The End of Europe?

European Union

Preface

I reside in Canada and have Canadian citizenship but also have United Kingdom/European Union citizenship through a parent.

I lived previously in England for two years starting my Doctoral work and visited Wales in the process of obtaining my final degrees.


On The Briefing online last Tuesday, Albert Mohler was asking if post-Christian Europe would survive?

He indicated it was doomed as post-Christian.

I certainly would prefer that there was less secularization and more Christian influence.

My view is Europe will survive, however.

The European Union may change and lose some power, but I personally favour the European Union as a military and economic union and do not favour a concept of European court  I prefer each nation to have its own court as the highest court of the land.

I also do not favour the idea of a 'United States of Europe' as I reason having experienced life in England, for example, that significant cultural differences still exist throughout Europe and nations should usually at least, have individual sovereignty.

But I ponder in regard to the theory of Europe being doomed because it is post-Christian.

When was Europe not very sinful, historically?

Was Christian Europe ever Biblically Christian?

I do not accept theologically or philosophically this implied golden age of Christianity, philosophy from some very conservative Christians in regard to Europe and even the more recent Christianized America.

The Western World has always been a very sinful realm.

Jesus said his Kingdom was not of this world in John 18 and Christianity has never been perfectly represented in it.

I am not claiming to be an historian but my MPhil and PhD theses contained aspects of historical theology.

One can reason that Christianity in its most Biblical New Testament form was spread by the power of the Holy Spirit in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and to the uttermost part of the earth (Acts 1:8). Cairns (1981: 55).

The Jews were preached to first and then the Gentiles. This means that persons were preached to within the Roman Empire in places such as Rome and Antioch.

Europe and Eurasia.

One can read in Scripture that even in the beginnings of the Christian Church theological error set in with heretical teaching and false teachers (Galatians, 2 Peter, Jude for example) and perhaps considering the Roman Empire environment, Europe would have perhaps been Biblically Christian in pockets.

Christianity beginning in the New Testament era under the Roman Empire, which had State religion.

Therefore, the New Testament era was not necessarily one that caused Europe to be predominantly, Biblically Christian.

And in an empire known for its brutality.

Future church-state connections meant the politicization of the church in many contexts starting with favour for the church from Constantine (ca. 274-337) and eventually the development of the Roman Catholic Church in the West and the Greek Orthodox Church in the East, and the Schism of 1054. Cairns (1981: 205).

Politicization of the church may have protected it from persecution but there was the danger of State influence in church matters with a church-state union and this often effects the integrity of the Biblical and New Testament message and theology.

Cairns states between 313 and 590 the Old Catholic church became the Roman Catholic Church in which the bishop of Rome won primacy over other bishops. Cairns (1981: 157). At the same time church ritual also became more elaborate. Cairns (1981: 157).

Was Europe Biblically Christian therefore from 313 to 590?

This would seem unlikely, at least culturally, again it would be in pockets, as it was in the New Testament era, if it was evolving from the New Testament era Christianity while under the Roman Empire which had Roman State religion, into more elaborate ritualistic Roman Catholic Church Christianity, which although it maintained a Biblical core, depended heavily on tradition.

Perhaps after 590 from a non-Roman Catholic perspective this would be the actual historical beginnings of the Roman Catholic Church, not believing it is actually traced to the Apostle Peter.

The Middle Ages forward seemingly would not qualify as historical periods or eras where:

Europe was not very sinful, historically.

Christian Europe was Biblically Christian.

Therefore, should Europe be assumed to be doomed at this point in history because it is this secular in the 21st century period and era?

CAIRNS, EARLE E. (1981) Christianity Through The Centuries, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House.

Vernazza, Italy-Facebook, Travel+Leisure

Vernazza, Italy-Facebook, Travel+Leisure

One Percent Owning More Wealth Than The Other Ninety-Nine Percent?

One Percent Owning More Wealth Than The Other Ninety-Nine Percent? 

Photos

1. Amsterdam-Facebook-Travel+Leisure

2. Netherlands 

Edited with added, Book of James related, Bibliography for academia.edu entry on July 10, 2022

The Guardian January 19

Cited 

Larry Elliott, economics editor, and Ed Pilkington The Guardian, Monday 19 January 2015

'New Oxfam report says half of global wealth held by the 1% Oxfam warns of widening inequality gap, days ahead of Davos economic summit in Switzerland'

Cited

'Billionaires and politicians gathering in Switzerland this week will come under pressure to tackle rising inequality after a study found that – on current trends – by next year, 1% of the world’s population will own more wealth than the other 99%.'

