Author: C.S. Lewis
Genre: Non-Fiction, Christian
Content:
C.S. Lewis gives the reader his insight on the truth of Christianity and what really makes someone a Christian. He dives deep into dogma, faith, and the understanding of Christ as God.
Opinion:
I have mixed feelings. We will start with the good.
The book is rather interesting and written in a conversational manner. He does have a unique perspective on the Christian existence. He writes with great passion and love for his religion as he is a revert to Christianity. His book on the trinity is particularly interesting. The way he describes the relationship between God, Son of God, and Holy Spirit is unique. His concept almost made sense to me.
bad seems like the wrong word so we will say The Other:
Do not expect this book to answer your questions. It will not. It may in fact confuse you even more. I had high hopes for this book when I was 3 chapters in and had not yet been bombarded by the things which frustrate me about Christian literature. Funny enough, I ran into them by chapter 4. He, as many, takes the view that only Christians will be saved in the end and somehow everyone is Christian or will realize that they are Christian at the end of days. All will accept Jesus as the savior of man in the end. After this happened it got hard for me to read the book because this belief pushes my buttons in a bad way. He also attributed a lot of things such as forgiveness, avoidance of pride, and the "Cardinal Virtues" (Prudence, Temperance, Justice, and Fortitude) souly to Christianity and no other religion. He states that these ideas are only seen in Christianity and no other religion can see them as clearly as those who accept Christ. Obviously, I highly disagree.
I also had previously posted that CS Lewis was able to say that either the man or the woman could be dominate in their relationship. Looking back at the chapter, I realized this is NOT what he said but that we are incapable of being the leaders in a relationship do to lack of rationale or heightened emotions. Sorry CS Lewis but no. Its the whole "Man was made for God, and woman for man" thing all over again.
I also had previously posted that CS Lewis was able to say that either the man or the woman could be dominate in their relationship. Looking back at the chapter, I realized this is NOT what he said but that we are incapable of being the leaders in a relationship do to lack of rationale or heightened emotions. Sorry CS Lewis but no. Its the whole "Man was made for God, and woman for man" thing all over again.
Buy or Library: Depends. If you are truly settled into the Christian religion then I would say buy it. You will enjoy it and most likely want to read it again. You may even be able to gain some insight from it. If you are not settled into Christianity or you are frustrated with Christianity this book will only frustrate you further. I do recommend giving it a read, but get it from the library. You most likely won't want to read it again.
If you like this you may like: Screwtape Letters - C.S. Lewis, When Bad Things Happen to Good People - Harold Kushner, Living Buddha, Living Christ - Thich Naht Hanh
Posts
I've also read this book. At a certain time in my life, I even read it repeatedly. It is not one I brought with me to Poland, however. I don't even remember his explanation of the Trinity - it was never a huge problem for me anyway, and I have my own explanation now anyway.
ReplyDeleteI most definitely DO NOT agree with his assertion that there has to be a dominant partner in marriage, and I most certainly do not agree with his reasoning as to why it should be the male. Because by his definition, I (my 'plumbing' notwithstanding) must really be a man - I'm too strong, too rational, etc.
I definitely have no need for a man to protect, provide for or guide me, and anyway I believe it is idolatry to marry someone because you need them. Which is why I am glad the Lord has allowed me to remain single for so long - so I could come to a point in my spiritual life where I can be sure that if I do marry, I am doing it for the right reasons.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteFixed. Now it says what I was trying to say. I never said CS Lewis only said men could be dominate but I suppose, given that this is what most people say, it came off that way. Makes more sense now.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed your review.
ReplyDeleteHave you read "The Case for Christ" by Lee Strobel? Some read it and find more questions, but I actually found it helpful and quite interesting. The author is a former investigative reporter for the Chicago Tribune. He was an atheist (or agnostic, I can't recall) and decided to check out Christ when his wife came home one day saying she'd become a Christian! He was shocked and sad thinking "there goes the fun Leslie," but later he was intrigued and amazed when she actually changed in GOOD ways. Thus he went investigating. Anyway, I found it interesting. You may think it's cheesy. :)
Thanks for posting your reviews. I am enjoying your blog!
Its on my list. He is a very interesting man. I am going to check it out soon.
ReplyDeleteThanks! I do hope the reviews are helpful.
Lewis didn't say women *can't* dominate. He said they *shouldn't*. And he had his reasons for that - something having to do with women not being sufficiently rational or impartial to assess a situation, especially one involving their children.
ReplyDeleteWhich is sheer nonsense. My mother is the sort who would, if she (God forbid) saw her daughter committing a crime, would call the police immediately - and be very proud of and pleased with herself for having done so. The sort who can take a dog brush with fat metal bristles to her daughter's hide if she thinks the latter deserves it - all without even raising her voice.
With a role model like that, you can imagine what sort of daughter she might have raised...
I didnt get that at all from the chapter but it is my first time reading the book and I didnt read real carefully. The book was annoying me by that point.
ReplyDeleteIf his opinion is as you suggest then yes I 100% Disagree.