voice, however, many people mistake for the voice of God, which is not the case. Sometimes, however, we worship eros itself as if it is a god. Eros promises us that our feelings will last through eternity, but as we can see from society today, this is not the case. Too many people listen to the voice of eros and treat it as a god, allowing its lies to persuade them that their feelings will last forever—thinking that they will be on their “eternal honeymoon.” Do not be fooled by the voice of eros!
I also really appreciate Lewis’s analogy about “falling in love” and “being in love,” and the distinction between them. He said that falling in love is like diving and being in love is like swimming. Falling in love is like diving into the water—it hardly takes any work, you only have to jump, and then gravity does the rest. Once you are in the water, or in love, however, you need to put work in—you need to swim. Without swimming, if you don’t put work into your relationship, you will drown and your relationship will die.

Plantinga Chapter 4

Plantinga speaks in this chapter of the redemption. From what do we need to be redeemed? Plantinga brings again the two ideas of corruption and guilt, which have taken us over and separate us from the love of God. However, the story does not just end with this separation; rather, hope is found through regeneration. This regeneration, Plantinga points out is found only through Christ. There is a “double grace” factor found through this regeneration, consisting of justification and sanctification, both countering the problems of corruption and guilt. These things, Plantinga states, “platform” on the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Christ. Justification was once explained to me in this way—just as if I’d never sinned. This atoning for our sins is part of the regeneration. To be fully regenerated, Plantinga says that we must also become “one with Christ” in a perfect union. But how can such a union be possible? Christ rose as our head—but we also have to rise with Him. The only way to rise from the dead with Christ is to become dead. It is true that we are dead in trespasses and sins, but we must also become dead in another sense. We must become dead to ourselves before we can truly become one with Christ in a perfect union. After this regeneration of ourselves, we are called to live lives of thankfulness to God for our regeneration. To do this, we must do everything to God’s glory, and model our lives after Christ. Plantinga paraphrases C. S. Lewis here, telling the story of a child who dresses up in her parents clothes, tramping around through the house in shoes that she could not fill. Lewis says that the purpose of this is that children are trying to walk in the ways of their parents, even though they are not yet ready. The important part is that they are trying. Likewise, we cannot ever hope to fill the “shoes” of Christ and live a life perfectly like His. We can only be like the child dressing up in clothes that don’t fit us.

Learning in Wartime

Lewis speaks here on the importance of learning, even when in the midst of something as great as a war. I wish to point out in this blog a couple of quotes/parts that I really liked of this sermon. The first was “the nearer you got to the front line, the less everyone spoke and thought of the allied cause and the progress of the campaign.” I was intrigued by this idea, because I personally would have thought it would be the other way around. Rather than thinking of the cause less, I would have assumed that those at the form really kept the progress or the campaign at a greater capacity. Lewis corrects my thinking here, and shows that even those who are the closest and the most affected by the war still are not living only and solely for it. They go about normal, daily activities as well. I also appreciated the picture Lewis presents when he mentions the parallel between the omnipresence of God and of religion in our lives. I think this is a genius way to present what our relationship with our beliefs should be.
When I read this sermon, I immediately thought about the Thessalonians. Paul admonishes them in the second letter because they are in a sense forsaking their life on earth. Some of them had quit their jobs because they were convinced the Lord’s return was imminent. With the prospect of something that was higher in importance, they had forgotten that they lived in the here and now. Those Thessalonians had forgotten about the calling and life that God had seen fit to give them here on earth, and had wasted that time in the name of religion. We must be careful that we do not follow in their footsteps, and ignoring the time and life we have been given here.

