In Integrative Essay On The Nature Of Man

Over the past few weeks we have looked at various topics written by both Plantinga and C.S. Lewis. Throughout all of the essays and books that we have read there have been many common themes. One of these  themes that I found very helpful to my understanding of the world and myself was the nature of human beings . Both Plantinga and Lewis have their own views on what it means to be human but they agree on many issues.

Once particular aspect of human nature that I found particularly interesting was the human nature that makes us search, to better ourselves by searching both in God’s word and within ourselves. This is done through  endless searching for morality and virtue through learning.  In Plantinga’s Book he says “ A little reflection tells us that Christians want such skill not to impress the less skillful and simply to become more employable. Christians hope to increase the net amount of shalom in the world.” This means that Christians search for skills and virtues should be done simply to further Gods kingdom. Instead of what happens many times, which is a search for knowledge and skill for personal gain. This is slightly different from Lewis, who said that “Human life means to me the life of beings for whom the leisured activities of thought, art, literature, conversation are the end, and the preservation and propagation of life merely the means. That is why education seems to me so important: it actualizes that potentiality for leisure, if you like for amateurishness, which is man's prerogative.” Lewis’s view of learning is directed toward learning as an end in itself. Lewis would say that learning should be done simply for the sheer joy of learning. Even through Plantinga and Lewis have different views  on the education aspect of learning they would both agree in the importance of learning to understand Gods world and to Bring Gods kingdom.

Another part of furthering oneself that both Lewis and Plantinga look into is the quest for morality. Plantinga says that “As we’ve noted before, good and evil seldom appear alone, and a Christian response to them is therefore bound to be mixed. Part of the goal of Christian higher education, then, is to “test the spirits,” including all the spirits that are in competition with the Holy Spirit.” Plantinga also says that “Scripture and the confessions give us solid principles and directions for reforming life, but they also invite us to find creative ways of applying them in the contemporary world. This is one of the reasons why a Christian college education is such an adventure for believers in Christ. In a community of faith, blessed with an abundance of intelligence, devotion, and experience, bound together by mutual respect and accountability, Christians can explore “the heights and depths” of the contemporary world.” Plantinga’s view of morality is always within the greater context of the Christian faith but even though we are saved we must test everything to see where it stands.  Some things will be always immoral and others will be bad only in curtain contexts. This means that as long as we are within God’s law we have a little elbow room to move around, as long as we are careful and within Gods word. Lewis takes a similar approach to his view of morality, although coming from an atheist background he first addresses them. He proposes the question can a man be good (moral) without Christianity. Ultimately, the answer is no not really. The first reason is that the man who doesn’t address Christianity is a coward for not looking into Christianity, which promises a moral life if followed correctly. Another reason is that non-Christians can’t save the world with only a sliver of truth. They need the whole truth otherwise they will only treat symptoms instead of the sickness. Lewis gives the example of the mountain climber to explain morality, he says “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.” So Lewis and Plantinga are in agreement that morality can only be understood once a person is within Christ. So once we are in Christ how should we go about studying morality? Firstly, the bible should be our guide for interpreting the morality of our experience s, but Lewis gives us another method in addition to be used with the bible.  He calls the different ways to view an experience, the along and looking at method. Lewis says, “One must look both along and at everything. In particular cases we shall find reason for regarding the one or the other vision as inferior.” This method gives us an additional view to the one that we have already experience so that we may use are new vantage point to determine whether what we are doing is right or wrong. So  now we have a good basis to choose to continue or change our behavior.

Both Lewis and Plantinga would agree that humans do indeed need to change our behavior because we keep falling into the same traps.  These include corrupting ourselves, loving eros in a distorted way, setting in place an inner ring to exclude others. All of these things are some of the worst parts of human nature and Lewis and Plantinga devise ways to overcome them. Plantinga says that because of Adam and eve’s original sin every single human is now corrupt in nature. He describes a personal corruption as “ A corrupted person turns God’s gifts away from their intended purpose. She perverts these gifts. For example, she might use her excellent mind and first-class education not to extend God’s kingdom but just to get rich.” Then Plantinga gives another example that describes the corruption of the our relationships. “He pollutes his relationships with foreign elements that don’t belong in them.” Many cases of corruption come from either a conscience or unconscious choice to put one’s self ahead of God. After this choice is made then all different kinds of evils follow. This is because man must have a master. In Joshua 24:15 its says “ If it is disagreeable in your sight to serve the LORD, choose for yourselves today whom you will serve: whether the gods which your fathers served which were beyond the River, or ^(A)the gods of the Amorites in whose land you are living; but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD." This shows that since human nature tends to push us toward being corrupt. We must place God in the place of master otherwise, we will end up corrupting our selves.

Another form of sinful human nature that also stems from putting ourselves first, is the act of distorting eros. The first example of this that Lewis gives is an addiction to the act of love. When someone becomes addicted to sex, the women ceases to be a person, she is now only a means of pleasure. Lewis says “ one doesn’t keep the carton after one has smoked the cigarettes” This is the most distorted view possible of eros but not the only view. Another distortion is falling in love  on eros alone. This can also stated as loving being in love. When people base their relationship on only this, their relationship is almost always doomed to fail unless major changes are made. This is because this form of love is fast to wear off, and when it does if the relationship isn’t based on anything stronger, it will fail. The final type of a distortion of eros is similar to the first because it is also an addiction but this form is also the result often of the first. It is an addiction to being loved, what some would call being clingy. This is often a result of an unbalanced relationship where one person needs the other more than the other needs the person. Even though this is the least distorted view of the nature of eros, it still causes huge problems in relationships because the balance between man, woman, and God is uneven. In addition, clinginess is the most easily fixed of the three distortions because all it requires is more attention focus on God in order to rebalance the scale.

