Trains

Today I was struck by the realization that my current "spiritual state" is pretty ironic. I am at a Christian college and I feel totally isolated from God. I feel like He and I are on parallel train tracks, and I keep looking in the distance and thinking that they converge sometime. I can hear Him telling me that my track ends and I need to jump on His train right quick, but as I reach my hand over through the window, I can't quite grab His, and I'm getting scared because we're going so fast.

Why is it that knowing I'm hurdling at astronomical speed toward a fatal crash is less scary than just jumping trains? I think I feel I'm safe because I'm heading in the same direction as God. I'm not saying that I'm not a Christian, I am. I believe in Jesus as my Lord and Savior. It just sounds like so much work to completely and fearlessly jump trains. Plus I feel like there's so much riding on MY train. I definitely can't take it all with me- I wouldn't be able to jump then- in fact, I don't think I can take any of it. But I don't want it to end up in a lonely and forgotten pile at the end of the track, either.

The Start of Something New

Being unable to come up with a satisfactory cliche or pun for the title of this blog, I decided to go with Jibberish for now. I felt it was an appropriate warning to whoever might happen across this page and think that I have truly meaningful things to say: I don't. I am struck by the urge to blog today, I had some fairly profound thoughts earlier when I was trying to do some devotions, and I thought that they were worth throwing out there. But we'll get to that in a minute. I probably won't be possessed by this urge again for a while, so I figured I would take advantage of it while it lasts.

To those of you who are already confused, I'm sorry, it won't get much better, or make much more sense. If you want to read something coherent, I would try my older posts, which were assigned for a wonderful class on C.S. Lewis. Now HE has written some cool stuff.

Anyway, I should be doing literally a thousand other things right now. I have 3 pen pals that I owe each of them a letter, homework, laundry, and a sad roommate that I should be comforting, not to mention this blog still needs a legitimate name. But I am not doing this to complain in a public forum, so I will shut up and get to the point.

"Motivation" Integrative Essay

Much of what we have talked about in class has related to the motivation behind how we choose to act. Right thinking does not always mean right living, but right living does not always mean right thinking either. In the articles we have read by C.S Lewis, and well as Engaging God’s World, by Cornelius Plantinga, we have learned how wrong motives can lead to detrimental side effects. We see this in our relationships with God, and with other people, in our education, the way we argue, and even simply obeying rules in general. No matter how hard we strive to live perfectly according to God’s laws, we are not going to be able to do it. Should this lead to frustration and defeat? Certainly not. But it should lead to careful reflection about the intentions of our hearts as we do our best to please our Maker. It is wise to consider how the motives behind our actions affect every area of our lives.

People often see Christianity as simply a list of rules- rules that God calls us to obey, but they argue that it is impossible and unreasonable for us to follow them all. In light of this, we should also evaluate the reasons why we choose to try to obey the rules that God has given us. Plantinga takes up this debate in chapter 4 of Engaging God’s World. The chapter is appropriately titled “Redemption”, and it essentially speaks of the need for us to see God’s commands in a different light. Plantinga points out that the rules God has given us are not a contract. They are not a condition to which God says “If you obey these, I will give you salvation”. The Israelites, for example, were given the Ten Commandments after they were delivered from slavery, not before (Plantinga 75). We, too, are given the instructions of Jesus from the gospels after He died for us. God’s commands are not conditional. There are consequences when we do not obey them, but mostly it is things that we bring on ourselves; sin wreaks its own havoc in our lives. Instead, God’s commands are guidelines to give His people freedom to the fullest extent, to help them flourish, to work towards shalom. God knows that we can never obey His commands perfectly, but it still honors Him to see us try. Martin Luther said, “Good works are not the cause, but the fruit of righteousness” (Plantinga 94). Our acts of obedience should not be motivated by a fear of the consequences for disobeying them, or even by a longing for rewards or recognition. Our obedience is a humble love-offering to God. Through obedience we communicate that we acknowledge that God knows better than we do.

Another popular idea today is that it is much better to simply create your own rules and morality to live by. Lewis argues against this perspective in his lecture “The Poison of Subjectivism”, by saying “This whole attempt to jettison traditional values as something subjective and to substitute a new scheme of values for them is wrong” (Lewis, “Poison” 2). We cannot make our own moral systems; it is like trying to enthrone our own logic. The very idea of subjectivism reveals our motives: they are thoroughly selfish and egocentric in nature. When we try to create our own laws, we are essentially telling God that we think we can do His job better than He can, and that we think our lives will be better off when we determine what we are going to do. When we put it like this, it seems ridiculous that anything would persuade us to try to do this. But that is how deeply our sinful nature runs in us. Plantinga says that when we place our faith in nature or in ourselves instead of God, the results are always disastrous (Plantinga 67).

Our discussion of motives also becomes very applicable when we consider why we interact with others in the way that we do. In class, we saw two examples of this. The first was our discussion of the chapter entitled Eros from Lewis’ book The Four Loves. This chapter discussed our motivations in romantic love: whether we pursue the warm, fuzzy feeling of “falling in love” (Eros), or the deep and real commitment of “being in love”. Lewis talks about how it is so tempting to idolize Eros himself, chasing after feelings and forgetting about the commitment that real love requires. He warns against using this motivation by saying, “When natural things look almost divine, the demoniac is just round the corner” (Lewis, “Eros” 144). It is never good to be motivated by Eros on a pedestal, because he does indeed look almost divine. But we know that true and real love sees Eros as only a part of the game, a part that needs to be controlled with a healthy dose of commitment. Lewis says, “It is we who must labour to bring our daily life into even closer accordance with what glimpses have revealed. We must do the works of Eros when Eros is not present” (159).

