Rating: 
Summary: An Incendiary Combination of Reason and Faith
Review: "Christ never meant that we were to remain children in *intelligence*: on the contrary. He told us to be not only 'as harmless as doves', but also 'as wise as serpents'...He wants everyone to use what sense they have." This is the description of a rational person's Christianity--this is why I respect C.S. Lewis so highly. Even if he and I may not have *total* agreement (even the agreement we do have is to a shocking degree!), it is clear this is someone who has applied his intellect to the matter of Christianity, carefully constructing his arguments step by step, defining all meanings and explaining their significance. He constantly warns against arrogance (as he also does in The Screwtape Letters) even as he proposes his theories--a caveat that I strongly believe must be taken with the utmost seriousness.I should warn the potential reader that I may make certain statements that will invite vehement disagreement, particularly in the most conservative quarters. However, I believe they are indicative of the nature of this book--if indeed one takes *extreme* offense to what I write, Mere Christianity is probably *not* the ideal book for that person. Lewis, from my readings, is no fundamentalist; otherwise, I could not imagine him daring to set the following into writing: "Is it not frightfully unfair that this new life [given through Christ] should be confined to people who have heard of Christ and been able to believe in Him? But the truth is God has not told us what His arrangements about the other people are. We do know that no man can be saved except through Christ; we do not know that only those who know him can be saved through Him." To my mind, and perhaps to others of what I call a moderate persuasion, this statement de-fangs one of the most serious potential arguments against Christianity. For to have a world in which certain people were condemned simply by happenstance of where they were born or when in time would require a capricious God--and such is *not* the God one encounters in the Bible. I respect the opinions of others, of course. However, I do warn very seriously that if statements of this nature are going to give you problems, you ought to look elsewhere in Christian writings. This is heavy reading--at least, in the sense of the care taken by Lewis in the construction of his arguments. While not a work of philosophy or theology, it does demand the reader's close attention. It is not at all devoid of wit--but do not expect there to be anything sensationalized about it in the way that most "popular" Christian literature on the market today is. To be blunt--expect more. And Lewis will deliver. This is nothing like the sort of thing one finds in the Left Behind series or other works of LaHaye (for which I have a very serious dislike on grounds that I personally believe it has the potential to foster damagingly exclusionary attitudes in its audience...but that is another day's rant, and I'll leave it for now). In fact, I would go so far as to suggest that the taste for Lewis' work and the taste for LaHaye's, or works of that nature, would be almost mutually exclusive. This is why I must again warn the reader to make an educated decision as to which type of literature he or she will benefit most from. To those, especially, on the more liberal end of the spectrum, I should let you know to be prepared for a few antiquated ideas such as certain statements of his about marriage and sexuality--however, Lewis himself in the same chapters does make certain allowances for the change of social mores. Bear this also in mind when he uses terminology for groups of people that, while acceptable in the 1940s, are no longer acceptable. In my opinion this is not sufficient grounds upon which to discount the entire book. The other reviews may have helped to give you an idea of the book's contents and style--it is my hope that this one will help you to decide if it is *appropriate* for you or not. This is why I call Mere Christianity *incendiary*. I am deadly serious in the use of this word. It will without doubt provoke either extremely passionate agreement or a vehement condemnation. As other reviewers have noted, there is almost no middle ground. With content like this, it is no wonder. And it is a reflection of a very major divide in the Christian community as a whole. I award the five stars because from my experience, if it IS appropriate for you, it will very likely be a most rewarding reading experience. If you know it will not be appropriate for you, however, I will honestly advise you to pass this over in favor of something else.
Rating:
Summary: Every Christian should read Lewis
Review: I love C.S. Lewis. He has never dissapointed me. But Lewis absolutly out did himself in Mere Christianity. I wish every nonbeliever would read this book to learn a bout the basic teaching and theologies of Christianity, and that every Christian would read this book to find out how much they really have in common with each other. Beautifully written. A true classic for all time.
Rating:
Summary: A Theological Masterpeice.
Review: The late C.S.Lewis in Mere Christianity displays all his talent for logic. He proves that you don't have to check your brain at the door to be a Christian. He gives a logical and detailed look into Christianity, its theology and its nature. A must read for Christians and non-christians alike.
A philosophical triumph.
This is not the preachy bible stomping tellings of an evangelical preacher. He is instead a master of logical aurgument, which he expresses with an eloquent tongue and witty charm.