The final aspect of sinful human nature that I will talk about is the concept of the inner ring. Lewis describes this phenomenon in such a way that it seems almost mystical. The concept is simple in any group of friends there will always be an in-group and an out-group. The in-group has its own lingo, signs, inside jokes, that the outside group isn’t a part of. Additionally, the phenomenon is an unspoken universal, people who are in the group don’t talk about being in, and people who aren’t in the group refer to the group differently that the group refers to themselves. Now many people don’t see this as a possible evil of human nature and alone the inner ring itself is morally neutral . However, the desire to be part of the in-group causes people large amounts of pain and suffering. This is because the tendency is for those who are part of the group to remain in the group and the people who aren’t to remain on the outside. This is maintain by the in-group people giving the out-group people an extremely hard time by not allowing the out group in. Lewis says, “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.” This perfectly describes the issue of the inner ring. The desire to be excepted by everyone will only lead to disappointment. Lewis also says “As long as you are governed by that desire you will never get what you want. You are trying to peel and onion: if you succeed there will be nothing left. Until you conquer the fear of being an outsider, an outsider you will remain.” The only way to overcome the evil part of the inner ring is by making an honest attempt to avoid the rings behavior and instead work on obtaining virtues. Naturally, others will see the progress and want to be part of the group that is focused of progress.

Now that this class is finished I have a better understanding of the nature of man. I understand better the different views on how to learn and obtain virtue. Also I am able to discern Gods word within its context and view personal experiences from different viewpoint. Finally I am able to recognize my fallen nature by getting rid of corruption, avoid the distortions of eros and the folly of following the inner ring.

Holy Bible New International Version. N.p.: New International Version, 2010. Web. 24 Jan. 2011. <http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=joshua%2024:15&version=NIV>.

Lewis, C.S. The Four Loves. N.p.: n.p., n.d. 2-3. Print.

Lewis, C.S. "The Inner Ring." University of London. London. . Keynote speech.

Lewis, C.S. Man or Rabbit. Yes: n.p., n.d. 113. Print.

Lewis, C.S. Meditation in the Toolshed. Yes: n.p., n.d. 2-3. Print.

Lewis, C.S. Our English Syllabus. N.p.: n.p., n.d. 83. Print.

Plantinga, Cornelius Jr. Engaging God's World. Grand Rapids MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2002. 54,55,101,131-133. Print.

 Integrative essay on the Nature of Man

Over the past few weeks we have looked at various topics written by both Plantinga and C.S. Lewis. Throughout all of the essays and books that we have read there have been many common themes. One of these  themes that I found very helpful to my understanding of the world and myself was the nature of human beings . Both Plantinga and Lewis have their own views on what it means to be human but they agree on many issues.

Once particular aspect of human nature that I found particularly interesting was the human nature that makes us search, to better ourselves by searching both in God’s word and within ourselves. This is done through  endless searching for morality and virtue through learning.  In Plantinga’s Book he says “ A little reflection tells us that Christians want such skill not to impress the less skillful and simply to become more employable. Christians hope to increase the net amount of shalom in the world.” This means that Christians search for skills and virtues should be done simply to further Gods kingdom. Instead of what happens many times, which is a search for knowledge and skill for personal gain. This is slightly different from Lewis, who said that “Human life means to me the life of beings for whom the leisured activities of thought, art, literature, conversation are the end, and the preservation and propagation of life merely the means. That is why education seems to me so important: it actualizes that potentiality for leisure, if you like for amateurishness, which is man's prerogative.” Lewis’s view of learning is directed toward learning as an end in itself. Lewis would say that learning should be done simply for the sheer joy of learning. Even through Plantinga and Lewis have different views  on the education aspect of learning they would both agree in the importance of learning to understand Gods world and to Bring Gods kingdom.

Another part of furthering oneself that both Lewis and Plantinga look into is the quest for morality. Plantinga says that “As we’ve noted before, good and evil seldom appear alone, and a Christian response to them is therefore bound to be mixed. Part of the goal of Christian higher education, then, is to “test the spirits,” including all the spirits that are in competition with the Holy Spirit.” Plantinga also says that “Scripture and the confessions give us solid principles and directions for reforming life, but they also invite us to find creative ways of applying them in the contemporary world. This is one of the reasons why a Christian college education is such an adventure for believers in Christ. In a community of faith, blessed with an abundance of intelligence, devotion, and experience, bound together by mutual respect and accountability, Christians can explore “the heights and depths” of the contemporary world.” Plantinga’s view of morality is always within the greater context of the Christian faith but even though we are saved we must test everything to see where it stands.  Some things will be always immoral and others will be bad only in curtain contexts. This means that as long as we are within God’s law we have a little elbow room to move around, as long as we are careful and within Gods word. Lewis takes a similar approach to his view of morality, although coming from an atheist background he first addresses them. He proposes the question can a man be good (moral) without Christianity. Ultimately, the answer is no not really. The first reason is that the man who doesn’t address Christianity is a coward for not looking into Christianity, which promises a moral life if followed correctly. Another reason is that non-Christians can’t save the world with only a sliver of truth. They need the whole truth otherwise they will only treat symptoms instead of the sickness. Lewis gives the example of the mountain climber to explain morality, he says “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.” So Lewis and Plantinga are in agreement that morality can only be understood once a person is within Christ. So once we are in Christ how should we go about studying morality? Firstly, the bible should be our guide for interpreting the morality of our experience s, but Lewis gives us another method in addition to be used with the bible.  He calls the different ways to view an experience, the along and looking at method. Lewis says, “One must look both along and at everything. In particular cases we shall find reason for regarding the one or the other vision as inferior.” This method gives us an additional view to the one that we have already experience so that we may use are new vantage point to determine whether what we are doing is right or wrong. So  now we have a good basis to choose to continue or change our behavior.