Plantinga Chapter 3

Plantinga addresses topics like total depravity and common grace in his third chapter--topics which I want to address here. I want to start by saying I am not trying to be confrontational, however, I do want to get my thoughts and reasoning out for total depravity and common grace.
On the matter of total depravity: I believe that all of mankind is totally depraved, meaning they are incapable of doing ANY good work in the sight of God apart from the grace of Christ. In saying this, I know many will have an issue with this because it means that the unbeliever cannot do any good work. What about those unbelievers that give their lives for another or all of the really “good” people that are unbelievers? Am I saying that there works are not good? From my human perspective I would be inclined to say that their actions are good, because from my point of view, they are good things. However, I believe that we have to consult scripture in this matter, not just trust how I feel their actions should be viewed. Romans 3:12 states “All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one." Also, Isaiah 64:6 says, “All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags; we all shrivel up like a leaf, and like the wind our sins sweep us away.” I cannot see any other way to interpret these verses except literally. This means that every human, even the greatest person ever to walk the earth, no matter how good they may seem, is incapable of doing any righteous, good thing in God’s sight apart from Christ.
Is this fair? No, it does not seem fair to say this at all, because I know some really good, unbelieving people—people who are better than I myself am. But it is not up to me to determine what is fair. Although I do not like this concept, I have studied it and cannot come to any other conclusion.
The subject of common grace I will only lightly touch on. I think that Psalm 73 really touches on this issue of “the blessings” God gives the wicked. In Psalm 73:1-16, Asaph is crying out to God in confusion, wondering why the wicked always seem to be so prosperous, and why God would give them so much. In verse 17, he says he finally understood when he entered the sanctuary of God, and realized the final destiny of the wicked. In the end, they will be judged. The problem I have with saying that grace is given universally is this—if a gift is given, and it is not used properly or the unbeliever does not thank God for it, they have sinned. God, who is all knowing, knows that when He gives the unrighteous this gift, they will sin because they do not glorify Him for it. Perhaps from my perspective, just as with Asaph, I can say it appears as though the wicked are blessed. However, is a gift that ultimately will be counted against the wicked really a gift then? I can’t believe that it is.

BBC on CS Lewis

The BBC production on C. S. Lewis was very interesting. I really appreciate the insight they were able to give me on Lewis as a person. Bringing out Lewis personality and character are really helpful for me in understanding where Lewis is coming from when writing. I am not saying that I totally understand where Lewis came up with his ideas, but rather that knowing a little more about him as a person helps me to see more of him portrayed in his work. Knowing his life-story helps me to see behind the works that he created and determine why he created them. He was not just a philosophical genius. He was also a person—one who struggled with Christian ideas. He lived through many trials in his life, trials which many times were the inspiration for his writings.
What probably struck me the most as we were listening to the production, however, has to do with Lewis’s age. Lewis was not a Christian all of his life; in fact, he was a hardened atheist until the age of 31. Even after being surrounded with Christian doctrine and ideals all of my life, I can never hope to have the ability to defend the faith as he does even when he is a “newer” Christian. To see that God gave someone such brilliance is staggering and yet makes me want to glorify God all the more.

Poison of Subjectivism

The Poison of Subjectivism is a difficult and highly intellectual piece by Lewis. I really appreciate how Lewis defends his positions carefully and thoughtfully, leaving little room for the position he is opposing to defend themselves. I appreciate how he points out that morality is not, and cannot be something subject to our will. To prove this point, Lewis uses the example of Nazi Germany; if morality is subject to man’s will, then what the Nazi’s did was not wrong. In the same way, if morality was subject change based on the will of individuals, our justice system would have no basis, because what is considered “wrong” for one man could be interpreted as morally correct by the offending man. To sum this up Lewis states, “Unless the measuring rod is independent of the things measured, we can do no measuring.”
Another quote I liked was “Except on the supposition of a changeless standard, progress is impossible.” Lewis uses the illustration of a train moving towards a terminus. If the terminus is immobile, the train is able to make progress toward it; however, if the terminus moves at the same speed as the train, the train cannot get any closer and no progress is made. In the same way, if there is not a permanent moral standard present in our world, but instead one that keeps changing, we can never come any closer to it, meaning our moral ideas will never make any progress. To have progress, you need to have an end, something to be striving to get closer to. It would be as if you were running a race with no end. No matter how long you ran for, even if you reached exhaustion, you would be no closer to the end of your run, and so it is as if you did not even run at all.
The final quote that spoke to me was “unless we return to the crude and nursery-like belief in objective values, we perish. I like this sentence because it brings me back to the biblical idea of being like a child. Matthew 18:3-4 tell us “And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven.” Sometimes we dismiss our years as children as simply our “learning phase,” whereas we should instead be trying to learn how to go back a be as a child.

