Mere Christianity: A Study

An in-depth, interactive chapter-by-chapter study of C.S. Lewis' classic book of the Christian faith. This study is provided as a ministry of Fellowship General Baptist Church of Poplar Bluff, Missouri. Site host and study facilitator is Mark Sanders. If you would like to send Mark an e-mail, his address is msand1126@yahoo.com

Sunday, July 03, 2005

Lesson Four: The Reality of the Law

from Book One, Chapter Three: "The Reality of the Law”

First of all, thanks to all who offered their prayers and support last week after the birth of our daughter, Chloe Elizabeth. She is home and doing well. She’s also the reason there was no posting last week. Now, let’s get back to Professor Lewis

This is the third chapter that Lewis has dealt with the Law of Human Nature. This is significant, because this seemingly simple observation about the nature of human morality and moral decisions will lay the framework for the rest of his theological system. Once we have accepted his logic, all else will follow accordingly.

Let’s reiterate his two main observations…

1) We are all “haunted” by the idea of how human beings ought to behave.

2) None of us live up to this standard of behavior.

Okay, so what? Lewis anticipates this very question. If all we were trying to do was determine that people are not perfect, then our discussion could end here. But as he explains, we are not interested in assigning blame; we are searching for the truth. In the area of human morality, our imperfections carry serious, eternal consequences. We must proceed.

CONTRAST BETWEEN NATURE AND HUMAN NATURE
When we talk about “natural laws” as they pertain to elements in nature, such as rocks and trees and clouds and rain, we may, in fact, be doing nothing more than describing the way in which these items work. The “law of gravity” really says nothing more simple than when you drop a rock from your outstretched hand, it will fall toward the ground. It makes no comment on the nature of the rock or of the force that causes it to fall.

When we talk about the Law of Human Nature, however, we are NOT talking about the ways in which humans behave. We are, quite the contrary, describing the ways in which people ought to behave, but very often do not. So when we talk about human morality, this is not “descriptive” in the sense that other natural laws are. Morality is “prescriptive,” telling us how people ought to behave, regardless of the nature of their real-life actions.

CONVENIENCE
Can we then describe the Law of Human Nature as simply a matter of personal convenience? Dr. Lewis dispels this theory with a couple of sharp examples. Losing your seat on the train is an inconvenience, but you would not be angry at someone who simply got there before you did. You would, however, be quite upset at someone who moved your belongings and took your seat when you were not looking. You would not be angry at someone who tripped you by accident, but you would be angry at someone who intentionally tried to trip you, even if he failed.

Why is this true? It goes back to the first chapter, when Lewis wrote of our universal notion of what is “fair” or “right.” We also cannot attribute our own moral decisions to that which is of the most benefit to us. Again, quite the contrary: often the most moral choices we can make will run contrary to our desires. More often than not, we have to forego the things we want in order to fulfill the urge of our conscience to do the right thing. If I’ve backed into your car in the Wal-Mart parking lot and no one saw it, it would be more to my benefit to just leave. The moral choice, however, is to leave my name and phone number and offer to pay to fix the damage.

SUMMARY
1) The Law of Human Nature is not an observation about how humans behave.
2) This Law is not just a human idea, because we cannot rid our minds of it.
3) The Law is not a human construct that we use for our benefit or convenience.
4) The Law of Human Nature is a real thing, not made up by ourselves.

Thus, we must conclude from these four statements that the Law of Human Nature is an expression of a reality beyond the material, human world, and that this law is a real thing that presses upon us. Once we have accepted these conclusions, we can take the next step.

Discussion Question:
Do you agree with the conclusion based on the four summary points? If not, can you formulate an alternative explanation for the Law of Human Nature?

To respond, please click on the word “comments” below. (If you have a pop-up blocker active on your web browser, you may need to deactivate it for this site to enable comments.)

1 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I agree with the four points that have been summarized. What Lewis has masterfully done, almost in spite of all that Christians say or do to try to prove the existence of God, is to show that transcendence is not only possible--which is, in iteslf, a critically powerful strike against a materialist worldview--he shows that there is a great "oughtness" to it.

Uh-oh. Something's out there! And it wants us to--*gasp, mock sarcasm*--behave!

(It reminds me very much of the end of the chapter "Chrisitianity and Religion" from Lewis' other work, Miracles. Also a great book in its own regard, the paragraph I refer to dovetails with this chapter.)

And with this summation of points, Lewis has dealt the deathblow to materialism. This is the subtle genius at work: namely, because most Christians (until now, including myself) wouldn't think to begin at such a point, and he has easily and eloquently overcome the biggest single obstacle to thism by simply showing that there is something transcendent. It seems rather simple, but its effects and meaning are stunning, from a philosophical and apologetic point of view.

Lewis claims that he's still a hundred miles away from the God of Chrisitian theology, but in this chapter we just moved a few thousand miles closer.

11:12 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home