Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

C.S. Lewis on the Reading of Old Books

reasonabletheology.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–179 of 179 posts

Re: C.S. Lewis on the Reading of Old Books

#171

Post by nimbleal »

smcameron wrote: post #110
brink wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's so bad about Mere Christianity? It ranks among my top 5.

It's completely idiotic. Lord, Liar, or Lunatic? Um, lunatic, obviously. He dismisses atheism with a single sentence, and exhibits an astonishing level of ignorance. If you read it as a Christian, you might not notice the idiocy, but if you aren't a Christian, it's really really bad, so many assumptions, so many times something is glossed over as if "obviously so", when it's so not. Fucking terrible, and obviously so…

> Um, lunatic, obviously

He would accept that answer (at least if we take the trilemma argument in isolation). The point is not that he is "Lord", but that good teacher is not one of the viable options[1]. You clearly haven't read him very carefully.

[1] Although good teacher whose teachings have been manipulated/corrupted would seem to offer a fourth option. But then what, if any, of his teachings could be reliably attributed to the man himself? So "corrupted good teacher" is practically equivalent to myth. We thus have Lord, Liar, Lunatic, or Legend. Any of those four would seem a rational position.

Re: C.S. Lewis on the Reading of Old Books

#172

Post by twodave »

enriquto wrote: post #139
slededit wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its been a while since I've gotten into the theory here. But ultimately an object is a set of data and mutators upon that data. The Unix model does not link the two together - where for most hardware the two are inseparable. A sound card can only work on certain formats of data - it is more than mere bytes. It may have only limited processing ability (e.g. an EQ functionality or FM synthesizer). Ioctls are a hack aro…

> A sound card can only work on certain formats of data - it is more than mere bytes. But you can keep this "data" that is only understandable by your sound card, and send it over the net, or compress it with gzip, or do whatever you want with it because, yes, it is merely bytes! > You can use the UNIX APIs on a mac, but why would you want to? because they are much more beautiful, and not a layered pile of unneeded a…

That's one of the more broad-sweeping statements I've come across. Object orientation is perfectly well-suited to every-day productive work of certain kinds. Just like most other programming methodologies.

Re: C.S. Lewis on the Reading of Old Books

#173

Post by hluska »

panarky wrote: post #119
sverige wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My favorite Bible interpreters are all 19th century English, Scottish, and Irish writers. They all knew Greek and Hebrew, and some of them studied the ancient manuscripts themselves. Their writing is clear and cogent and their interpretations are still very much relevant. Sadly, I've little use for most contemporary writers on the same subjects. They just aren't up to the same standard.

If God wants to communicate with humanity through the Bible, why make it so difficult to understand the real message? Instead of requiring years of study of ancient manuscripts in Hebrew and Greek, why not just deliver the message in clear, modern, unambiguous language that the reader understands?

One of my favourite professors was a Jesuit priest. During a class on Christianity, he was asked roughly the same question. His reply was so good that it is still stuck with me, over twenty years later.

Paul said, "Well yeah, that might make sense. But, what if the real purpose of scripture is so that god can teach us to get along with people whose scriptures appear to say something different?"

Re: C.S. Lewis on the Reading of Old Books

#174

Post by panarky »

hluska wrote: post #173
panarky wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If God wants to communicate with humanity through the Bible, why make it so difficult to understand the real message? Instead of requiring years of study of ancient manuscripts in Hebrew and Greek, why not just deliver the message in clear, modern, unambiguous language that the reader understands?

One of my favourite professors was a Jesuit priest. During a class on Christianity, he was asked roughly the same question. His reply was so good that it is still stuck with me, over twenty years later. Paul said, "Well yeah, that might make sense. But, what if the real purpose of scripture is so that god can teach us to get along with people whose scriptures appear to say something different?"

In flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus.

https://biblehub.com/2_thessalonians/1-8.htm

Scripture like this probably don't help teach people of different faiths to get along.

Re: C.S. Lewis on the Reading of Old Books

#176

Post by buckthundaz »

inimino wrote: post #37
kd5bjo wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect 'inimino is referring to Euclid's "Elements" http://www.gutenberg.org/files/21076/21076-h/21076-h.htm

Indeed. Not only do you learn geometry, but you participate in the same understanding of geometry that all later mathematicians started from. I've always encouraged reading Euclid, Newton, Einstein. In my humble opinion, mathematics is much easier to understand historically, as it developed, and the best historical perspective comes from primary sources. I must acknowledge, however, that for whatever reason very few…

This is great, thank you so much!

Re: C.S. Lewis on the Reading of Old Books

#177

Post by hluska »

panarky wrote: post #174
hluska wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of my favourite professors was a Jesuit priest. During a class on Christianity, he was asked roughly the same question. His reply was so good that it is still stuck with me, over twenty years later. Paul said, "Well yeah, that might make sense. But, what if the real purpose of scripture is so that god can teach us to get along with people whose scriptures appear to say something different?"

In flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. https://biblehub.com/2_thessalonians/1-8.htm Scripture like this probably don't help teach people of different faiths to get along.

Good point.

I don't practice Catholicism anymore and must confess that I've reached the limits of my Catholic school education, so I'm not even remotely qualified to speak to that. I know that Thessalonians would be one of Paul's (the apostle, not that Paul from my first reply) letters and Paul has always struck me as the world's first growth hacker, but I'm not knowledgeable enough to do more than express a simple opinion.

I'd give anything to have access to some reasonable Catholics who I could ask questions like this. Alas...

Re: C.S. Lewis on the Reading of Old Books

#178

Post by sudovancity »

noonespecial wrote: post #19

Time is a fantastic filter. When I was cleaning out my grandparents attic I found a few dozen old books from the 30s and 40s. Wanting to see if they had any value I searched Amazon Ebay and even Google. I could find no record of them having ever even existed. I opened a few of them and found out why. They sucked.

That final bit, got a pretty good chuckle out of me, thank you

Re: C.S. Lewis on the Reading of Old Books

#179

Post by genghisjahn »

pmoriarty wrote: post #74
genghisjahn wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Read Epictetus if you liked MAs Mediations.

Read Seneca if you liked Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius. He's better than both, imo.

I was skeptical but you are correct. Seneca’s Letters from a Stoic is fantastic.
Post reply on HN