1

Ethical Philosophy

Thinking Clearly in a World of Nonsense

Topic for Examination on February 9, 2014 (last revised February 3, 2014)

Christian Apologetics in the form of C.S. Lewis’ very popular book entitled

Mere Christianity

Summary

Published in 1952, Mere Christianity came from C.S. Lewis’s radio broadcasts during

WWII. He was an English lit professor, former atheist but not a theologian. None-

theless, his book is hugely influential and very popular.

Apologetics means “to defend a religion,” here Christian

beliefs. He is YES on virgin birth, wives must obey

husbands, capital punishment; NO on the “monstrosity of sex outside of marriage,

“perverted desires”, divorce, etc. (See page 3 for some of the surprising moral laws.)

To this reader, it’s familiar debate tricks (bad analogies, false choices, etc.) to

justify old-school Christian beliefs. But of course, beliefs always come first, reasons follow.

2

What The Book Is Like

In his lengthy preface, Lewis claims humility. On marriage he admits no

experience, and then holds forth with certainty. He says that if you

aren’t already a Christian, you will not be persuaded. He does not take

sides in doctrinal disputes between denominations. He says that all

other religions may not be 100% wrong, but they are not right. Only

Christianity is right. He accepts his own ideas as right and others as

“wrong” and “nonsense.” Some times he is harsh, condescending, even

insulting and spiteful towards other people about their beliefs.

Christianity is not simple. It is a “fact” of the universe like E=mc2. It is the only

accurate explanation of creation and like E=mc2, something that no ordinary person

(not a theologian) would expect. (p. 41) Atheists are uneducated and child-like in their

simple mindedness, while theology is an “experimental science.” (Lewis doesn’t say it

that clearly, but that is clearly what he says and means.)

Like a roadmap, theology is a rational guide to taking a journey. You can travel

without a map, but you’ll probably not get where you want to go.

He admits that his opinions are not found in the scriptures.

But they are widely held by theologians as a result of their

“research”. Other scientists use instruments such as

microscopes, while theologians use “their entire selves.”

He says every argument against God’s existence leads

instead (once reason is applied) to proof of God’s being.

He sees himself as a scientist, like Galileo. Like Galileo he has

discovered odd and unexpected (see left) aspects of God. Like

Neo-Platonists, he intuits, calls it “reason” and then feels certain of

what he concludes. He states that he rejects his own human nature

and foibles; and turns to God to be completely remade. He wants

basic parts of himself removed.

His ideas are plentiful and carefully explained through poor analogies, false choices

and unexplained assertions.

Well, you judge for yourself.

3

The Law Of (Human) Nature1

All human moral codes in history are alike, sort of.

All over the world and at all times, moral codes have differed, but not by much. What they have in common is God speaking to us. (Natural Law) On a very basic level, people do not need to be

educated into a sense of right-and-wrong, it is inborn in them. (p. 41)

For example, if you compare the British moral code to the Nazi

moral code and say that one is better than the other, you are

actually comparing them both to some other standard. That other standard is God’s

“Real Morality.” (p. 25)

Some Examples of God’s “Real Morality”

(A) “fair-play”, courage, unselfishness; honesty, kindness and helpfulness (p. 72)

(B) prudence, temperance, justice, fortitude, (p. 74) charity, obedience, respect (p. 81)

(C) capital punishment for murder (p. 106)

(D) go to war with “gaiety and wholeheartedness”

(E) burn a witch at the stake, if you believe she really is a witch (p. 26)

(F) “just leave her alone.” If you see a woman you find attractive, you should not engage

her, “just leave her alone..”) Women are not interested in men or sex. (Yes, he wrote that.)

(G) do not masturbate, act cowardly or lend money at interest

(H) do not get divorced because that would be breaking a promise

(I) wives should obey husbands because women don’t want to control their own lives

Arguments Against God’s Existence…Really Support It

For Lewis, atheism once thought about rationally, forces us

into theism. Atheists often complain that the universe is

cruelly indifferent. If god exists, he would not allow that.