We must also think about our relationships with others in the context of our circles of acquaintances. Lewis refers to these as “Inner Rings” in his lecture to the students at the University of London. (Lewis, “Inner Ring”). Often, in our interactions with other people, we are motivated by the desire to get “in”. To be seen by others as part of an elite group or a certain circle. Because of this we manipulate, and attempt to control others to gain acceptance into their groups. Plantinga says that the purpose of acquiring skills should be to increase the amount of Shalom in the world, not be to impress the less skillful, or even to become more employable (Plantinga 131). But so often, this is why we do things. We strive to impress others, to make them jealous, to show that we can do something that they cannot, or that we are better than them in some way. Lewis says, “I must not as whether you have derived actual pleasure from the loneliness and humiliation of the outsiders” (“Inner Ring”). The desire to be accepted into these rings is not only dangerous and destructive, it is also addicting. Lewis draws an analogy between this and piercing through the layers of an onion. Just as there are many many layers, there is ring after ring to become a part of. And at the center, there is nothing but a wasted life and broken relationships. “Unless you take measures to prevent it, this desire is going to be one of the chief motives of your life”, Lewis warns (“Inner Ring”). In both love and work, we must see other people as immortal beings, created by God in His own image, and treat them as such. Lewis makes this point in his sermon “The Weight of Glory”, where he says, “All day long we are, in some degree, helping each other to one or other of these destinations. It is in the light of these overwhelming possibilities… that we should conduct all our dealings with one another, all friendships, all loves, all play, all politics” (Lewis, “Weight”).

Our motives will also invariably affect the way that we approach our jobs. Plantinga highlights this by saying that the emphasis should be on “how you will do your job,” not which job we end up doing (Plantinga 117). Right now, we are students, called to Calvin College by a God who tells us, “For I know the plans I have for you” (Jeremiah 29:11). So just as we should approach a job with pure and right motives, we must try our very hardest to approach our education with the same reasons. It is not so much what college we go to, or even that we are at college at all. These are the “which job?” questions that Plantinga says are not to be our main focus. It is easy to be motivated by the grades, the degrees, the “right major”, or the “dream job”. But, as Christians, we are called to higher motivations than these. In his lecture “Learning in War-Time”, C.S. Lewis answers the deep questions that many of us have asked of ourselves. Why are we spending time learning when there is a world in desperate need of Jesus out there? Lewis puts it this way, “all our merely natural activities will be accepted, if they are offered to God, even the humblest: and all of them, even the noblest, will be sinful if they are not” (Lewis “Learning”). Our learning is to be motivated by humble obedience to God- appreciation for what He has created and what we can learn from it, and desire to be the best person that we can: the person that God is shaping us into. Lewis says in “Our English Syllabus”, “The student is, or ought to be, a young man [or woman] who is already beginning to follow learning for its own sake” (Lewis, “Syllabus” 85). In “Learning in War-Time”, however, he takes is advice one step further. “I mean the pursuit of knowledge and beauty, in a sense, for their own sake, but in a sense which does not exclude their being for God’s sake” (Lewis “Learning”). God has blessed us with the wonderful institution of Calvin College, and a world of learning at our finger tips. We will only truly make the most of this gift if we are motivated by our love of learning and the One who created us with the ability to learn.

Plantinga says that “Our sense of God runs in us like a stream” (7). We know, deep down, that we are created beings, with the unique desire and ability to offer our efforts to God. We can do nothing on our own, but through Christ we can humbly offer our actions to God. Our obedience, our relationships, our interactions with others, even our approach to education can and should be motivated by our love and gratitude to God. Our logo here at Calvin states “My heart I offer you Lord- promptly and sincerely.” It is important to remember that throughout our lives, we should be searching for ways to set our motives right- to remind ourselves that in all things, our actions should come from a heart that is offered to God.

Works Cited

Lewis, C.S. The Four Loves: Eros. ©Helen Joy Lewis. 1960.

Lewis, C S. "The Inner Ring." University of London. 1944. Lecture.

Lewis, C.S. “Learning in War-Time.” Church of St. Mary the Virgin, Oxford. 1939. Lecture.

Lewis, C.S. “Our English Syllabus.” Oxford University Press. 1939. Print.

Lewis, C.S. “The Poison of Subjectivism”. From Christian Reflections. 1967.

Lewis, C.S. “The Weight of Glory.” Church of St. Mary the Virgin, Oxford. 1942. Lecture.

Plantinga, Cornelius Jr. Engaging God's Word. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdman's Publishing Co. ,

2002. Print

The Problem of Pain

"But, self-imprisoned, always end where I begin" says C.S Lewis, in the poem As The Ruins Fall. Our pain is so closely linked with our own fallen, sinful nature. From the poem, this line is Lewis' confession that when he tries to do things on his own, his sinful nature restricts him to being able to do nothing. This is so true of myself as well. Even when I think I am getting somewhere in life, when I start to feel that I have really accomplished something all by myself, I am usually humbled by the magnitude of my own failure.

Even when it is simply the failure to do anything with perfect humility. In this chapter, Lewis says, "But to surrender a self-will inflamed and swollen with years of usurpation is a kind of death." No matter what, when our pride or our will is broken, it will always be painful. This happens to us all the time- I hate to admit that I am wrong, that I have the wrong attitude, or that what I want is in contrast to what God wants for me. Lewis compares it to breaking a child's will in education. You do this out of love for the child. Even when they throw their wildest tantrums, you must not give in because the child has to learn that he will not always get his way in life. I picture God as a gentle teacher, breaking our will because we feel that we have such a strong hold on it. I wanted so badly to go to University of Michigan law school, and when I got accepted, I felt that the door was open for me. But pretty soon things started to go wrong with my plan. The financial aid wasn't there, the school didn't feel right; I felt like an excited puppy on a short leash. It seems silly, now that I see that He was pulling me towards Calvin the whole time.

Even as I write this, I think "how can I complain about the supposed pain that a college decision caused me?" But I guess my point is that each little time that our wills are broken is a little bit of pain- and it only reminds me of our fallen nature, because if we were not sinful beings, our wills would always be in line with God's, and pain would not be needed as a fundamental contrast to Shalom.

Man or Rabbit?

The part of this essay "Man or Rabbit?" that stuck out to me the most was the following: "But to the Christian, individuals are more important, for they live eternally; and races civilizations and the like, are in comparison the creatures of a day." This reminds me of the Weight of Glory were Lewis warns us that "it is immortals whom we joke with, work with, marry, snub, and exploit- immortal horrors or everlasting splendours." This is actually something I have never thought about before reading these essays. Why should races and categorizations of people matter so much when they will only exist while we are here on earth, but we will continue to be around for eternity? It makes our divisions into "popular" vs. "unpopular" or "attractive" vs. "unattractive" seem so silly!

