Ben E's Analysis of "What Christians Believe"

What Christians Believe
C.S. Lewis
First Year Writing 150H
Professor Spencer

In the world today it can be a difficult venture to help others to understand our religious beliefs. “What Christians Believe”, authored by C.S. Lewis, seeks to do just that by explaining what is accepted as truth to Christians according to him. He effectively does this by an appeal to logos and pathos primarily through the use of analogies.

The first instance where Lewis uses an analogy to convince his audience of his point is when he compares Pantheism and Christianity. He states the belief of Pantheist being that God is the universe and is a part of all of us. He then goes on to state the Christian view of God being that he created the universe and is separate to it, “…like a man making a picture or composing a tune” (176). This analogy is effective logically because it is an easy example that the reader can relate to. He later goes on to explain also that if you believe (as the majority does)in opposites - good and bad - then you believe more in the Christian view of God. So logically this analogy convinces the reader that Lewis is right and that there is a God, independent of creation and that there are good things and bad things in it. It is also an effective analogy because the image of a man making a painting or a tune gives the image of a great artist working a on a piece of artwork or a musician composing a masterpiece. Thus this appeals to those that see good and beauty in the world to more likely believe in what Lewis is portraying.

The next use of an analogy in the article is used to convince atheists by logic that there is a God. He says “A man feels wet when he falls in water, because he is not a water animal: a fish would not feel wet” (176). He compares this to his own sense (and by extension other atheists) of justice in an unjust world. He logically explains that when he was an atheist he felt that there could not have been a God because the world was cruel and unjust. As he thought about it, he started to wonder where he got his sense of justice from. He then applies this analogy to show that because he knew there were injustices in the world there was meaning to life. So saying we are fish and don’t know we are wet is like saying we don’t realize there is meaning to life. This analogy is effect because for the reader to say they are like the fish and are ignorant of sense and meaning is almost like admitting they are stupid.

Lewis uses another analogy to help see how religion is complicated and not simple. He compares it to a table. He explains that looking at the table you may say that it is simple. However, he goes on to say that if you were to ask a scientist to tell you what it is made of and how it is made, the answer you would receive would be complicated and perhaps difficult to understand. This he puts in contrast to how people – those in particular he mentioned who would like to destroy Christianity – look at religion and complain that it isn’t simple. He goes on to explain that reality is complex and in his experience, odd. So it would be silly to ask for something more than simple and expect simplicity. His argument combined with his analogy logically helps the audience to be persuaded to his point of view that religion isn’t simple.

Another analogy that is used by Lewis is used to explain that things can happen that are contrary to God’s will. He compares this principle to a mother telling her children “I’m not going to go and make you tidy the schoolroom every night. You’ve got to learn to keep it tidy on your own”(180). We know that as parents we set rules and guidelines for our children to follow and give them the opportunity act for themselves. We can expect that sometimes children will not be tidy and that is against their mother’s will but it also her will that left them free to be untidy also. This is what Lewis compares God to – a loving parent who asks us as His children to do what he says but leaves it to us choose. So this analogy effectively convinces the reader C.S. Lewis’ of his belief of God as it is logically shows, if God is good, how evil can happen in opposition to God’s will and also is effective as it plays on the emotions of the reader to think of their own mothers and build on the trust that they have for them.

An additional use of an analogy is used when Lewis compares Christianity to Dualism. His analogy shows how these two beliefs share the premise that the universe is at war between good and evil. He goes on to use the analogy that the Christian belief is “… a civil war, a rebellion, and that we are living in a part of a universe occupied by the enemy. Enemy-occupied territory…”(179). This analogy is effective because it builds on the argument that he had previously argued with the reader, that the evil power or Satan is a corruption of good things and only has power given it by the good power or God. This appeals to pathos of the reader, particularly those who share Lewis’ view of Christianity and works to inspire them that they are in an epic battle serving their King – God – against the rebels.

The final analogy that the author has used to convince the audience of his argument is where he discusses the belief that there is no happiness other than the happiness that comes from following God. To persuade the reader he uses the analogy that human beings are like cars. He builds off of the point that since God created us then it only makes sense that the ‘gasoline’ that makes us work the best comes only from Him. He further goes on to say that it is useless to ask God for any other happiness aside from what he asks us to do because there is none. Therefore this analogy appeals to logos to sway the audience to his point of view.

Overall this is an effective article. As C.S. Lewis brings in new points, his use of analogies not only convinces his audience with logic but also plays on their emotions to make them trust his arguments further. This is all contributes to the paper’s obvious objective to make the reader believe in Christianity and fundamentally accept, ignore or deny the divinity of Jesus Christ.