C.S. Lewis: It must be understood that my conversion at that point was only to theism pure and simple. I knew nothing yet about the incarnation. The God to whom I surrendered was sheerly non-human.
C.S. Lewis: [Reading from Chesterton] A great man knows he is not God and the greater he is, the better he knows it. The gospels declare that this mysterious maker of the world has visited his world in person. The most that any religious prophet has said was that he was the true servant of such a being. But if the creator was present in the daily life of the Roman empire, that is something unlike anything else in nature. It is the one great startling statement that man has made since he spoke his first articulate word. It makes dust and nonsense of comparative religion.
C.S. Lewis: As I drew near to Christianity, I felt a resistance almost as strong as my previous resistance to theism. As strong but shorter lived for I understood it better. But each step, one had less chance to call one’s soul one’s own.
C.S. Lewis: What Tolkien showed me was this — that if I met the idea of sacrifice in a pagan story I didn’t mind it at all — I was mysteriously moved by it. The reason was that in pagan stories I was prepared to feel the myth as profound. Now the story of Christ is simply a true myth.
C.S. Lewis: I know very well when but hardly how the final step was taken. I went with my brother to have a picnic at Whipsnade Zoo. We started in fog, but by the end of our journey the sun was shining. When we set out I did not believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and when we reached the zoo I did. I had not exactly spent the journey in thought. Nor in great emotion. It was more like when a man, after a long sleep, becomes aware that he is now awake.
Duration : 0:7:36
June 22nd, 2009 at 3:24 pm
Indeed. Science …
Indeed. Science just makes you love the Lord more. He is wonderful.
June 22nd, 2009 at 3:24 pm
The only way that …
The only way that religion explains anything at all is with blind assertions lacking any form of physical evidence save for what is misinterpreted by those looking for proof of their religion in the natural world. The belief that religion is necessary to explain what science has not yet explained is a symptom of a dumbed down American society that is world-renowned for failing it educate itself on matters of math and science.
June 22nd, 2009 at 3:24 pm
Anyone that reduces …
Anyone that reduces science by whipping out the “it doesn’t explain everything” argument clearly don’t have any business commenting on the nature or accomplishments of science. Science is supposed to be about gathering evidence and finding a conclusion based on that evidence, if we could “explain everything” with science, we would already have all the evidence in existence to explain everything. Such an argument misses the idea of science completely.
June 22nd, 2009 at 3:24 pm
Soooo I take it you …
Soooo I take it you read answersingenesis and call it “studying.”
June 22nd, 2009 at 3:24 pm
Science is …
Science is magnificent, but science cannot explain everything. When men try to use science to explain things like how we all came to be;they fall short and have to fill in the gaps with lies from their imagination. The more I study science-the more I am at awe at how amazing our Lord is.
June 22nd, 2009 at 3:24 pm
Best quote about CS …
Best quote about CS Lewis’s writings is that “he is chewing more than he has bitten off,” by Christopher Hitchens.
June 22nd, 2009 at 3:24 pm
And, for the record …
And, for the record, I have no intention of changing your mind. Your asscheeks are covering your eyes and your ears, and that can’t be changed in a youtube conversation. I simply intend to show you that you’re incompetent and unfit to make any of the claims that you are making, so that other viewers don’t get confused by your opinions.
June 22nd, 2009 at 3:24 pm
“I never said that …
“I never said that there was no proof, I just said that much of Science is based on assumptions.”
“There is no proof of the big bang. There is no proof of the evolution of all life from inorganic matter.”
Clearly you can’t remember one of your arguments from the next, so you can’t fault me for questioning your understanding of a scientific theory, or the fact that you agree with one of the most roundly mocked and criticized pieces of pseudo-intellectual philosophy ever conceived.
June 22nd, 2009 at 3:24 pm
I never said that …
I never said that there was no proof, I just said that much of Science is based on assumptions. They would never admit it, but many of today’s theories are just that; theories. I believe in a certain theory myself, a theory that I have both loved and experienced first-hand.
Pascal’s wager is just his own logic, in which I agree with. He was one of the world’s greatest minds in his time. Once you discover your own natural law, you can call his argument infantile all you would like to.
June 22nd, 2009 at 3:24 pm
You think that here …
You think that here is no proof of the big bang or of evolution. Clearly you’ve never done your own research or had a remotely original thought if you think this is a moral contest and both sides have equal physical evidence. Tell me, have you ever heard of Vera Rubin? Do you know what real abiogenesis is?
Also, this does not excuse using Pascal’s Wager as an argument. I have to assume that you’re an infantile douchebag based on the use of that argument until you abandon it.
