Re: oddments

I need to dig up another Lewis essay here to give you an idea about Lewis'
own estimation of the value and meaning of his work. No use going on about
it, though -- I may as well just dig up the essay. I think I know what
book it's in.

If by the "authorial intent of the Problem of Pain" I think we can safely
say that Lewis intended to defend the idea of a good, just, and all
powerful God in the face of human suffering.

Does this mean every sentence, every paragraph, has no ambiguity at all, or
that every good reader will necessarily interpret every nuance of his
argument the same way? No.

Jim

Scottie Bowman wrote:

> Three random items.
>
> 'Artefect'. I could have kicked myself as soon as
> I pressed the Send key. I was thinking of something
> like an old pot dug up in the back garden. By 'neutral',
> I meant it could be used for boiling a cabbage or a human
> head. Instead of 'non-human' I should have written
> 'anonymous' - meaning that on the spectrum where
> we measure the amount of recognisable input from
> a particular individual, it was more towards the plastic
> bag end than the Grecian urn.
>
> C. S. Lewis. I couldn't STAND those wimpish
> Narnia Chronicles. Nor could any of my descendents.
> I did, however, read the Screwtapes & the Problem of Pain
> during my deeply spiritual adolescence. It's simply beyond
> me that anyone could regard these Christian tracts as open
> to a significant variety of interpretations - & that old Cecil
> would have found that perfectly OK.
>
> 4000 colleges. Not for one second did I doubt your statistic, Jim.
> It was the awesome, Babel-like enormity that 'gave me pause'
> (as in, 'stopped me in my tracks', 'made me catch my breath'
> - much the commonest usage among Anglophones.)
>
> Scottie B.
>
> -
> * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
> * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH

-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
Received on Tue Oct 29 11:57:47 2002