C.S. Lewis: Ongoing Investigation

For non-mainstream, heterodoxical discussions. Request access to the Heretic Group here.
User avatar
Pazooka
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5222
Location: FEMA District 8

Re: C.S. Lewis: Ongoing Investigation

Post by Pazooka »

nightlight wrote: September 6th, 2021, 5:27 pm
Pazooka wrote: September 6th, 2021, 4:59 pm
nightlight wrote: September 6th, 2021, 4:08 pm
Pazooka wrote: September 6th, 2021, 3:55 pm

Notice what Nephi describes God as doing versus what he describes the enemy as doing:

20 My God hath been my support; he hath led me through mine afflictions in the wilderness; and he hath preserved me upon the waters of the great deep.
21 He hath filled me with his love, even unto the consuming of my flesh.
22 He hath confounded mine enemies, unto the causing of them to quake before me.
23 Behold, he hath heard my cry by day, and he hath given me knowledge by visions in the night-time.
24 And by day have I waxed bold in mighty prayer before him; yea, my voice have I sent up on high; and angels came down and ministered unto me.
25 And upon the wings of his Spirit hath my body been carried away upon exceedingly high mountains. And mine eyes have beheld great things, yea, even too great for man; therefore I was bidden that I should not write them.
26 O then, if I have seen so great things, if the Lord in his condescension unto the children of men hath visited men in so much mercy, why should my heart weep and my soul linger in the valley of sorrow, and my flesh waste away, and my strength slacken, because of mine afflictions?
27 And why should I yield to sin, because of my flesh? Yea, why should I give way to temptations, that the evil one have place in my heart to destroy my peace and afflict my soul? Why am I angry because of mine enemy?
28 Awake, my soul! No longer droop in sin. Rejoice, O my heart, and give place no more for the enemy of my soul.
You are not understanding was Lewis is saying.

The house you built yourself is disgusting... God cannot live in it.

God rips out your foundation, which is the natural man, on account of you being evil. Understanding what He is makes you see what you are. When you begin to see what you are it is painful because you see that you are evil.

Nephi felt sorrow because he was going though the change. He was killing the natural man.

Once in the New house we are able to face all things because we are yoked with Him

You are looking for tits on an ant
“God rips out your foundation.” God does no such thing. Instead, from the beginning He prepared, for you, a perfect foundation. You are naked and He clothes you. You are hungry and He feeds you. Satan kills you and He restores you. That is His character. His yoke is easy and His burden is light.

“Looking for tits on an ant.” That must be another Lewisism. I’ll bet it was in his bookThat Hiddeous Strength.
Lol

Satan does not restore you. You naturally are Satan. You are evil. Your foundation is naturally opposed to God.

You're not a blank piece of earth... You were born with a foundation that needs to be removed.

Have you ever removed a building and it's foundation? You have to rip it out and build a new one.

24 And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts

23 And he said to them all, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me.

You believe Jesus wasn't clean cuz he touched dead bodies and ate with dirty hands.... You believe that there's multiple Jesus spoken of in the Bible. You believe a man that says Jesus wants you to shed blood of people who can't be forgiven.

Perhaps understand who Jesus of Nazareth is before able to clearly see who follows Him and who doesn't
Hey, nightlight, are you single? Cause I’ve got a cute divorced friend who loves C. S. Lewis…

abijah`
~dog days~
Posts: 3481

Re: C.S. Lewis: Ongoing Investigation

Post by abijah` »

I think in this case you are seeing what you want to see, and unwarrantedly trying to fit Lewis/Tolkien into a category wherein they don't belong.

I suspect that because you have seen plenty of genuine counterfeits, that now you're more likely to draw illusory correlations, see things that aren't really there, like how I interpreted this thread.

Great podcast with Heiser about LOTR and CS Lewis and how intuitive their stories and writing styles so closely jived with the symbolism and world-paradigm presented in the Christian story/worldview: episode 322 (oh no! :lol: illuminati confirmed!)

I have read Mere Christianity, and there are some serious gems in there that changed my perspective going forward. Nightlight shows well in this thread how much good there is to be gleaned from this single book, especially compared against the highly-tenuous and gnat-straining arguments you have against him, which I find totally unsubstantial and uncompelling. I'm perfectly open to being persuaded, if indeed they are Luciferians, but as of yet there has been nothing presented thats even slightly persuasive.

I think Lewis and Tolkien were both instruments in the hands of God, who's talents were quickened and illumined by the portion of the Spirit working in them.

I think Lewis was better at articulating the glorious Christian archetype in straightforward terms, and simple allegory.

However, regarding grand, epic narratives/worlds and high-fantasy storytelling, I think Tolkien is better. He thought Lewis with Narnia was too simplistic and on-the-nose, its like, ok, Aslan = Jesus. Cool.

Whereas Tolkien's method of portraying Christ is more of an Old Testament format - a mosaic in which multiple characters personify and display a certain aspect of Christ, contributing to a larger fractal Trope.