June 22nd, 2009 at 3:24 pm
Besides, what point …
Besides, what point is there in being on a website only to criticize people who believe in one thing? Many of us are firmly routed to our religion and will just argue against you. Is a debate all you are looking for? Or are you trying to prove us wrong? If the later is true then you’re doing a terrible job of it.
June 22nd, 2009 at 3:24 pm
First off, I said …
First off, I said most of science. Second off, I am not nor have ever been a cod and/or codpeice. Much of the science we have today is not assumptions, duh. But a whole lot of it is just assumptions. There is not only just physical evidence against the bible, but physical evidence to prove it. Get off your high horse, stop looking down at everyone, and consider both sides of the equation. It’s not like I’m forcing you to believe, I’m just putting my own thoughts out there for consideration.
June 22nd, 2009 at 3:24 pm
Also, you little …
Also, you little codpiece, science gave you your computer, put food on your table, and created every modern convenience that you now enjoy. “Science is just based on assumptions” is a chickenshit answer for the weak-minded and anyone else that doesn’t want a real answer.
June 22nd, 2009 at 3:24 pm
Pascal’s Wager = …
Pascal’s Wager = answer
What if there is a God, and he created the Bible as well as the physical evidence against the Bible to see who was smart enough to figure out that the Bible was false? What if he sends all religious people to and only accepts the agnostics and atheists that proved capable of critical thought? Your argument is typical of so many infants on this planet that have a religion just for fear of punishment.
June 22nd, 2009 at 3:24 pm
Either way there is …
Either way there is no harm in believing. There is harm in not believing. it is a 50/50 chance with only your soul to bet. Which side will you choose? I have chosen the way of life, even if there were to be no God, then that would be all there was to it. But if God truly does exist (as I believe) and you choose not to believe then your soul is condemned. Which is smarter to choose?
June 22nd, 2009 at 3:24 pm
Much of Science is …
Much of Science is based on assumptions. There is no proof of the big bang. There is no proof of the evolution of all life from inorganic matter. Is not science just as much of a leap of faith as believing in God?
Think for a moment, if there is a god and you do not believe in him, you lose. If you believe in him, you win. If there is no god and you do not believe, then that is that. If there is no god and you believe, then what is the harm of wishful thinking?
June 22nd, 2009 at 3:24 pm
This is a great …
This is a great documentary. Whats the name of the full production. The guy that plays the younger Lewis looks a whole lot like him.
June 22nd, 2009 at 3:24 pm
Where did you get …
Where did you get this? Please post the rest of the video or a link to its entirety
June 22nd, 2009 at 3:24 pm
Мой английский …
Мой английский просто отстойный!
June 22nd, 2009 at 3:24 pm
Is that supposed to …
Is that supposed to be an argument to convert non-Christians?
June 22nd, 2009 at 3:24 pm
No one has an …
No one has an excuse against God because all of creation bears witness to its creator.
Even in the Old Testament the way to God was always faith. “Abraham believed God and it was counted to him as righteousness”.
God made the law to show us our inability to save ourselves by our own works, and to lead us to Christ. Jesus does not abolish the law but fulfills it.
He did not set up anyone to fail, he knew that some would but he knew that many would come to Him and Glorify Him.Our Choice.
June 22nd, 2009 at 3:24 pm
mykids22,
- RE: ” …
mykids22,
- RE: “Yes God knew man would fall”
Knowing that billions and billions of his creation would fail his expectations and end up in eternal torment? Isn’t that like a crack-addict who knows her child will be born an addict and likely die a horrendous and painful death, intentionally getting pregnant anyway? We don’t see that as an act of love. Why would you think it’s loving if God does it?
And yes, he did change the rules. Otherwise you should be killing almost everyone.
June 22nd, 2009 at 3:24 pm
Yes God knew man …
Yes God knew man would fall and He made us anyway. Knowing He would have to sacrifice Himself to save us, He still made us. That doesn’t show that He is not omnipotent, it shows His greatest attribute: Love That’s how much He loved you, He died in your place for you. It’s a free gift if you accept it.
He didn’t change the rules from Old to New Testaments; You don’t quite understand the covenants and that is why it seems confusing to you.
June 22nd, 2009 at 3:24 pm
Popular myth? Hmmm …
Popular myth? Hmmm. How can we have a discussion when you deny historical facts? And, your refutation to the eternal existence of the universe is; it is. There’s no arguing with that. But, there were hundreds of eyewitnesses to the risen Christ. Call it myth if you like-it will cost you eternity.
June 22nd, 2009 at 3:24 pm
And as you can see …
And as you can see Beast, they STILL hesitate to respond to my question….
Maybe they think SATAN HIMSELF told me to ask it?