This works into our conclusions about "The Inner Ring" too. Why should it matter what rings we are a part of or what rings others are not a part of ? This is the wrong attitude. This is the attitude that says our lives are simply blips on a grand spectrum of history and time. The right attitude says that even civilization, history, and time are simply blips on the grand spectrum of eternity. This should make us take our actions much more seriously, and see the importance of our day-to-day interactions with other people.

When talking about the difference between rejecting God because of honest error or dishonest error, Lewis says this: "But to evade the Son of Man, to look the other way, to pretend you haven't noticed, to become suddenly absorbed in something on the other side of the street... this is a different matter." In light of how we ourselves are immortal, our decisions and actions are really eternal as well. It is so much more dangerous to reject God once we have heard His message and felt His pull on our hearts. This too reminds me of the letter from Screwtape Letters that tells us how the road to Hell is so often gradual. Our rejection of God can be gradual too- simply allowing ourselves to be distracted, to turn the other way, to disobey God’s instructions in our lives. Each little step that pulls us away from God is a gradual foot slide on the slippery slope down.

The Inner Ring

While reading this essay on the Inner Ring, I appreciated the way that Lewis pointed out that the pursuit of constant acceptance into rings is often tiresome. I compare it to running on a treadmill, where no matter how long or fast you run, you still don't really get anywhere. You feel like you are getting somewhere for awhile because it takes so much effort and energy. But really we are just peeling back layers, or running over the same strip of rubber the whole time. Lewis puts it this way, "It is tiring and unhealthy to lose your Saturday afternoons: but to have them free because you don't matter, that is much worse." We constantly talk of "being involved", of doing different things, making friends, etc. We spend so much time doing so many different things, no wonder we are stressed out and overwhelmed! And for what? To say that we are balanced, well-rounded individuals? This may be true in a sense, but when we grind our teeth or find ourselves bedridden from what started as a basic cold virus, it becomes vital to re-evaluate our priorities.

This is true of friendships, too. So often I find myself going out with a big group of friends, most who are not really close friends, doing things I don't really care to do and spending money that I don't necessarily have. Then I say I don't have the money to go get coffee and catch up with a true friend that I haven't seen in ages, or I don't have the time to sit and reply to a letter from my accountability partner, who truly loves and cares about me! Lewis says, "And if in your spare time you consort simply with the people you like, you will again find that you have come unawares to a real inside: that you are indeed snug and safe at the centre of something which, seen from without, would look exactly like an Inner Ring....This is friendship." All this reminds me of the excerpt we read from Screwtape Letters, where the Screwtape says, "You can make him waste his time not only in conversations he enjoys with people whom he likes, but in conversations with those he cares nothing about on subjects that bore him." This is what we constantly do to get into Inner Rings. It is important to recognize what a waste of time that this truly is.

Plantinga Chapter 5: Vocation in the Kingdom of God

As I have been reading through Plantinga's book so far, I found myself agreeing with the majority of what he has said, and appreciating the clarity with which he says it. But this chapter did not go down as easily as the others for me. It is hard for me to be critical of writing; I have a deep appreciation for people who can write their thoughts and make others understand them. But this chapter of Plantinga's book disturbed me to the point that I feel I must be critical of it.

I took a class my senior year of high school that very thoroughly covered the topic of vocation using the book Total Truth by Nancy Pearcey. We also talked about vocation during a week of Prelude here at Calvin. These two times interested me and reassured me about God's plans for the lives of His followers and His desire for us to participate in a vocation that honors Him. I appreciated and agreed with many of the points that Plantinga made in this sense. However, I felt that he wrote with an air of superiority in this chapter that would offend any non-Christians and even some Christians who do not happen to be Reformed. My first example of this is on page 109, where he asserts that "Working in the kingdom is our way of life. And many followers have concluded that we need powerful Christian education to learn how to serve the kingdom most intelligently." Even if this were true, and there were not countless examples of people who did not receive a Christian education and are most intelligently serving the kingdom (which there are), I would still say that one should have the tact not to say that sort of thing out loud, much less in a book, and I might add that I would be ashamed for even thinking this way. Not that a Christian education doesn't help you better serve the kingdom; I am just saying that an attitude that pridefully says that "I can serve the kingdom better than you because I went to a Christian high school or college" is both sinful and wrong in my opinion.

I could go on with the examples where I felt that Plantinga wrote with an offensive air of superiority, but I know that this is beside the point. Sometimes we must simply dig deeper and keep the truth in some things. One point that I appreciated from the chapter was his discussion of simply going with the flow and not taking the time or effort to avoid "absorbing the views of the world" and being aware of the differences between our faith and what we are learning. Sometimes it is important to look critically at the things that we are being spoon fed and compare them to the highest authority, the Bible. Plantiga warns against this danger when he says, "such students will be busy with a hundred other things and won't take the time or spend the effort to sort out the good from the evil." I hope and pray that I will be able to resist the temptation to be this kind of student.

The Four Loves: Eros

The whole time I was reading this chapter on Eros, I kept coming back to chick flicks. Movies in which the guy and the girl somehow overcome "obstacles" and ignore all reason and reality in pursuit of Eros. The movies follow their journeys of falling in love and then end before they have to remain in love. Somehow, I simultaneously love and hate these movies. The idea that the state of falling in love never turns into simply "being in love" is appealing. But wishful thinking aside, we know that it's unrealistic. Even family relationships and friendships have their emotional ups and downs.

Take, for example, the story of Pride and Prejudice. I am a sucker for all things Jane Austen, but in light of Lewis' discussion of Eros, I have taken a new critical view of this classic story. Lewis makes the point about how lovers will often decide to be unhappy as long as they are together, rather than happy or whole when they are apart. Pride and Prejudice confirms this. Elizabeth is completely repulsed by the behavior and superior air of Mr. Darcy. She cannot stand him, and she even remarks that he is the last person in the world that she would marry. She receives an offer of marriage from a sensible choice; someone who would make an excellent partner. The book and the movie both teach us to despise this person simply because Elizabeth is "not in love" with him. But when Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy "fall in love", our hearts are warmed, and we agree that they should definitely be married. Even though there is no evidence that their personalities are compatible, or even that either of them have overcome their pride or their prejudice.