I absolutely love the ontology of Tolkien's world, and the creation myth he used for it:
http://www.newhumanityinstitute.org/pdfs/article-genesis-creation-and-tolkien-silmarillion.pdf wrote: When I was a child, my dad read me books at bedtime. He read me The Hobbit and the first two books of The Lord of the Rings trilogy. I thought they were amazing stories back then. As an adult, I’ve found J.R.R. Tolkien to have some of the most amazing insights into spiritual truth I’ve ever read. One of them is his story of God’s creation of Earth, and God’s struggle with evil, recounted in The Silmarillion. In this story, God’s name is Iluvatar, and he creates all things through his song. He creates the Ainur, the angels, and they sing with him. Together their music fills the void. Tolkien writes, ‘For a great while it seemed good to him, for in the music there were no flaws’ (p.16). But then, one of the most powerful of the angels, named Melkor, becomes impatient, wants to create things on his own, and so he starts to sing a discordant melody. The two songs clash. Here is how Tolkien describes that clash:
‘Straightway discord arose about him, and many that sang nigh him grew despondent, and their thought was disturbed and their music faltered; but some began to attune their music to his rather than to the thought which they had at first. Then the discord of Melkor spread ever wider, and the melodies which had been heard before foundered in a sea of turbulent sound. But Iluvatar sat and hearkened until it seemed that about his throne there was a raging storm, as of dark waters that made war one upon another in an endless wrath that would not be assuaged.
Then Iluvatar arose, and the Ainur perceived that he smiled; and he lifted up his left hand, and a new theme began amid the storm, like and yet unlike to the former theme, and it gathered power and had new beauty. But the discord of Melkor rose in uproar and contended with it, and again there was a war of sound more violent than before, until many of the Ainur were dismayed and sang no longer, and Melkor had the mastery. Then again Iluvatar arose, and the Ainur perceived that his countenance was stern; and he lifted up his right hand and behold! A third theme grew amid the confusion, and it was unlike the others. For it seemed at first soft and sweet, a mere rippling of gentle sounds in delicate melodies; but it could not be quenched, and it took to itself power and profundity. And it seemed at last that there were two musics progressing at one time before the seat of Iluvatar, and they were utterly at variance. The one was deep and wide and beautiful, but slow and blended with an immeasurable sorrow, from which its beauty chiefly came. The other had now achieved a unity of its own; but it was loud, and vain, and endlessly repeated; and it had little harmony, but rather a clamorous unison as of many trumpets braying upon a few notes. And it essayed to drown the other music by the violence of its voice, but it seemed that its most triumphant notes were taken by the other and woven into its own solemn pattern.
In the midst of this strife, whereat the halls of Iluvatar shook and a tremor ran out into the silences yet unmoved, Iluvatar arose a third time, and his face was terrible to behold. Then he raised up both his hands, and in one chord, deeper than the Abyss, higher than the Firmament, piercing as the light of the eye of Iluvatar, the Music ceased.
Then Iluvatar spoke, and he said: ‘Mighty are the Ainur, and mightiest among them is Melkor; but that he may know, and all the Ainur, that I am Iluvatar, those things that ye have sung, I will show them forth, that ye may see what ye have done. And thou, Melkor, shalt see that no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me, nor can any alter the music in my despite. For he that attempteth this shall prove but mine instrument in the devising of things more wonderful, which he himself hath not imagined.’ (J.R.R. Tolkien, The Silmarillion, Houghton Mifflin Company Boston: 1977, p.16-17)

Analysis
This is one of the most powerful and beautiful illustrations of the struggle between God and evil that I know. I used this as the opening illustration of Genesis 3:14 – 15, the curse of God upon the serpent. Since that text is God’s pronunciation of His future victory over Satan through the ‘seed of the woman,’ it begins the Scriptural narration of spiritual warfare, God’s good providence in the face of evil and Satanic disobedience. Similarly, Tolkien’s account of the creation involves the historical, not philosophical, explanation for evil, and how it will one day be defeated.
The sheer number of parallels this story has to the biblical story is impressive. (1) Tolkien has one eternally existing God, Iluvatar, as the biblical story has one God. (2) Iluvatar creates the angels through a verbal means, singing, as God creates everything by a verbal means, speaking. (3) Iluvatar desires goodness and harmony in the universe, as God clearly does by the order He builds into creation. (4) Iluvatar allows the angels freedom, as God implicitly does. This explains why (5) Iluvatar is not the author of evil, as God is not the author of evil. Rather, (6) that role falls to a disobedient angel named Melkor, the Satan figure. Finally, (7) Iluvatar commits himself to overcoming the dissonance introduced by Melkor, as God commits himself to overcoming the dissonance introduced by Satan. Further reflection on some of the aspects of the story deepens the parallel, but reveals some limitations of the analogy.
The first positive aspect of this analogy is the use of singing as a way to connect the activity of God with the activity of Satan/evil. While singing is not the method God actually used to create the universe, singing explicitly denotes both structure/order and freedom/creativity, and we are very familiar with this phenomenon. In order to make music meaningful, there must be a basic structure and order regarding tempo, melody, chord progression, and underneath all that, a mathematical distance between notes that must be unalterable lest dissonance occur. On the other hand, to also make music meaningful, especially when multiple musicians are involved, there must be a wide range of creativity and freedom allowed. These two elements – order and freedom – must coexist within a song. There is a dynamic interaction between them, and, one might even say, an ideal convergence of the two that we intuitively appreciate. In the Genesis account, there is clearly both order and freedom in God’s handiwork, but also encouraged by God of life and humankind. There is order: Day does not violate the night, and vice versa; species reproduce ‘after their kind,’ i.e. they stay within their categories and do not intermingle (Daniel’s twisted beasts represents a creation gone mad). At the same time, there is freedom: God gives Adam the task of cultivating a garden; God allows Adam to name the animals; God gives Adam choices between multiple good things.
At the same time, of course, singing also conveys a great sense of disharmony when the basic harmony is violated. In the case of the ‘good angels,’ and, by extension, all ‘good beings,’ singing in harmony with the true melody represents faithful obedience to God. Yet in the case of Melkor and, by extension, all who sin, singing in disharmony represents willful and arrogant disobedience to the rhythm and cadence established by Iluvatar.
Tolkien’s insight into the nature of evil is profound yet elegantly put. Evil is ‘loud, and vain, and endlessly repeated.’ It has ‘little harmony, but rather a clamorous unison as of many trumpets braying upon a few notes.’ Tolkien shows us the cancerous nature of evil because evil possesses only a vague originality and is actually a mere response to something. For instance, Satan could only twist and corrupt God’s word, making it seem false, introducing the idea that another reality can overcome God’s reality. Hence evil is an attempt to influence others to join one’s own melody. Evil attempts to drown out God, but cannot. It seeks to be as captivating and melodious as God’s goodness, but it cannot.
God’s way of redemption, moreover, is portrayed as a third melody that is deep and wide and powerful, responding to the presence of evil, which is allowed to coexist for a time, but capturing the highest triumphs of the evil melody into its own song before emerging victorious. In Genesis, God’s victory is put forward in categories that reinforce but amplify the creation order. Who will be victorious over the serpent? A man, the ‘seed of the woman.’ It will not be an angel or other created being, but a man. This is important because a human was originally placed at the highest point in creation under God, and given rule and dominion and authority. It must therefore be a human who will vanquish evil and restore God’s good creation. The creational design will be maintained, implicitly restoring humanity itself to its intended place of honor. Furthermore, the highest triumph of evil, the bruising of this man’s heel, will become the occasion for this man to bruise the serpent on the head, just as the most brazen note of Melkor’s song is taken captive by the deeper and stronger song of Iluvatar. That is, this man will deliver the fatal blow. This sets the pattern for God’s victory: God will be victorious because His creation will be restored in an amplified way.