I can't recommend this book more if one enjoys a good philosophicl or theological read.
Rating: 
Summary: To be a Christian...
Review: Many people go into this book expecting C.S. Lewis to erect an impenetrable wall of logic around Christianity and its theology. Aside from being impossible, such a feat would be wearisome and pointless. Besides, Lewis is not a theologian or philosopher (something that probably makes the book all the more enjoyable!), but a professor of literature. As such, his genius lies in a causal (yet convincing) discussion of what would otherwise be a group of very complicated ideas. Some complain that the book begins weakly, for it is here that Lewis attempts a refutation of other theologies and philosophies in order to demonstrate the credibility of Christianity. Of course, we all know (as did Lewis, I am sure) that you cannot substantiate one position on the basis of the refutation of another (when there exist countless positions). But to claim that the book is therefore fallacy-ridden would be misguided because it is quite evident that Lewis was not after rigor. Rather, the book is designed to be a causal discussion of basic Christian principles, morals, and beliefs. And we must remember that it was originally given as a radio address in the early '40s. That being the case, I find the result fairly impressive even today. So what did I get out of the book? Although interesting, the philosophy is not Lewis' strong point. His real strength comes in showing us the kind of life that Christianity offers, and how that life is so amazingly true on a mythological level. For example, in discussing the idea of repentance Lewis explains: "repentance...is not something God demands of you before He will take you back...it is simply a description of what going back to Him is like." But we need God's help in order to repent, for "no man knows how bad he is till he has tried very hard to be good." And when we do try to be good, we find that we are utterly incapable. So we turn to God for help. But how can a God which has never suffered help us in our own suffering? Such a God is too impersonal. And this is where Christianity comes in. We must die to our own pride and independence of God, and God must help us with this metaphorical death. But "we cannot share God's dying unless God dies; and He cannot die except by being a man." This is the vision of Christianity: we are not alone in our suffering. Theologically, it is difficult to imagine anything more brilliant or true. However, those who look logically and with disdain upon what they perceive to be an elaborate and unlikely substitute for science, pronouncing religion nothing more than superstition, do not see these truths.
Rating:
Summary: Response to orpington
Review: As another reviewer pointed out, Christians seem to rate this book highly while atheists and agnostics tend to give it low ratings. Assuming that orpington is not an atheist or agnostic (from his objections that Lewis does not tow the Scripture line as he would demand of such a work), I guess fundamentalists (at least this one in particular) are not impressed with this work from Lewis either. THE BIBLE may say that once a person is saved they are never lost, but Lewis points out that giving our lives to God is a decision, and who among us hasn't seen someone make that decision and then change it?
As for the idea that people could come to Christ from other traditions, I can attest to this myself. I was raised in the Methodist denomination and then pursued the Bahai faith and Buddhism seeking to determine if I really believed in Christianity or followed it merely from conditioning in childhood. Lewis has helped bring me back into the Christian fold, with a much clearer idea of what I believe and why. As Mike Scott of The Waterboys wrote in one of his songs, it's "been a long way to the Light." Who is to judge how we get there, so long as we answer God's call?
Rating:
Summary: C.S. Lewis ROCKS!!!!!!
Review: I would recommend the whole wide world to read this awesome book!C.S. Lewis is incredible, and by far my favorite author. This book describes the seemingly obvious yet not so obvious problems of humanity. It perfectly explains those feelings and thoughts we all have but can't seem to find the words to place on them. If you know anyone who's intellect gets in the way of them accepting the idea of Christianity as a whole, give them this book. I adore C.S. Lewis. This is a book that should be read by anyone who loves God. It's brilliant.
Rating:
Summary: Another of C.S. Lewis' Excellent Books
Review: This is a great book for those who want to take their belief in Christ to a higher level. This book is laid out in three parts: Right and Wrong, What Christians Believe, and Christian Behaviour. In the third part--Christian Behaviour--Mr. Lewis eloquently portrays what it means to accept Christ. Mr. Lewis understood very well the true principle: one of the things that will make heaven indeed heaven is the way people treat each other and deal with each other. Those who accept Christ will find themselves yearning to live as he lived, and do as he did. By doing so, they will ultimately build the kind of character it takes to be "heavenly." Mr. Lewis also points out some of the characteristics that prevent us from developing such character -- such as pride. "Pride gets no pleasure out of having something, only out of having more of it than the next man." Mr. Lewis points out that pride is one of the many qualities, which (if unbridled) keeps so many people away from true discipleship in Christ. The competitive nature of pride compels us to squander away our limited time on earth in a competitive pursuit of worldly treasures and success, which (for most of us) is at the expense of more important things. And, if my life has been spent without performing the Christ like acts of service and love -- necessary to build "heavenly character," can I actually expect heaven to be a place where I will comfortably fit in? I highly recommend this book and I find it a valuable addition to my library.