Both Lewis and Plantinga would agree that humans do indeed need to change our behavior because we keep falling into the same traps.  These include corrupting ourselves, loving eros in a distorted way, setting in place an inner ring to exclude others. All of these things are some of the worst parts of human nature and Lewis and Plantinga devise ways to overcome them. Plantinga says that because of Adam and eve’s original sin every single human is now corrupt in nature. He describes a personal corruption as “ A corrupted person turns God’s gifts away from their intended purpose. She perverts these gifts. For example, she might use her excellent mind and first-class education not to extend God’s kingdom but just to get rich.” Then Plantinga gives another example that describes the corruption of the our relationships. “He pollutes his relationships with foreign elements that don’t belong in them.” Many cases of corruption come from either a conscience or unconscious choice to put one’s self ahead of God. After this choice is made then all different kinds of evils follow. This is because man must have a master. In Joshua 24:15 its says “ If it is disagreeable in your sight to serve the LORD, choose for yourselves today whom you will serve: whether the gods which your fathers served which were beyond the River, or ^(A)the gods of the Amorites in whose land you are living; but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD." This shows that since human nature tends to push us toward being corrupt. We must place God in the place of master otherwise, we will end up corrupting our selves.

Another form of sinful human nature that also stems from putting ourselves first, is the act of distorting eros. The first example of this that Lewis gives is an addiction to the act of love. When someone becomes addicted to sex, the women ceases to be a person, she is now only a means of pleasure. Lewis says “ one doesn’t keep the carton after one has smoked the cigarettes” This is the most distorted view possible of eros but not the only view. Another distortion is falling in love  on eros alone. This can also stated as loving being in love. When people base their relationship on only this, their relationship is almost always doomed to fail unless major changes are made. This is because this form of love is fast to wear off, and when it does if the relationship isn’t based on anything stronger, it will fail. The final type of a distortion of eros is similar to the first because it is also an addiction but this form is also the result often of the first. It is an addiction to being loved, what some would call being clingy. This is often a result of an unbalanced relationship where one person needs the other more than the other needs the person. Even though this is the least distorted view of the nature of eros, it still causes huge problems in relationships because the balance between man, woman, and God is uneven. In addition, clinginess is the most easily fixed of the three distortions because all it requires is more attention focus on God in order to rebalance the scale.

The final aspect of sinful human nature that I will talk about is the concept of the inner ring. Lewis describes this phenomenon in such a way that it seems almost mystical. The concept is simple in any group of friends there will always be an in-group and an out-group. The in-group has its own lingo, signs, inside jokes, that the outside group isn’t a part of. Additionally, the phenomenon is an unspoken universal, people who are in the group don’t talk about being in, and people who aren’t in the group refer to the group differently that the group refers to themselves. Now many people don’t see this as a possible evil of human nature and alone the inner ring itself is morally neutral . However, the desire to be part of the in-group causes people large amounts of pain and suffering. This is because the tendency is for those who are part of the group to remain in the group and the people who aren’t to remain on the outside. This is maintain by the in-group people giving the out-group people an extremely hard time by not allowing the out group in. Lewis says, “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.” This perfectly describes the issue of the inner ring. The desire to be excepted by everyone will only lead to disappointment. Lewis also says “As long as you are governed by that desire you will never get what you want. You are trying to peel and onion: if you succeed there will be nothing left. Until you conquer the fear of being an outsider, an outsider you will remain.” The only way to overcome the evil part of the inner ring is by making an honest attempt to avoid the rings behavior and instead work on obtaining virtues. Naturally, others will see the progress and want to be part of the group that is focused of progress.

Now that this class is finished I have a better understanding of the nature of man. I understand better the different views on how to learn and obtain virtue. Also I am able to discern Gods word within its context and view personal experiences from different viewpoint. Finally I am able to recognize my fallen nature by getting rid of corruption, avoid the distortions of eros and the folly of following the inner ring.

Holy Bible New International Version. N.p.: New International Version, 2010. Web. 24 Jan. 2011. <http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=joshua%2024:15&version=NIV>.

Lewis, C.S. The Four Loves. N.p.: n.p., n.d. 2-3. Print.

Lewis, C.S. "The Inner Ring." University of London. London. . Keynote speech.

Lewis, C.S. Man or Rabbit. Yes: n.p., n.d. 113. Print.

Lewis, C.S. Meditation in the Toolshed. Yes: n.p., n.d. 2-3. Print.

Lewis, C.S. Our English Syllabus. N.p.: n.p., n.d. 83. Print.

Plantinga, Cornelius Jr. Engaging God's World. Grand Rapids MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2002. 54,55,101,131-133. Print.

Personal Pain

I thought that by reading the problems of Pain I would be better equip to understand my own pain in my life ,but C.S Lewis’s arguments only tinkers with different ideas of pain. So now I find myself roughly in the same place I was before reading it. I understand that in a fallen world, where there is sin the body will rot and nothing will last. However, I have learned through personal experience, it is also possible for the mind to be just as bad and this is the type of pain which I have struggled with. Since an early age I have struggled with depression and the immense pain and troubles that it has brought me.  I get that bad things happen, people die in wars, children starve, the world is a hostile place. But what I don’t understand is why some people get relief from their suffering while others are stuck in what seems like lifelong misery. I’ve tried very hard to understand depression and different methods of relief. Ive tried different combinations of every medication on the shelves and either the side effects are as bad as the depression or the medication makes it so, I am only able to function.  The hardest part is its all internal, which makes it hard to talk about, I almost skipped this blog and wrote something else here, because its normal to pretend that everything is okay when it isn’t and talking about personal suffering gets mixed responses.

In class today we talked a little about pain and Adriana said that to those who belong in Christ their pain is always for the glory of God. I really can’t see that to be true. Ive studied the book of Job, he was an honest man who lost everything and questioned God, Then God comes and asked Job who is he to question the things God has set in place. Then the book ends on a higher note because Job ends up getting more than he had before. I understand the story ,but If I were to go to Job while he was in his pain and say this is part of Gods will what would he say “oh thank you I feel better now” No  probably not. Telling someone who is suffering and doesn’t have much hope that this is part of Gods plan doesn’t make them feel better especially when they have prayed endlessly for either God to show his face or at least do something.