The main drawback of using this story as an analogy is that a song is not the same as the promise-fulfillment pattern established by God’s word-acts. In Genesis 1, God acts by His word. God’s reliability to do according to His word forms the prophetic expectation for hope in God’s faithfulness to His word and covenant and serves as a reliable way to trace God’s actions through history (e.g. Amos 3:7). The loss of the divine word-act makes it difficult for Iluvatar to communicate to beings in the world once Middle Earth’s history begins. Note that Tolkien’s account occurs as a dialogue between Iluvatar and Melkor prior to the creation of the world of Middle Earth; in that sense, it is outside of earthly time. God’s pronouncement, however, occurs within the flow of historical time in our world. Hence, hope features more strongly in the Bible than it does in Tolkien’s Middle Earth saga. Within the flow of our time, God has assured us by His word – even by His Word made flesh – that He will be victorious over evil.
Last edited by abijah` on September 7th, 2021, 3:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

larsenb
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10813
Location: Between here and Standing Rock

Re: C.S. Lewis: Ongoing Investigation

Post by larsenb »

Pazooka wrote: September 6th, 2021, 10:31 am . . . . .
And, to clarify, this is why I’m studying his actual writings - to substantiate or disprove whether he teaches the doctrine of Christ or Lucifer.
The old either/or trap.

How about him being just an earnest truth seeker who was trying to test Christianity by bringing his own intellectual/reasoning powers to bear on the subject?

User avatar
Pazooka
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5222
Location: FEMA District 8

Re: C.S. Lewis: Ongoing Investigation

Post by Pazooka »

abijah` wrote: September 7th, 2021, 3:03 pm I think in this case you are seeing what you want to see, and unwarrantedly trying to fit Lewis/Tolkien into a category wherein they don't belong.

I suspect that because you have seen plenty of genuine counterfeits, that now you're more likely to draw illusory correlations, see things that aren't really there, like how I interpreted this thread.
You and I just tend to differ on some things, including the premise of the other thread (time will certainly tell). I’m still gathering information on Lewis. I was reading further along in Mere Christianity last night and there were parts where I was starting to get excited (like he was finally laying down some truth about Jesus), but it never quite gets there. Maybe I’ll end up changing my mind - but I’m not there yet.
Great podcast with Heiser about LOTR and CS Lewis and how intuitive their stories and writing styles so closely jived with the symbolism and world-paradigm presented in the Christian story/worldview: episode 322 (oh no! :lol: illuminati confirmed!)
Yeah, I caught that episode. Perhaps it boils down to the fact that both the right side up and upside down religions both share the same core.
I have read Mere Christianity, and there are some serious gems in there that changed my perspective going forward. Nightlight shows well in this thread how much good there is to be gleaned from this single book, especially compared against the highly-tenuous and gnat-straining arguments you have against him, which I find totally unsubstantial and uncompelling. I'm perfectly open to being persuaded, if indeed they are Luciferians, but as of yet there has been nothing presented thats even slightly persuasive.
One of the biggest discrepancies between how Lewis describes God’s character and how Nephi describes it, illustrated well in 2 Nephi 4, is that God is the one: extending mercy, being a support, leading him through affliction, preserving him, filling him with his love, confounding his enemies, hearing his cries, giving him knowledge, sending angels down to minister to him, sending His Spirit to carry him away upon high mountains...etc
While “the enemy” is the one causing “his heart to weep” and his soul to “linger in the valley of sorrow” and his “flesh to waste away” and his “strength to slacken” and to “destroy {his} peace” and “afflict {his} soul.” Sounds like he’s the one with the sledge hammer.

