[ARCHIVED THREAD] - C.S. Lewis (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 1/5/2014 6:14:17 PM EDT
|
God created things which had free will.That means creatures which can go either wrong or right.Some people think they can image a creature which was free but had no possibility of going wrong; I cannot.
If a thing is free to be good it is also free to be bad. And free will is what has made evil possible. Why, then, did god give them free will? Because free will, though it makes evil possible, is also the only thing that makes possible any love or goodness or joy worth having. -C.S. Lewis |
|
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." C S Lewis
Applicable to guns, cannabis, etc... |
|
Quoted:
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." C S Lewis Applicable to guns, cannabis, etc... NICE. Well done. |
|
Quoted:
NICE. Well done. Quoted:
Quoted:
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." C S Lewis Applicable to guns, cannabis, etc... NICE. Well done. Jack was a brilliant man. |
|
Brilliant man. I was a Christian long before I read "Mere Christianity", but this quote really tied everything together for me...
“But supposing God became a man - suppose our human nature which can suffer and die was amalgamated with God's nature in one person - then that person could help us. He could surrender His will, and suffer and die, because He was man; and He could do it perfectly because He was God. You and I can go through this process only if God does it in us; but God can only do it if He becomes man. Our attempts at this dying will succeed only if we men share in God's dying, just as our thinking can succeed only because it is a drop out of the ocean of His intelligence: but we cannot share God's dying unless God dies; and He cannot die except by being a man. That is the sense in which He pays our debt, and suffers for us what He Himself need not suffer at all.” C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity |
|
Quoted: I like C.S.Lewis but personally I subscribe to the idea of total depravity The concept is nonsense. It's like saying totally pregnant. If you are depraved, you do not deserve life. It doesn't matter "how" depraved you are. The problem is that the concept of "Total Depravity" has been expanded to mean things that are not well supported by the totality of scripture. |
|
Quoted:
I'd say he did. C. S. Lewis has explored the concept. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Is God a cosmic sadist?  Ever read C.S. Lewis? I could ask you the same.  I'd say he did. C. S. Lewis has explored the concept. Yeah, right after his wife died of cancer. "The terrible thing is that a perfectly good God is in this matter hardly less formidable than a Cosmic Sadist. The more we believe that God hurts only to heal, the less we can believe that there is any use in begging for tenderness. A cruel man might be bribed–might grow tired of his vile sport–might have a temporary fit of mercy, as alcoholics have fits of sobriety. But suppose that what you are up against is a surgeon whose intentions are wholly good. The kinder and more conscientious he is, the more inexorably he will go on cutting. If he yielded to your entreaties, if he stopped before the operation was complete, all the pain up to that point would have been useless. But is it credible that such extremities of torture should be necessary for us? Well, take your choice. The tortures occur. If they are unnecessary, then there is no God or a bad one. If there is a good God, then these tortures are necessary. For no even moderately good Being could possibly inflict or permit them if they weren’t." -C.S. Lewis |
|
Quoted:
That is an agenda that has been pushed since the beginning and it is false IMO but you definitely should believe as you like.. This place got trolly rather quickly However, it stands as a legitimate question for those who choose to question human existence under the premise that our reality is owed to a creator. |
|
Quoted:
That is an agenda that has been pushed since the beginning and it is false IMO but you definitely should believe as you like.. It is not an agenda. It is simply understanding the human faculty for perceiving reality. We are beings that question our existence... |
|
Quoted:
However, it stands as a legitimate question for those who choose to question human existence under the premise that our reality is owed to a creator. Quoted:
Quoted:
That is an agenda that has been pushed since the beginning and it is false IMO but you definitely should believe as you like.. This place got trolly rather quickly However, it stands as a legitimate question for those who choose to question human existence under the premise that our reality is owed to a creator. Um, no. Restating what something is doesn't make it different. Simply saying "...it stands as a legitimate question for those who choose to question human existence under the premise that our reality is owed to a creator." is nothing more than restating what you originally considered it to be. You have said nothing. |
|
Quoted:
