C. S. Lewis, Bertrand Russell, Martin Luther & a Bret McAtee Conversation

A quote from C.S. Lewis, as explained by Dr. Ravi Zacharias,

“In A Pilgrim’s Regress, C.S. Lewis wrote about a man who ordered milk and eggs from a waiter in a restaurant. After tasting the milk he commented to the waiter that it was delicious. The waiter replied, “Milk is only the secretion of a cow, just like urine and feces.” After eating the eggs he commented on the tastiness of the eggs. Again the waiter responded that eggs are only a by-product of a chicken. After thinking about the waiter’s comment for a moment the man responded, “You lie. You don’t know the difference between what nature has meant for nourishment, and what it meant for garbage.”

This morning I was involved in a brief exchange with one who advocates advertising for those who advocate Homosexual, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transvestite acceptance into the Church of Jesus Christ as normative.

http://roomforall.com/about-us/purpose/

That brief exchange reminded me of this C. S. Lewis quote. In Lewis’ story the Spirit of the Age had captivated John (Lewis’ main Character) and insisted that what was intended for nourishment was garbage. My conversation was the inverse. Unlike Lewis’s story where nourishment was taken for garbage, my conversation was a case where someone was insisting that moral garbage was morally healthy. My conversation partner didn’t know the difference between what God had intended for misery and what God had meant for pleasure.

The Spirit of the Age when uninformed by the Spirit of Christ always teaches this kind of upside down world, where good is evil and evil is good. Bertrand Russel, the 20th Century renown Atheist caught something of how this achieved methodologically speaking,

“The social psychologist … will have a number of classes of school children on whom they will try different methods of producing unshakable conviction that snow is black. Various results will soon be arrived at: first, that influence of home are obstructive. Second, that not much can be done unless indoctrination begins before
the age ten. It is for the scientist to make these maxims precise and discover how much it costs per head to make children believe that snow is black. When the technique has been perfected, every government that has been in charge of education for more than one generation will be able to control its subjects securely without the need of armies of policeman”

Luther said 500 years ago on this score that,

“It is the nature of all hypocrites and false prophets to create a conscience where there is none, and to cause conscience to disappear where it does exist.”

Our prevailing zeitgeist is not interested in creating a conscience that tells us that snow is black or that cow milk is a secretion akin to urine or feces. No, what our Spirit of the Age is set upon convincing us is that morality is pluralistic and that the only evil that exists is the person who declaims against the evil of immorality.

And many are the children — young and old alike — who have been convinced that “snow is black,” and who will seek to destroy anyone who insists that, “no, snow really is white.”

10 Responses to “C. S. Lewis, Bertrand Russell, Martin Luther & a Bret McAtee Conversation”

  1. Gray Bell June 21, 2011 at 7:24 am #

    Bret, sorry for posting personal as a comment. Did not know how to email you. Thought you might like reading this book if you have not already. Go to http://www.garynorth.com/philadelphia.pdf You should get the freebook there. If not search similar site. The book is fascinating and is called Conspiracy in Philadelphia. Would be interested in your thoughts on it. Warm regards Gray

  2. ShortestOfThemAll June 22, 2011 at 2:51 pm #

    I just read this not two days ago in a really great book. Thanks for posting!

  3. jetbrane June 24, 2011 at 6:51 am #

    Grey,

    I’ve read that book which was eventually put in a much larger North work entitled, “Political Polytheism.”

    Great book, though I don’t agree with all of North’s observations. I think an argument can be advanced that the Constitution can be argued to be a Christian document.

  4. Gray Bell June 25, 2011 at 8:05 pm #

    Bret, thanks for replying. Sorry it took me so long to respond, as I have been out of town this week. I have also read political polytheism and would tend to agree with North if all his sources are verifiable. I like his conclusions, though have heard some good arguments made for the constitution also. His strongest point for me is the absence of a requirement that one must be a believer to hold office. I think letting foxes in to guard the hen house will always ultimately end in disaster. We are at disaster stage now! Do you agree with the five points of the covenant and his assertion that covenant theology is a package deal with postmillinial eschatology? Thanks Gray

  5. jetbrane June 26, 2011 at 7:04 am #

    Gray.

