Comments on: C. S. Lewis and The Tao http://withallyourmind.net/archives/2006/c-s-lewis-and-the-tao/ Fri, 21 Nov 2008 01:06:57 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 By: Barry Carey http://withallyourmind.net/archives/2006/c-s-lewis-and-the-tao/#comment-11333 Barry Carey Fri, 15 Dec 2006 15:24:26 +0000 http://withallyourmind.net/archives/2006/c-s-lewis-and-the-tao/#comment-11333 Laura, Thanks so much for taking the time to comment. I'm afraid you misunderstand Lewis and he is often taken out of context. For example, you stated, "He said that the tao was before God himself!!!". This does injustic to lewis. ON page 18, Lewis states, "The Chinese also speak of a great thing called the Tao. It is the reality beyond all predicates, the abyss that was before the Creator Himself..." Lewis does not explicity argue for the Tao existing before God himself. He is explaining what the Tao is to the Chinese. I admit it may be easy to misunderstand. If I'm explaining secular humanism and in the process make a statement, "There is no God", I'm not arguing for that position, simply explaining secular humanism. Lewis takes the concept of the Tao and allows it to stand for objective morality and shows how this is necessary. I hope I've cleared up some of this confusion. I certainly don't think Lewis was inerrant, but he made valuable contributions to the defense of the Christian faith. I think this issue of the Tao does a disservice to his argument in The Abolition of Man. Laura, Thanks so much for taking the time to comment. I’m afraid you misunderstand Lewis and he is often taken out of context. For example, you stated, “He said that the tao was before God himself!!!”. This does injustic to lewis. ON page 18, Lewis states, “The Chinese also speak of a great thing called the Tao. It is the reality beyond all predicates, the abyss that was before the Creator Himself…” Lewis does not explicity argue for the Tao existing before God himself. He is explaining what the Tao is to the Chinese. I admit it may be easy to misunderstand.

If I’m explaining secular humanism and in the process make a statement, “There is no God”, I’m not arguing for that position, simply explaining secular humanism. Lewis takes the concept of the Tao and allows it to stand for objective morality and shows how this is necessary. I hope I’ve cleared up some of this confusion.

I certainly don’t think Lewis was inerrant, but he made valuable contributions to the defense of the Christian faith. I think this issue of the Tao does a disservice to his argument in The Abolition of Man.

]]> By: Laura http://withallyourmind.net/archives/2006/c-s-lewis-and-the-tao/#comment-11295 Laura Fri, 15 Dec 2006 00:55:30 +0000 http://withallyourmind.net/archives/2006/c-s-lewis-and-the-tao/#comment-11295 As a Christian, I always thought that C.S. Lewis was a good man. It wasn't until High School when, trying to tell people about Jesus, they contridicted what I was telling them from the Bible with a quote from C.S. Lewis. I now see that C.S. Lewis had many real pagan ideas, and tries to mix paganism, Christianity and ALL other religions together. "The Chinese also speak of a great thing (the greatest thing) called the Tao. It is the reality behind all predicates, the abyss that was before the Creator Himself. It is Nature, it is the Way, the Road. It is the Way the universe goes on, the Way in which things everlastingly emerge... into space and time. It is also the Way which every man should tread in imitation of that cosmic and supercosmic progression, conforming all activities to that great exemplar. [page 30 - The Abolition of Man] HE SAID THAT TAO WAS BEFORE GOD HIMSELF!!! This is NOT Godly. I could show hundreds more quotes from his books that are weird to say the least, they are pagan. As a Christian, I always thought that C.S. Lewis was a good man. It wasn’t until High School when, trying to tell people about Jesus, they contridicted what I was telling them from the Bible with a quote from C.S. Lewis.

I now see that C.S. Lewis had many real pagan ideas, and tries to mix paganism, Christianity and ALL other religions together.

“The Chinese also speak of a great thing (the greatest thing) called the Tao. It is the reality behind all predicates, the abyss that was before the Creator Himself. It is Nature, it is the Way, the Road. It is the Way the universe goes on, the Way in which things everlastingly emerge… into space and time. It is also the Way which every man should tread in imitation of that cosmic and supercosmic progression, conforming all activities to that great exemplar. [page 30 - The Abolition of Man]

HE SAID THAT TAO WAS BEFORE GOD HIMSELF!!! This is NOT Godly. I could show hundreds more quotes from his books that are weird to say the least, they are pagan.

]]> By: Kevin Winters http://withallyourmind.net/archives/2006/c-s-lewis-and-the-tao/#comment-10367 Kevin Winters Sat, 25 Nov 2006 22:21:47 +0000 http://withallyourmind.net/archives/2006/c-s-lewis-and-the-tao/#comment-10367 On that note, a good buy that I recently made was Robert Solomon and Kathleen Higgins' <i>What Nietzsche Really Said</i>. I would highly suggest it. On that note, a good buy that I recently made was Robert Solomon and Kathleen Higgins’ What Nietzsche Really Said. I would highly suggest it.

]]> By: Kevin Winters http://withallyourmind.net/archives/2006/c-s-lewis-and-the-tao/#comment-10366 Kevin Winters Sat, 25 Nov 2006 22:20:22 +0000 http://withallyourmind.net/archives/2006/c-s-lewis-and-the-tao/#comment-10366 Nietzsche was not a nihilist or a relativist. One of the better traditional terms in describing Nietzsche (though still inadequate) is a virtue ethics. Nietzsche was very much a classicist and philologist and he felt that the ancient Greek view of arate (excellence) was very important. Thus, while he rejected universal ethics that attempt to subsume morality under a collection of dos and don'ts, he felt that goodness came from good people, just as evil came from evil people. Our mode of being is prior to our actions. Nietzsche was not a nihilist or a relativist. One of the better traditional terms in describing Nietzsche (though still inadequate) is a virtue ethics. Nietzsche was very much a classicist and philologist and he felt that the ancient Greek view of arate (excellence) was very important. Thus, while he rejected universal ethics that attempt to subsume morality under a collection of dos and don’ts, he felt that goodness came from good people, just as evil came from evil people. Our mode of being is prior to our actions.

]]>