Rating: 
Summary: Wonderful book by a wonderful author
Review: Based on a series of broadcasts made during World War 2, C.S. Lewis avoids the complex theological differences that separate the different Christian beliefs and focuses on the core that they all share. Lewis has an amazing knack for being able to lay bare the terribly complex with explanations that are striking simple, yet inexplicably sensible. Lewis has amazing insights into the faith that he developed only late in life. Some of the chapters can be difficult to work through, but overall the book is an amazing review of the fundamentals of Christianity.
Rating: 
Summary: An exercise in rationalization
Review: C.S. Lewis builds foundations of logic based on faulty black or white situations, and then expounds his theories upon the trembling base beneath. The further an objective human being gets, the less steady the footing becomes. It is inconceivable to me that such a book can occupy a revered position to otherwise objective people. Of course, objective individuals are not the target audience. If you are a Christian, then this book will most likely confirm that you are indeed the best, the smartest, and the only truly righteous in the only way such a thing can be confirmed: Through rationalization, circular logic, and outright self-delusion. The misogyny and blatant hatred imbued in this dogma-filled tripe is offensive. It is interesting to an objective person only as an examination of self-delusion.
Rating:
Summary: This book was very helpful to me
Review: I had left Christianity behind when I became an adult, and spent a number of years searching for a faith that "fit." A friend recommended this book to me at a time when I was not a rabbid anti-Christian. It changed my entire view of the world. CS Lewis wrote so convincingly that I could no longer be a pagan, and found myself drawn inevitably towards the Christian faith, this time with reason and logic behind me.
Rating:
Summary: Leading Up to the Leap
Review: C.S. Lewis's Mere Christianity is a wonderful book. Lewis was at one time an atheist who later came to Christianity, and Mere Christianity is a compilation of Lewis's thought that lead to the conversion. The book is not a difficult read; Lewis has taken complex ideas and broken them down to their most simple forms. His thought is always logical, and almost as far as one can go, he details the logical reasons for God. Of course, as Kierkegaard and Lewis both know, faith in God can't be found by simple reasoning; there is that "leap" involved. For this reason, Lewis goes on to explain many of his basic beliefs about Christianity.Really, Mere Christianity is a great book to detail the most basic foundations of Christianity. There are a few areas where my own interpretations and opinions differ slightly from Lewis, but that is definitely to be expected. Lewis was open-minded and acknowledged that differences in doctrinal thought are essential from Christian to Christian. I think that this is part of the real strength of the book; C.S. Lewis has explained the most basic principals of Christianity in general, and the individual Christian can build on them. Mere Christianity can be an essential tool to help the Christian better articulate his/her beliefs, and the book can also serve as a very basic introduction to a person considering or wanting to learn about Christianity.
Rating:
Summary: Disappointing
Review: Lewis fails to support any of this major claims and fails to take seriously any argument other than his own. I was very disappointed as many have spoken well of this book. His "argument" would only appeal to someone who is already a Christian; non-Christians who are looking for a good logical argument supporting Christianity will be disappointed. The book's version of a water-down version of Plato's theory of forms--spiced up with a touch of Aristotle--represents, at best, middle-brow religious theorizing.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent introduction to the faith
Review: A great place to start for anyone interested in learning about Christianity. This book strikes an effective balance between religion and theology. A thorough knowledge of the Bible is not necessary to get a lot out of this book. Lewis's writing flows easily and is very conversational (most of this book was originally broadcast as radio talks), and he has a wonderful way of illustrating his points with helpful examples.
Rating:
Summary: A Review of C.S. Lewis's "Mere Christianity"
Review: From 1942 to 1944 C. S. Lewis did a series of radio broadcasts on Christian Faith. These broadcasts were then made into a book, Mere Christianity. A guideline to why and what Christian's believe, it gives an intellectual and philosophical understanding of Christianity. It is an excellent series of subjects starting with the "Meaning of the Universe," where Lewis takes a systematic approach involving right and wrong as a key to understanding the Universe. As the book continues it follows a path in which Lewis gives insight towards more technical and precise variables of Christianity such as faith and forgiveness. He concludes the book with a large section on the "Doctrines of the Trinity," plastered with metaphors and deep explanations concerning the world around us, rather than each of us as an individual personality. However, this book is a conquest for the truth, it does not have the final answer. If one finds a final answer for their spiritual beliefs in this book, they are contradicting what they have read. A final answer can only be found within one's self.
