Juliana's Analysis of "What Christians Believe"

A Critical Analysis of C.S. Lewis’ “What Christians Believe”

C.S. Lewis is considered to be one of the greatest Christian writers of all time and upon reading his essay “What Christians believe” it is easy to see why, as Lewis not only presents a compelling argument but also manages to entertain his audience whilst dealing with such a heavy topic. In his essay, “What Christians Believe”, C.S. Lewis artfully uses tone, false dilemmas, and appeals to his reader’s sense of logos to effectively persuade his educated religiously-diverse audience to support his view of Christianity.

One instance of Lewis’ masterful use of tone can be found at the start of the section titled “The Invasion” when Lewis writes “Very well then, atheism is too simple.” This is somewhat of an orienting statement as Lewis has just spent the last few paragraphs arguing against the concepts of atheism. However, this line does not only serve as transitioning sentence as the casual ton of “very well then” seems to imply a personal sense of finality, as if there is no more to be said on the subject. This casual conversational way of stating that one the strongest opponents against Lewis’ argument is simply wrong is very powerful as the personal tone brings it somewhat closer to the heart of the reader and the definiteness of the statement successfully convinces his mature and rational audience to dismiss the views held by atheists as false, which brings them closer to agreeing with his point of view.

Another instance in which Lewis uses his tone to persuade his mature audience to agree with his point of view on christianity can be found when he uses humor to create interest in his point and to make the ideas of his opponents seem laughable. He writes that for what those who believe Jesus to have been only a great moral teacher but not actually a God to be correct, Jesus would have had to have been “a lunatic-on the level of a man who says he is a poached egg” to have made the claims that he did. Through this he points out that for anyone to disagree with his point of view would be ridiculous . The contrast between his example of the man who thinks he is a poached egg with the gravity of his discussion of the truths of belief and religion is very stark, which implies that those who would make such an assertion are clearly misunderstanding reality. Through his clever use of sharp humor within the context of such an important topic Lewis effectively supports his theory that his point of view is correct and that anyone who believes otherwise is clearly mistaken.

Lewis not only uses his tone to persuade his readers of the truth of his perspective of Christianity, but he also employs the emotive fallacy of false dilemma to convince his readers of the truth of his argument. One example of Lewis‘ use of false dilemma can be found at the end of his essay where he writes that “You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse”. This challenge to the reader is found just after Lewis reasons that for a man to have said the things that Christ did, especially in his time period, he was either completely insane or he was honestly the Son of God as he claimed, so those who argue that Jesus was a good moral teacher, but not the true Son of God must be wrong. This false dilemma, would suggest that Jesus could only have been one of two things: a saviour or a lunatic. By only allowing his readers to pick from these two narrow categories, though there may be other possibilities in reality, Lewis successfully narrows the chance of his audience disagreeing with him. In a normal situation, one could say “I sort of agree, but I think it is more like this...” whereas in the situation that Lewis has created one must either be entirely for Lewis’ argument or entirely against it. This effectively persuades people to side with Lewis concerning the situation that he has created.

Another such instance of Lewis’ clever use of false dilemma can be found in the very first paragraph of the essay when Lewis writes that “Christianity is right and they are wrong. As in arithmetic there is only one right answer to a sum...” These words come right after Lewis states that becoming a Christian has left him more accepting of other religions in general but that in matters where Christianity and other religious doctrines differ, one must be right and the other, by default, must be wrong. The word “arithmetic” in this sentence is especially poignant as it connotes a very logical formula wherein there can only be one right answer. Not only does this appeal to a reader’s sense of logos, as naturally someone who considers themselves to be a logical thinker must naturally want to find the “correct” answer to a question of arithmetic, but it also creates a false dilemma in which there can only be one right answer. In reality there could potentially be any number of varying answers as no one can prove whether one is more correct than the other, however Lewis purposely creates a scenario in which there are only two options, right and wrong. This false dilemma pushes his readers to make a choice and decide what they believe, in doing this Lewis is effectively pressuring his audience to agree with him through his use of false dilemma.

Finally, Lewis appeals to his readers’ sense of Logos to persuade them to adopt his views of Christianity by never specifically stating exactly what he believes or what he thinks that they should believe, rather Lewis merely reasons out various points of doctrine and allows the reader to come to his own conclusion of what is right or wrong. This feature of Lewis’ writing is most prominent towards the end of his article, especially when he is discussing the issue of theodicy, or the problem that arises when we consider the the fact that despite Christianity’s claim that God is both good and omnipotent, evil still exists in the world. He explains his belief in terms of his reasoning and never outrightly states that he is correct, the reader is only expected to follow his logic and come to the same conclusion that he did. When describing his reasons he uses the words “probably” and “it may be quite sensible” to allow the reader some space to consider the ideas presented for himself and then to ultimately agree with these ideas. Thus the reader does not feel that he is being dragged into agreement with Lewis but rather through his own sense of logic it would seem to him that Lewis is right. Considering that those reading this essay are most likely at least moderately well educated and must show some interest in the validity of religion, it can be assumed that this tactic of relying on the reader to use their own reasoning to follow Lewis’ argument and arrive at the same conclusion would be rather successful.

Lewis’ appeal to his readers’ sense of logos can also bee seen in the way that he develops his arguments, as he typically starts with the illogical and then gradually works his way into resolving the seemingly unreasonableness of the problem through his logic and then at the end of the paragraph he summarizes what can be learned from this. For example on the last page of his essay he begins by putting forward many puzzling questions such as “What should we make of a man...who announced that he forgave you for stealing other men’s money?” then he slowly explains, what one “should make” of such a man until he arrives at the conclusion that “This makes sense only if He really was that God.” Through this, Lewis’ audience is led to feel that they are the ones coming to an understanding of the problem and yet it is really Lewis guiding them through the dilemma with his own logic. Therefore this sort of approach would appeal to a reader’s sense of logic not only because the reasoning itself seems to be solid, but because the reader almost feels as if he has come up with it himself and is therefore more likely to trust in it.

Therefore it can be seen that Lewis develops a very convincing argument for his educated and religiously curious audience regarding his beliefs concerning Christianity, God, and theodicy through the means of tone, false dilemmas, and his frequent appeals to a reader’s sense of logos.