Cited

Ahead of this week’s annual meeting of the World Economic Forum in the ski resort of Davos, the anti-poverty charity Oxfam said it would use its high-profile role at the gathering to demand urgent action to narrow the gap between rich and poor. The charity’s research, published on Monday, shows that the share of the world’s wealth owned by the best-off 1% has increased from 44% in 2009 to 48% in 2014, while the least well-off 80% currently own just 5.5%. Oxfam added that on current trends the richest 1% would own more than 50% of the world’s wealth by 2016. 

Cited

'Oxfam made headlines at Davos last year with a study showing that the 85 richest people on the planet have the same wealth as the poorest 50% (3.5 billion people). The charity said this year that the comparison was now even more stark, with just 80 people owning the same amount of wealth as more than 3.5 billion people, down from 388 in 2010.'

Cited

Byanyima said: “Do we really want to live in a world where the 1% own more than the rest of us combined? The scale of global inequality is quite simply staggering and despite the issues shooting up the global agenda, the gap between the richest and the rest is widening fast.”

Cited '• Introduce minimum wages and move towards a living wage for all workers.'

End Citations

'1% of the world’s population will own more wealth than the other 99%.'

Oxfam added that on current trends the richest 1% would own more than 50% of the world’s wealth by 2016.'

I was not clear initially in regard to the statistics when I heard the story online.

But seeing it in print it is assumed that 1% of the population will have more wealth than 99% of the population and own more than 50% of the wealth also.

'Byanyima said: “Do we really want to live in a world where the 1% own more than the rest of us combined?'

No, but as a Christian theologian and philosopher that is a moderate conservative, I also do not want socialistic large government non-solutions which damage economic and business growth and individual initiative.

I do not want to be under the excessive economic or political control of governments or corporations.

Or any human controlled religion.

'Cited '• Introduce minimum wages and move towards a living wage for all workers.''

I do agree with the concept of a 'living wage' or 'working person's wage. That being a wage within an economy by where a person can survive.

I have significant difficulty with corporations ethically placing fiduciary responsibility to shareholders above a living wage for employees.

Just because persons will work at a certain wage level, as in market value does not mean it is a living wage, but rather economics and other factors may pressure persons to accept the seemingly best deal possible and corporations should not use the economic argument that if someone will work at a certain wage then it is ethically acceptable, even if legal.

There needs to be other ethical and moral issues considered.

Corporations should put persons and their welfare, including a living wage for all employees above fiduciary responsibility to shareholders.

Biblically consider James

James 5:1-6

New American Standard Bible (NASB) Misuse of Riches

5 Come now, you rich, weep and howl for your miseries which are coming upon you. 2 Your riches have rotted and your garments have become moth-eaten. 3 Your gold and your silver have rusted; and their rust will be a witness against you and will consume your flesh like fire. It is in the last days that you have stored up your treasure! 4 Behold, the pay of the laborers who mowed your fields, and which has been withheld by you, cries out against you; and the outcry of those who did the harvesting has reached the ears of the Lord of [a]Sabaoth. 5 You have lived luxuriously on the earth and led a life of wanton pleasure; you have [b]fattened your hearts in a day of slaughter. 6 You have condemned and [c]put to death the righteous man; he does not resist you. 

Footnotes: James 5:4 I.e. Hosts James 5:5 Lit nourished James 5:6 Or murdered New American Standard Bible (NASB) Copyright © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995 by The Lockman Foundation

Wealth is not inherently wrong, but its misuse is...

Vox January 24

Cited

'Be careful with that viral statistic about the top 1% owning half the world’s wealth Updated by Ezra Klein on January 22, 2015, 2:50 p.m. ET'

Cited

'In recent days, there's been a startling statistic going around. The number comes from Oxfam, and warns that the combined wealth of the richest one percent will pass that of the other 99 percent next year, at least if current trends hold. The statistic has been reported in the Guardian, the New York Times, and FiveThirtyEight, among others. Even Hillary Clinton is using a version of it. But it doesn't mean quite what it looks like it means.'