Concerning the logical soundness of this book, C. S. Lewis demonstrates an almost uncanny ability to prove religious arguments with reason on a consistent basis. And to make it even better, he builds upon each subject that he proves. This is best noted in his explanations of the universe, where he concludes that there is a one God that created everything. However, there are obvious fallacies concerning the validity of Lewis's arguments. Although a great scholar and philosopher, he was once an atheist, which gives us the hint that he might not be such a great authority. And if he is a die-hard Christian, we must not overlook the fact that he is biased. There are very few instances where counter views, and arguments are presented. However, this book was written from a series of lectures during World War 2 where Lewis was given the task to explain the truth in Christianity, not prove it. Also, a large majority of the book relates to religious presumptions, which don't go with the flow of structural logic, but when dealing with religion improvable presumptions are inevitable. However, these are all minor technicalities that have little affect on the real meaning of the book. For Christians and non-Christians alike, truth prevails over faith. We must make sure we understand our beliefs before we completely conform to them. Faith and no margin for evidence results in blind ignorance.
As a service to society, Lewis created a structural manual describing Christian values, and their affect on humanity. For the person looking for answers concerning their spirituality, this book is a gateway to finding them. It presents the reader with an opportunity to comprehend why Gods word is true. It also encourages questioning, and not only enlightens, but inspires reason. Summarizing the review is a quote that demonstrates the attitude of C.S. Lewis, "In religion, as in war and everything else, comfort is the one thing you cannot get by looking for it. If you look for truth, you may find comfort in the end: if you look for comfort you will not get either comfort or truth - only soft soap and wishful thinking to begin with and, in the end, despair."
Rating: 
Summary: Not the end-all, be-all, even of Lewis' work; but still okay
Review: Not really the best Christian apologetic Lewis ever wrote: that would be his 1960 revision of _Miracles: A Preliminary Study_, in conjunction with his much earlier _The Problem of Pain_ (which should be read after MaPS). Still, MC is very accessible to many readers. The chapters of the first two sections were originally designed to be "Broadcast Talks" (the original title of the first publication of the first section) on BBC radio during WWII. They provide a colorful version (if somewhat oversimplified, as Lewis well knew) of the theistic Argument from Morality, which does help to introduce the principles within and around the argument; and, for section 2, a variation of what has come to be called the Lewis Trilemma (aka 'Liar, Lunatic, or Lord?'). The Trilemma is also oversimplified (keep in mind the broad target audience), and should not be considered to be Lewis' ultimate opinion on the subject; but unfortunately he never seems to have written a more technical version. (Some even more foreshortened versions can be found in other articles and essays he wrote.) In any event, although it is tempting to deride Lewis for simply presuming that the texts are sufficiently accurate to make such a judgment, any critic (pro or con) ought to know from other writings that Lewis was well aware of the benefits and limitations (and abuses) of textual criticism. Besides, the attempt to call into question the honesty of the textual authors/editors merely ends up reinstituting the Trilemma again at the next level. The Trilemma cannot easily be brushed aside: as the increasingly complex (and spurious) historical revisionism theories of the past 30 years (forms of which Lewis was already familiar with from his own day and prior) ironically testify. This doesn't mean that the Trilemma argument is rock-solid, either, however. It isn't a substitute for preliminary philosophical argument; nor is it a substitute for historical analysis. It perhaps works best as the very tail end of one (or ideally both) of those endeavors. Dr. Gregory Boyd makes much the same point very well in _Cynic Sage or Son of God_ (an indepth analysis of the logical bona fides of various historical propositions): if Jesus was like _that_, then we have a fairly straightforward explanation for why the earliest existant texts about him are like _this_--an explanation that doesn't require (for instance) hypothesizing about what a hypothetical community did not believe based on what a hypothetical 'early strata' of a hypothetical document hypothesized to have been used by this hypothetical community does _not_ say. |g| (As Boyd pithly observes: _that_ requires faith! Lewis, who had already seen numerous similar attempts at historical