Ive talked to some of my closest friends about this, thinking that together we could figure something out. Someone brought up something that I thought was interesting. They brought up the idea that my suffering could be used later on in my life to help understand someone else’s suffering. I have no idea if this is true, I don’t think so though because I believe that it isn’t good to compare  peoples suffering because each person’s experience with pain is unique and it doesn’t help someone who is suffering to tell them you know what they are going through, because you really don’t.

To end this rant I just would like to say that everyone has a different amount of suffering in their lives at different times and the healthiest thing to do is talk about it with close friends, because even through this doesn’t take away pain and they can’t completely understand what you’re going through. It at least shares the pain between friends and makes it easier to handle.

Man or Rabbit

C.S. Lewis’s article Man or Rabbit  poses an interesting question can a man be good without being a Christian? This question in its self is interesting to Lewis because he wonders why wouldn’t someone want to learn more about Christianity . Because he says that either Christianity is the biggest lie ever concocted or humanities greatest hope. It would be the greatest hope, because it explains the mystery of a creator, moral law, and gives us the ability  to overcome sin and to have a relationship with that God.  So Lewis can’t understand why this idea should be overlooked in the quest to live a good life. Next he says that trying to help the world with only a sliver of truth is possible , but its only addressing the physical problems of the world.  Lewis gives the example that it is similar to a non-Christian saving the world from its problems, Say a man finds another man that is starving and takes pity on him. Not being a doctor the first man gives the starving man a full meal, but because he isn’t a doctor the starving man dies because he can’t handle the nourishment. Without Christianity good things can be done, however often times without the full truth even though they have the best intentions bad results happen.

Then Lewis continues the discussion in a different direction, he asks another question, without the truth that Christianity brings, can a non-Christian understand what good really is? Lewis would say no instead he says “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.” This means that a knowledge of what is good can only come from an understanding of moral law, and moral law can only be understood within the greater context of Christianity. 

What is my calling

“When our earthly kingdoms has had a good year, we don’t necessarily long for the kingdom of God to break in. We like our own setup just fine.”

I thought that this quote from Plantinga summed up  many people’s feelings about our daily lives and also some of our views on vocation.  Many times people that are in college are just busy enjoying life along with trying to figure out what they want to do with their lives. However,   in addition they  should be asking themselves where does God want me to be, and what does he want me to do with my life.  When we take our vocation into our hands instead of trying to follow Gods will, then we completely miss out on the journey of faith expect of life.  That’s part of the reason that I came to Calvin College,  I wanted to figure out what I’m supposed to do with my life. So far I’ve tried doing this at Calvin by building my talents, and searching for God along the way

So far in my life I have definitely felt a push toward issues of sustainability and all things plant related. So I was glad when Plantinga brought the issue of sustainability because I am always interested in what other people have to say on the issue.  He says that it’s a shame that the secular realm has taken charge of the issue of sustainability. It’s sad because Christians are the ones that have a God given mandate to be stewards of the earth, yet many times we have been way less than satisfactory in this area. We should be leading the movement of reformation toward new ideas, instead of watching from the sidelines as the world around us changes. I was also in agreement with Paulo that the change should come from the bottom up. Otherwise either change won’t happen fast enough or changes will be made from the top down. This isn’t optimal because the majority won’t be represented when changes are made. Even if I don’t end up with a job in this area it will still be important to me. But whatever my calling is I’m sure that as long as I’m doing what God wants instead of whatever I want (which changes constantly) ill be okay.

Another concept that Plantinga brought was the building of virtues like, diligence, patience, charity, and ta-da stewardship. In my last philosophy class, we talked about the building of virtue through a conscience effort to improve oneself.  However, in addition to this it’s important to also ask God to help us work on virtues. It’s important to remember that God won’t just give you virtues , but he will put you into opportunities and situations where you need to use specific  virtues to get through. So be careful!!! I asked God for patience because I used to be a very impatient person. I naively thought that he would just give my more patience ,but instead he gave me hard family and friend issues that could only be worked out through patience. So I learned it in sort of a trial by fire kind of way.

The Inner Ring

Once again Lewis sees a phenomenon, analyzes it and is able to relay the information he has gained  from reflection perfectly to  his readers, In order that they can also recognize problems in their lives, so they can work on improving themselves. This time the phenomenon Lewis is describing what he calls the inner ring. Now a days we call these things clicks, either way the concept of inner ring is universal  and timeless.  The concept is relatively simply in every group of friends there will always be the tendency to keep people out of the group . Also people on the outside of the group view the group differently than the people in the group.  In response to the morality of the inner circle, Lewis says that the inner circle itself is morally neutral but most times the way that people are excluded  from the group is wrong. Lewis says, “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.” From this, I think back to my early high school years when I was working at a greenhouse. There was always a group of older high school workers that I tried to be friends with. However, It took almost  a year before I became friends with them.  Over that time I did tons of things that made me look stupid so that I could be friends with them.  Of course I can look back now and see how foolish I was, also im sure that everyone is able to look back and find an example of the inner ring.

Another part of the inner ring that is discussed is how once you are in the inner circle you make it hard for others to enter. Lewis says “you will always find them hard to enter, for a reason you very well you know.  You yourself, once you are in, want to make it hard for the next entrant, just as those who are already in made it hard for you.” At the same greenhouse,  when I was a junior I gave the new kids a really hard time and kept them out of my inner circle.  Even though it seems innocent the subject of being either in or out of the inner ring can overtake people’s lives if they aren’t careful.

Lewis says that if inner ring starts become a major focus of one life than the way to break it is by, first realizing its existence. Then work instead of their gifts and personal qualities. The realization alone takes away some of the power of the circle. The rest of the power of circle can be taken away by doing your best because when your whole energy is placed in your gifts instead of circles than others will realize this and you will find new friends that value the same things you value.