Who ever said you were a cottage to begin with? What about the little infants who die before their cottage is able to undergo massive renovations to make them fit habitations for God to dwell? Aren’t we in the “gall of bitterness” to think so?

Maybe he’s just a man who doesn’t always construct great metaphors. Not sure yet. But I do know, as Juliet has pointed out before, that Luciferian families bring their children up with that mindset - that hard is good, and pain makes you strong.
Whereas Tolkien's method of portraying Christ is more of an Old Testament format - a mosaic in which multiple characters personify and display a certain aspect of Christ, contributing to a larger fractal Trope.

I absolutely love the ontology of Tolkien's world, and the creation myth he used for it:
Unless Melkor is really Michael and his caricature in the story is just another slap in the face. What if Iluvatar is Lucifer the Illuminator? Black is white and white is black. I used to think Katniss Everdeen was really a hero and that the Capitol was really the bad guy in the story. That’s exactly the image you are intended to receive. Is Odin the good guy? With his missing eye? Is Osiris? Even Hugh Nibley makes mistakes.

User avatar
Pazooka
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5222
Location: FEMA District 8

Re: C.S. Lewis: Ongoing Investigation

Post by Pazooka »

larsenb wrote: September 7th, 2021, 3:09 pm
Pazooka wrote: September 6th, 2021, 10:31 am . . . . .
And, to clarify, this is why I’m studying his actual writings - to substantiate or disprove whether he teaches the doctrine of Christ or Lucifer.
The old either/or trap.

How about him being just an earnest truth seeker who was trying to test Christianity by bringing his own intellectual/reasoning powers to bear on the subject?
That could be. Not ruling it out. Thanks

abijah`
~dog days~
Posts: 3481

Re: C.S. Lewis: Ongoing Investigation

Post by abijah` »

Pazooka wrote: September 7th, 2021, 4:56 pm You and I just tend to differ on some things
Fair enough.
Perhaps it boils down to the fact that both the right side up and upside down religions both share the same core.
Nah, I'd conversely submit that at their "core", they are diametric opposites, and only dressed with similar clothing, the whited sepulchre counterfeitting the other in its outward appearance. The distinguishing between one and the other naturally has to do with discerning who wears the clothes rightfully and naturally, as opposed to the one who looks like someone who's a stranger to the garb, an imposter among us.
One of the biggest discrepancies between how Lewis describes God’s character and how Nephi describes it, illustrated well in 2 Nephi 4, is that God is the one: extending mercy, being a support, leading him through affliction, preserving him, filling him with his love, confounding his enemies, hearing his cries, giving him knowledge, sending angels down to minister to him, sending His Spirit to carry him away upon high mountains...etc
While “the enemy” is the one causing “his heart to weep” and his soul to “linger in the valley of sorrow” and his “flesh to waste away” and his “strength to slacken” and to “destroy {his} peace” and “afflict {his} soul.” Sounds like he’s the one with the sledge hammer.
Again, I simply think you're mischaracterising Lewis, and drawing a false dichotomy between him and Nephi. I'm sure I could find abundant Lewis quotes not only pertaining to Jesus Christ Himself, but also His mercy, the liberal generosity in His abundant blessings, and of His power to preserve and deliver His covenant people.
Who ever said you were a cottage to begin with? What about the little infants who die before their cottage is able to undergo massive renovations to make them fit habitations for God to dwell? Aren’t we in the “gall of bitterness” to think so?
It's just a metaphor, and doesn't warrant this granular degree of scrutiny imo.

And I think the parable is on point, don't see anything wrong or improper about it.
Maybe he’s just a man who doesn’t always construct great metaphors. Not sure yet. But I do know, as Juliet has pointed out before, that Luciferian families bring their children up with that mindset - that hard is good, and pain makes you strong.
Another illusory correlation in my estimation.
Unless Melkor is really Michael and his caricature in the story is just another slap in the face. What if Iluvatar is Lucifer the Illuminator? Black is white and white is black.
Baseless, unfounded whataboutism. If you provided any evidence to suggest such a diabolic inversion, the "what if's" might be more substantial.

Illuvatar is obviously JHWH, who creates the world through singing, alongside the complementary submelodies of the Ainur, who obviously correlate with the divine council, the sons of God, the plural "we" of God's OT heavenly dialogue. (Sorry mormons, this isn't actually a Heavenly Mother inference)
Then Iluvatar arose, and the Ainur perceived that he smiled; and he lifted up his left hand, and a new theme began amid the storm, like and yet unlike to the former theme, and it gathered power and had new beauty.
Isaiah 42
Sing to the LORD a new song, his praise from the end of the earth, you who go down to the sea, and all that fills it, the coastlands and their inhabitants.
I used to think Katniss Everdeen was really a hero and that the Capitol was really the bad guy in the story.
Interesting. I recall you having some thought-provoking insights about that series. One I specifically remember is the one, i forget which book, where the hours of the day each have their own distinct plague/challenge with which to deal w/, and how this idea potentially has relevance in actual scriptural prophecy. Doesn't the antichrist (per Antioches) try to change the "times and seasons", the set feastdays which marked out and divided the liturgical year`cycle. Set periods of time, perhaps similar to in Hunger Games, which get demonically usurped, associated hand-in-hand with the 1/3 part of the divine council who opted to follow Lucifer, and wandered from their proper celestial course.

