I am sorry for everything being a little inconsistant.
Because of the Kid's Sunday and the long weekend, we will be missing a couple of weeks of lessons.
I've just posted the first "Walking with Susan" lesson and I'll post the next early this week.
I hope you are all having a wonderful weekend and I will hopefully see you tomorrow!
Saturday, May 16, 2009
Part 2: Walking with Susan
She’s not prone to believing in other worlds, and she sure doesn’t feel safe once she gets there. But Susan has a knack for asking the honest, practical questions we all long to know in this kingdom quest. The trouble is: Are the answers what we want to hear?
Video Clips:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fu7sHD0gdEc
As Edmund points out from the very beginning (and it would take an annoying little brother to bring this up!), Susan is trying to fill a parental role in the absence of their mother and father. Who is she to tell them its time for bed? Then once they get to Narnia, she’s the one who suggests they take the coats with them to stay warm. She’s also the one to worry about such concerns as what they’ll find to eat along the way.
In short, walking with Susan means we’ll be taking the most practical, sensible route.
And that’s okay, up to a point. Her common sense is often helpful, and the others are glad to have her along. But even before the children enter Narnia, we see some cracks developing in Susan’s sensible exterior, particularly when it comes to approaching the Professor about what to do with Lucy.
Susan uses what she probably feels are very grown-up arguments against believing Lucy’s story. The possibility of there being another world just doesn’t seem plausible. But before we get even four lies into the discussion, we realize that Susan’s common sense is no match for the Professor’s logic.
The basic principles of logic dictate that a statement cannot be both true and false at the same time (the law of contradiction) and that a statement must be either true or false (the law of the excluded middle). We see these laws at work in the trilemma posed by the professor. Lucy is lying, or she is crazy, or she is telling the truth. She can’t be some combination, and she can’t be none of those things (whoa...). The laws of logic dictate that she must be one of them. Which is the most likely?
Notice how practical common sense about the supposed impossibility of other worlds doesn;t come into the equation.
As susan discovers, some truths are not necessarily the most obvious or sensible at first glance. They often require uncommon sense. To give an everyday example: You would think that the chances of finding two people at a party who share the same birthday would be pretty slim. After all, there are 365 days in a year. But oddly enough, the rules of statistics tells us that the chances are better than 50 % in a group of more than 23 people. Just because something isn’t obvious doesn’t make it nonsensical. There’s a pattern, a rhyme, a reason to it.
And the same is true with the Christian faith. Even though at some point we must admit that logic only goes so far in explaining everything about what we believe, we certainly have a very plausible case for believing what we do. Not only do we have the authority of God’s word to rely on but we follow in the footsteps of many intelligent people who’ve accepted Christianity on the basis of some very powerful arguments in its favour.
Blaise Pascal was a seventeenth-century French mathematician and philosopher perhaps best known for the triangle that bears his name. But he was also a Christian, albeit a struggling one (aren’t we all!). His gambler’s interest in the mathematical principles of statistics and probability lead him to pose a wager to his atheist friends that can be (very) roughly summarized like this: “Fine. Let’s say you’re right and I’m wrong about the existence of God. Well then, in the end, we all lose. Death is the winner. But let’s say that I’m right and you’re wrong. Well, then you’ve still lost, while I’ve won infinite happiness in heaven for eternity. “
He was no fool. If there’s only one option that leads to a winning outcome, why bet on anything else?
C.S. Lewis followed squarely in this intellectual tradition in his defense of the Christian faith. As we’ve already discussed, the climate of Oxford academia seemed incompatible with his forays into Christian apologetic. But even in this community that saw Christianity as intellectually foggy, Lewis was able to make faith not only plausible but highly probable. “At the end of the day you may not agree with him,” says one scholar, “but Christianity is no longer the source of mindless beliefism. He believed that there’s a reason for accepting these things and you can’t just write it off.”
Lewis’ argument in favour of Jesus’ claim to be God (as we discussed in the previous chapter) is perhaps the most famous example. Note how he argued his position from the standpoint of logic rather than from practicality or common sense. Common sense would tell you that a regular, Joe Schmo human being can’t also be a holy, perfect God. But uncommon sense tells a completely different story, and one that can’t be quickly or easily discounted.