Cited

'To see the problem, here's another version of the same number: the combined wealth of my two nephews is already more than the bottom 30 percent of the world combined. And they don't have jobs, or inheritances. They just have a piggy bank and no debt. Oxfam presents the statistic, which is derived from data published in Credit Suisse's Global Wealth Databook (pdf), as a measure of wealth. But it's technically a measure of net worth: assets minus debts. As such, what it's picking up isn't just massive inequality in wealth, but also massive inequality in the ability to access credit. So for the purposes of Oxfam's calculation, a farmer in China's rural Sichuan province with no debt but also very little money is wealthier than an American who just graduated from medical school with substantial debt but also a hefty, six-figure income. By any sensible standard, the medical student is richer, but because her student debt still outweighs her financial assets, the net worth measure counts her as poorer than the Chinese peasant.'

But the author notes....

Cited

'Update: My explanation of the wealth distribution chart was confusing. So, to clarify, that chart mixes countries and continents, but I'm further breaking it down by country, which you can find on page 107 of the Databook. North America doesn't have the second-highest number of people in the bottom decile, but among countries, the US does.'

In closing there seems to be much speculation in regard to the statistics and economics, but one can be concerned about the wealth disparity, even from a moderate conservative perspective.

BARCLAY, WILLIAM (1976) The Letters of James and Peter, Philadelphia, The Westminster Press. 

BAUER, WALTER. (1979) A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, Translated by Eric H. Wahlstrom, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press. 

BRUCE, F.F. (1987) Romans, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

CAIRD, GEORGE B. (1977) Paul's Letters from Prison Paperback, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

CARSON T. (1986) ‘James', in F.F. Bruce (ed.),The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Zondervan. 

COURSON, JON (2005) Application Commentary, Thomas Nelson, Nashville.

DUNNETT, WALTER M. (2001) Exploring The New Testament, Wheaton, Crossway Books. 

ELWELL, WALTER AND YARBROUGH, ROBERT W., Third Edition (2013) Encountering The New Testament, Grand Rapids, Baker Academic. 

FEE, GORDON (1987) The First Epistle to the Corinthians, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

MARSHALL, ALFRED (1975)(1996) The Interlinear KJV-NIV, Grand Rapids, Zondervan. 

STRONG, J. (1890)(1986) Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Burlington, Welch Publishing Company.

THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT (1993) Stuttgart, United Bible Societies. 

The Orthodox Study Bible, New Testament and Psalms, (1993) Saint Athanasius Orthodox Academy, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee.

Paradise: Third Post

Amalfi Coast, Italy-Facebook-Travel+Leisure

I was listening Friday afternoon to an online Pastor. He stated basically the following view, although in the context of Luke 16, which I noted in the 2013 article:

Some scholars have concluded that since the remaining references to Paradise after Christ and the cross with Luke 23, refer to Heaven, followed by the resurrection and Christ's ascension, that Paradise has been removed from Hades...Kent (1996: 826).

The Pastor stated that the Hell section of Hades remains, although not the final place of judgment, that being the lake of fire (Revelation 20).

The implication being that Paradise was now non-existent in the New Testament context, replaced by Heaven.

What was not mentioned by the speaker was the view that Paradise has been removed from Hades and taken to the third heaven. Kent (1996: 826).

This appears Biblical in light of 2 Corinthians 12.

For fairness I will note that none of us presenting theological and Biblical works, unless presenting specific academic theses are presenting exhaustive works with articles and in the case of Pastors, sermons.

There is the issue of Paul's 2 Corinthians reference and his willingness to consider departing the body to be with the Lord in Philippians 1.

Erickson reasons that based on Biblical evidences the righteous in the intermediate state arrive at Paradise. Erickson (1994: 1183). The intensity of the condition of Paradise and Hades will not be as intense as the finalized states. Erickson (1994: 1183). This would be not only a reasonable theological and philosophical deduction based on the fact it is intermediate state and pre-final judgment (2 Corinthians 12 and Revelation 20 respectively) but also these are simply spiritual states and not spiritual/physical states. As Erickson notes the human condition is incomplete. Erickson (1994: 1183).

By my reasoning and speculation, Paradise could be a simulated spiritual realm like earth with simulated physicality.

Heaven and also Paradise could be one and the same perhaps with a new location after the resurrection of Christ.

The exact location is a rather irrelevant point as it is a spiritual realm and by my speculation, perhaps with simulated physicality.

The New Testament version of Paradise now featuring the presence of the Lord.

For the sake of argument, did the Old Testament version of Paradise never feature the Lord's presence?

This seemed to be the assumption of the Pastor.