revisionism in his day, even outside Jesus-studies, would agree.) As always, careful qualification should be observed, pro or con: and it is admittedly worth noting, that due to certain restrictions in his delivery, Lewis is not as carefully qualified as he could be. (i.e., this is a necessarily truncated _introduction_ to the topic, not the final word on it.) The AfM in Section 1, remember, is also not rigorously proposed. (Although it is more thorough than the chapter on morality in MaPS, again for a good reason in relation to the structure of that greater work.) Unfortunately, again, Lewis never wrote a rigorous (specifically theistic) AfM--possibly because he believed that no total weight would hang adequately on it (there is some indication of this in how he uses it to make a restrained and subordinate point in MaPS). _The Abolition of Man_ (and a few essays here and there which presage it) does not exactly take up the slack as a theistic AfM--although, once again, this is because Lewis didn't design it to. (See my review of TAoM.) The remaining two sections (also originally published separately) form the majority of the book. The 3rd section, on 'Christian Morality', is again a useful and enjoyable (if very basic) introduction to the subject, both at a theological and historical level, in the sense of: 'This is the consistency of the subject in relation to Christian philosophy, and this is (a very basic) overview of how Christian thinkers have tended to most cogently consider the matter.' The final section, on the doctrine of the Trinity, is the best popular introduction to the subject I know. Both last sections (3 and 4) can work well at helping readers, both believer and sceptic, to clear away some misconceptions concerning those two topics (the generally-Christian moral code, and the trinitarian doctrine). Unfortunately, theories on those topics are widespread and different enough, that confusion may result if these are taken to be _the_ foundational base of understanding for future reading; especially in the case of the Trinity. Still, as aids to practical application of the relevant doctrines, they make excellent introductions.
Rating:
Summary: By far the best apologetic book written...
Review: From an intellectual point of view, this is by far the greatest apologetic work I have encountered. Now, it doesn't mean I buy it hook, line and sinker, nor does it mean that because it is intellectually sound it is 'true' in the deepest sense of the word. But, in terms of Trinitarian Christian orthodoxy as I have come to understand it, Lewis simplifies an extraordinarily complex subject to its basics, thus the title 'mere' Christianity. He cuts off the tendencies many of us have to go off on tangents about things that really don't matter in terms of the Gospel message and excise them at that point. For those who think Lewis is deluded, consider his qualifications at Oxford. He is an erudite writer who has a gift for analogies and thought provoking insights that really help the reader grasp what Christianity really espouses.
Rating:
Summary: The best Christian writer available...
Review: C.S. Lewis is the best Christian writer that I've found in my efforts to better understand this influential world religion. Although much of his language seems dated and a bit stuffy (he died in 1963), his use of metaphor is excellent and he has a lucid style that perfectly deconstructs Christian philosophy and its tenets. Why should someone believe in Christ, Lewis wonders? The fact is, there is independent historical documentation to prove that Jesus lived, as much as there is proof that Alexander the Great lived. So, Lewis argues, you either believe what this man claimed or you believe he was a lunatic. While I appreciate Lewis's point here -- and it is a woeful indictment on the education system that many Americans don't know this fact-- it ignores a bigger issue. Yes, Jesus, lived...but the written accounts of his life and the upstart nature of his religion were written 30-100 years after he lived, and do not necessary perfectly reflect his message or life. Any examination of the life of Jesus needs to include consideration of the fact that the writings about him are fallible and contradictory. After an examination of reasons to believe, Lewis details various aspect of Christian morality. Many of his points are important and surprising. For one, Lewis states that "all sins of the flesh are bad, but they are the least bad of the sins. All the worst pleasures are purely spiritual: the pleasure of putting people in the wrong, of bossing and patronizing and spoiling sport... This is why a cold, self-righteous prig who regularly goes to church may be nearer to hell than a prostitute. But, of course, it is better to be neither." Take that, Fred Phelps! "Mere Christianity" is a comprehensive and fascinating book. I learned a lot about Christian faith from it and it lead me to read most of Lewis's other books.
|