I'd say he did. C. S. Lewis has explored the concept. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Is God a cosmic sadist? Ever read C.S. Lewis? I could ask you the same. I'd say he did. C. S. Lewis has explored the concept. I believe all of us explore that at some point, the believers and the non, whenever we go through a difficult time such as tragedies or atrocities. But God delighting in our demise is hogwash IMO, he delights in us trusting in Him through the dry seasons of this life. Ultimately our suffering does not create happiness in our God. |
|
Quoted:
Um, no. Restating what something is doesn't make it different. Simply saying "...it stands as a legitimate question for those who choose to question human existence under the premise that our reality is owed to a creator." is nothing more than restating what you originally considered it to be. You have said nothing. How does my comment invalidate the concept of questioning ones existence? I simply stated a question posed in the writings of C.S. Lewis. |
|
Quoted:
It is not an agenda. It is simply understanding the human faculty for perceiving reality. We are beings that question our existence... Quoted:
Quoted:
That is an agenda that has been pushed since the beginning and it is false IMO but you definitely should believe as you like.. It is not an agenda. It is simply understanding the human faculty for perceiving reality. We are beings that question our existence... I do not question my existence and I don't feel that I "owe" it to my Creator, as you stated, but rather believe I was created by a loving God and I thank him for everything in my life down to my breath I just took. The subject worth exploring is Grace |
|
Quoted: Total Depravity is man's condition apart from the grace of God. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Well, if the concept was simply and properly called "depravity" then we couldn't make our theological points spell out a cute flower. But no, some had to ADD to the concept of depravity for some reason. I guess we had to make it depravier or something. |
|
Quoted:
A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion. Proverbs 18:2  Quoted:
Quoted:
CSB A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion. Proverbs 18:2 Ok, I've been wondering for some time now. What does CSB mean? |
|
Quoted:
The concept is nonsense. It's like saying totally pregnant. If you are depraved, you do not deserve life. It doesn't matter "how" depraved you are. The problem is that the concept of "Total Depravity" has been expanded to mean things that are not well supported by the totality of scripture. Quoted:
Quoted:
I like C.S.Lewis but personally I subscribe to the idea of total depravity The concept is nonsense. It's like saying totally pregnant. If you are depraved, you do not deserve life. It doesn't matter "how" depraved you are. The problem is that the concept of "Total Depravity" has been expanded to mean things that are not well supported by the totality of scripture. Total depravity begins at the source of human existence. Being totally departed, there is nothing in any man that warrants mercy or grace. The expression is meant to convey that no matter how good one thinks himself or others to be, there is no hope because he is corrupt from the core. The use of the adjective "total" is meant to explain the depths of man's depravity, not the breadth. As Paul states in Ephesians "you were dead in trespasses and sins." One may ask "how dead is 'dead'?" I don't see it as nonsense since it explains the universality of man's condemnation apart from Christ. |
|
Quoted:
Total depravity begins at the source of human existence. Being totally departed, there is nothing in any man that warrants mercy or grace. The expression is meant to convey that no matter how good one thinks himself or others to be, there is no hope because he is corrupt from the core. The use of the adjective "total" is meant to explain the depths of man's depravity, not the breadth. As Paul states in Ephesians "you were dead in trespasses and sins." One may ask "how dead is 'dead'?" I don't see it as nonsense since it explains the universality of man's condemnation apart from Christ. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I like C.S.Lewis but personally I subscribe to the idea of total depravity The concept is nonsense. It's like saying totally pregnant. If you are depraved, you do not deserve life. It doesn't matter "how" depraved you are. The problem is that the concept of "Total Depravity" has been expanded to mean things that are not well supported by the totality of scripture. Total depravity begins at the source of human existence. Being totally departed, there is nothing in any man that warrants mercy or grace. The expression is meant to convey that no matter how good one thinks himself or others to be, there is no hope because he is corrupt from the core. The use of the adjective "total" is meant to explain the depths of man's depravity, not the breadth. As Paul states in Ephesians "you were dead in trespasses and sins." One may ask "how dead is 'dead'?" I don't see it as nonsense since it explains the universality of man's condemnation apart from Christ. To suggest that man possesses even a minute amount of inherent good discounts the Gift of Grace. Ephesians 2 expresses it far better than I can. |