Ephesians 4:7-10 is used by some scholars for possible support for Jesus Christ setting the Hebrew Bible Saint captives free:

New American Standard Bible (NASB)

7 But to each one of us grace was given according to the measure of Christ’s gift. 8 Therefore [a]it says, “When He ascended on high, He led captive a host of captives, And He gave gifts to men.” 9 (Now this expression, “He ascended,” what [b]does it mean except that He also [c]had descended into the lower parts of the earth? 10 He who descended is Himself also He who ascended far above all the heavens, so that He might fill all things.)

Footnotes: Ephesians 4:8 Or He Ephesians 4:9 Lit is it except Ephesians 4:9 One early ms reads had first descended New American Standard Bible (NASB) Copyright © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995 by The Lockman Foundation

Based on Scripture I can see the theological reasoning that Paradise may have now been relocated so those within now fully experience the presence of the Lord in Paradise/Heaven.

But does not mean that the Lord was never experienced at all in Paradise previously?

This seems speculative and questionable.

Would it be Biblically Paradise without at least some divine communication?

ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

HUGHES, PHILIP, EDGCUMBE (1990) A Commentary On The Epistle To The Hebrews, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

KENT H. A. (1996) ‘Paradise', in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.

MARSHALL, ALFRED (1975)(1996) The Interlinear KJV-NIV, Grand Rapids, Zondervan. 

STRONG, J. (1890)(1986) Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Pickering, Ontario, Welch Publishing Company.

C.S. Lewis: The Fall

Troo, Scotland-Facebook

MPhil 2003

6. The Fall of Man

Lewis stated: "According to that doctrine, man is now a horror to God and to himself and a creature ill-adapted to the universe not because God made him so but because he had made himself so by the abuse of free will." Lewis (1940)(1996: 63).

Lewis tied in his free will concept with what he saw as the doctrine of the fall. He concluded that this concept was developed by the church fathers to counteract the heresy of Monism, that God produces effects being both good and evil, and Dualism, where two Gods existed, one good and one evil.

Lewis proclaimed that the Christian view opposed this and stated that God made things good, but that they were corrupted through free will. He then went on to discuss the theological idea that the fall somehow resulted from Adam’s sin. He seemed unsure whether or not the story of Adam was fact or fiction. He stated on this point : "Wisely, or foolishly, they believed that we were really-and not simply by legal fiction-involved in Adam’s actions." Lewis (1940)(1996: 64).

On the idea that Adam can perhaps be fictional the question should be asked: "then where does sin come from?, and why did Jesus Christ, the God-man, come to earth to rescue us from Adam’s sin?" The apostle Paul in Romans 5:12-21 seems to clearly portray a literal Adam as falling, and thus a literal Christ is needed for restoration. I think if Adam is deemed as not necessarily literal true man, then Christ may just as well be fiction, and this basically challenges the core of the Christian faith.

I believe that within Christian orthodoxy, it is plausible that Adam could be seen as fiction and somehow another non-defined person may have sinned, and this leads to the need for Christ to die for humanity (2015 note, but this is not a Biblical view and is unnecessary use of figurative approaches). Why, however, should Christians believe this without any documented evidence? If believers seek to deny the literal story of Adam, since we do not have historical evidence outside of Scripture, then we are faced with a worse problem with a hypothetical first sinful human with no evidence to back up his/her existence whatsoever.

KILBY, Clyde S. (1965) The Christian World of C.S. Lewis, Appleford, Abingdon, Berks, U.K., Marcham Manor Press. LEWIS, C.S. (1961)(1983) A Grief Observed, London, Faber and Faber. 

LEWIS, C.S. (1941)(1990) The Screwtape Letters, Uhrichsville, Ohio, Barbour and Company. 

LEWIS, C.S. (1940)(1996) The Problem of Pain, San Francisco, Harper-Collins.

C.S. Lewis: Divine Goodness

Saint John-Facebook-Travel+Leisure

Preface

Lewis was an important and key Anglican exemplar for my Wales, MPhil thesis:

2003 The Problem of Evil: Anglican and Baptist Perspectives: MPhil thesis, Bangor University

The link features my work on Lewis, some of which has been edited and presented on this blog previously.

MPhil 2003

I am not a Lewis scholar, but realize that many pastors and Church leaders view him as a major and primary theological source.

In contrast, I acknowledge him as a useful historical Christian apologist.

I present for a second straight time a Lewis post, realizing that he is very popular and that I could edit more of his work for smaller articles.

