C.S. Lewis' Miracles

Terry L. Miethe

• Editorial: Holman Reference
• Año: 2000
• ISBN:
  9781433670916
• Categoría: Teología y religión
• Categoría: Referencia bíblica

Shepherd's Notes- Christian Classics Series is designed to give readers a quick, step by step overview of some of the enduring treasures of the Christian faith. They are designed to be used along side the classic itself- either in individual study or in a study group. The faithful of all generations have found spiritual nourishment in the Scriptures and in the works of Christians of earlier generations. Martin Luther and John Calvin would not have become who they were apart from their reading Augustine. God used the writings of Martin Luther to move John Wesley from a religion of dead works to an experience at Aldersgate in which his "heart was strangely warmed." Shepherd's Notes will give pastors, laypersons, and students access to some of the treasures of Christian faith.

MIRACLES

CHAPTER 1: THE SCOPE OF THIS BOOK

Chapter at a Glance

Chapter 1 is only three pages. The question of whether miracles occur cannot be answered by experience. Neither can it be answered by history, by examining the evidence by rules of historical inquiry. It's a philosophical question—a question of the worldview a person holds.

---

Aristotle (384–322 B.C.) was one of the most influential philosophers in Western history. He was Plato's prize pupil, tutor to Alexander the Great, and wrote on every major subject in philosophy: metaphysics, philosophy of science, philosophical psychology, aesthetics, ethics, and polities. He is the father of classical logic.

---

Summary

Lewis opened the chapter with a quote from Aristotle's Metaphysics, Book II, “Those who wish to succeed must ask the right preliminary questions.” Then he told a ghost story. He had only met one person who claimed to have seen a ghost. The interesting thing about this was that the person didn't believe in an immortal soul before she saw the ghost and still disbelieved after seeing it. She thought it a trick or illusion of the nerves. Seeing is not always believing.

Lewis's example shows that we can always explain away or reinterpret experience. When and how we do this will depend on our presuppositions. If this is so with direct experience, how much more so with historical inquiry. Neither direct experience nor historical inquiry can prove that there are miracles. They can only provide evidence if a person believes miracles are possible.

We see these kinds of moves in New Testament interpretation. Some New Testament scholars rule out the possibility that the Gospel of John was written in the mid first century. They say a much later date is required because Jesus is represented as predicting Peter's execution. Their presupposition is that predictive prophecy is impossible. So John's Gospel must have been written after Peter's death.

Miracles is a philosophical analysis of miracles which would precede any investigation of whether particular miracles have occurred.

---

How would you know that a miracle has happened? What would convince you that a miracle has actually happened?

---

The work that Lewis has done in Miracles has significant consequences for how we study and interpret the Bible. Some interpreters discount or explain away the miracles in the Bible. When they do so, they may be assuming at the outset that there are no miracles. It's not their inquiry into the biblical text that leads them to the conclusion that this or that miracle did not happen.

---

Logical positivism was the philosophical mode of the day, and linguistic analysis was gaining popularity. Logical positivism held that all statements about moral or religious values are scientifically unverifiable and, therefore, meaningless.

---

---

The story Lewis told about the woman and the ghost is reminiscent of A. J. Ayer's near-death experience. Ayer, one of the leaders of logical positivism, wrote “What I Saw When I Was Dead.” He related that he had encountered an intensely bright red light that was painful even when he turned away from it. This light for him represented the governance of the universe. His entire experience, he believed, indicated that death was not the end of consciousness. In spite of his experience, he remained an atheist.

---

What evidence should be allowed to count for or against the existence of God? or for or against Christianity? What would it take, or did it take, for you to believe in God, or to become a Christian? How would one search for such evidence?

---

CHAPTER 2: THE NATURALIST AND THE SUPERNATURALIST

Chapter at a Glance

Lewis says there are two broad views of reality. One view is that nature is all there is. A second view is that there is something in addition to nature. Lews calls those who hold the first view naturalists and those who hold the second supernaturalists.

Summary

The naturalist believes the “ultimate Fact” is that the universe is operating on its own, by itself. Further, the naturalist believes that every event is tied to another event, that every event happens because some other event happened, and all are ultimately tied to the “Total Event.” All existing things and happenings are totally interlocked and cannot be independent from the whole event. Nothing really exists on its own.

A supernaturalist agrees with the naturalist that something exists in its own right, that there exists some fact necessary to explain all others. This fact is a necessary ground for everything else. But, of course, the supernaturalist doesn't think this “fact” is nature. Everything ultimately falls into two categories: (1) Either things or one thing is basic and originally exists on its own. (2) The second category is full of things that derive from, come from, result because of, the one thing which is basic and causes all other things to exist. Therefore, this one thing is self-existent, exists on its own. Everything else exists only because the one thing exists and would cease to exist if the one thing stopped maintaining the others in existence.

---

What do you think it means to refer to the “sovereignty of God"? How does this idea relate to the idea of humans having freedom of the will?

---

Lewis compared the two views by saying that the naturalist gives a democratic picture of reality, while the supernaturalist gives a monarchical—governed by a king—picture. For the supernaturalist, sovereignty does not reside with the whole mass of things but with the one thing. The supernaturalist believes that the one self-existent thing is on a different level and is more important than all other things.

The one self-existent thing is what supernaturalists call God. But there is an important distinction here. The essential difference between naturalism and supernaturalism is not exactly the same as believing in a God and total disbelief. Naturalists could admit to a certain kind of God, a “great cosmic consciousness” or a “God” which arises from the whole process. Lewis didn't think a naturalist would object to this kind of God because it would not be outside of nature or exist on its own.

If there is reason to believe that nature is not the only reality which exists, then we certainly can't say in advance that it is secure from intrusion, from miracles. However, if naturalism is true, we can know absolutely that miracles are not possible. How could something come into nature from outside it when there is nothing outside! Yes, some events may be mistaken for miracles because of our ignorance. The first choice that must be made is between the two views, between naturalism and supernaturalism.

---

Naturalism and s...