Lewis says, "They expected that mere feeling would do for them, and permanently, all that was necessary." The story ends before their marriage starts- before they reach any bumps in the road. It just reminds me how, even still today, we often put Eros on a pedestal, and say that once you find it, you must do anything to keep it. I was even convinced that it is always best that people who have "fallen in love" should always stay together, because this is what chick flicks told me. "Falling in love" seemed perfect. But to be perfect is to be divine, and C.S Lewis warns against this when he says, "when natural things look most divine, the demoniac is just round the corner." Seeing Eros as divine is dangerous territory.

So what does he suggest? Lewis points out that "falling in love" is the easy part, and "being in love" is much harder. It is a daily choice. You have to be dedicated to it, and don't expect Eros to be on your side or to be present permanently. So what about the main characters of Pride and Prejudice or the Notebook (where it is perfectly acceptable for the main character to cheat on her fiance and have sex before marriage because she ran in to her "soulmate", who she thought was dead)? How do we tell them that "Eros, or himself, will never be enough and will indeed survive only in so far as he is continually chastened and corroborated by higher principles"? We cannot tell them. But we can remind ourselves, and also remember that Eros is not our highest pursuit here.

Lewis says, "this programme, modest as it sounds, will not be carried out except by humility, charity, and divine grace." And this is true no matter how many chick flicks, Frank Sinatra songs, or romance novels tell us otherwise.

Learning In Wartime

I have read a few books by Shane Claiborne, and I usually think while I am reading them that maybe I should give up everything, sell all my stuff, and simply live as the first Christians did. I wonder how I can possibly be spending so much time and money at a place like Calvin College when there is a huge world out there that is desperate for Jesus. I know that Christ told us that He would come again like a thief in the night, and I wonder if he finds me pulling an all-nighter studying for an exam, would He say I was faithfully waiting for Him? I really appreciated this article by C.S Lewis because it answered questions that were permanently begging to be asked deep in the back of my brain.

Lewis says, "One's life, after conversion, would inevitably consist in doing most of the same things one had been doing before: one hopes, in a new spirit, but still the same things." Alot of times we think that the lives of Christians should be much, much different than the lives of others. And we should be different- but we still have to eat, we still have to drink, we still have to sleep. If we are called to it, we still might even have to study. Lewis goes on to say that, "all our merely natural activities will be accepted, if they are offered to God, even the humblest: and all of them, even the noblest, will be sinful if they are not." Often we focus on the last part of that sentence, the part that relates to total depravity. But what about the first part? A shower, working out, eating lunch can be a humble offering to God? I have not thought of it this way. If we shower and exercise, not for a flat belly or to for our appearance to others, but because our body is God's temple then yes, these can be offerings to God. If we eat and sleep in order to serve Him more energetically rather than because we are gluttonous or lazy, then I believe He is honored.

I sometimes thought that these were all selfish things, including studying. I thought that my reading that wasn't for school, reading like good novels, or random other books that I read purely for interest, were all selfish wastes of time. But these are things in which I pursued learning for the sake of learning, as Lewis put it in “Our English Syllabus”. I hope and pray that I might approach my studies in this way, or the way Lewis states it in this article, “the pursuit of knowledge and beauty, in a sense for their own sake, but in a sense which does not exclude their being for God’s sake.” His answer to my question is that being at Calvin is where God has placed me now, and as long as I offer my act of studying up as a humble offering to God, He will be honored.

Plantinga Chapter 4: Redemption

I struggled a bit reading this chapter of Engaging God's World. I was overcome by the prideful attitude that I had heard it all before, and that Plantinga could not possibly have anything new to say to me. I found, however, that while it may not have been much "new" material, God did remind me of a few things. So even though I was not the biggest fan of the way that Plantinga chose to communicate the information, I did come away with some new thoughts about a few things.

One thing in particular that caught my attention was the idea behind God's rules in our lives. Plantinga discusses both the Ten Commandments as well as the added suggestions from the new testament, which he refers to as "glad instructions" (p. 93). I was reminded by his discussion of how God chose to give the commandments after the Exodus that our "religious rules" are not a deal with God. He didn't give them to the Israelites and say "if you follow these, I will deliver you". Instead, they were guidelines to give His chosen people freedom to the fullest extent, to help them flourish, to work towards shalom. God knew that they could never obey His commands perfectly, but it still honored Him to see them try. It is the same situation with us. Following the guidelines that God gives us in the Bible will not get us into Heaven. Only what Christ did will give us salvation. True redemption means following all the rules perfectly and having shalom. But we are too fallen-we need Christ and His atonement for our shortcomings. Plantinga says, “Proclamation of the resurrection of Jesus isn’t nearly everything Christians have to offer the world, but it’s the platform for everything they have to offer.” Everything we do must be seen in light of how we have been redeemed by Christ- we must admit that we are helpless to do anything on our own.

Another reason that Plantinga gives for God’s rules is that they are the only way we can have true and lasting freedom. In “Learning in Wartime”, C.S Lewis said, “Christianity does not exclude any of the ordinary human activities.” In the sense that Lewis means this, as far as eating, drinking, sleeping, etc., this is true. One might say that Christianity restricts us from a lot of the sinful human activities. But God doesn’t physically prohibit us from doing these things- it is our choice whether or not to obey God’s command. But when does adultery have a happy ending? God gives us these commands to allow us to live life to the fullest; and this rule is no exception.

On the first page, Plantinga comments that “Fallen people can’t stand scrutiny.” In other words, none of us can stand scrutiny. I know there are many times in my life when I cannot stand criticism or am too prideful to accept advice. In this case, it is important that I hear God’s words through Plantinga reminding me of the right reasons to obey His commands.