Therefore, atheists conclude, God does NOT exist.

But Lewis points out that a fish does not have the idea of

dryness because it has always been wet. (So where does a fish get

1 The Law of Human Nature used to be a generally accepted. Differences between moral codes are caused by

differing views of reality. For example, we don’t burn witches today because we no longer believe they exist. If

we did believe they exist, burning them would be appropriate. (p. 26)

4

the idea of dryness? From God!) So where in a cruel universe can the idea of cruelty (or not-cruelty) come from? It must come from God, therefore Lewis concludes,

God MUST exist.

He goes on…if the universe had no meaning, we would not know what meaning is. We are however, aware of meaning. The fact that we have the concept of meaning

proves that it exists in the mind of God. Therefore, God exists. (p. 39)

My God Is Better Than Your God

Lewis allows three types of world views.

1. materialism – the universe has no meaning, it just is or just happened

2. Religion-ism – what lies beneath the universe is like a mind, conscious and with

preferences, some things it likes and some it doesn’t

3. Life-force philosophy – we evolved not because of god, but from a life-force or

perhaps a will-to-live

Among religionists, there are two types.

1. God is Beyond Good and Evil - Some religionist (Neo-Platonists, Pagans, Spinoza)

say God is beyond good and evil. The UNIVERSE IS God. Our ideas of good

and evil are only our preferences based upon our perspective.

2. God is Like A Person - Christianity, Judaism and Islam say that God created the

universe and is therefore outside of it. Their god IS GOOD. He is a “fighting”

god. He has preferences and wants us to act in certain ways.

Values, meaning etc. are like unicorns. No one has ever seen a unicorn, but we still have

the idea of a unicorn… therefore they must exist.

Case closed, unicorns and gods exist.

It’s not like people can just make stuff up. It’s not like a species could evolve new senses,

like radar in bats or geo-positioning in migrating birds. That can’t happen.

5

Logic: If God is not like a person, who instilled these ideas in our heads? A transcendent god (beyond good-and-evil and uninvolved) would not bother to put such ideas into our minds. Therefore, God must be like a human being.

What He and Real Christians Believe, and Why

Christians believe Satan is now “Prince of the World.” (p. 52)

Atheists ask “how can an all powerful God let that happen?”

Answer: God had to give people free-will because …that is

the only way love, goodwill and joy is worth having2. (p. 53) But

freewill cuts both ways. Even God cannot give people free-

dom and also keep them from using it wrongly. (In this, he

contradicts Augustine in several ways.)

What’s more, you cannot argue with God because your ability to argue comes from

Him. (What?3 In this he is assuming that these ideas are God’s ideas. But earlier he

stated that they are not in the scriptures. Therefore, he is really saying that you cannot argue with C.S. Lewis. He also says that the greatest sin is arrogance but

doesn’t seem to notice it in himself.)

Having settled that thorny issue, he moves on. What Christ said4 was (p. 55)

“simply the most shockingshockingshockingshocking thing that has ever been uttered by human lips.”

Lewis’ Most Famous Assertion (so here it is verbatim)

“I was trying here to prevent anyone the really foolish thing that people often say about

Him: “I am ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be

God.”

That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of

things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic-on the

level of a man who says he is a poached egg-or else he would be the Devil.

2 He does not say how he knows that. 3 Can we not fly because God made gravity or swim because he didn’t give us gills? 4 Lewis says that Jesus claimed (A) to be God, (B) he had always existed and (C) could forgive sins. I

cannot find that in my Bible. I find contradicting and ambiguous statements.

6

You must make your choice. Either this man was and is the son of God or else a madman or

something worse. You can shut him up for a fool or you can spit at him or kill Him as a

demon; or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God.

But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher.

He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.” (p.56)

And then the coup de grace:

“It seems to me obvious that he was neither a lunatic nor a fiend; and

consequently…I have to accept that view that He was and is God.” (p. 57)

Case closed, matter settled.

Why Did Christ Have To Die?