Eros, Gardens, Lust

In the section of The Four loves Lewis describes a form of love, eros as “being in love or if you prefer, that kind of love which others are in.” From reading this section and the talks we had in class. I think that this is the most dangerous form of love, because it grabs us by the hand and leads us into situations without thinking.  Using the example of the senior scramble at Calvin I wonder how many of these relationships are healthy. Many times people see all of their friends getting married and they themselves want that  type of relationship that others have, so they try too hard to speed along a relationship by getting married early(over tending a garden). This is okay as long as they work at their marriage ,but often times when the eros wears off there isn’t anything left. In class the example was given of being given a garden, As someone who owns a garden (and hopes to get a MS degree in Botany) I can easy relate. There are always curtain plants in the garden that you “love” more than others, and there are plants that are picky and are almost more trouble than worth keeping them. However, each plant in its entirety makes the garden great. Also with the garden example we talked about what happens to an untended garden. Here is a personal story to illustrate the summer of my sophomore year I worked a ton, and didn’t have time to do the garden. Since the garden is kind of my thing, my family didn’t really mess with the garden at all. So by the end of the summer it was more like a weed garden than a vegetable one with the weeds being the majority of the plants overshadowing the vegetables. Same with our relationships, however not all divorces end because of one major weed in the relationship often times it’s a bunch of little ones that have deep roots that choke out the existing plants.

Another part of the section of eros that I found interesting was the difference Lewis gives between lust and eros. He says that when lust is the goal than it’s not really the woman a man is after.  Its only the service she can provide to him. Then he gives the example of throwing a cigarette pack away after using it. Its sad cause I know people like this who only continue relationships because it extends the service. To his girlfriend’s face he is the nicest person but behind her back he could really care less about her. This situation is complicated because she thinks her garden is beautiful but everyone else can see its weeds.

Finally I liked what was said about men being spiritual leaders of the household ,because I know in my house it’s not that way. I would like that f one day when I have a family if I could be their spiritual leader because that seems like a noble and worthwhile job.

Learning and War

In times of war people tend to question what matters in life, this is because the reality of war is surrounded by death.  Many people would say that academic life should be put on hold in times of war and students should fulfill the duty owed to their country. However,  Lewis disagrees with this for many reasons and on many different levels. So I will only highlight a few of my favorite points of his many arguments. In one argument Lewis is refuting the point about what war does to death. First, the argument is that in times of war more people are dying.  While it is true that some people will die earlier, the frequency of death is still one-hundred percent so that debate about more death goes out the window. Another point about how war changes our view of death is that in times of war people’s suffering before death increases. However, once again Lewis counters this with the idea that natural death is just as painful, if not more as death in war. Especially if the final blow is a headshot and the soldier feels nothing.  Another point about death that is brought up next is that people who are dying aren’t really to meet their maker. Lewis also disagrees with this by saying that no one is more prepared to meet God than someone that is on the front lines. Then Lewis concludes by saying that the only thing that war and death have in common is that when war is around people think more about their own mortality because of a fear of death.

Another thought that Lewis speaks on briefly is the idea that history is important especially in times of war. He says that the past isn’t special to study however, since we can’t study the future and the present  needs something to be set against we have no choice but to study the past. From here, he gives the paradigm of the man that lived in many places.  Then when returning to his native village he becomes immune to local errors because of his experience. In this same way, scholars need to tell about what has happened in the past otherwise humans will be doomed to repeat the same mistakes. It is this duty to serve which puts education at a higher step then war.

Another argument that Lewis battles against is the one that claims that Christians shouldn’t have any leisure time because the battle against the devil is endless. Lewis quotes scripture to turn away this idea, St. Paul says “Whether ye eat or drink or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.” This means that the Christian life isn’t supposed to replace our natural life only transform it. This means that God can be glorified in any wholesome activity even rest.

Redemption

Throughout chapter four of Plantinga’s book I found numerous passages that  were dealing with things going on in my life so I thought I’d write about those.  The passage that stood out to me the most at the time of reading was the part the talked about liberty. It says that “ Everybody wants liberty. The problem is that everybody wants it on his own terms. However, salvation doesn’t work that way. God doesn’t save people (from slavery, from addiction, from sin and shame) and then cut them loose to do what they want, because without the guidance of God “doing what we want” is a recipe for falling right back into slavery.  Most of the time, in my younger life id think of God more like the genie in a bottle, he was there to grand me wishes and keep me out of trouble. This thought came out of an almost forced profession of faith by my parents in high school, followed by being nagging into serving our church. This combined with the fact that I had few friends at our church turned me off to the whole experience. So instead I would do whatever I wanted. In short I did what rebellious teens do, I drank ,smokes, lied, manipulated people and just ended up really depressed(big surprise). I’d like to say  that I grew up in college but I never really learned the term fun in moderation. Till I almost got kicked out of Calvin my freshman year. Even through I’m doing better now I look back and I can see all the things that held me in bondage. This makes my rediscovered belief in God even more amazing because he still lets me come back to him even though I spent years trying to find my own liberty.

Another passage that grabbed my attention when I was reading the chapter through a second time was the idea that we must put on grown-ups clothes not because we are better than others are ,but because it is the only way we can be better than we currently are( and more grownup like). A few weeks ago I was at the dentist and what I saw there reminded me of this. While I was getting my teeth cleaned I happened to look up at the wall and saw a picture. The picture showed my dentist behind a patient and his young son  with scrubs,gloves,face mask,and drills sitting on the patient’s chest ready to do work just like his father. I just thought of this as a more comical version of the putting on the grownup clothes in order to be more like the father. But my example also includes the son trying to do the same work as the father in addition to dressing like him.