Rating: 
Summary: Lewis a heretic?
Review: I believe Lewis is a hugely overrated theologian; even a hugely overrated commentator. Here's one example: In Mere Christianity (Book 4, Chapter 10 'Nice People or Good Men') Lewis writes, "There are people (a great many of them) who are slowly ceasing to be Christians but who still call themselves by that name: some of them are clergymen. There are other people who are slowly becoming Christians though they do not yet call themselves so. There are people who do not accept the full Christian doctrine about Christ but who are so strongly attracted to Him that they are His in a much deeper sense than they themselves understand. There are people in other religions who are being led by God's secret influence to concentrate on those parts of their religion which are in agreement with Christianity, and who thus belong to Christ without knowing it. For example, a Buddhist of good will may be led to concentrate more and more on the Buddhist teaching about mercy and to leave in the background (though he may still say he believed) the Buddhist teaching on certain other points. Many of the good Pagans long before Christ's birth may have been in this position." Certainly a Christian may cease to 'act' like a Christian; but Lewis wrote that a Christian could cease to 'be' a Christian, thus revealing his total misunderstanding or total disregard of John 10:28,29. "And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father's hand." In addition, given Lewis' heretical comment that 'good Pagans' could belong to Christ because of their concentration on Buddhist teachings about mercy, I now have serious doubts about Lewis' own spiritual regeneration. I would advise anyone to skip Lewis altogether and read someone who understands Scripture. For starters I would recommend Matthew Henry or Samuel Davies (and as a bonus, they're both in public domain).
Rating:
Summary: Mere Assumption
Review: Mere Assumptions is a more appropriate title. I have never seen such an array of circular reasoning and assuming in my life. Hardly one fact is referred too.
My ex-pastor gave me this book to straighten my thinking out. What a confusing bunch of bologna. I was glad I read it, it confirmed my doubts.
Rating:
Summary: Classic work but there other stars in the universe...
Review: Firstly, ask yourself, "are you satisified with the current philosophical world view?" Do you think Postmodernism protects your human rights? Does it criticise violence such as Sept 11 or the encroachments of Ashcroft? Why not? Can it say with confidence that GE food, famine, war, or globilasation are beneficial or not? Does it really beleive in itself? Modern philosophy is failing to provide a framework to the world we live in. If you think otherwise you should read more Derrida and Lacan to clear your head... now there is a contradiction!
If the pomo assertion that truth is false is itself falsified, is found to be a deadend, then we are forced to look back at where we erred...
Mere Christianity is an introductory work and as said below it is a complilation of talks given on radio, thus, the language is occasionally unnuanced and the arguments not as solid as could be.
Nonetheless, CS Lewis has given us a classic, a thought provoking piece that gave me some new perspectives and concepts to address old issues with. It is a wonderful read.
The biggest problem with the book though is the idea of "Mere-ism". I feel too many people read this work and use it as a licence for undefined nebulous Christianity, which is what Lewis warned against when he said that people must move out of the corridor of the house and choose a room. Choosing a church group that prides itself on faith in the corridor is not choosing a room.
On the other hand, to the agnositics and others out there who might have been dissapointed with Mere Christianity, do not conclude that this is the pinnacle of Christian thought. It is an attractive primer but not all that there is to be said... Christianity has suffienct depth as you are prepared to explore.
Two coversion stories of academics that spring to mind are:
Seven Story Mountain by Thomas Merton (Communist to monk)
Apologia pro vita sua by John Henry Newman
Rebuilding a Lost Faith by John L. Stoddard is very good. If you want some modern philosophy to supplement the atheist humanists you are fed at college try the Cambridge don:
Elizabeth Anscombe (Modern Moral Philosophy)
You could also read David Hume and see if you really do agree with his atheist conclusions! Or you could try the highly amusing GK Chesteron (Everlasting Man, Heretics, Orthodoxy, The Thing), Oscar Wilde, Evelyn Waugh, Gordon Greene, or Tolkien.
The Encyclical on Faith and Reason (Fides et Ratio) is worth looking at also.
| 