    I agree with the five points of the covenant and that covenant theology is a package deal that includes postmillennial eschatology though I realize that people can be fine Christians and be inconsistent in their covenant theology. I think also though that we need to have a Seminary that ranks with Westminster or Covenant or Reformed or Gordon Conwell that is covenantal, presuppositional, postmillennial and theonomic in its charter. The amills in this country are like ants on a pop-sickle stick. It is impossible to get away from them.

  6. Gray Bell June 26, 2011 at 3:13 pm #

    Bret, I agree, though I know way more premil disp. than amils. Probably because I am around more baptists than presbyterians here in North Carolina. Postmils are as rare as hen teeth though growing in number in my circles. We teach discipling our families in our home with the father as main priest and our church equips them to do so. My 18 year old son has an amazing theological understanding for his age and this culture he was raised in. We did homeschool him from the 1st grade onward, so he is “sheltered” to some degree. I would have no problem with a properly chartered seminary with properly vetted teachers, though the credentials would have to come from a dear friend of a dear friend of a dear friend. If you get my meaning. But back to Dr. North. Do you feel a religious test for civil magistrate would be proper and esential? Really like to hear your thoughts on that one. Thanks Gray

  7. Gray Bell June 26, 2011 at 3:17 pm #

    Bret, sorry I forgot a book recommendation I meant to include in the last post. Dr. E.C. Wines wrote a book called The Hebrew Republic. If you havent read it is worth picking up. He goes at the constitution as being modeled after the hebrew political economy. He has many great points that I agree with him on. Gray

  8. jetbrane June 30, 2011 at 9:24 am #

    Do you feel a religious test for civil magistrate would be proper and essential? Really like to hear your thoughts on that one.

    Yes … the civil magistrate should have a religious test. In point of fact religious tests are inescapable. The current religious test is that all who serve must promise to not support a religious test.

    Thank you for the book recommendation.

  9. Gray Bell July 1, 2011 at 11:04 am #

    Bret I agree with your statement fully. I believe it is essential. Everything as we have discussed before is religion so their is no escaping it. Some religous test will be required. It is just a matter of which god is being worshipped. So explain why you think a case can be made for this country being founded as a christian nation. You said you had read Political Polytheism, if you havent read Conspiracy in Philadelphia I think it has more background and history that really helps support Garys thesis. I know you are on the front lines with these R2k guys battling over the natural law issue,which is very important. But arent these so called founding fathers the same thing?

  10. jetbrane July 1, 2011 at 12:08 pm #

    Gray,

    I think the failure of an explicit religious test was a failure. I don’t think it makes the document non-Christian.

    There is in the Constitution the language that indicates that they were operating out of a Christian Worldview

    “…that the executive shall have ten days (Sundays excepted) within which to determine whether he will approve or veto a bill.”

    Clearly “Sundays excepted” is traced back to a belief in the Sabbath.

    Then, there is the reality of the religious oaths that were in almost all the State Constitutions ( I think Rhode Island was the exception). The fact that

    1.) It would be assumed that all the men who served in the Federal Government would have served in some State government meant that they had already sworn to some Christian religious oath

    2.) I don’t think anyone ever imagined that the Federal Government would be anything but a kind of skeleton operation that would always be subservient to the States where the Christian religious oaths were in place.

    Now, clearly they made a mistake by not including a explicit Christian religious oath to serve in the Federal Government but I do not believe that means that these united States was formed as a pagan country. There is to much evidence in our history that testifies to the contrary.

    We must keep in mind that it seems they desired to have a loosely theological Christian nation without having a specific denomination established as the State Church.

    As it turn out even that kind of pluralism didn’t work.

Leave a Reply:

Gravatar Image