I could see the time-keeping element and distinct hourly-periods in Hunger Games as being similar to endtime events.
That’s exactly the image you are intended to receive. Is Odin the good guy? With his missing eye? Is Osiris? Even Hugh Nibley makes mistakes.
Yeah, and touching on those things like w/ Osiris, Horus and Isis and the resurrection-of-a-fallen-god trope, as well as the striking symbolic parallels wear Alfather Odin sacrifices one of his eyes for knowledge, and who sacrifices himself to himself upon the Yggdrasil`Tree, at the base of which there is a serpent. The whole one-eye thing likewise having its iteration in Egyptian myth, in Horus vs Seth , or the Eye of Re who gets identified and associated with the crown princess, the "Daughter of Re".

Of course there is plenty of one-eye symbolism that is used in the modern-day by obviously satanic individuals/groups/agendas. "The Blind God", who perhaps seems to get away with lawlessness mayhaps on account of his inability to see, and therefore gaming the system where Agency & Accountability are concerned -- that perhaps, in his "blindness", being less culpable/accountable for his deeds, just as it was with Adam & Eve who were "innocent" because their eyes were not open.

I also suspect this may have something to do w/, or functioning as a part of the Davidic Servant's ministerial profile as well, and this pericope simply being just another example of JST being wrong -

Isaiah 42
Who is blind but my servant, or deaf as my messenger whom I send? Who is blind as my dedicated one, or blind as the servant of the LORD?
He sees many things, but does not observe them; his ears are open, but he does not hear.
The LORD was pleased, for his righteousness’ sake, to magnify his law and make it glorious.


Sounds weirdly reminiscent of what God's commission to Isaiah (which, as Gileadi correctly affirms, serves as the type/shadow/category of the Davidic Servant's parallel endtime commission), which is also characterised by lack of vision and sense of hearing.

Isaiah 6
And I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?” Then I said, “Here I am! Send me.”
And he said, “Go, and say to this people: “‘Keep on hearing, but do not understand; keep on seeing, but do not perceive.’
Make the heart of this people dull, and their ears heavy, and blind their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed.”

As I have afore speculated regarding Michael being the Davidic Servant (particularly regarding the symmetry w/ Isaiah 51 - amongst myriad other parallels), this idea of the Lord's "dedicated one" and "servant" who is blind would take on a whole new layer of meaning, given how Michael as Adam was the original culprit who's original transgression "opened the eyes", the archetypal blind--->seeing transition.

Who is blind but my servant, or deaf as my messenger whom I send? Who is blind as my dedicated one, or blind as the servant of the LORD?

He sees many things, but does not observe them; his ears are open, but he does not hear.

The LORD was pleased, for his righteousnesssake, to magnify his law and make it glorious.


^ This could totally be an apt description for a Michael-ic Davidic Herald. He who was originally blind, who then saw (consequence of fruit), and is somehow now blind (and legally innocent again, perhaps? 🤔) again, "seeing many things" whilst paradoxically "not perceiving".

And given the fact of the transgression of eating the forbidden fruit as being something of a demonic sacrament, as Ritual Eating/Feasting and Sex are fundamentally joined at the hip -- it would also do a lot to unfold the deeper layers of this likewise seemingly-contradictory and paradoxical description of the DS:

Isaiah 45
Thus says the LORD to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have grasped...
For the sake of my servant Jacob, and Israel my chosen, I call you by your name, I name you, though you do not know me.
I am the LORD, and there is no other, besides me there is no God; I equip you, though you do not know me

User avatar
Pazooka
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5222
Location: FEMA District 8

Re: C.S. Lewis: Ongoing Investigation

Post by Pazooka »

abijah` wrote: September 7th, 2021, 6:45 pm
Pazooka wrote: September 7th, 2021, 4:56 pm You and I just tend to differ on some things
Fair enough.
Perhaps it boils down to the fact that both the right side up and upside down religions both share the same core.
Nah, I'd conversely submit that at their "core", they are diametric opposites, and only dressed with similar clothing, the whited sepulchre counterfeitting the other in its outward appearance. The distinguishing between one and the other naturally has to do with discerning who wears the clothes rightfully and naturally, as opposed to the one who looks like someone who's a stranger to the garb, an imposter among us.
One of the biggest discrepancies between how Lewis describes God’s character and how Nephi describes it, illustrated well in 2 Nephi 4, is that God is the one: extending mercy, being a support, leading him through affliction, preserving him, filling him with his love, confounding his enemies, hearing his cries, giving him knowledge, sending angels down to minister to him, sending His Spirit to carry him away upon high mountains...etc
While “the enemy” is the one causing “his heart to weep” and his soul to “linger in the valley of sorrow” and his “flesh to waste away” and his “strength to slacken” and to “destroy {his} peace” and “afflict {his} soul.” Sounds like he’s the one with the sledge hammer.
Again, I simply think you're mischaracterising Lewis, and drawing a false dichotomy between him and Nephi. I'm sure I could find abundant Lewis quotes not only pertaining to Jesus Christ Himself, but also His mercy, the liberal generosity in His abundant blessings, and of His power to preserve and deliver His covenant people.
Who ever said you were a cottage to begin with? What about the little infants who die before their cottage is able to undergo massive renovations to make them fit habitations for God to dwell? Aren’t we in the “gall of bitterness” to think so?
It's just a metaphor, and doesn't warrant this granular degree of scrutiny imo.