Nicodemus faced just such a conundrum in his midnight visit to Jesus (see John 3). We’ve already mentioned his struggle to grasp what Jesus meant by the statement “unless you are born again, you can’t see the kingdom of God” (verse 3). Nicodemus scratched his head: “How can an old man go back into his mother’s womb and be born again?” he asked (verse 4). But Jesus wasn’t talking about physical rebirth; he was talking about spiritual rebirth. Think like a logician: if our sinful nature is what keeps us out of the Kingdom, then we must get rid of that sinful nature in order to enter it. And if our sinful nature is something we’re born with, then only death of some kind will free us from it. Therefore, if we’re going to participate in the Kingdom, then we must experience the death of our old sinful nature and be given a new nature. We must start over somehow. To use a famous metaphor, we must be born again.
Head hurt yet? Feel like you’re going over the edge? So does susan when she hears the Professor’s uncommon sense. When she realizes their host is being perfectly serious, her final, most desperate question boils down to practicalities: “But what are we to do?”
Sometimes it feels like you’re being asked, like susan, to put aside you’re common sense and get a little crazy when it comes to this Kingdom quest. And yet making the leap isn’t necessarily making a leap into the dark, though it may feel like it. Its making a leap into the light. Things that didn’t make sense before actially seem clearer, more logical, once you give it a shot. You’re not dismissing common sense; you’re recognizing that it doesn’t necessarily take you far enough.
C. S. Lewis, perhaps better than anybody in the past 100 years, argued that we don’t check our brains at the door when we become Christians. Sure, the Christian faith may seem to have a lot of holes in it sometimes. You won’t be able to argue every point and win (and you certainly can’t argue someone into the Kingdom, as we discussed before). But your faith is defensible, as defensible as any other worldview out therem and far more pplauseible and even probable than many.
Believing in God’s Kingdom is not always “sensible” or practical, but it is plausible. Will you make the leap into the light?
Don’t let anyone capture you with empty philosophies and high-sounding nonsense that come form human thinking and from the spiritual powers of this world, rather than from Christ.
Colossians 2:8
Further In
As Edmund points out from the very beginning (and it would take an annoying little brother to bring this up!), Susan is trying to fill a parental role in the absence of their mother and father. Who is she to tell them its time for bed? Then once they get to Narnia, she’s the one who suggests they take the coats with them to stay warm. She’s also the one to worry about such concerns as what they’ll find to eat along the way.
In short, walking with Susan means we’ll be taking the most practical, sensible route.
And that’s okay, up to a point. Her common sense is often helpful, and the others are glad to have her along. But even before the children enter Narnia, we see some cracks developing in Susan’s sensible exterior, particularly when it comes to approaching the Professor about what to do with Lucy.
Susan uses what she probably feels are very grown-up arguments against believing Lucy’s story. The possibility of there being another world just doesn’t seem plausible. But before we get even four lies into the discussion, we realize that Susan’s common sense is no match for the Professor’s logic.
The basic principles of logic dictate that a statement cannot be both true and false at the same time (the law of contradiction) and that a statement must be either true or false (the law of the excluded middle). We see these laws at work in the trilemma posed by the professor. Lucy is lying, or she is crazy, or she is telling the truth. She can’t be some combination, and she can’t be none of those things (whoa...). The laws of logic dictate that she must be one of them. Which is the most likely?
Notice how practical common sense about the supposed impossibility of other worlds doesn;t come into the equation.
As susan discovers, some truths are not necessarily the most obvious or sensible at first glance. They often require uncommon sense. To give an everyday example: You would think that the chances of finding two people at a party who share the same birthday would be pretty slim. After all, there are 365 days in a year. But oddly enough, the rules of statistics tells us that the chances are better than 50 % in a group of more than 23 people. Just because something isn’t obvious doesn’t make it nonsensical. There’s a pattern, a rhyme, a reason to it.
And the same is true with the Christian faith. Even though at some point we must admit that logic only goes so far in explaining everything about what we believe, we certainly have a very plausible case for believing what we do. Not only do we have the authority of God’s word to rely on but we follow in the footsteps of many intelligent people who’ve accepted Christianity on the basis of some very powerful arguments in its favour.