The Poison of Subjectivism

When reflecting on the article "The Poison of Subjectivism" I was recalling an argument that I had with a fellow worker at the summer camp that I work at. I use the word "argument" here quite intentionally, because what started as a friendly discussion had quickly progressed into something much more personal, heated, and unpleasant than simply a debate. I don't exactly remember what the issue was; something I feel strongly about, like abortion, the education system, or something of the sort. Regardless, somehow we ended up on the subject of nature vs. nurture. I will avoid bulverism by not going into the details on the type of person that this certain co-worker was, but I will say, we did not see eye-to-eye on much. When C.S Lewis states that "To say that a thing is good is merely to express our feeling about it; and our feeling about it is the feeling we have been socially conditioned to have", he is referring to this "modern idea" that we are basically products of our environment. I am not saying that the "nurture" idea is completely wrong or completely right, I just feel that often we take the idea too far, as Lewis describes in this essay.

My co-worker and I ended our argument, each thinking that the other was crazy for believing what they said they believed. However, we did agree on one thing. In all things, we must obey God, and follow the commands He gives us through His word and His Spirit. Lewis brings up the question "Are things right because God commands them or does God command them because they are right?" This question struck me as one of the most interesting points in the essay, because I immediately thought that the first answer was right. Lewis instantly set me back by pointing out that if that was the case, then God would no longer have to be good. He could be an evil dictator God, commanding whatever He wants to. And the second is wrong too, because goodness did not precede God. Thinking of the union between God and goodness was a very new and intriguing thing for me, and I really appreciated Lewis' explanations and examples.

No matter what, Lewis' essay proves timely and vitally important still today. His sense of urgency in conveying His message in this essay is a good reminder of the seriousness of the issue. We can't labor under the assumption that humans can make their own truth. This is where we get into very dangerous territory. Lewis calls it the"fatal superstition that men can create values". This is truly a fatal mistake to make, and I needed to be reminded of this just as much as the original audience of this essay.

Plantinga Chapter 3: The Fall

We see evidence of evil everywhere in our world. It is so hard to understand why hurricanes destroy cities, why earthquakes devastate countries, or why people die of hunger. In this chapter of Plantinga's book, he focuses on the differences and connections between evil, sin and corruption. He also describes how this part of the story affects life on earth. Many people, seeing these problems, either try very hard to fix them, or give up in despair. I have always been somewhere in between these two reactions. Sometimes I find myself trying so hard to fix everyone's problems, to make the hurt and the pain and the sadness disappear. But then, after putting in so much time and effort, i am often overcome by a wave of helplessness, hopelessness, and despair.

Plantinga says, "The human problem isn't just that we timidly conform to prevailing modes of life; it's also that nothing human can jolt us out of our slump." In other words, it is not only that we are completely and utterly lost in our own sin, there is also the reality that we can do nothing about it. No matter how often we find cures for diseases, people will continue to die. Plantinga also talks about the way that humans have always, and will always continue to "diagnose and prescribe", or point out what is wrong with the world, and come up with strategies to fix it. We organize relief efforts, mission trips, and homeless shelters. We raise money for the poor, the needy, and the organizations that help them. And we should. It is just that nothing we do can present a permanent fix for the problem. I have often felt that it is like putting a band-aid on a wound that needs stitches.

On the next page, Plantinga says that "God is for Shalom, and therefore against sin." It is a grave reminder than humanity is corrupt, all the way down to the cores of our beings. We are in a world where only God can save humanity. Does this mean we should give up helping people and cleaning up from the havoc that sin wreaks on earth? Of course not, God calls us to be compassionate and help those in need. We are to do this because we want to be like Him, and He wants to help us too. The effect of the Fall are much like the way C.S Lewis describes subjectivism (even though subjectivism is one effect of said Fall). It is a poison, a deadly poison that spreads all through our world, affecting and killing everything. It harkens back to the longing that we all have deep within us. An understanding that this is not the way things are supposed to be, and a knowledge that they will not always stay this way.

Beyond Personality

I was tempted to be offended by the way that the presentation depicted Lewis' view of women while I listened to it in class. I had a hard time dealing with the idea that he only liked a woman because of her "masculine mind". I would not consider myself a radical feminist, but I do think that women have long been over looked and belittled. I was thinking about how great it would have been to have C.S Lewis for a teacher, and then I wondered if Lewis would have even given me the time of day because I am a girl.

Then, I realized that we often ask to be belittled. The quote "Perfect humility dispenses with modesty" reminds me that even in studies, we should present our ideas with confidence. Lewis would be proud of any student who engaged his (or her) mind in what they were studying, was quick to ask questions, eager to share opinions, but glad to have them critiqued or refuted. As a humble student, I wish that I could live the type of life Lewis lived- constantly engaging deep subjects in reflective thought.

In the excerpt that we read from Screwtape Letters, Screwtape describes the effective strategy of simply making the person think about nothing for long periods of time. I am so tempted to do this with useless staring out the window, or even wasting time staring at Facebook pages. I would much rather spend my time thinking, and becoming the type of person who is interesting to talk to, who offers a mind sharp enough to sharpen yours on. Lewis, in "Our English Syllabus", says "...The interesting and the interested man..."describing the type of people that we should want to be.

I am only allowed to be offended by degrading remarks about the minds of women if I do something about it. This is a great reminder that minds are sharpened with practice. I want to be fully engaged in my studies, fully invested in the search for truth, and willing to open my mind.

Mere Christianity

This section of "Mere Christianity" had so much information packed into such a small amount of writing. Lewis' clear and concise way of wording things allows him to pack many profound truths into just a few chapters. So in this blog, I am simply going to focus on two small sentences. Bits of blunt truth that were very convicting for me.

The first of these quotes is from chapter 1, and it states “Selfishness has never been admired.” How true this is! Lewis is just giving an example of a trait that people have agreed on for a long time now. Even now, in the age of individualism and “it’s all about you”, “you can be whomever/whatever you want to be”, etc., it is still no fun to be around selfish people. The theme of selfishness has come up over and over again in what we have read so far from Lewis. For example, the other day when Professor Paulo was talking about the steps towards misdirection on our vocation road map; the very first step was a “feeling of self-importance”. I guess I am just being reminded that selflessness is an important aspect of our faith.