And I think the parable is on point, don't see anything wrong or improper about it.
Maybe he’s just a man who doesn’t always construct great metaphors. Not sure yet. But I do know, as Juliet has pointed out before, that Luciferian families bring their children up with that mindset - that hard is good, and pain makes you strong.
Another illusory correlation in my estimation.
Unless Melkor is really Michael and his caricature in the story is just another slap in the face. What if Iluvatar is Lucifer the Illuminator? Black is white and white is black.
Baseless, unfounded whataboutism. If you provided any evidence to suggest such a diabolic inversion, the "what if's" might be more substantial.

Illuvatar is obviously JHWH, who creates the world through singing, alongside the complementary submelodies of the Ainur, who obviously correlate with the divine council, the sons of God, the plural "we" of God's OT heavenly dialogue. (Sorry mormons, this isn't actually a Heavenly Mother inference)
Then Iluvatar arose, and the Ainur perceived that he smiled; and he lifted up his left hand, and a new theme began amid the storm, like and yet unlike to the former theme, and it gathered power and had new beauty.
Isaiah 42
Sing to the LORD a new song, his praise from the end of the earth, you who go down to the sea, and all that fills it, the coastlands and their inhabitants.
I used to think Katniss Everdeen was really a hero and that the Capitol was really the bad guy in the story.
Interesting. I recall you having some thought-provoking insights about that series. One I specifically remember is the one, i forget which book, where the hours of the day each have their own distinct plague/challenge with which to deal w/, and how this idea potentially has relevance in actual scriptural prophecy. Doesn't the antichrist (per Antioches) try to change the "times and seasons", the set feastdays which marked out and divided the liturgical year`cycle. Set periods of time, perhaps similar to in Hunger Games, which get demonically usurped, associated hand-in-hand with the 1/3 part of the divine council who opted to follow Lucifer, and wandered from their proper celestial course.

I could see the time-keeping element and distinct hourly-periods in Hunger Games as being similar to endtime events.
That’s exactly the image you are intended to receive. Is Odin the good guy? With his missing eye? Is Osiris? Even Hugh Nibley makes mistakes.
Yeah, and touching on those things like w/ Osiris, Horus and Isis and the resurrection-of-a-fallen-god trope, as well as the striking symbolic parallels wear Alfather Odin sacrifices one of his eyes for knowledge, and who sacrifices himself to himself upon the Yggdrasil`Tree, at the base of which there is a serpent. The whole one-eye thing likewise having its iteration in Egyptian myth, in Horus vs Seth , or the Eye of Re who gets identified and associated with the crown princess, the "Daughter of Re".

Of course there is plenty of one-eye symbolism that is used in the modern-day by obviously satanic individuals/groups/agendas. "The Blind God", who perhaps seems to get away with lawlessness mayhaps on account of his inability to see, and therefore gaming the system where Agency & Accountability are concerned -- that perhaps, in his "blindness", being less culpable/accountable for his deeds, just as it was with Adam & Eve who were "innocent" because their eyes were not open.

I also suspect this may have something to do w/, or functioning as a part of the Davidic Servant's ministerial profile as well, and this pericope simply being just another example of JST being wrong -

Isaiah 42
Who is blind but my servant, or deaf as my messenger whom I send? Who is blind as my dedicated one, or blind as the servant of the LORD?
He sees many things, but does not observe them; his ears are open, but he does not hear.
The LORD was pleased, for his righteousness’ sake, to magnify his law and make it glorious.


Sounds weirdly reminiscent of what God's commission to Isaiah (which, as Gileadi correctly affirms, serves as the type/shadow/category of the Davidic Servant's parallel endtime commission), which is also characterised by lack of vision and sense of hearing.

Isaiah 6
And I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?” Then I said, “Here I am! Send me.”
And he said, “Go, and say to this people: “‘Keep on hearing, but do not understand; keep on seeing, but do not perceive.’
Make the heart of this people dull, and their ears heavy, and blind their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed.”

As I have afore speculated regarding Michael being the Davidic Servant (particularly regarding the symmetry w/ Isaiah 51 - amongst myriad other parallels), this idea of the Lord's "dedicated one" and "servant" who is blind would take on a whole new layer of meaning, given how Michael as Adam was the original culprit who's original transgression "opened the eyes", the archetypal blind--->seeing transition.

Who is blind but my servant, or deaf as my messenger whom I send? Who is blind as my dedicated one, or blind as the servant of the LORD?

He sees many things, but does not observe them; his ears are open, but he does not hear.

The LORD was pleased, for his righteousnesssake, to magnify his law and make it glorious.


^ This could totally be an apt description for a Michael-ic Davidic Herald. He who was originally blind, who then saw (consequence of fruit), and is somehow now blind (and legally innocent again, perhaps? 🤔) again, "seeing many things" whilst paradoxically "not perceiving".

And given the fact of the transgression of eating the forbidden fruit as being something of a demonic sacrament, as Ritual Eating/Feasting and Sex are fundamentally joined at the hip -- it would also do a lot to unfold the deeper layers of this likewise seemingly-contradictory and paradoxical description of the DS:

Isaiah 45
Thus says the LORD to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have grasped...
For the sake of my servant Jacob, and Israel my chosen, I call you by your name, I name you, though you do not know me.
I am the LORD, and there is no other, besides me there is no God; I equip you, though you do not know me
Katniss vs President Snow
Beautiful, innocent, kind, victim vs ruthless, calculating, murderous tyrant?
The underdog is victorious with a little help from underground District 13 (had gone underground at the end of the last war)

Iluvatar vs Melkor

Osiris vs Set

Odin vs Fenrir

It’s the same old story, I think.