The Fall

I like in this chapter how the concept or evil came up. I have wondered about this on and off for three years now and I’ve come to understand that I’m not able to understand an answer to this question at least in whole. Nevertheless, here is what I’ve come up with so far. Originally I believed in young earth creation so my belief in evil was relatively  easy. First the demonic type of evil came from a choice not to follow God,  resulting in Satan and his followers being forced from God. The second source of evil was human sinful nature which came from also another choice to eat the forbidden fruit. However, this is also hard to understand, why would God who created the curious nature in humans ,also put a forbidden tree in the same garden as them. This seems like placing chocolate on the dinner table and telling children not to eat it while I walk in the other room. It doesn’t make sense unless since God knew we would sin and now that Jesus has overcome sin we are now able to be closer than before to him. However, Adam and Eve would walk with God in the garden and that seems much closer than any experience I’ve had with God so I’m not really sure. From an old earth prospective, this story is even harder to deal with because it is poetic. So does this mean that pre-human groups were walking with God then we fell into sin. I’m also unsure about this because there is reason to believe that they killed murdered and raped just like are other primate relatives. So is the paradise of Eden a metaphor for what is to come instead of what has already happened? I’m not sure but I definitely believe that death existed since animals were created because many species need death in order to survive. Simple examples of this are fungi and carnivores. Fungi feed off dead material so in a world without death their role as decomposers isn’t needed. Also carnivores need to kill in order to eat and their whole body structure and digestive system is made to handle flesh. So in a world without death this also seems unlikely.  So I believe that death is a part of Gods plan and isn’t evil. My final issue that I’ve struggled with is the concept of a soul especially if we arose from animals. The best explanation that I’ve heard of so far was that our soul developed after we were set apart from the animals this seem plausible but its hard to understand at this point. I hope some people reading this will response with their own thoughts particularly on the concept of soul.

A Modern Poison

Progress in science has led humankind to a new level.  A level that allows us to study our own rational thought as an object, which works solely by chemical and electrical signals. From this study a new philosophy has emerged called subjectivism.  The dictionary says “Subjectivism is the belief that reality is not a firm absolute, but a fluid, plastic, indeterminate realm which can be altered, in whole or in part, by the consciousness of the perceiver—i.e., by his feelings, wishes or whims.”  In response of this modern thinking, C.S Lewis wrote The Poison of Subjectivism to explain to the new followers of Subjectivism and those thinking about converting about its folly. The reason that Lewis had an issue with subjectivism is that intellectuals started applying subjectivism to practical reason. So that where was no longer a line between what is thought of as good or evil because everything is in the mind of the perceiver. This contradicted Lewis’s believe in a God given moral law. Subjectivism was the modern choice of philosophy because its followers thought that they could be better people if they weren’t tied down to solid truths about right or wrong. However, Lewis says that without defined moral lines there is no such thing as a better man because there is no basis for good so how could a man be better. Lewis gives the example that if someone doesn’t believe in a God given moral law he only has to look into the past to find that a crossed cultures there has indeed been consistency to what is ultimately right and wrong. Another argument that subjectivist claim to why they follow this philosophy is that now we can understand better our instincts. Once again, Lewis claims that this is yet another reason to not follow subjectivism because without a moral law there is no way of telling which instincts are good to follow and which aren’t because there are no lines only a large grey area.

In response to Lewis’s essay I would say that I tend to agree with him that there is a strong amount of evidence for a moral law. I also agree that defined lines of what is good and evil are also necessary for two reasons, first so that there is a consistent standard to know whether the future, current and past actions that were/are taken are right or wrong.  And Secondly a moral law is needed to judge progress in character because without it no choices are right or wrong.

Mere Christianity

After reading through Mere Christianity I was amazed once again by C.S Lewis’s argument and style. The premise of the book is quite simple, Lewis plans to prove the existence of a God by using rational thought alone. First, he does something that isn’t very natural in philosophical debate  circles he comes before his readers with humility. Which is interesting because normally this would make him seem weak and discredit his logic. However, his humility is also a weapon that makes the hearts of his readers soft and openly makes them except his reason.  The next tactic used is he makes his argument applicable to everyone but stating that everyone who is above morality can disregard his essay. This entraps the reader because as Lewis knows none of us are above morality. Now that Lewis has everyone caught in the quicksand of his argument we have no choice but to listen. Next Lewis does yet another philosophical tactic, which is grounding your argument by first starting with a concept that your opponent already believes. Lewis says that in every single culture, from an early age, all humans have a concept of what is moral and what is amoral. He gives an example  of a child’s argument where  the response is “how would you like that if someone did that to you”. Lewis then says that this is more than the child claiming that he doesn’t like the action of the other child but something more. He then says that this is a concept of moral law, because both the villain and victim agree that a standard has been broken. This is the concept or a moral law. Now some of Lewis’s reader are feeling uneasy because they don’t believe in a greater moral law. They only believe in a non -authoritative law created by man in order to get along with the herd. However, Lewis expects this and parries with this example. IFa man is in trouble and another man hears him, the man who hears will have two natural responses. One, that he needs to help the man in trouble because he is one of the herd. The second response is to run away in order to live another day, this is the self-preservation nature that is within us all. Then unexpectedly Lewis pull out another response the third, this is the moral laws which overrides the self-preservation by telling the man that he should indeed help the man. I found this argument very interesting because in topic of secular morality the self-preservation and saving the herd are talked about, however with them it only comes down to a choice instead of, first the intervention of moral law which affirms that one choice is better than the other. I’m not sure how a secular rationalist would combat this argument, so if anyone reading this has ideas please comment below. In addition, another part of Lewis’s argument that confused me was the intercultural idea of moral law. In order to understand this more ended up going to the library after class and reading parts of the Abolition of Man,  Which is a really hard read but definitely worth the time spent on it. What I got away from Abolition of Man was that indeed there is a standard of law that is used by all men however certain thing are inconsistent in different cultures however this can be explained by sin distorting the moral law.

