This book just keeps getting better and better. Thanks, Parker, for an exhilarating tour of a book that demonstrates so winsomely what it means to conform one's mind to Christ. The picture of Lewis tirelessly wielding a machete, chopping down very tall philosophical and theological weeds to give a clear view of the truth, came readily to mind as I read his arguments in this chapter.
Lewis's talk of historical evidence brought to mind N.T. Wright's excellent book, "The Resurrection Of The Son Of God." If, once you are convinced that miracles are possible, after reading Lewis, Wright's book is a magisterial study of the Gospels as history by a historian. It's long and detailed, but Wright is an enthusiastic exegete and writes well. Once I settled into it, I found it an exhilarating read.
Lewis's explanation of antecedent probability and the examples he gives (i.e., pebbles from the stratosphere and personal experiences) bring things to light that are so obvious they usually are unconsciously assumed, the truth of which, once brought to one's attention, is so startling as to provoke laughs of delight (p.161). It seems all of Lewis's books have such moments for me.
It seems to me that in refuting Hume, Lewis is going back to the Argument From Reason, especially as he begins to discuss the Uniformity of Nature (p.162)
On P. 168, at the bottom, where he is discussing Whitehead, is this what theologians call the Platonic-Christian synthesis?
I think, concerning Whitehead, it shows Lewis's magnanimity and deep confidence in what he believes to be true that he can find common ground with a thinker with whom he obviously has very deep disagreements. A good example for the rest of us.
Lewis's discussion of the Laws of Nature brings to mind Stephen Hawking's argument in "The Grand Design, " that the Laws of Nature are God, which goes to show you that even brilliant people can misunderstand what theists mean by God.
I love his comment at the top of p. 170 about Theology. I think one could say that behind all truths there is the Truth.
Also on p. 170, Lewis's "innate sense of the fitness of things" I think, is another expression of what one finds in "The Abolition of Man" and other places in Lewis's corpus: the idea that there is a baseline assumption that has to be accepted in order to reason at all.
This book just keeps getting better and better. Thanks, Parker, for an exhilarating tour of a book that demonstrates so winsomely what it means to conform one's mind to Christ. The picture of Lewis tirelessly wielding a machete, chopping down very tall philosophical and theological weeds to give a clear view of the truth, came readily to mind as I read his arguments in this chapter.
Lewis's talk of historical evidence brought to mind N.T. Wright's excellent book, "The Resurrection Of The Son Of God." If, once you are convinced that miracles are possible, after reading Lewis, Wright's book is a magisterial study of the Gospels as history by a historian. It's long and detailed, but Wright is an enthusiastic exegete and writes well. Once I settled into it, I found it an exhilarating read.
Lewis's explanation of antecedent probability and the examples he gives (i.e., pebbles from the stratosphere and personal experiences) bring things to light that are so obvious they usually are unconsciously assumed, the truth of which, once brought to one's attention, is so startling as to provoke laughs of delight (p.161). It seems all of Lewis's books have such moments for me.
It seems to me that in refuting Hume, Lewis is going back to the Argument From Reason, especially as he begins to discuss the Uniformity of Nature (p.162)
On P. 168, at the bottom, where he is discussing Whitehead, is this what theologians call the Platonic-Christian synthesis?
I think, concerning Whitehead, it shows Lewis's magnanimity and deep confidence in what he believes to be true that he can find common ground with a thinker with whom he obviously has very deep disagreements. A good example for the rest of us.
Lewis's discussion of the Laws of Nature brings to mind Stephen Hawking's argument in "The Grand Design, " that the Laws of Nature are God, which goes to show you that even brilliant people can misunderstand what theists mean by God.
I love his comment at the top of p. 170 about Theology. I think one could say that behind all truths there is the Truth.
Also on p. 170, Lewis's "innate sense of the fitness of things" I think, is another expression of what one finds in "The Abolition of Man" and other places in Lewis's corpus: the idea that there is a baseline assumption that has to be accepted in order to reason at all.