4. Divine Goodness

Within this chapter, Lewis portrayed God as demanding both discipline and compassion from people and demonstrating both himself in his character. He was a God who punished sin, yet sent his Son to die for that same sin. Lewis stated: You asked for a loving God: you have one. The great spirit you so lightly invoked, the ‘lord of terrible aspect’, is present: not a senile benevolence that drowsily wishes you to be happy in your own way, not the cold philanthropy of a conscientious magistrate, not the care of a host who feels responsible for the comfort of his guest, but the consuming fire himself. Lewis (1940)(1996: 39).

Lewis indicated that God used his love in discipline for the betterment of his creatures, and that this could lead to the temporary suffering of people. Lewis compared a man disciplining a dog to God disciplining human beings. The creature is made better for the purposes of the master through this type of discipline which is often physically and emotionally painful. Kilby stated concerning this view of Lewis: "If we keep Him at center, it is possible to suppose that pain is His method of training us for better things than we understand." Kilby (1965: 67). Lewis noted: "Those Divine demands which sound to our natural ears most like those of a despot and least like those of a lover, in fact marshal us where we should want to go if we knew what we wanted." Lewis (1940)(1996: 46).

This seems plausible that God uses some of his toughest commands to bring about the greatest growth in his creatures. However, I would say perhaps it is more likely that God marshals us where we should go if we wanted what we should. I think that Lewis was correct that God used pain in love to strengthen his creations, but I like Kilby’s observation on the concept that some of the things we need we cannot understand, and often, I would think, do not want to understand. In human beings there often seems to be a certain tendency to believe and act on what is comfortable and brings pleasure at the expense of the truth and right living, which may not be nearly so comfortable. I think there is discipline in love which takes people to places of mental anguish and frustration that are not in the least desirable, even if they knew that things were working for the ultimate good. Nonetheless, God puts people through tough times and they will learn their lessons for the greater good; some will grow closer to God and some will harden in position against God. People, as sinners, generally want to live lives in which their sinful nature can flourish. Even Christians still, at times, need painful discipline in order to take them from wrong attitudes and actions to right attitude and actions. Since God has our best interests at heart, it is my view that no amount of suffering which God gives an individual diminishes at all the total goodness of God. I think it a mistake for the critic of God, to begin to doubt God’s goodness, omnipotence, or very existence, when this individual believes that his/her particular acceptable level of frustration and pain and been surpassed. How is any human to know why or how he/she must suffer?

How is any human being to know God’s reasoning behind it? Lewis raised this problem as Uncle Screwtape in The Screwtape Letters. He noted that it was important for demonic beings to attempt to move a human being struggling with problems from considering philosophical debate to concentrating on the everyday sense experience. Even if a particular train of thought can be twisted so as to end in our favour, you will find that you have been strengthening in your patient the fatal habit of attending to universal issues and withdrawing his attention from the stream of immediate sense experiences.

Your business is to fix his attention on the stream. Teach him to call it "real life" and don’t let him ask what he means by "real". Lewis (1941)(1990: 12). It can become normal for a human being to become so self-absorbed in his/her suffering that serious difficult thinking about God and his reasons for willing suffering for the greater good, are overlooked. Instead, anger and bitterness against God grows and temporal sensory suffering can lead to a philosophy which can seriously doubt God’s ultimate power and goodness. Once one individual holds to what I think is the most plausible explanation, that both reason and revelation demonstrate that there exists an all-powerful, loving God, then this God is entitled to the benefit of the doubt. For if this God does exist, he alone knows completely why a person must suffer and has infinite knowledge in which to draw from. Every human being on the other hand, has finite knowledge on which to build his case against the evil that exists in God’s creation that God does not eliminate.

KILBY, Clyde S. (1965) The Christian World of C.S. Lewis, Appleford, Abingdon, Berks, U.K., Marcham Manor Press.

LEWIS, C.S. (1961)(1983) A Grief Observed, London, Faber and Faber.

LEWIS, C.S. (1941)(1990) The Screwtape Letters, Uhrichsville, Ohio, Barbour and Company. 

LEWIS, C.S. (1940)(1996) The Problem of Pain, San Francisco, Harper-Collins.

C.S. Lewis: The Problem Of Evil/Atheism

Hallstatt, Austria, Facebook-Travel+Leisure

Preface

Lewis was a key Anglican exemplar for my Wales, MPhil thesis:

2003 The Problem of Evil: Anglican and Baptist Perspectives: MPhil thesis, Bangor University

The link features my work on Lewis, some of which has been edited and presented on this blog previously.