Blaise Pascal was a seventeenth-century French mathematician and philosopher perhaps best known for the triangle that bears his name. But he was also a Christian, albeit a struggling one (aren’t we all!). His gambler’s interest in the mathematical principles of statistics and probability lead him to pose a wager to his atheist friends that can be (very) roughly summarized like this: “Fine. Let’s say you’re right and I’m wrong about the existence of God. Well then, in the end, we all lose. Death is the winner. But let’s say that I’m right and you’re wrong. Well, then you’ve still lost, while I’ve won infinite happiness in heaven for eternity. “
He was no fool. If there’s only one option that leads to a winning outcome, why bet on anything else?
C.S. Lewis followed squarely in this intellectual tradition in his defense of the Christian faith. As we’ve already discussed, the climate of Oxford academia seemed incompatible with his forays into Christian apologetic. But even in this community that saw Christianity as intellectually foggy, Lewis was able to make faith not only plausible but highly probable. “At the end of the day you may not agree with him,” says one scholar, “but Christianity is no longer the source of mindless beliefism. He believed that there’s a reason for accepting these things and you can’t just write it off.”
Lewis’ argument in favour of Jesus’ claim to be God (as we discussed in the previous chapter) is perhaps the most famous example. Note how he argued his position from the standpoint of logic rather than from practicality or common sense. Common sense would tell you that a regular, Joe Schmo human being can’t also be a holy, perfect God. But uncommon sense tells a completely different story, and one that can’t be quickly or easily discounted.
Nicodemus faced just such a conundrum in his midnight visit to Jesus (see John 3). We’ve already mentioned his struggle to grasp what Jesus meant by the statement “unless you are born again, you can’t see the kingdom of God” (verse 3). Nicodemus scratched his head: “How can an old man go back into his mother’s womb and be born again?” he asked (verse 4). But Jesus wasn’t talking about physical rebirth; he was talking about spiritual rebirth. Think like a logician: if our sinful nature is what keeps us out of the Kingdom, then we must get rid of that sinful nature in order to enter it. And if our sinful nature is something we’re born with, then only death of some kind will free us from it. Therefore, if we’re going to participate in the Kingdom, then we must experience the death of our old sinful nature and be given a new nature. We must start over somehow. To use a famous metaphor, we must be born again.
Head hurt yet? Feel like you’re going over the edge? So does susan when she hears the Professor’s uncommon sense. When she realizes their host is being perfectly serious, her final, most desperate question boils down to practicalities: “But what are we to do?”
Sometimes it feels like you’re being asked, like susan, to put aside you’re common sense and get a little crazy when it comes to this Kingdom quest. And yet making the leap isn’t necessarily making a leap into the dark, though it may feel like it. Its making a leap into the light. Things that didn’t make sense before actially seem clearer, more logical, once you give it a shot. You’re not dismissing common sense; you’re recognizing that it doesn’t necessarily take you far enough.
C. S. Lewis, perhaps better than anybody in the past 100 years, argued that we don’t check our brains at the door when we become Christians. Sure, the Christian faith may seem to have a lot of holes in it sometimes. You won’t be able to argue every point and win (and you certainly can’t argue someone into the Kingdom, as we discussed before). But your faith is defensible, as defensible as any other worldview out therem and far more pplauseible and even probable than many.
Believing in God’s Kingdom is not always “sensible” or practical, but it is plausible. Will you make the leap into the light?
Don’t let anyone capture you with empty philosophies and high-sounding nonsense that come form human thinking and from the spiritual powers of this world, rather than from Christ.
Colossians 2:8
Further In
- When is it helpful to have common sense- a practical response to solving a problem?
- In what ways does the Christian faith seem implausible or simply unbelievable to you?How will you live according to the uncommon sense of the Gospel stories?
- People often argue that faith just isn’t practical (e.g., :I just don’t have time for church” or “I don’t have enough money to give to the soup kitchen”). What’s really at the heart if their objections?
- How can you show that faith in the God of the bible is both reasonable and plausible?
- What are you going to do about it?
The Word on Uncommon Sense
Take time to read one or more of the following Bible passages:
Proverbs 3:5-6; 1 Corinthians 1:18-27; 4:1-4; 1Timothy 6:20-21; 2 Timothy 2:23-26
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)