Screwtape Letters

After reading the letter twelve of the Scewtape letters. I was fascinated by the idea that Lewis had the insight to think as a demon would.  Most people even Christians spend little time thinking about spiritual warfare, but Lewis recognized this as a major fault of Christians, then amazingly was able to put himself in the mind of the enemy. Then examine humankind in a way that a demon would. In order to help Christians overcome the enemy by showing them their own weaknesses that the enemy uses to exploit them. One example Lewis gives as a tactic of the enemy was the art of distraction in everyday common things. In class we talked about how there is no such thing as an unimportant choice, because the habitual actions that we take end up shaping who we become. Personally, I know I’m guilty of not treating every action as important, especially in my leisure time. Many times I end up sitting in front of the tv watching shows I don’t like simply because it’s something to do and I need a break from work. I’m really not sure why I do this because honestly I probably have ten other things I would rather do, and plenty of other things I should do.

Another Point that Screwtape addresses to wormwood is the fact that he thinks it’s good that the patient is going to church. At first I thought that this a contradiction, why would a demon think it good that a man be going to church? But after I continued reading I understood that if the patient goes to church and doesn’t learn anything. Then no spiritual growth happens ,but the patient is lured into a false sense of security. He believes that by going to church he is still a good person fulfilling his Christian duty but in reality he is just falling away. In order to combat this behavior we need to be intentional in our spiritual walk. By taking steps towards improvement in the Christian devotions we can be sure that progress is made because the work is intentional. However, the intentional behavior shouldn’t be just applied to the spiritual side of our lives but all forms.  In class Paulo gave the example in soccer of being able to use both feet only after long hours of practice. So that when the situation came up that he needed to use his non-dominate foot he would be able to trap the ball then score no problem. The analogy describes the  usefulness of responses for temptation in any area of life. The idea behind it is that when temptation comes we will be more effective in resisting it if we have already thought about the issue at hand. That way when temptation strikes we won’t have to debate as hard in our head sin overcome it because the right choice is there we only need to choose it.

On a darker note another thing that sort of bothered me was the discussion about how the road to hell is easy. I often think of curtain sins as more bad than others, but I forget that God can’t stand any sin so they are all equally bad before him. The screwtape letters addresses this when Screwtapes says that murder isn’t necessary if cards will do. This is scary because I often think highly of myself because I’m not murdering or stealing from people or anything like that. So I’m doing good right? Not really, all my little sins our accumulating and I don’t even realize it. This is defiantly an area of life I need to work harder at. I have been lulled into a thinking exactly what the enemy wants.

The Weight Of Glory

In response to The Weight of Glory I found interesting how C.S. Lewis makes the point that Christianity has been falsely influenced by Kant and the Stoics. The example that he gives says that “If there lurks in most modern minds the notion that to desire our own good and earnestly to hope for the enjoyment of it is a bad thing, I submit that this notion has crept in from Kant and the Stoics and is no part of the Christian faith. Even though this is a side note to the meat of the essay, I thought about the importance of possible outside sources on the Christian faith and the implications thereof. Lewis points out that the idea that our desire for joy isn’t a bad thing. However, the avenues that we use to fulfill our need for joy are what determines whether we will be filled with eternal joy or just temporarily satisfied. Also along these lines brings back a memory of a conversation that happened this past semester. In English 101, professor Fondse was taking about how the Dutch Christian Reformed Church claimed that everything in the world was redeemable. However, Christians weren’t allowed to go to the movies, play card games, or dance.  The argument given at the time was the slippery slope argument that if Christians were allowed to do these activities then sin would be the result.  Even the Great poet Robert Frost claimed that “dancing is a vertical expression of a horizontal desire” With the kind of dancing that goes on in clubs I sort of agree with him.  But where I disagree with the Old Christina Reformed Church  and Frost would be that in hindsight if we didn’t look into dancing they we would have missed out on things like worship through liturgical dance or the joy that young teen feel with going to prom for the first time which are good things. So im kind of torn because there are some things that shouldn’t ever be done to obtain joy and there are others that are sort of a grey area because it done properly they can be used for the glorification of God however if we aren’t carefully sin could result. So in order to properly explore our gifts in this world the importance of discernment can’t ever be stressed enough. 

Creation and its implications on our mindset

While paging through Plantinga’s second chapter on creation I found one concept that I had never paid any attention too and now I’m questioning if this new concept will change my viewpoint on everything else dealing with Jesus. In chapter two Plantinga tells about how we often forget that Jesus was always around even before his physical birth. I never really thought of Jesus as existing as a separate part of the trinity before his physical birth. He even mentions the sons role in the creation of the universe. Saying “we find it difficult to think of him acting as the mediator of creation.”  So far the implications of this to me make it even more amazing that Jesus gave up his divine power if only for a short time. St. Paul  says in Philippians 2:5-11 “did not cling to his divine prerogatives but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave” Thinking of Jesus as the separate chosen part of God to dwell among us makes what he did even more amazing to me. Another concept that I found interesting was Plantinga’s viewpoint on General and special revelation. By that, I mean our ability as the created to learn about the creator through natural things (general revelation) and through God’s holy word (special revelation) learn as well. When we approach general revelation we must remember  eight things because we view creation through an impure looking glass. Here are a few of my favorite viewpoints that Plantinga gives concerning creation. First all creation is savable there is nothing that is too far gone that it can’t be saved by Gods love. This includes all of the sinners that we consider the worst like murderers and rapists. Even they are redeemable.  Another viewpoint was that God created everything from nothing, I can’t really ever wrap my mind around this because I’m not very artsy I can’t make something from something else so  what God does utterly confounds me.  Finally I liked the illustration that because he are all image bearing creations he have an obligation to bring out the image of God in other because in turn it will help us bring out the image in ourselves.

