September 2016

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30  


« The Bible on The History Channel | Main | The Value of Developing a Detective’s Perspective »

March 04, 2013


Mere Christianity was the first apologetics book I ever read.

It was a unique experience.

This guy seemed to think he was presenting something like arguments and evidence

For religion!

For example, he started with what I now know is called the moral argument.

(I know this because I just downloaded a digital copy and started re-reading the book on my Kindle.)

I didn't find the book convincing; there was definitely something off about it.

On the other hand, I didn't know how to respond to these arguments - if that's what they were.

And, since I was camping, I was cut off from whatever responses there were out there.

What would they be like? I had no idea.

Would I find them convincing?

Was I about to become a Christian? I had no idea.

Turned out the answer was No.

Please support your claims, sir.

I was wondering RonH why you are posting here? Are you just the voice of reason in an otherwise intellectually distraught blog? Why do you feel the need to speak out about what you felt from C.S. Lewis. Do you truly think that you are going to convince someone here that they are wrong. If so, and that is your mindset, then please give us some arguments about why you feel that way. Your opinions about a book won't convince me. What would convince me is a sound rebuttal to C.S.Lewis's arguments. Obviously you have since came up with some since they didn't convince you... or did you? Have you truly looked at why you don't accept them. Is it just stubborn pride that keeps you in that mindset or are you truly convinced by another sound argument? I would like to know.

Ron H is a contrarian.

He loves to make unsupported claims and rile people up. That is why he posts here. When it becomes an effort or he is roundly defeated in the arena of thought, he moves on to his next unsupported claim.

Since he is really not interested in truth, it is a waste of time to debate his self-serving points of view.

Son of Adam & William West,

Amy said

I’ll never forget the wonder I felt at seeing not only how Christianity matches up with reality, but also its depth and beauty more clearly than I ever had before.

You have not asked here for Amy to support her claims.

You have not asked Amy if she has truly looked at why she accepts Lewis's arguments.

My comment was very similar in nature to what Amy said.

Why do you treat the Amy and me so differently?

I'm so near the beginning of the book, I think I'll wait before commenting on the contents.

I expect reading it this time it will be very different.

William, I do this be cause I like to.


You see, they aren't making contrary claims to what I believe. So why would I challenge them? When someone chooses to disagree with what I believe I want to know why. The main reason being is because I want to learn. If I am wrong I want to know why I am wrong. If I am right then I want to know the other sides arguments as well so that I can challenge them better next time. Of course I don't go strolling through athiests or agnostic's blogs to throw a stick in the fire. I prefer to wait until they come to me. You have come to this posting, which is clearly a christian website, so you have come to the other side to throw a stick in the fire. Since you have come here I want to know what good arguments you have against what C.S. Lewis says in his book. If we are to have a healthy discussion then your claims about his book need to be backed up. What do you think was off about it?

Reminds me a lot of when I first read Richard Dawkins "The God Delusion".

I wasn't entirely sure that the "arguements" were actually meant to be taken seriously. I kept thinking it was all prologue and the knock down argument for his case, but it never came. I'm still waiting and and he hasn't given the arguements that were supposed to make me an atheist yet.

"This guy seemed to think he was presenting something like arguments and evidence"

He was also undeniably right about that. Nothing is more like an argument than an argument. And don't confuse the fact that an argument does not convince you (or even that an argument is bad) with the fact that it is what it is and not something else.

"For example, he started with what I now know is called the moral argument."

Which would be an argument.

"I didn't know how to respond to these arguments - if that is what they were"

Honestly Ron, if you have a hard time telling the difference between an argument and something else, why do you find it surprising that people "treat...Amy and [you] so differently". Amy, I'm pretty sure, knows how to identify arguments.

The comments to this entry are closed.