MPhil 2003

I am not a Lewis scholar, but realize that many pastors and Church leaders view him as a major and primary theological source.

In contrast, I acknowledge him as a useful historical Christian apologist.

Vienna-Facebook-Travel+Leisure

1. C.S. Lewis Introduction British born, Clive Staples Lewis (1898-1963) was a world renowned British writer whose theological literary works have been influential within Christian apologetics. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, describes Lewis’ beginnings and places of study. Anglican scholar-novelist and Christian Apologist, perhaps best known for his literary fantasies that explore theological concepts. Born near Belfast in Northern Ireland, he received his B.A. from University College, Oxford, in 1924, and was fellow and tutor in English literature at Magdalen College, Oxford, from 1925 until 1954. He then accepted the Chair of Medieval and Renaissance English at Cambridge. Hein (1996: 630).

Concerning the problem of evil, his most related work is The Problem of Pain which will serve as the base text for this section. Within the text are ten Chapters which I will use as nine sections for this part of my work. These Chapters within his book are Introductory, Divine Omnipotence, Divine Goodness, Human Wickedness, The Fall of Man, Human Pain, and Human Pain Continued, which I shall deal with together, Hell, Animal Pain, and Heaven.

2. Introductory Lewis began this chapter by explaining the reasoning for his atheistic belief of the past. He noted that the world and Universe appeared to be consisting of "empty space, completely dark, and unimaginably cold." Lewis (1940)(1996: 1). The world existed by beings "preying upon one another." Lewis (1940)(1996: 2).

Lewis in his past atheism concluded that: "Either there is no spirit behind the universe, or else a spirit indifferent to good or evil, or else an evil spirit." Lewis (1940)(1996: 3).

Clyde S. Kilby described Lewis’ view concerning the idea of a possible God as creator in relation to humanity: "With man it was worse still for, unlike animals, he has both consciousness and reason, the first allowing pain to be a ceaseless reality, and the second making it a reality to be always anticipated until the time of that last and greatest pain called death." Kilby, (1965: 66). Lewis’ atheism appeared to be a plausible explanation of the world and Universe he lived in. He observed throughout most of the Universe, a lack of sustainable life, and that the life that existed on earth was hostile to itself as animals and people inflicted pain upon one another and eventually each individual being ceased to exist.

As Kilby pointed out, Lewis believed human beings’ rational understanding of these problems made their pain far worse than that of the animals who did not fully understand their present suffering, nor their impending doom in death. The spirit behind this reality, if there was one, was either indifferent or evil because it, or he, failed to rid the world of the vast amount of suffering that Lewis observed. There was a troubling obstacle to his atheism. Lewis asked: "If the universe was so bad, or even half so bad, how on earth did human beings ever come to attribute it to the activity of a wise and good Creator?" Lewis (1940)(1996: 3).

Lewis struggled with the idea that the very nature of reality which he saw as being naturalistic and not needing a creator, showed the very signs of being made by a creator. The fact that human beings struggled with what they saw as evil meant that they were by nature contrasting evil with the perfect good which did not make sense as coming from randomness, but rather a perfect God. If this perfect God did not exist, then the supposed evil that humanity suffered should not bother people at all, it is natural, and should not be a problem.

This type of evidence undermined his atheistic conclusions because if an atheist claimed something to be evil, he/she must have something good to contrast it with. Without a perfect creator establishing something as evil or good becomes very difficult and subjective. It could be said that if all the pain and death in the Universe is natural, then there is no evil or good, just existence and no problem at all. The atheist, for example, can argue that rational beings suffering is a wrong because it causes pain which is not good for the mind and body. However, without a perfectly good God as a model, it can be strongly argued that for evolutionary reasons suffering is needed. The weak must suffer and die in order for stronger beings to emerge, so thus what we see as a problem of evil could be seen simply a necessity of reality. When the perfect God is introduced into the equation then his nature can be contrasted with that of fallen creation and indeed we can see that there is a problem of evil!

KILBY, Clyde S. (1965) The Christian World of C.S. Lewis, Appleford, Abingdon, Berks, U.K., Marcham Manor Press.

LEWIS, C.S. (1961)(1983) A Grief Observed, London, Faber and Faber. 

LEWIS, C.S. (1941)(1990) The Screwtape Letters, Uhrichsville, Ohio, Barbour and Company. 

LEWIS, C.S. (1940)(1996) The Problem of Pain, San Francisco, Harper-Collins.