Our English Syllabus

After reading Our English Syllabus curtain trends started arising repeatedly. One of these that I really liked was the notion that “a perfect study of anything requires a knowledge of everything” this quote is one of the many reasons why core classes are so important to a liberal arts education, particularly at Calvin College. However, because students must study a broad range of subjects the information in each core class must be expansive in order to cover the whole subject in one semester. One problem with this that inevitably arises is what to put an emphasis on? The author gives the example of a tree representing the subject of English literature. The medium of soil has been necessary to the development of the tree so naturally the soil example is the people, social, economic, and intellectual things that gave rise to the tree. Further on the author doesn’t mention the soil, but I think back to our original essay and I believe that in order to understand something it is important to look at it from different viewpoints(at and along). The example that came to mind was the bible, If someone reads it without  any prior context then they miss out on all the cultural implications of the story as well as geographical significants. Therefore, to fully understand the bible there is reference points at the bottom of the page that tell about whatever is being discussed. Originally, I would skip over these because they weren’t “part of the bible.”  However, I now understand that they are central to my understanding of the verse because I’m not a biblical historian. In the rest of the example of the tree the author also says that students take a class (of say English) and when finished they say something like okay I’m finish with that subject what’s next on the list. This is a terrible way of looking at college as a group of requirements. Instead each class (including the ones I don’t like) should be treated a invaluable learning experience that is both broad and specific. Also along these lines the author gives the example of students that pick classes based on what they think employers will like. While college is, a great avenue for attaining a job it is also important to take classes that show interest to you. Otherwise, the things learned will be what you think others want you to know, instead of becoming knowledgeable in areas of thing you want to know.

Longing, Hope, and the Pursuit of Happiness

In the first chapter of Engaging God’s World Cornelius Plantinga takes a quote from the book a Separate Peace. The quote describes a scene of imaginable beauty on a summer day in New Hampshire. The main character, Gene says that “I wanted to break out crying from stabs of hopeless joy, or intolerable promise, or because those mornings were too full of beauty for me.” After reading the quote a few times I was faced to ask myself two questions. One had I ever felt a natural beauty to the decree that Gene had seen. Then secondly how is this overwhelming natural longing for beauty related to hope and longing for God. After some pondering, I could think of a few natural landscapes that took the breath right out of me, but there was one experience I’ve had that trumps all other. However  I’m  sure I can’t describe what I saw to its full  glory but I will try. Last year, I when on an interim trip to the Galapagos Islands. During one of the nights, we were traveling from Espanola back to the largest island of Santa Cruz. It was getting late prolly around midnight and one of our guides wanted to show the people that were still up all the stars. So he turn off all the lights on the boat and the whole night sky instantly came alive. It was as if we could see every single star ever created, and because we were on the open ocean the stars stretched at far as could be seen in every direction. All I could do was lay on the bow of the boat and take the experience in as the waves slowly bobbed the boat up and down. I remember the great joy that I felt, It was like God had created something amazing and then said okay now enjoy it.  Using this experience helps me understand what Plantinga talks about later when he describe a time when there will be shalom. He says that “these earthly things are solid goods, and we naturally relish them. But they are not our final good. They point to what is “higher up” and “further back”.” From this I wonder, because I see tons of beauty in creation so I can’t really imagine what else God has waiting for me since the pleasure that we get from natural things is only a crude example of what is to come.

In C.S. Lewis essay Have No Right to Happiness Lewis describes a trend that was becoming prevalent in his day and now is out of control in ours. He tells about the pursuit of happiness at the expense of others.  Lewis explains this with the paradigm of two couples that that leave their spouses for reasons like, they lost their good looks in after giving birth and growing old, or their husband got injured in the war and he isn’t the same. Then he claims that these are poor excuses to leave a spouse and they aren’t justifiable, but somehow they are legal. Later Lewis talks about how a pursuit of happiness(sexual) attitude leads to the centralization of immoral behavior. When sexual impulses are fulfilled the guilty often sight that they are only doing what is natural so they don’t feel the burden of what they are doing to others. The others that are victimized in many cases end up being women, this is because they have the deck of card stacked against them. Since every year after maturity they lose their beauty and they are the greater of the two genders to get hurt physically (STDs/unwanted pregnancies) and emotionally by sleeping around.  Additionally  the guilty person also ends up making themselves a victim as well because sexual sin can act like a virus and spread to other areas of people’s lives. Paulo gave the example of wanting to ask people whom were being interviewed for a job position about past divorces because the job called for a person of integrity. When someone can’t be trusted to stay with his wife, than he can’t be trusted with anything because all of his validity is gone.  After reading the essay and having class discussions I was troubled because I know of many Christian families going through a divorce right now and its sad to see people that were so strong being tricked into thinking that what they are doing is okay.

Bulversim

After reading through the essay Bulversim a few times, I was still looking for something to write about then it hit me. In the first section about the Marxist and Freudians arguments for their worldview. Lewis points out that the same argument that they make can be turned around and used against them. First Lewis clams that either every thought is tainted at the source or it is possible that only some are tainted. Since the latter is given in his next proof, Lewis then goes into his next point that, since there is no way to good way of telling which thoughts our tainted and which ones are not then, the Marxist and Freudians worldviews are just as valid and any other idea. One mistake in Marxist and Freudian arguments that Lewis makes a theme of later in the essay is the idea of Bulversim. Lewis states that because people already have a viewpoint about a certain topic it, when faced with evidence that contradicts their beliefs. People automatically discredit evidence without reason or just one the basis of not aligning with their viewpoint. As a person that loves to debate with others. I have seen this many times but never identified this phenomenon of Bulversim nearly as clearly as Lewis has.   The way I see the issue of Bulversim is that it needs to be cut out from arguments  and peoples lives because in any argument it is an easy way out of critically thinking about our own beliefs. 

Meditation in the Toolshed

 After reading the C.S. Lewis article I found it interesting how, for many experiences it is necessary to look both along and at the experience in order to properly interpret it. I found this prospective interesting because I am a person that tends to look along things by viewing experiences rationally, rather than  putting weight on the emotional side. However, since each person is unique, everyone  has a different level of emphasis on either type of experience viewing. and therefore people must realize that the way they view the world is a unique personal.experience in itself.