Mere Christianity

Lewis’s book Mere Christianity is a work of apologetics. In it he defends Christianity, not on a denominational level, but just the basics of Christianity itself. He states in his preface “The reader should be warned that I offer no help to anyone who is hesitating between two Christian ‘denominations’.” He does not deal with matters of “high theology,” which should only be discussed by “real experts.” After we discussed this in class, I thought that Yemi had a very good point about denominations. He said that denominations indicate the fact that we cannot truly understand God completely. No one will ever perfectly understand God, and therefore on this earth there will never be a total agreement between denominations. However, we present a much more united front to the world when we can overcome our denominational differences and love each other still. I thought that was a very interesting and valid argument.
I also wanted to comment on the third chapter, which my group discussed in class. There is a quote in the middle of the chapter that made me think of a verse in the Bible. The quote was, “…the Law of Human Nature tells you what human beings ought to do and do not.” This portion made me think of Romans 7:19, in which the apostle Paul says, “For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.” Also, in this chapter, Lewis shows the separation of the Natural Law and the Laws of Science. The Laws of Science deal with fact only; the laws are observed and only that which is observable is real. The Law of Morals however has two components. One is fact—what men actually do on this earth, and the other is something else—how we know men ought to behave. This is something that I never really thought about, and I really appreciate the distinction that Lewis makes here between the two.

Letter to Wormwood

Lewis’s book The Screwtape Letters is such an original and thought provoking piece of writing. I was amazed the first time I read it because although I was aware of the spiritual battles we all face, I had never really considered the methodology that is possible behind the Devils attacks. To have created such a powerful piece of fiction on a subject that most would dare not cover in such a manner was bold and in my mind, also brilliant of Lewis. Lewis’s personification of the forces of darkness brings out in my mind a real taste of how dangerous the Devil and his demons truly are. While this whole book is fiction and we cannot in reality know how demons go about their work (as pertaining to “veteran demons” and so forth) there is much we can learn from Lewis’s book.
One eye opening principle that in the back of my mind I knew, but never truly realized, was how gradually the Devil takes us down the slippery slope. At one point, Screwtape tells his nephew Wormwood, “This dim uneasiness needs careful handling. If it gets too strong it may wake him up and spoil the whole game.” This quote stuck out at me especially because of the word “game.” In reality, this is no game; rather, it is the battle of our lives. The Devil and his host begin quietly—they do not want to disrupt our Christian lives too quickly and scare us away. They use the distorted pleasures and distractions of this world to lull us into an enchanting sleep, only beginning the “game” that they play with our lives. Once we are asleep and lying in their embrace, we are content to fall into deeper and deeper sleep as long we are let down slowly. The road to hell begins with baby steps.

Creation Chapter 2

I appreciate Planinga’s insight on creation. I found it made me marvel at the absolute greatness that God Himself displayed through creation. He did not need to create, nor did He need anything to create with. He created for His own pleasure, and yet He loves us infinitely. As an artist puts himself in every work he creates, God puts evidence of Himself throughout creation. Planninga points out that creation is the general revelation to all men of Himself. It was a way for God to spend Himself creatively.
Creation also has some implications for us Planinga states. We have been given a position of authority in Creation. But as we act on this authority, it is imperative that we remember we must imitate God. We must be stewards over creation, but also imitate God in the way He loves it. A part of our position in creation that is many times overlooked is the fact that we must learn from it. A great overseer is one who truly knows that which he is overseeing. However, because of the vastness of creation, we can never really come to a full understanding of it. We do have the responsibility to try though. In all of this exploration of creation, we also will be learning more and more about the Creator himself. When we explore creation we will see the various ways in which God is glorified through it. Through learning and caring for creation, we can really grow in our relationship with God.
Planninga also addressed the idea that God was glorified through Christ in the act of spending Himself that others might flourish. I really appreciated that thought. It is so important that our actions also bring glory to God. We must try, in our imperfect way, to imitate this trait. Let God use us that we may cause others to flourish and therefore give glory to God.

The Weight of Glory

“We are half-hearted creatures fooling about with drink and sex and ambition when infinite joy is offered us, like an ignorant child who wants to go on making mud pies in a slum because he cannot imagine what is meant by the offer of a holiday at the sea. We are far too easily pleased.” This quote from Lewis’s essay Weight of Glory is what I want to address in this blog. So much of life is focused on the “pursuit of happiness” as we read before in Lewis’s other essay. However, the “happiness” that we find on earth is nothing but a temporary, very limited taste of the true happiness and pleasure we will find in heaven.
Without the knowledge of God, we are nothing but a child in the mud. We find small pleasure in the mud, and yet we are ignorant of the pleasure that sand could give us. Because we see no other alternative and would never of ourselves search for one, we are content to stay in the mud and get minimal pleasure when infinite pleasure in the sand could be found. We are far too easily contented with the tiny, instant pleasures that we don’t have to do much work for.
I also appreciate how Lewis brings out the enchanting nature of the world. The devil is pleased when we are content with the instant pleasures that this earthly realm can afford. We do not even realize how truly enchanting this world can be. Lewis states that need a spell to break free from the evil enchantments of worldliness. We must realize that we ourselves have not the strength to break free from these bonds of enchantment. In fact, if it were strictly up to us, we would be lost in the embrace of worldliness forever, content to simply find pleasure in the mud.

