Sigmund Freud wrote:
A lamp post.
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
Yeah? Well sometimes its a big brown dick!
Sigmund Freud wrote:
A lamp post.
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
Yeah? Well sometimes its a big brown dick!
Hey Kim...in my opinion the lamp post represted the decisions that God gives us. I picture it as a road sign that you can choose to go one way or another. I think God always gives us choices and he will help us choose the right one if we ask him.
<3 Kingdomgirl05
well i feel that the children don't represent only children in a literal sense. Edmund is definitely a representation of the common man. he struggles constantly for power like man on earth has for centuries. in the beginning of the series he is very selfish. It is Lucy that represents children in general. She represents innocence. Peter represents Peter from a biblical stand point. He is always going by the rules much like Peter (part of the reason i don't really care for him. I havent quite figured out what Susan represents.
Courtney wrote:
well i feel that the children don't represent only children in a literal sense. Edmund is definitely a representation of the common man. he struggles constantly for power like man on earth has for centuries. in the beginning of the series he is very selfish. It is Lucy that represents children in general. She represents innocence. Peter represents Peter from a biblical stand point. He is always going by the rules much like Peter (part of the reason i don't really care for him. I havent quite figured out what Susan represents.
That awkward moment when someone digs up a 4 year old thread without acknowledging it.
I dunno how accurate the movie Shadowlands is, but this is good scene about Narnia:
Starting off any point on Narnia, or C. S. Lewis for that matter, with quotes from Tolkien doesn’t really prove any point as Lewis intentionally smuggled religion into a story and Tolkien combined many ideals into one for his plot. While they may have interacted and been friends, it remains that both stories are polar opposites with the only real similarity being that they both contain mythological elements.
Tolkien surpassed Lewis with the Hobbit, LOTR, the Silmarillion etc. It was enough to encompass “narnia” as a small part of the same world as Tolkien took it to new depths, this being his claim to fame and the reason his books are still popular today. The Chronicles of Narnia have many subtle, and not so subtle, parallels to the Bible, intentionally.
An allegory can often be a multi-level story, where there are at least the literal meaning and the allegorical one. It is also true that although Lewis may not have intended his story meant for children to be Christian or other allegory, he did intend it to have Christian parallels. He created a world that he believed needed to have similarities to our in order to survive: seasons, food. cooperation among residents, and, well, yes, a savior of sorts. After all, where there is good and evil, good must conquer (it should in the world of children's literature, anyway- in my humble opinion!)
Its the single burning flame left in a cold world.. its where lucy meets Jesus... its the light that illuminates the dark.
G. K. wrote:
Another great writer who influenced Lewis was G. K. Chesterton, whose greatest works were Heretics and Orthodoxy. Any of his fans on here?
I've read several of the multitude of writings by Chesterton. Hmmm, let's see. I loved his biographies of St. Francis of Assisi and St. Thomas Aquinas. I also read his biography of Chaucer which deals more than a bit with Shakespeare, too. Stylistically, to me, Chesterton in places is about as good as writing gets. Philosophically, he's fantastic, too - read about Chesterton's idea of the democracy of the dead or of Chesterton's fence. Part of what makes him interesting to me is that he wrote from outside the US where I live and decades ago, so certainly in a different cultural milieu than mine in the US and ours now. I have on my bookshelf (and don't know when I'll get to it) The Collected Works of G.K. Chesterton, Volume III, which deals quite a bit with Catholicism. In the half-dozen or so of his works that I have read, he's excellent at giving the view from 30,000 feet and cleverly relating things.
Brian wrote:
CS Lewis a great philospher? You must be kidding. He isn't even a good apologist. Lord, Lunatic or Liar? (You missed an "L" How about Legend?) Have you ever read any critical theology or any real critiques of the argument from design? God, CS Lewis is really, really bad. I would love to have been able to watch a Dawkins or Hitchens blow him away in a debate. Better yet a critical religious scholar like Bart Ehrman, Bruce Metzger, Burton mack, or Robert Price, who all undoubtedly know the Bible much better than he did.
I can really only believe you have never seriously grappled with any counter-arguments to Lewis.
I only will weigh in here regarding Hitchens. In what little I've read by him I find impressively poor scholarship. Here is something I posted on LetsRun way back on 01/01/2012, shortly after his death:
May God bless Christopher Hitchens.
I heard Christopher Hitchens interviewed a few times, read a few articles about some of his debates, and sometimes read his own writings of which I here address just three: (1) a less than one-page article he wrote on Gandhi and Maximilian Kolbe which appeared in "The Nation" in 1983, (2) his book published in 1997 on that "Villain of Villains" (to borrow a phrase of Christopher Buckley uttered sarcastically in defense of that "Villain"), Mother Teresa ("The Missionary Position: Mother Teresa in Theory and Practice" - I wonder whether it was Hitchens, the publisher, or someone else who titled the book), and (3) "god is not Great" published in 2009.