The heathen nations have always made the villain out to be the hero and God and His posterity don’t always get painted in the most flattering light.

That could have absolutely nothing to do with Lewis. But I’m hoping to find out.

abijah`
~dog days~
Posts: 3481

Re: C.S. Lewis: Ongoing Investigation

Post by abijah` »

Pazooka wrote: September 7th, 2021, 10:13 pm Katniss vs President Snow
Beautiful, innocent, kind, victim vs ruthless, calculating, murderous tyrant?
The underdog is victorious with a little help from underground District 13 (had gone underground at the end of the last war)

Iluvatar vs Melkor

Osiris vs Set

Odin vs Fenrir

It’s the same old story, I think.

The heathen nations have always made the villain out to be the hero and God and His posterity don’t always get painted in the most flattering light.
Yeah, but I suspect that this is where the "wheels within wheels" stuff factors in. Its like, you have these two diametric systems wherein one imitates the other - what you need to do is go back a wheel, step back one rung/ring in order to see from God's vantage point:
Image
I am seriously suspicious that ^this Sky-Wheel stuff, and "Line (elliptical) of Heaven" business refers to something like a divine astrolabe, or an armillary sphere gyroscope type of thing, kinda like that thing you see in the Game of Thrones title sequence, of wheels within wheels, God overseeing the grand construction of a world wherein all the structural forces and wheels are calibrated and synergised with one another, contributing to the larger-scale meta-rhythm of the cosmic metronome of the Father, Him being the Holder of all the various wheels, and organising them in a certain way that that they interact and intermingle one with another, according to God's proverbial Armillary`Sphere:
wheels w/in wheels
Image
Last edited by abijah` on September 8th, 2021, 3:01 am, edited 1 time in total.

abijah`
~dog days~
Posts: 3481

Re: C.S. Lewis: Ongoing Investigation

Post by abijah` »

abijah` wrote: September 7th, 2021, 11:47 pmwhere the "wheels within wheels" stuff factors in.
Image
I am seriously suspicious that ^this Sky-Wheel stuff, and "Line (elliptical) of Heaven" business refers to something like a divine astrolabe, or an armillary sphere gyroscope type of thing, kinda like that thing you see in the Game of Thrones title sequence, of wheels within wheels...
Imo this thread should not be directed at Lewis/Tolkien, but rather at George RR Martin, someone still alive, who created a fantasy realm (using actual real-world historical/mythological tropes, Tolkienic/Lewis tropes, myths and archetypes/categories/symbols, be it Biblical, mythological, Tolkienic, Lovecraftian, Norse Myth &c. etc.) which may actually have some potential in terms of rubbing elbows w/ a bonafide luciferian agenda (which has always been very keen to shape Entertainment Media & Culture; lucifer was always a mask-wearing drama nerd) that, indeed actually hinges upon the subversion/skewing of certain tropes/archetypes/symbols in the collective imagination of the West. To undo what Tolkien had crafted.

The "Song of Ice and Fire", the classic trope of the hieros-gamos ballad, the union of opposites into a unified singular Whole. Which has its roots in true symmetry, geometry, and symbolism -- but has been bastardised by many, even w/in Christianity using the Gnostics as just one example; proper Watcher doctrine.

I'd see GRRM as a much more likely contender for being a covert agent of the Enemy, the larger ASOIAF paradigm indeed has an intricate, coherent, and in many instances correlational system wherein symbols are ascribed their meaning and association, usually overlapping . Even the methods GRRM uses in his books mimics the same precise methods used by prophets/scripture-secretaries/editors in the Bible, literary hyperlinks being just one example.

This is a youtuber I found last year who I perceive to have an adept symbolic mind (though I obviously often differ greatly from the conclusions he draws), generally speaking -- as well as specifically concerning the GRRM mythos -- and its actually kinda spooky how the Azor`Ahai archetype gets presented, and how closely the "Prince who was Promised" trope/leitmotif parallels, and interacts with authentic apocalyptic imagery, the principle of all things having their mirror-opposite (Ice, and Fire), and messianic (as well as luciferian) typology:
Spoiler
There's a good deal of luciferian/antichrist foundational precedent and groundwork that gets laid in his works, as well as that gets employed and developed as the series progresses, freshly informing this generation's perspective and lens regarding how they associate/conceptualise certain (and potentially skewed) ideas/feelings/narrative`interpretations w/ certain tropes/symbols, and within a certain (and potentially deceptive) framework. Storytelling is crucial to building and maintaining a civilisation, this stuff definitely matters, and plays an active role in shaping/informing the general schema and mythic perspective of the masses.

Don't hate on CS Lewis or JRR Tolkien. Go hate on GeorgeRRMartin, instead!

I could totally see, and in fact would even expect luciferian TPTB would seek to influence culture and shape collective mythic imagination with carefully-crafted sagas like Game of Thrones or Hunger Games, to help usher in the ever-ripening antichrist era, and laying all the necessary symbolic/conceptual groundwork and cultural conditioning to help create space and room for his revolutionary and subversive propaganda.