Our English Syllabus

Our English Syllabus contains Lewis’s thoughts on the subject of education and was read to the English Society at Oxford. What I thought was very interesting and enlightening was the idea that all subjects are connected. Lewis points out that to perfectly and wholly understand one subject, we must also understand every other subject. From this perspective, we cannot truly understand any subject in its entirety, and must settle instead for bits and pieces. This idea shows me that we really cannot ever stop learning—the world is too vast and full. Having said this, such a declaration only points out the vastness and greatness of our Creator. He alone perfectly knows and understands every subject and how they connect to one another.
I also really appreciated Lewis’s analogy of education to sports. He said playing sports has the beneficial by-product of exercise/health. If you are playing to win, you will find that you have gained this benefit. If you play for the sole purpose of the exercise, however, you will find that you have not fulfilled that goal. In the same manner, if your sole focus on school is to become educated, you will not accomplish your goal. You must at least “pretend that you are concerned with knowledge.”
Learning is a lifelong process. Lewis points out that we cannot limit our learning simply to when we are in school. Rather, we must continue learning every day we are alive. There is too much to learn about the world—to limit ourselves to only the few years we are in school gives us only a small portion of the infinite knowledge we can attain. Realize, however, that no matter how long our life, no matter how intelligent we are, we will not be able to reach the end of learning. Do not limit yourself—learn something new everyday.

Chpt 1 Plantinga

Plantinga addresses the topics of hope and longing in the first chapter of his book Engaging in God’s World. He states that all humans have an inner longing for “something we have been separated from.” We are hoping to be reunited to something that we are missing—a happy memory, friends, and etc… However, Plantinga states, we will never truly fulfill this longing with the unions we create on this earth. Plantinga writes that all humans are born with a longing and want for God. This is where our feeling of separation comes from. It is the reason for our “stabs of joy and longing.”
Plantinga’s next and final point is to say show that longing is just an ingredient of hope. Hope comes from a want for something, and an intense want of something can be described as a “longing” for it. This hope is coupled with imagination. It is the imagination that allows us to hope and the hope that keeps us going. To hope and not to act on this hope, however, is useless. “Without costly action, hope can soften into sentimentality. With costly action, hope may harden into reality.” With this statement, we are told that we cannot rely on hope only, but rather, we must act in accordance with this hope. Finally, we must base our hope and center it on Jesus Christ alone. I do appreciate Plantinga’s idea that we cannot rely on our hopes and just expect them to turn into reality. We cannot simply be idle, waiting for our hopes to “harden into reality,” but neither can we ourselves make that hope harden. We need to work towards it, but it is up to God whether or not this hope will become reality.
I did find myself questioning Plantinga especially on the idea that all men “want God.” This does not make sense to me. If all men want God, and yet God rejects them, does that not make God unjust? I think instead that all creation points towards God, showing every human being that He exists, therefore leaving no man with the excuse that they did not know that God existed. However, man in his fallen, depraved nature wants to do everything to reject God. So instead, they worship nature itself. Consider Pantheism, Hinduism, and various other religions—either their central goal or some significant part of their religion is focused on the worship of nature itself.

Have no 'Right to Happiness'

Lewis introduces his “Have no ‘right to happiness’” essay by telling the story of Mr. A and Mrs. B, two neighbors that had divorced their previous spouses to get married to each other. There reason was that they had to take their one chance for happiness, because “every man has a right to happiness.” Lewis goes on to point out that there was no such thing as a right to happiness, only a ‘right to pursue happiness by all lawful means,’ two very different rights. Lewis also mentions to that society has treated the impulse of sexual pleasure in a much different regard than all other impulses. While every other human impulse has in some respect restrictions, society today pushes to get rid of all restrictions on sexual pleasures. Lewis finally finishes by stating these two points: “a society in which conjugal infidelity is tolerated ….must be adverse to women” and furthermore that the ‘right to happiness’ argument progress from sexual pleasure to any other impulse in society.
I really appreciate this essay. I think Lewis addresses quite well what the problem with this situation is, and does a fine job of refuting such an idea. In addition, I would like to comment that this ‘right to happiness’ excuse made by Mr. A was really a ‘pursuit of instant gratification.’ Is there a difference? I believe there is. True happiness cannot be found only by focusing on the pleasures of the moment and running away from the trials of life.
One critique I did have of Lewis’s essay was in the second page second full paragraph when Lewis is critiquing “Clare.” It seemed to me that Lewis was trying to explain Clare’s viewpoint by attacking her personally, something that was addressed by Lewis as “Bulverism.” Perhaps I am misunderstanding Lewis here, but it seems he is attacking the person instead of the issue at hand for these few paragraphs.

