I don’t think it’s truly sunk in that I’m in Los Angeles right now. But I have been here for a full 24 hours, incident-free! I am really enjoying meeting so many new people (and trying to remember a thousand names). There is a genuine sincerity about the people here that you can feel. I love to hear about their love and passion for God. They are truly consumed with a fire for Him in every conversation. I think much of this is due to the fact that many of the people who volunteer here have been saved off the streets themselves and know what it’s like to be in desperation and without hope. Now that they have that hope that comes only through Jesus Christ, they won’t ever let it go and they want to talk about it all the time! It’s been a huge encouragement to me.
On another un-related note, I’m reading through several books right now, one of which is the first book of the Chronicles of Narnia by C.S. Lewis. I wanted to re-read them now that I can catch the analogy and metaphor behind the story. There is an interesting correlation I noticed in Peter and Susan’s conversation with the professor at the mansion they’re staying at. They are asking the professor’s advice about how to deal with Lucy, their sister who keeps talking about a “magical” wardrobe she found that leads to another world of fauns and evil witches. Her brother Edmund keeps calling her a liar and makes fun of her even though he saw exactly what she saw.
The professor, Peter, and Susan determine that Lucy is not known for lying. The professor’s response: “Why don’t they teach logic at these schools? There are only three possibilities. Either your sister is telling lies, or she is mad, or she is telling the truth. You know she doesn’t tell lies and it is obvious that she is not mad. For the moment then and unless any further evidence turns up, we must assume she is telling the truth” (The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, 45).
When I read this, I thought, “Hmmm… this sounds so familiar…” In C.S. Lewis’ well-known book Mere Christianity, he proposes this same logic for determining the validity of Jesus’ claims to be the Messiah. This is commonly known as the lord, liar, or lunatic logic:
“I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: ‘I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept His claim to be God.” That is one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic – on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg – or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to” (Mere Christianity, 52).
On another un-related note, I’m reading through several books right now, one of which is the first book of the Chronicles of Narnia by C.S. Lewis. I wanted to re-read them now that I can catch the analogy and metaphor behind the story. There is an interesting correlation I noticed in Peter and Susan’s conversation with the professor at the mansion they’re staying at. They are asking the professor’s advice about how to deal with Lucy, their sister who keeps talking about a “magical” wardrobe she found that leads to another world of fauns and evil witches. Her brother Edmund keeps calling her a liar and makes fun of her even though he saw exactly what she saw.
The professor, Peter, and Susan determine that Lucy is not known for lying. The professor’s response: “Why don’t they teach logic at these schools? There are only three possibilities. Either your sister is telling lies, or she is mad, or she is telling the truth. You know she doesn’t tell lies and it is obvious that she is not mad. For the moment then and unless any further evidence turns up, we must assume she is telling the truth” (The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, 45).
When I read this, I thought, “Hmmm… this sounds so familiar…” In C.S. Lewis’ well-known book Mere Christianity, he proposes this same logic for determining the validity of Jesus’ claims to be the Messiah. This is commonly known as the lord, liar, or lunatic logic:
“I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: ‘I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept His claim to be God.” That is one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic – on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg – or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to” (Mere Christianity, 52).
.JPG)
1 comment:
Glad things are off to a good start man. Love the C.S. Lewis reference. Have a good time out there
Post a Comment