I mean cmon, how is this not blatant anti-christ (or possibly DS) typology -
GRRM wrote: According to prophecy, our champion will be reborn to wake dragons from stone and reforge the great sword Lightbringer that defeated the darkness those thousands of years ago. If the old tales are true, a terrible weapon forged with a loving wife's heart. Part of me thinks man was well rid of it, but great power requires great sacrifice. That much at least the Lord of Light is clear on.
Show me anywhere else that you get a more crisp, honed and coherent similitude of Lucifer than in GRRM's saga. It's so spot-on. The idea of sacrificing the very life of your own beloved-helpmeet, killing your spouse to obtain the needed power to "defeat the darkness" seems to ring at least very close to the mark, seems to me. Certainly Satan would happily live eternally alone, at the cost of his helpmeet's salvation, and indeed it makes me wonder if there's actually something to the idea, it just seems like such a natural and logically-seamless narrative arc to me, like a proper hand in a glove.

User avatar
Pazooka
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5222
Location: FEMA District 8

Re: C.S. Lewis: Ongoing Investigation

Post by Pazooka »

abijah` wrote: September 8th, 2021, 12:45 am Don't hate on CS Lewis or JRR Tolkien...
That’s the thing...as much as I wonder where their allegiance truly was, I think they’re FASCINATING.

Blatant only goes so far and only serves a certain audience. Some of the best programming is nearly imperceptible. And, as much as it bores me to continually butt up against some of the precious precepts (and precept makers), the reactions are always informative.

I knew someone, the grandson of a Utah senator and a very intelligent, but emotionally stunted, man. He had committed adultery and tried to pick up the pieces of his life with the time he had left but ended up being “destroyed in the flesh” - that was simply the most obvious and sad way to put his slow, crippling death. He was a therapist and, in his final years, clung hard to C.S. Lewis. Maybe the God Lewis describes resonated with him. But, so far, I have not been lifted in my faith by peering into Lewis’s heart. I’ll have to post just one example of what I’m talking about - - something I read last night - - when I get another minute.

But, thanks. I’ll take a look at the stuff you shared.

abijah`
~dog days~
Posts: 3481

Re: C.S. Lewis: Ongoing Investigation

Post by abijah` »

Pazooka wrote: September 8th, 2021, 8:45 am I knew someone, the grandson of a Utah senator and a very intelligent, but emotionally stunted, man. He had committed adultery and tried to pick up the pieces of his life with the time he had left but ended up being “destroyed in the flesh” - that was simply the most obvious and sad way to put his slow, crippling death. He was a therapist and, in his final years, clung hard to C.S. Lewis. Maybe the God Lewis describes resonated with him. But, so far, I have not been lifted in my faith by peering into Lewis’s heart. I’ll have to post just one example of what I’m talking about - - something I read last night - - when I get another minute.
We can definitely at least agree that there is indeed a certain subsection of Lewis' fanboys who I seem to be of a certain "type", potentially a bit pretentious or something else generally irksome.

Which, granted, probably describes me to a tee! :D

And I definitely acknowledge that, including in LDS circles, many say they read Lewis not so much because they've been genuinely impacted by his works, but more likely because they think it makes them seem cultured or refined, or some silliness. He's the vanilla option of being one's favoured author, a guy who is popular to like for reasons not far beyond simple name association, and imo may be overhyped in some aspects. Maybe its just me though.

User avatar
Pazooka
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5222
Location: FEMA District 8

Re: C.S. Lewis: Ongoing Investigation

Post by Pazooka »

Here’s a specimen I ran across last night. It is so close to the truth it almost hurts. But it’s not quite there. Whether or not it’s due to ignorance or ill intent, is almost impossible to decide - - which is why you need tons of data points to form any kind of conclusion.
Remember, this repentance, this willing submission to humiliation and a kind of death, is not something God demands of you before He will take you back and which He could let you off if He chose: it is simply a description of what going back to Him is like. If you ask God to take you back without it, you are really asking Him to let you go back without going back. It cannot happen. Very well, then, we must go through with it. But the same badness which makes us need it, makes us unable to do it. Can we do it if God helps us? Yes, but what do we mean when we talk of God helping us? We mean God putting into us a bit of Himself, so to speak. He lends us a little of His reasoning powers and that is how we think: He puts a little of His love into us and that is how we love one another.
When you teach a child writing, you hold its hand while it forms the letters: that is, it forms the letters because you are forming them. We love and reason because God loves and reasons and holds our hand while we do it. Now if we had not fallen, that would be all plain sailing. But unfortunately we now need God's help in order to do something which God, in His own nature, never does at all—to surrender, to suffer, to submit, to die. Nothing in God's nature corresponds to this process at all. So
that the one road for which we now need God's leadership most of all is a road God, in His own nature, has never walked. God can share only what He has: this thing, in His own nature, He has not
.
First, the association of repentance with “submission to humiliation”. It’s a hair to split, for sure. Submission to humiliation rituals as a means of ascent, in Luciferianism, mirror the humility and submission that mark the straight and narrow path.

Secondly, God is a family Man. Joseph Smith clarified some things about His nature, including the principle that as we are, now, He once was. I know Lewis is trying to make the case for why a being such as Jesus was necessary but, contrary to what Lewis is asserting, everything in God’s nature corresponds with the repentance process, actually, since He personally experienced victory over all His foes and is now in a position to help us do the same, and has total empathy with the process.

Doesn’t it boil down to whether one’s faith is built on a correct understanding of the personage and character of God. And if it’s not...is it really faith? “...Every thing which inviteth and enticeth to do good, and to love God (as He really is, I would assume), and to serve him, is inspired of God.”

User avatar
ransomme
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4014

Re: C.S. Lewis: Ongoing Investigation

Post by ransomme »

C.S. Lewis would have to be an incompetent Luciferian, because he sure has inspired am awful many to draw closer to God.

Post Reply