Bulverism

Bulverism—the attack of a person of opposing opinion on a topic to prove yourself rather than considering the actual topic at hand. In his essay entitled “Bulverism,” Lewis points out how this “vice” has permeated the debates of his day. He discussed how thoughts are biased or tainted in some manner, and raises two questions: ‘are all thoughts tainted, or just some’ and ‘does the taint invalidate the thought itself?’ He goes on to point out that we must see some thoughts as tainted and others as not, but then begs the question ‘how do we determine which are tainted and which aren’t?’ After this he answers the second question by pointing out that if the thought is a true one, it does not matter whether it was tainted or not. Lewis says that if you try to determine which thoughts are tainted by the biases of the thinkers themselves, you delve into the realm of “Bulverism.”

The great problem with this “Bulverism” from a logical point of view is that you have immediately assumed “that a man is wrong” and jump to point out why he is wrong. Instead, Lewis says it is important “show that a man is wrong before you start explaining why.” I really appreciate this point that Lewis makes because it is something I tend to struggle with in discussions. If someone has a differing opinion than I do on a topic, I will immediately jump to why they are wrong without considering their opinion and showing that they are wrong.

I thought one of the most interesting quotes in the essay was “Until Bulverism is crushed, reason can play no effective part in human affairs.” This quote made me wonder if such a time will ever come. I believe that Bulverism is a distortion brought out because of the fall. We are ready and willing to point out how others have come to their “silly notions,” and discredit another idea because of the bias of the thinker. If this is a manifestation of fallen man, can we ever fully “crush” it? I think while we live here on earth, Bulverism will be something that everyone struggles with in a debate/discussion.

Meditations in a Toolshed

Today for class we discussed the piece "Meditations in a Toolshed" by C.S. Lewis. In this particular writing, Lewis deals with how we view everything in this world. By using the simple example of a light beam in his toolshed, Lewis illustrates that there are two different ways or perspectives when viewing something. You can either look “at” the beam or “along” the beam. The difference is viewing something from the outside, (with a rational, sometimes scientific, explanation) and being on the inside (having the experience yourself, ie emotions, and etc…). Both perspectives create for a viewer two different pictures of the same element, making one question which actually is the correct perspective. The answer, Lewis argues, is both. Although both angles create two totally different pictures, neither picture is complete unless you put them together. In other words, using both perspectives helps you see that which is viewed in its entirety. Therefore, it is important to look both “at” and “along” everything to truly understand what you are seeing.

One interesting point brought out in class about these perspectives was that no matter how you are looking at the “light beam” one thing always remains consistent. The object of your scrutiny will always be there. No matter how you look at the light beam, the sun that creates it will always be there. Your views cannot change what is constant. I also was intrigued when it was briefly mentioned that “time changes perspective.” This can be seen in the life of any individual. As one gets older, his perspective on certain events changes dramatically from when he/she was a child. If you were anything like me as a child you can understand this using the example of discipline. When I was in the middle of being disciplined, I could not understand the reason for it and it made me angry. I was however, only looking from the inside of discipline. Once I was outside that discipline and could look back and see it from an outside perspective, I could see the benefits and necessity of the discipline I was given.

This article did leave me with questions. Is there another perspective perhaps that is all encompassing? I believe there must be, for as was mentioned in class, our Creator knows everything in its entirety. He alone has the “third perspective” which is able to understand fully and completely all things. In I Corinthians 13:12, the apostle writes “For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.” No matter what our perspective, even when using both, we still are only “looking through a glass darkly” and cannot perfectly understand something until we get to heaven. Our earthly minds are not totally able to comprehend what God has made, and therefore, there is something about every “light beam” that we miss. Although we may have completed the picture, it is muddy, dark, and unclear. It will be without clear definition until our eyes are totally opened by Him.