|
Quoted:
I do not question my existence and I don't feel that I "owe" it to my Creator, as you stated, but rather believe I was created by a loving God and I thank him for everything in my life down to my breath I just took. The subject worth exploring is Grace The amazing aspect of human intelligence is that we are capable of questioning our very existence. Human dogma doesn't need to play a part in the process. The subject, for philosophers, is the nature of humanity and the reality the we occupy. |
|
Quoted:
To suggest that man possesses even a minute amount of inherent good discounts the Gift of Grace. Ephesians 2 expresses it far better than I can. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I like C.S.Lewis but personally I subscribe to the idea of total depravity The concept is nonsense. It's like saying totally pregnant. If you are depraved, you do not deserve life. It doesn't matter "how" depraved you are. The problem is that the concept of "Total Depravity" has been expanded to mean things that are not well supported by the totality of scripture. Total depravity begins at the source of human existence. Being totally departed, there is nothing in any man that warrants mercy or grace. The expression is meant to convey that no matter how good one thinks himself or others to be, there is no hope because he is corrupt from the core. The use of the adjective "total" is meant to explain the depths of man's depravity, not the breadth. As Paul states in Ephesians "you were dead in trespasses and sins." One may ask "how dead is 'dead'?" I don't see it as nonsense since it explains the universality of man's condemnation apart from Christ. To suggest that man possesses even a minute amount of inherent good discounts the Gift of Grace. Ephesians 2 expresses it far better than I can. +1 |
|
Quoted:
Ok, I've been wondering for some time now. What does CSB mean? Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
CSB A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion. Proverbs 18:2 Ok, I've been wondering for some time now. What does CSB mean? Cool Story Bro |
|
Quoted:
How does my comment invalidate the concept of questioning ones existence? I simply stated a question posed in the writings of C.S. Lewis. Quoted:
Quoted:
Um, no. Restating what something is doesn't make it different. Simply saying "...it stands as a legitimate question for those who choose to question human existence under the premise that our reality is owed to a creator." is nothing more than restating what you originally considered it to be. You have said nothing. How does my comment invalidate the concept of questioning ones existence? I simply stated a question posed in the writings of C.S. Lewis. It doesn't invalidate it. Rebutting TD is a totally different topic. You simply restated it and then tried to pass it off as an argument. |
|
Quoted: +1 Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I like C.S.Lewis but personally I subscribe to the idea of total depravity The concept is nonsense. It's like saying totally pregnant. If you are depraved, you do not deserve life. It doesn't matter "how" depraved you are. The problem is that the concept of "Total Depravity" has been expanded to mean things that are not well supported by the totality of scripture. Total depravity begins at the source of human existence. Being totally departed, there is nothing in any man that warrants mercy or grace. The expression is meant to convey that no matter how good one thinks himself or others to be, there is no hope because he is corrupt from the core. The use of the adjective "total" is meant to explain the depths of man's depravity, not the breadth. As Paul states in Ephesians "you were dead in trespasses and sins." One may ask "how dead is 'dead'?" I don't see it as nonsense since it explains the universality of man's condemnation apart from Christ. To suggest that man possesses even a minute amount of inherent good discounts the Gift of Grace. Ephesians 2 expresses it far better than I can. +1 The concept also states that none can seek grace, nor recognize it, or any other good thing from above. This the the part that departs from scripture. All humans are descended from the line with ate the fruit of the Tree of knowledge of good and evil. Drawing the conclusion that no one has good in them to justify their sins? Great. Drawing the conclusion that all are so lost that none can seek, or know to seek? Hmmm. You're going to have to rethink that one. |
|
Quoted:
The concept also states that none can seek grace, nor recognize it, or any other good thing from above. This the the part that departs from scripture. All humans are descended from the line with ate the fruit of the Tree of knowledge of good and evil. Drawing the conclusion that no one has good in them to justify their sins? Great. Drawing the conclusion that all are so lost that none can seek, or know to seek? Hmmm. You're going to have to rethink that one. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Total depravity begins at the source of human existence. Being totally departed, there is nothing in any man that warrants mercy or grace. The expression is meant to convey that no matter how good one thinks himself or others to be, there is no hope because he is corrupt from the core. The use of the adjective "total" is meant to explain the depths of man's depravity, not the breadth. As Paul states in Ephesians "you were dead in trespasses and sins." One may ask "how dead is 'dead'?" I don't see it as nonsense since it explains the universality of man's condemnation apart from Christ. To suggest that man possesses even a minute amount of inherent good discounts the Gift of Grace. Ephesians 2 expresses it far better than I can. +1 The concept also states that none can seek grace, nor recognize it, or any other good thing from above. This the the part that departs from scripture. All humans are descended from the line with ate the fruit of the Tree of knowledge of good and evil. Drawing the conclusion that no one has good in them to justify their sins? Great. Drawing the conclusion that all are so lost that none can seek, or know to seek? Hmmm. You're going to have to rethink that one. None can nor will save for the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. |
|
Quoted:
To suggest that man possesses even a minute amount of inherent good discounts the Gift of Grace. Ephesians 2 expresses it far better than I can. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I like C.S.Lewis but personally I subscribe to the idea of total depravity The concept is nonsense. It's like saying totally pregnant. If you are depraved, you do not deserve life. It doesn't matter "how" depraved you are. The problem is that the concept of "Total Depravity" has been expanded to mean things that are not well supported by the totality of scripture. Total depravity begins at the source of human existence. Being totally departed, there is nothing in any man that warrants mercy or grace. The expression is meant to convey that no matter how good one thinks himself or others to be, there is no hope because he is corrupt from the core. The use of the adjective "total" is meant to explain the depths of man's depravity, not the breadth. As Paul states in Ephesians "you were dead in trespasses and sins." One may ask "how dead is 'dead'?" I don't see it as nonsense since it explains the universality of man's condemnation apart from Christ. To suggest that man possesses even a minute amount of inherent good discounts the Gift of Grace. Ephesians 2 expresses it far better than I can. So if man were created in God's image, wouldn't he by definition possess some inherent, though imperfect good? |
|
Quoted: None can nor will save for the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Quoted: Quoted: The concept also states that none can seek grace, nor recognize it, or any other good thing from above. This the the part that departs from scripture. All humans are descended from the line with ate the fruit of the Tree of knowledge of good and evil. Drawing the conclusion that no one has good in them to justify their sins? Great. Drawing the conclusion that all are so lost that none can seek, or know to seek? Hmmm. You're going to have to rethink that one. None can nor will save for the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. In other words, the only reasonable conclusion that can be drawn from scripture is that "all are inspired" in some manner. |
|
There is no such thing as "evil". It is a word that we use to define what we believe to be wrong, cruel and malicious, but it is not a force or state of being in and of itself. If a man goes out, finds another person, kills that person and eats their body then we consider it to be the worst kind of evil. If a bear comes across a person, kills them and eats their body then we say "oh well!" Why isn't the bear evil for committing the same act that the "evil" man committed? Because the bear is just doing what bears do and doesn't have any knowledge of evil. The person knows that it is deemed to be wrong by society to kill and eat another person, so in doing so that person becomes evil. It is the knowledge of what we define as good or evil which makes good or evil applicable to us. Evil is also a matter of perspective. In Iran they execute homosexuals by hanging them. In Saudi Arabia they execute women for adultery. In Afghanistan they used to imprison, torture and execute people for converting to a religion other than Islam. In China you can be jailed, drugged, starved and executed for being a Christian. We call it evil. They call it justice. Evil is not a state of being, like being alive or being dead, being asleep or being awake, being fat or being thin. It is a label that we created to describe something we disapprove of. God has nothing to do with it. |
|
