Atheism
The Atheist position is completely untenable. That means that it makes no sense and has no real arguments founded in logic. The main argument is that we know that there is no God. That argument only works if a person or people can claim to know everything in every place at every time. Nope, no one can do that except say, God.
Agnosticism
Thus the argument for agnosticism makes a little sense. It says that we can not know that there is a God. That means then that a person knows what can be known in this time, this place. That might actually work for some. However, it occurs to me that a being that knows everything there is to know (in order to know what can not be known) on a given topic is still claiming a rather extravagant extent to their knowledge. Unless of course this limited knowledge position is actually arguing that we can not know because our knowledge is limited which leads us to to beg the question. If you can not know then how is that you have concluded that you can not know.
God
In my opinion it makes logical sense that: 1-There must be an intelligent designer who we call God. 2-There must be a logically morally superior being 3-Those who claim that they have experienced God are more likely to be correct about what they have experienced than those that claim that one can not experience God (A person is more likely to believe that something (or someone can be experienced when they have experienced it/Him themselves and of course less likely to believe when they have not experienced it/Him.)
Narnia (TM)
By the way, it occurs to me that the popular Narnia(TM) series (based on Children's books by C.S. Lewis show an interesting alternative reality that is more likely than Atheists and Agnostic argue. These persons which are obviously quite intelligent in my opinion arguing for adult ideas to be swayed by logic that is not as sound as that found in Children's books.
I have heard the C.S. Lewis in his lifetime swore that the books were not based in great theological meaning. Anyway, neither is this blog...
Where was I? Oh yes, It appears to me that Atheists and Agnostics are not arguing so much against God as for a reality without the Christian God (or any God recognized by many.) In fact, they are arguing for themselves to be the God of choice. I am willing to accept that whatever being would be most extremely right in the universe and in the life of the person in question would be their god.
In other words, if an atheist succeeds in arguing against the possibility of knowing the real God then they have successfully argued for their own supremacy. Get it? If I win the argument against God then I get to be God or at least reduce Him to be like me. So, there you have it then. Same old game. "non-believer' believe in themselves or system or money or whatever. So, they seek to make that God.
In a nut shell, my position is that someone or something must be on top. failing to recognize that God has this rightful place or that Satan has claimed His place under many guises leads one to argue against God.
Not the God I might have created...
Even if the God of the Atheist and agnostic is on the surface, reason (This is what they often argue) then they have a God of sorts and will be servant to It. Let's just say I have met someone I would much rather serve than any construct empowered by man. I serve God. It isn't always fun. He isn't always exactly what I want Him to be. However, He is God and so where we clash I realize I must adjust.
The only thing in the universe that doesn't belong to God and therefore can actually be sacrificed to Him is a person's free will. For those who have not done so, no amount of testimony by those who have will explain the experience. But, He still seeking worshippers in Spirit and Truth and He is patient that all men might come to repentance.
Pastor Dan
www.newheightsfellowshipchurch.org
2 comments:
CS Lewis was a self professed atheist at age 15. He discovered Christianity at age 33, in 1931. His conversion to Christianity greatly affected his writings. The Chronicles of Naria were written between 1949 and 1954. His first novel was The Pilgrim’s Regress, which was poorly received.
When his friend D. Martin Lloyd-Jones asked him when he would write another book, Lewis’s now famous response was, “When I understand the meaning of prayer.” It was after this that he wrote the Chronicles of Naria.
I am curious where you got your information that C.S. Lewis swore that the books were not based in great theological meaning. Even you must admit that the books contain Christian ideals intended to be easily accessible to young readers.
Now while I am on the subject of novels, allow me to get on my soapbox for a moment. It is scary how certain individuals can have their whole spiritual belief altered by a work of fiction. One example that I am familiar with would be the 1961 novel Stranger in a Strange Land by Robert Heinlein. It tells the story of Valentine Michael Smith, a human who has returned to Earth in early adulthood after being raised by Martians on the planet Mars. The novel explores his interaction with—and the eventual transformation of—Earth culture.
In 1968, Tim Zell and others formed a Neo-Pagan religious organization called the Church of All Worlds, modeled after the religion founded by the primary character in the novel. Except for correspondence with Zell; a lengthy letter to Zell appears as a letter to "a Fan" toward the end of the book in Grumbles from the Grave and a paid subscription to the Church's Green Egg magazine during the 1970s. Heinlein refused to accept a complimentary subscription, is the only connection Heinlein had to the Church of the Worlds.
Can you tell I am a fan of Robert Heinlein? I found this novel to be a science fiction twist to the novel Jungle Book; I believe Heinlein’s wife suggestion on this fact was the basis of the story. I certainly did not feel the need to create a Pagan church on the matter.
I realize this doesn’t really support your argument against Atheism and Agnosticism, in fact I have added another position, Neo-Paganism.
In conclusion, I believe what I am trying to say is that Atheism, Agnosticism, and Neo-Paganism are the attempt of individuals to find answers to the meaning of life; and it is scary how easily some people can be influenced, even by a work of fiction. It is our responsibility as Christians to show them the true meaning of God’s love.
Ronald
Whether CS Lewis intended to teach Christian values or use Christian imagery and at what part of the process either might be true is I supose uncertain. However, The movies indeed contain Biblical elements and non-Biblical elements. I could get into this more...
However, I don't think he ever expressly said he was writing an expressly Christian thing but he was for certain a Christian. The work probably falls into a Christian fiction category. Still, in a scene in Shadowlands which is theoretically historically accurate (though by no means exact) and is a biographical work on Lewis, Lewis sort of argues against the deep imagery that persons of his day were trying to read into it. This continues today. I guess persons have a deep desire to reach for the mystery of life (a non-famous pastor said that recently (me.) Anyway, If he had been trying to write something that was expressly Biblical he failed terribly and I think as the scene in Shadowlands depicts he was more writing for the enjoyment and entertainment value of all persons involved. Knowledge of God can be found in almost all things and on the obverse (is that a word) knowledge of the enemy. The implications of the Narnia series are profound though not intended to lead persons
to any
form of understanding of the true nature of GOD.
Perhaps a person might be led closer...Surely that is so. However, I mean to say that that may or may not have been his purpose and I'd the biography is accurate he resisited deep interpretations of imagery. You can watch just this scene though I think there may also be another, on you tube. The movie itself is 131 minutes long but contains some interesting insight into the man.
People use a frame of reference when writing all their work. I am writing a piece of Christian fiction now which deals with demonic and Christian warfare. The book is strictly fiction but assumes the warfare is real. No other imagery in the book teaches (at least intentionally.) I think that is probablty a close semblance to what went on with Lewis and Narnia but there is no fact only a thought of mine behind that statement.
Thank you for being my friend and brother. I value you more than words can carry.
Pastor Dan
Post a Comment