In "The Nation" article on Gandhi and Kolbe, Hitchens dismisses them both as unholy fakirs and, on a tissue of evidence and ignoring abundant and robust evidence contrariwise, called Kolbe an anti-Semite who got what he deserved at Auschwitz. The article was written in 1983 shortly after the Catholic Church canonized Kolbe as a saint in 1982. (I will leave to others any defense of Gandhi as I am less familiar with his history and I do not share as many beliefs with him as I do with Kolbe and the Blessed Teresa of Calcutta (increasingly "Kolkata")). Kolbe (1894-1941) was a Pole who earned two doctorates as part of his formation as a priest and Franciscan Friar (the various Franciscan orders derive their names from St. Francis of Assisi (1182-1226)). Kolbe was head of a Franciscan friary (of about 700 men) in Poland while Poland was under siege first by Russian Communists and later by Nazis. He hid roughly 3,000 Poles, including an estimated 300 - 1,500 Jews, in the friary at considerable risk to himself, to the other friars, and to the Catholic Church. He encouraged others to hide Jews as well, and specifically instructed his fellow Franciscans not to inflame anti-Semitic sentiments - Kolbe had a media apostolate, producing Catholic newspapers, magazines, and the like. He even is reported to have organized the delivery of gifts to the Jewish children hidden in the Friary (the Christian children had received gifts for Christmas which the Jewish children did not celebrate). Kolbe spoke fluent German and was offered German citizenship but refused it. His father, Julius Kolbe, was a Polish patriot, one of Pilsudski's patriots, who battled against Bolsheviks in his efforts for the independence of a partitioned Poland, and for this Julius was hanged in 1914. The Nazis arrested Maximilian Kolbe in 1939 but eventually released him, only to arrest him again in 1941 on the charge that he was an intellectual. He was sent to Pawiak prison in February 1941, and in May 1941 was transferred to Auschwitz, often described as labor camp and a death camp.
Numerous records attest to Kolbe's behavior at Auschwitz. He shared his meager food rations with other detainees, and he blessed the Nazi's who almost beat him to death. In July 1941, a prisoner was unaccounted for and presumed to have escaped (reports indicate he was later found drowned in a latrine). To deter escapes, the Nazis assembled prisoners and selected ten for death by starvation. Franciszek Gajowniczek, a Polish army sergeant and one of the ten, cried out in despair for his wife and three children. It was then that Fr. Kolbe broke from the ranks, presented himself to deputy commander SS-Hauptsturmführer Karl Fritzsch while politely removing his own prisoner's cap, and spoke words approximating these: "I wish to take the place of that man. He has a wife and children. I am old and alone. I am a Catholic priest from Poland." (Fr. Kolbe was 47 years old; Sergeant Gajowniczek was 39). Commander Fritsch agreed to the switch. Kolbe and the other nine men (there may be no record of their identities), were marched to a starvation bunker, stripped, and locked inside. After about ten days, only four, including Kolbe, remained alive, though Kolbe suffered tuberculosis for most of his life. After a few more days, on 14 August 1941, Nazis gave lethal injections to the four, first to the two unconscious prisoners then to the two conscious prisoners. Fr. Kolbe was the last of the four to receive an injection. He died within a few seconds. His body was cremated the next day as hundreds of thousands would be over several years. Sergeant Gajowniczek, the man spared by Kolbe's courage, died in 1995, at 93 years of age.
I am happy to report that Hitchens seems to have retreated, even if only slightly, in his 2009 work "god is not Great" from his calumnious opinion of St. Maximilian Kolbe. Hitchens then wrote of a priest who "apparently behaved admirably" (I write from memory and do not have the book nearby) at Auschwitz, but quickly segued into sneering at Pius XII (pope from 1939-1958).
Hitchens' criticisms of Teresa of Calcutta are quite lame. Hitchens tries to persuade his audience that Teresa loved poverty but not the poor. If you are fairly well instructed in Catholicism, you will find Hitchens' criticism littered with his own misunderstanding on numerous points: he confuses the Virginal Conception (the belief that Jesus was conceived by a virgin, Mary) with the Immaculate Conception (that Mary's soul was created without original sin in a relationship with God similar to that of Adam and Eve's relationship with God before the Fall) and shows little comprehension of Catholic teaching regarding birth control, for example, the paradigmatic difference between artificial birth control, which the Catholic Church opposes) and natural family planning (NFP), of which, for the right reasons, the Catholic Church approves. NFP methods are fertility awareness methods that do not impair a woman's cyclical fertility or a man's fairly constant fertility (the Catholic Church encouraged the development of the various NFP methods: the Billings ovulation method, the Creighton method, and other symptomatic or thermal methods). He faults Teresa for calling abortion the greatest destroyer of peace in the world, though he himself elsewhere calls abortion an abomination, and neglects to offer his opinion on what precisely is a greater offender than abortion.
I'll stop there. I hope to write a book about Hitchens' take on Kolbe, Teresa and Pius XII. Hitchens strikes me as an elegant stylist, but extremely lazy with regard to research, and a remarkable bigot.
There is overwhelming evidence that early Christians prayed for the dead and that this was viewed favorably by the Fathers of the Church, and Catholics, Orthodox, and a few Protestants continue to pray for the dead. I believe in the incredible mercy of God and pray for the salvation of Christopher Hitchens.
So when Prince Caspian sailed out into the sea and found that island where the people with one leg were jumping around, which part of the bible was that about?
The Golden Age of LRC
Monopods are symbolic of monotheism
Bad Wigins wrote:
So when Prince Caspian sailed out into the sea and found that island where the people with one leg were jumping around, which part of the bible was that about?
Cool. A 15 year old thread.
C.S. Lewis always insisted Narnia was not an allegory, although it seems obvious it is. In any case, there are many parts that are certainly not intentional or even unintentional allegory.