Quoted: So if man were created in God's image, wouldn't he by definition possess some inherent, though imperfect good? Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I like C.S.Lewis but personally I subscribe to the idea of total depravity The concept is nonsense. It's like saying totally pregnant. If you are depraved, you do not deserve life. It doesn't matter "how" depraved you are. The problem is that the concept of "Total Depravity" has been expanded to mean things that are not well supported by the totality of scripture. Total depravity begins at the source of human existence. Being totally departed, there is nothing in any man that warrants mercy or grace. The expression is meant to convey that no matter how good one thinks himself or others to be, there is no hope because he is corrupt from the core. The use of the adjective "total" is meant to explain the depths of man's depravity, not the breadth. As Paul states in Ephesians "you were dead in trespasses and sins." One may ask "how dead is 'dead'?" I don't see it as nonsense since it explains the universality of man's condemnation apart from Christ. To suggest that man possesses even a minute amount of inherent good discounts the Gift of Grace. Ephesians 2 expresses it far better than I can. So if man were created in God's image, wouldn't he by definition possess some inherent, though imperfect good? I have never heard a 5-point Calvinist explain this, nor the purpose of a "tree of knowledge of good and evil". |
|
Quoted:
The amazing aspect of human intelligence is that we are capable of questioning our very existence. Human dogma doesn't need to play a part in the process. The subject, for philosophers, is the nature of humanity and the reality the we occupy. Quoted:
Quoted:
I do not question my existence and I don't feel that I "owe" it to my Creator, as you stated, but rather believe I was created by a loving God and I thank him for everything in my life down to my breath I just took. The subject worth exploring is Grace The amazing aspect of human intelligence is that we are capable of questioning our very existence. Human dogma doesn't need to play a part in the process. The subject, for philosophers, is the nature of humanity and the reality the we occupy. Please give me examples of human dogma that you feel are unnecessary. This is starting to feel like I'm talking with my brother lol...he is highly educated from the University of YouTube |
|
Quoted:
+1 Quoted:
Quoted: To suggest that man possesses even a minute amount of inherent good discounts the Gift of Grace. Ephesians 2 expresses it far better than I can. +1 lol I can't think of anything more anti-human that to claim all men are totally evil and incapable of any intrinsic goodness because of a book called Holy Words or as I call it "The Diary of a Tyrant". |
|
Quoted:
There is no such thing as "evil". It is a word that we use to define what we believe to be wrong, cruel and malicious, but it is not a force or state of being in and of itself. If a man goes out, finds another person, kills that person and eats their body then we consider it to be the worst kind of evil. If a bear comes across a person, kills them and eats their body then we say "oh well!" Why isn't the bear evil for committing the same act that the "evil" man committed? Because the bear is just doing what bears do and doesn't have any knowledge of evil. The person knows that it is deemed to be wrong by society to kill and eat another person, so in doing so that person becomes evil. It is the knowledge of what we define as good or evil which makes good or evil applicable to us. Evil is also a matter of perspective. In Iran they execute homosexuals by hanging them. In Saudi Arabia they execute women for adultery. In Afghanistan they used to imprison, torture and execute people for converting to a religion other than Islam. In China you can be jailed, drugged, starved and executed for being a Christian. We call it evil. They call it justice. Evil is not a state of being, like being alive or being dead, being asleep or being awake, being fat or being thin. It is a label that we created to describe something we disapprove of. God has nothing to do with it. Hmmmm not sure where to start with this so I will just simply say my worldview is respectfully totally the opposite of yours |
|
Don't have to rethink it....Romans 3:11 answers it for me, "no one seeks after God." The "concept" is not a concept, it's found all throughout Scripture. It practically is overflowing in the first 3 chapters of Romans, which is basically an indictment on all mankind.
And you are correct, there is no way anyone can justify their sin. |
|
Quoted:
lol I can't think of anything more anti-human that to claim all men are totally evil and incapable of any intrinsic goodness because of a book called Holy Words or as I call it "The Diary of a Tyrant". Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted: To suggest that man possesses even a minute amount of inherent good discounts the Gift of Grace. Ephesians 2 expresses it far better than I can. +1 lol I can't think of anything more anti-human that to claim all men are totally evil and incapable of any intrinsic goodness because of a book called Holy Words or as I call it "The Diary of a Tyrant". Its basically we feel like we have what we have because of His love and nonbelievers are more like "I got this" You see laws and rules when you read the Bible? |