On a separate, but related note, the other quote is from the note at the end of chapter 4. It is just a small sentence describing the “Life-Force” idea, saying, “All of the thrills of religion, and none of the cost.” It just reminded me of the watered-down, lukewarm religion that Screwtape told Wormwood to encourage. Often I feel that, whether we have the “Life-Force” belief system or not, we employ the same self-centered idea of religion. Lewis says, “…a sort of tame God. You can switch it on when you want, but it will not bother you.” This is when religion becomes selfish, when we only use God when we need Him, and keep Him contained in our box.

Shattered Glass (Movie)

"Do remember, the only thing that matters is the extent to which you separate the man from the Enemy. It does not matter how small the sins are provided that their cumulative effect is to edge the man away from the Light and out into the Nothing." ~The Screwtape Letters

Shattered Glass is a movie that starts by following the career of a promising young journalist working at the political magazine "The New Republic". Stephen Glass is entertaining, he is creative, and he is very quickly climbing the corporate ladder. But (*Spoiler Alert*) Glass, in the end, is revealed to be a pathological liar who has fabricated all or part of the majority of his articles. The web of lies that Stephen spins catches him and destroys the career that he has worked so hard to build. Lying is the easy thing for him to do, because it gives him success and satisfies the most people with the least work. What he thinks of as small sins adds up and pulls him completely into darkness.

Glass also begins to blame those around him for the mess that he is in. When Chuck (his boss) confronts him, Glass uses bulverism to fight back. He says that Chuck is only “attacking” him because he supported his former boss all the way up until the end. He takes the attack personally instead of professionally, and cannot see that Chuck is not doing this because of any personal history or disagreements, merely because Stephen has made a huge mistake.

The life of Stephen Glass has a lot to do with the very first article we read, “Meditation in a Toolshed”. Glass’ perspective was that he had not anything wrong. Many times he wrote stories about events that he had “gone to”, when in reality he hadn’t actually been there. To sound like a good journalist, he led people to believe that he had looked along things, when in reality, he was only looking at them. This simple change perspective may seem like a small lie, but it significantly changed many of his stories. And he thought that if he could change the perspective that he wrote from, he may as well change a few of the facts, the locations, the times, or the people. Soon he was convincing himself that if he could slightly alter facts, then he could also add new details to the story. And then he was making up parts of the story, and soon he was making up entire events. This is what we learned in the above quote from the Screwtape Letters; sin tends to have a snowball effect in our lives.

One more connection: Glass’ life is also a great example of what C.S Lewis talks about in the first chapter of “Mere Christianity”. Glass constantly spoke of the importance of true journalism, of fact-checking, of a reliable and honest system. Then in his own life and career, Glass completely failed to live up to the standards that he held for others. He thought that to be honest and communicate truth was Right, and lying and fabrication was Wrong. But he did not live according to his own standard. In our fallen world, we still have a standard of right and wrong, and we hold others to it, but often we fail to follow it ourselves.

The Screwtape Letters- Letter XII

The word “habit” is an interesting word. You can have good habits or bad habits, but is it good or bad to have habits? As I read this excerpt from “The Screwtape Letters”, for what is I think my fourth time, the concept of habits stood out and convicted me most. Something new stands out each time I read any of these letters, and it always teaches me something new, as only the best books can. In this letter, Screwtape points out that when religious duties become habits, they become stale, and before we know it, we have deceived ourselves into thinking that our spiritual state is fine despite the reality of its gradual decline. I would add here that I struggle with this in my daily life. It is easy for my religious habits to become simply concerned with outward appearances. It sometimes gets to the point where it isn’t even about God anymore… and this almost invariably breeds hypocrisy in my life.

My other realization about habits is that when we refer to our spiritual disciplines as habits, we are already attaching a sort of negative connotation to them. Habit in itself, even when referring to good ones like brushing your teeth or doing your homework, does not usually sound like something fun or something to be looked forward to. Does doing our devotions, praying, or going to church need to be put in the same category as exercising, taking showers, or calling our mothers? I wish it weren’t that way.

This part of the letter raises questions for me. Is it bad, then, to do things out of habit? If I must force myself to read my Bible, would it be better for me not to do so? Can a good habit become a bad thing merely by becoming a habit? I know that in a best case scenario we simply want to do our “religious duties”. Psalm 40:6 says, “Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but my ears you have pierced; burnt offerings and sin offerings you did not require.” God wants our attention and our listening ears, our whole being, if possible, rather than habitual offerings from a hard heart. But at what point to we stop? From my own experience, I think that God would rather have me read my Bible, even if it is out of habit. And often, I enjoy it very much once I am started. He speaks to me even if I am reluctant or lazy.

Screwtape says, “In this state, your patient will not omit, but he will increasingly dislike, his religious duties. He will think about them as little as he feels he decently can beforehand, and forget them as soon as possible when they are over.” Habit or not, we can all fight the devil by choosing to think more about our “religious duties” as a vital and connected part of the rest of our lives.

"The Weight of Glory"

“The Weight of Glory” gave me for the first time what I believe to be a very realistic and very possible view of what Heaven might be like. Not only that, but Lewis’ ideas finally were able to give me a strong anticipation for eternity. Prior to this, I knew that I was supposed to look forward to life after death. But I found myself simply dreading a never-ending stretch of time filled with singing and bowing and looking at jewel-encrusted lakes. As nice as all this sounds, I always felt like I wanted to live life, like I would be sad or missing out on things if I were to die today. Lewis has effectively reminded me that the gift of life everlasting with God will be beyond anything imaginable- wonderful in ways that I had not thought of before.