“Christ death has somehow put us right with God and

given us a fresh start.” (p. 58) But why?

Why would a god kill his own son in exchange for not

punishing people for doing the things He designed

them to do?

It doesn’t matter Lewis explains. There are many theories and it’s not yet settled by

theological research. You don’t need to worry about it. Problem solved.

There is a lot more such stuff in Mere Christianity, but I think you get the drift.

7

C.S. Lewis’ Life (mostly from Wikipedia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C._S._Lewis)

Born in Belfast in 1898, Lewis’ father was a lawyer and his mother the

daughter of an Anglican priest.

During the First World War, he was commissioned into the Third Battalion of

the Somerset Light Infantry. He was in trench warfare at the Somme Valley

on his 19th birthday. In April 1918, Lewis was wounded and two of his fellows

were killed by a British shell falling short of its target. Lewis suffered from

depression and homesickness during his convalescence.

He “fell away from his faith during his adolescence but “One evening in

September of 1929, Lewis had a long talk on Christianity with J.R.R. Tolkien

(a devout Roman Catholic.) “I gave in, and admitted that God was God, and knelt and prayed….” He

returned to the Anglican Communion, becoming "a very ordinary layman of the Church of England". His

faith had a profound effect on his work, and his wartime radio broadcasts on Christianity brought him

wide acclaim.

Lewis himself was a “fellow and tutor of English literature at

Oxford” and the author of several famous books including the

“Screwtape Letters” (1941) and the Tales of Marnia.

In 1956, he married the American writer Joy Davidman, a

Jewish American writer and convert from atheism to

Christianity. Their marriage was for the purpose of allowing her

to legally reside in England. She was 17 years his junior and died

four years later at the age of 45.

He had no other marriages, no children and no known sexual

relationships. There were speculations about his long relation-

ship with the mother of his best friend “Paddy,” who was killed

in the war. Paddy’s mother was 27 years older than Lewis.

Apparently there was no hint of dishonesty or insincerity in him.

But he was an educated person. How could he write such stuff?

On the other hand he was a literature professor and fiction

writer. Maybe he was simply on that page.

Lewis died three years after his wife…one week before his 65th birthday. Media coverage of his death

was minimal; he died on 22 November 1963—the same day that U.S. President John F. Kennedy was

assassinated.

8

On Later Reflection

Lewis was academically gifted. Upon graduating from Oxford, he was offered a

teaching position. So how did he miss all that information about logical fallacies and

cheap debate tricks? He certainly uses them a lot? Was it intentional trickery?

What is the preternatural appeal of his work to believers? I’ve known very educated

people who recommended, even gave me copies of Mere Christianity to read.

Somewhere in the book he defined psychological repression (accurately as I under-

stand it.) Thoughts and feelings coming up from repressed sexuality that the

individual would never guess were coming from repressed feelings. Then he dismisses

that as the source of his Christian beliefs. He does not say why.

I have to admit that Mere Christianity is one of the most enlightening books I’ve

read. It “reveals the man behind the curtain” or more

specifically, the THINKING inside the man wearing

the backwards collar.

Yet millions of people swear by it. If that is what

Christianity is based upon, I better understand what

Jeremy Bentham meant by “nonsense on stilts.”

9

D+

On a grading system from A to F, I give Mere Christianity a grade of D+

He did apply thought to matters religious; that is no small thing. On the other hand,

he did it very poorly.

His book insults the Universe and degrades human beings. How could he miss the

entire 20th Century? He was a smart guy with access to education; he worked at

Oxford for God’s sake! How could he do that? Richard Dawkins said of Lewis “he

should have known better.”

It had to be an intentional oversight motivated by non-rational psychological forces,

(“crazy” as I mean the word.) He wasn’t much crazier than most, he just wrote it

down and inflicted it upon lots of people.

To his credit, he wasn’t trying to psychologically harm people, he just did.

The best conclusion I can offer to Lewis’s cartoon version of all creation is

Sebastian TwitSebastian TwitSebastian TwitSebastian Twit February 3, 2014