The first point that brought me to this realization was the point about receiving recognition and praise from God. Using my own analogy, I have always strived for good grades. Each time I brought home a report card from grade school and high school, I looked for the approval of my parents. Some part of me, even if it was buried deep or I tried to hide it, wanted to please my parents with my grades. After all, they were paying for my Christian education and encouraging me to do my best. Lewis says, “I could detect a moment… during which the satisfaction of having pleased those whom I rightly loved and rightly feared was pure.” I hope (and firmly believe) that God will be better at this than my parents. My parents, never surprised by my grades, always said the same thing. They usually told me that I did a good job, but they would be proud of me even if I hadn’t. All good parenting theories aside, I just wanted them to exclaim and go on about what an excellent job I had done. Lewis goes on to describe how awesome that feeling will be, “when the redeemed soul, beyond all hope and nearly beyond belief, learns at last that she has pleased Him whom she was created to please.” This, is an awesome idea of glory.

The other point I found appealing was Lewis’ references to beauty. He puts it this way on page 7, “Beauty has smiled, but not to welcome us; her face was turned in our direction, but not to see us. We have not been accepted, welcomed or taken in to the dance.” Just as we long and yearn to be appreciated and praised, we long to be accepted and covered by beauty. I know that people say that this is only “a girl thing”, but all of us desire to have a likable appearance in some way or another. We want to look cool, appear put together, and be attractive. We want to become part of the beauty that we see around us. And this is one of the things that Lewis says awaits us in glory. Not only will we be approved, accepted and praised by God Himself, we will become part of the beautiful dance that we have so long admired.

Plantinga Chapter 2: Creation

Plantinga covers a wide variety of information, opinions and points about creation and its effect on us as humans and as creatures formed by God. Because of this wide base, I am just going to choose a few points that stuck out to me from the chapter to talk about. The first is the notion that “Creation is neither a necessity, nor an accident” (page 23). I have not, for very long, pondered the reason that God created. I may have thought about how, when, or what exactly He created, but the why didn’t seem to matter. He did it, so why does it matter what His reasoning was? Plantinga goes on to say that the act was fitting for God. He didn’t need us, and He didn’t create us on a whim or out of boredom. It is in God’s nature to create, to design, to share. This makes sense to me because we, who are made in His image, also create things. Sometimes we create because we are bored, sometimes we create because we need something. But other times, we create out of the same “imaginative love” that G.K. Chesterton says that God created out of.

The next point that stood out to me in particular is somewhat related to the first. If God has created all things, simply out of an imaginative love that is in His character, then we are to have the utmost respect for what He has created. Plantinga’s first point from the “Meaning of the Christian Doctrine of Creation” section is that all things are potentially redeemable. Everything has in it some of the good that God originally created it to have. This, at first, was a bit hard for me to swallow. Even mosquitos? Even deadly tsunamis? Even Hitler? Yes, each of these things, no matter how fallen, does have some of the original goodness that it was created to have. It may be hidden, buried deep beneath the surface; it may take years to dig through the bitterness and resentment and hatred of the havoc that something has wreaked, but the goodness is there, and we must seek to find it. It is not that we can redeem any of these things. We simply must find the goodness, and never condemn anything as beyond repairable. And this says something about the God that we believe in- the Creator God in whom we believe, and how we trust and hope in Him to one day restore us to the perfection that we were created in. Lewis puts in this way in “The Weight of Glory”, “The door on which we have been knocking all our lives will open at last.” And the things that we thought were unredeemable will be restored to the good and perfect status for which they were created.

"Our English Syllabus"

Often, we approach the idea of college, or school in general, as something that we simply have to do; just another part of life. C.S Lewis reminds us that true education done right actually liberates us, frees us to learn what we want. This, for me, is particularly comforting because it reminds me that I am not at Calvin College in a DCM interim class because I have to be here. It may seem obvious now, but I had forgotten that it is my choice to be here. And not only to be present, but to be learning- truly learning.

I think that while Lewis focuses on the difference between the actual differences in the mode of education, the importance for students lies in the difference between simply being present or being invested in your own education. Lewis says on page 82 that “education is essentially for freemen, and vocational training is for slaves.” I would argue that even education can be for slaves. When we limit ourselves to simply doing what we’re told throughout our education, we simply become slaves, working for grades. It is only when we truly invest ourselves in our education, when we immerse ourselves in and dedicate ourselves to what we learn; it is then that education can be for freemen.

As we talked about in class, this immersion in our education involves self-forgetfulness. This seems contrary to the message of owning your own learning and deciding what to pursue, but I think it more refers to putting aside the things that you are concerned about- which major will give you the most money, which will help you find a spouse, or which will make you famous. This connects with the “right question” that we, as freshmen, should be “What do I most want to know?” What can make me a better person, what will allow me to contribute to God’s kingdom on earth, etc. It also involves humility in admitting that we don’t know all the right answers, and re-evaluating our motives, because we should work towards a different goal, besides simply getting A’s.

Lewis says, “The student is, or ought to be, a young man who is already beginning to follow learning for its own sake, and who attaches himself to an older student, not precisely to be taught, but to pick up what he can.” This was the most convicting quote from the article for me. It definitely puts learning into perspective, reminding us how the process of learning is valuable in itself, not merely the diploma that comes from it.

Plantinga Chapter 1: Longing and Hope

Plantinga’s first chapter from his book “Engaging God’s World” articulates very well the idea that all humans have an innate need for something more. In class, we talked about how C.S Lewis refers to this as Sehnsucht, which Plantinga mentions too. For C.S Lewis, this longing led him on a search for true and real joy. But often, this longing leads people to try to fill it with all sorts of things- materialism, romance, success, even learning. Ultimately, we know that only God can fulfill this longing. The chapter connects very well with the article “We have no right to happiness” that we just read by C.S Lewis. This longing for something often makes us think that by pursuing happiness, we can fill the void ourselves. But as we talked about in class, even people who achieve the things that they believe will make them happy, are still left unsatisfied.

Sometimes it is discouraging to watch the world we live in turn to so many things besides God to fill the longing. The fact that we, as Christians, know where to turn to for fulfillment gives us a unique opportunity in this world. Plantinga says, “To be a Christian is to participate in this very common human enterprise of diagnosis, prescription, and prognosis, but to do so from inside a Christian view of the world.” This means acknowledging that God, as Creator is the only one in whom we can have hope that the world will be restored and our longings will be satisfied. Then we must share- point others in the right direction, toward the One who truly satisfies.

I was struck by the presentation “Has God left Europe?” as they talked about the way that people might not call themselves Christians, but still pray or believe in a higher being. The longing may seem dormant at times, and it may seem that the world has become “secular”, but we know that no human can get away from the longing for more.

"We Have No 'Right To Happiness'"

Our society encourages us to pursue a lot of things for ourselves: success, fame, love, the list could go on and on. Using C.S Lewis' article, we focused specifically on discussing whether or not we have a "right to happiness". I think that whenever we discuss having a right to anything, we have to look at our motives behind claiming these so called "rights". To me, claiming that you have a right to something implies that you feel you deserve that thing. Lewis phrases it this way, "[a right is] correlative to an obligation on someone else's part. If I have a right to receive 100 pounds from you, this is another way of saying that you have a duty to pay me 100 pounds." Saying that we have a right to happiness means that if we don't have it, then we are someone being cheated or failed by society.

Pursuing a right to happiness is focusing on ourselves and what we deserve. If we are true followers of Christ, we know that focus on ourselves is exactly what Jesus preached against. The familiar story of the disciples who wanted to sit next to Jesus in places of honor in Heaven were chastised. Jesus told them, “Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant.” He also instructs us to deny ourselves, as we talked about in class. Jesus always encouraged self-control and contentment. For me, the important question is not so much do we have a right to happiness as should we try to pursue our own individual happiness?

On a completely different note, I would like to bring up an interesting point for discussion because I am curious about what others think. In the article, Lewis starts one paragraph with the statement “For one thing, I believe that Clare, when she says ‘happiness’, means simply and solely ‘sexual happiness’.” Then he goes on to describe aspects of Clare’s character that led him to this conclusion. My question is, do you think that Lewis is slipping slightly into Bulverism here, or do you think he is simply giving background information in a somewhat sarcastic context? Yes, he addresses and refutes Clare’s actual point throughout the rest of the article. But do you think he uses bulverism when he describes her as “rather leftist in her politics” and a “rabid teetotaler”? I’m not sure myself, just some food for thought.

"Bulverism"

C.S Lewis, in his essay entitled "Bulverism", gets to the heart of much of the problem in the way that we argue and debate today. Bulverism, as Lewis calls it, is the method of attacking the arguer instead of their argument, focusing on their personal flaws or motives instead of the points that they are trying to make. I think bulverism can play a significant role in the way that we view debates and arguments, and i would go so far as to say that it is the reason that many people hate deep discussions.

Bulverism is so prevalent in the way that we discuss things, that I think people have come to associate arguing and debating with personal attacks. Since we often focus on the person who is making the argument instead of the argument itself, people have a natural tendency to take counter-arguments or rebuttals personally. This is the case whether we mean it that way or not. Even when we are not "bulverizing" people can interpret the way we refute them as a personal attack. This is what Professor Paulo was talking about when he shared the story about his daughter in class.

I am convinced that this is why the concept of political correctness developed. The overuse of bulverism has made in necessary to be extremely cautious in the way we argue. It is now imperative that you do not step on anyone's toes or offend them in your argument. Especially in public settings, you must make sure that no one can take your argument as a personal attack. Unless, of course, they attacked you first, in which case society encourages that you use bulverism to fight back.

When heated debates are done correctly, both parties come away having learned more and expanded their perspectives. It is a great feeling when you can explain something that you are passionate about and back it up rationally and logically. It is even fun when someone comes up with a smart way to refute your point and make you think even harder. This kind of debate only occurs on rare occasions, at least for me. It seems like more often we walk away feeling angry, misunderstood, or frustrated with the other person or people with whom we are debating. This, I think, is why we so often choose to simply avoid controversial subjects.

"Meditation in a Toolshed"

One quote from "Meditation in a Toolshed" that captured my attention was "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." I think this quote sums up Lewis' central argument most succinctly. He argues that instead of spending so much time arguing about which way is the more valuable, or right, way of looking at things, we should be taking both into account. It was interesting to me how Lewis' powerful and yet simple language could so easily convince me that both are equally important, and I think this stems from the way I was brought up.

I grew up in a Christian home and a Christian school system. It may sound like a sunday school answer, but the way Lewis argued in this essay brought the intersection of my faith and my life into light for what just might be the first time. The dichotomy between our spiritual and our societal lives can, in many senses, be boiled down to a problem of perspective. As we discussed in class, often religion values looking along because looking at does not make much sense. Growing up in church, we were told to evangelize using our story; our personal experience with God. When, as children, we asked how prayer works, we were told that it comes down to our trust in God's hand in our lives. We were not given scientific proof in this case, because most of our encounters with God do not fit with in the confines of science. Then there was school, where we were told to prove our points. One of my English teachers had a favorite phrase, "ample evidence" to describe the type of essays she was looking for- papers littered with facts and statistics, as well as studies. In these cases, personal stories and experiences could be effective, as long as they were accompanied by other proof. They could never stand alone to make a point.

This is one way that I learned how to compartmentalize my faith and my schoolwork, my religious and my cultural life. Early on, I learned that Jesus valued more stories, and society wants concrete scientific fact and logic. Then, in high school, I perfected the art of which perspective was necessary at what time, or in relation to which subjects. My bio teacher wouldn't accept a poem about My grandparents' cottage in springtime when she asked me to explain photosynthesis; just like my English teacher wouldn't accept a paragraph about organic compounds when she told us to write about childhood memories.

I don't think Lewis is arguing that both ways are equally important in all situations, I think he is merely pointing out that we don't always have to choose between one or the other. He says later on, "In fact, we must take each case on its merits." That is why I think our religious studies can value looking at something, (for example, when we studied the flood in Religion 121 and saw much of the evidence and historical records might mean that it was a story meant to teach theological truth and not necessarily historical fact). Or that society should value looking along more often as well, because stories and experiences can be very important to cultural life as well (such as in sociology, where we talked about race and poverty in terms of statistics and facts, but also watched videos where people shared their own personal struggles and stories).

I guess what I am saying, in short, is that the division, or friction, between our lives as Christians and our lives in the world relates to our perspective on things. Looking at is not just for the world and looking along is not just for Christians. Both perspectives can and should be used in both contexts.