Lewis Lectures - Ransom Trilogy: The Silent Planet

Рет қаралды 26,136

New Saint Andrews College

5 жыл бұрын

Pastor Doug Wilson lectures on CS Lewis' The Silent Planet.
Find out more about the college:
nsa.edu

Пікірлер: 42

@caidtc4555 3 жыл бұрын

An absolute treasure trove!

@sglendinning10 3 жыл бұрын

CS Lewis does seem to write a sun-centric understanding of the solar system into this book. His description of the return journey makes sense from an orbital mechanics perspective. They have to travel closer to the sun than they wanted to make it back in the allotted time.

@ikeaspiringpolymath 2 жыл бұрын

Not quite. He describes them "cutting across" the orbit of the earth in order to hit the orbit at another point. The shortcut across the orbit brought them closer to the sun.

@David-bh7hs Жыл бұрын

@@ikeaspiringpolymath yes...? That's not contradictory, so why are you saying "not quite"?

@paulblase3955 11 ай бұрын

Lewis, and Wilson, aren't talking about physical reality so much as metaphysical reality.

@skywatcherextraordinaire7014 4 жыл бұрын

Fantastic! Thank you so much!

@johnroe9298 3 жыл бұрын

The Heavenly Trilogy

@calebwalker4220 3 жыл бұрын

I wish we learned this in our Western Civ class.

@prayunceasingly2029 2 жыл бұрын

Lewis seemed to include planets, even in the Narnia series.

@SamanthaGluck Жыл бұрын

This is absolutely fascinating!

@abigailstein2420 3 жыл бұрын

Imagination and thought in the Middle Ages

@thesheep6248 Жыл бұрын

Thank you

@lukasmakarios4998 3 жыл бұрын

Did you forget the book that Lewis thought was his best? "Till We Have Faces"?

@RichardBragg 3 жыл бұрын

Maleldil is Christ not The Father (God). Jesus is God too but we usually use God to refer to The Father.

@Dgoc813 2 жыл бұрын

Maleldil “took human form on [our] world,” and is clearly identified with the Word, “all things came from Him” but in Perelandra Maleldil is also used to refer to the Father, and the new Eve communes with the Holy Spirit but calls it “Maleldil.” I think He is the trinity. Etymologically tho, “eldil” means “archangel.” I am not exactly sure what title of God correlates to ruler of angels, Lord of Hosts… however one would assume that in old solar the true name of god is similar to the Tetragrammaton

@Moltenstardeath 5 ай бұрын

I wish he'd talked about the book.

@SonnenShades 8 күн бұрын

Same. I came here thinking it would be a discussion on the theme of the book, however he didn't talk about it almost at all.

@garypotter5569 Жыл бұрын

Were you the teacher who exposited that CS Lewis put some kind of "code" in his Narnia series that make it next-level cool?

@dawsonmayes4898 8 ай бұрын

No, that was Michael Ward

@lukasmakarios4998 3 жыл бұрын

What's wrong with having an angel, in the appearance of a star, showing the wise men the way to find Jesus? Problem solved.

@MrBrendanRizzo 2 жыл бұрын

Now now, the lecturer has a chip on his shoulder about modernity. You can’t just invoke a miracle, it ruins the propaganda value. /sarcasm

@priscillabeaman5047 2 жыл бұрын

The next pendragon clue: Ransom gives Jane the kiss to give to Marc.

@nickjames205 Жыл бұрын

I like that idea, but ransom had all the answers to Merlin's obscure questions. I think the Pendragon would need to know that stuff. But maybe he would be contacted later.

@totallynotthebio-lizard7631 2 жыл бұрын

Today I learned that Astronomy is boring and Astrology is 🔥

@judahinman1604 4 ай бұрын

Inklings

@lukasmakarios4998 3 жыл бұрын

How to belabor the Ptolemaic world-view ad infinitum... With everything designed by an omnipotent watch-maker... It only depends on what one perceives as the ultimate telos. The question of "spheres or islands" is actually irrelevant. And of course, each world would have its own conception of Deity.

@SpookyGroovyPolitoCatMum Жыл бұрын

3 years ago. This is only 3 years ago! Hubble showed us a lot more and so-called modern snow it. 3 years ago. Last year the James Webb Telescope launched! Within the past year and a half two years SpaceX has been throwing stuff out into space. Since the fifties we have seen fantastic science fiction films that say that modern mankind does not believe what you're saying about there being mostly nothing out there. Although Douglas Adams did write that we were an insignificant blue dot with not so important life forms on it. And Carl Sagan did say that our planet was insignificant and the grand scheme of things and that if we're all there is wouldn't it be a great waste of space since space is mostly space. However within the past decade or more Guillermo Gonzalez wrote got fired for published and produced the film called the privileged planet. And the nutshell conclusion of this fantastic effort and so worth watching program and reading book, is that it would be a great waste of space except that upon intelligent careful logical examination it is most reasonable to discern that if anything in the universe were out of place our planet might not be able to sustain life. That's not a big what if we barely missed it we almost didn't happen evolutionary statement kind of thing. No! On the contrary! But it really means is that God so balanced an entire universe to make a home for his children to glorify himself and to enjoy them and receive their worship. He loves us because he loves us because he does. How much? Well how far out can the James Webb Telescope see??! I'm done with this guy

@MrBrendanRizzo 2 жыл бұрын

Why would a circle be the only perfect shape and closest to God? A line stretches back and forward to infinity, just like God. It looks like the medievals had their own unwarranted assumptions. Why did Lewis give them a pass but castigate us moderns for it?

@briggy4359 Жыл бұрын

Show me a line that stretches backwards and forwards infinitely.

@David-bh7hs Жыл бұрын

Lines are undefined terms in mathematics.

@MrBrendanRizzo Жыл бұрын

@@David-bh7hs No, they are not. They are defined as the single connection of two points, extended infinitely in both directions.

@David-bh7hs Жыл бұрын

@@MrBrendanRizzo I have a degree in mathematics with a focus in geometry. It's impossible to define a line without using circular logic. "An infinite set of points stretching in either direction" is a good start, but then you must define direction. You can't define that without a solid definition of line. We must assume the definition of lines axiomatically.

@MrBrendanRizzo Жыл бұрын

@@David-bh7hs Ok. Now you’re just quibbling over definitions. The point was that medieval people thought lines were infinite so there is no reason for them to prefer circles. The real issue is Lewis accusing moderns of believing certain things for ulterior reasons and claiming the medievals did not, which I am questioning.

@SpookyGroovyPolitoCatMum Жыл бұрын

Believing the Bible because Lewis says it's okay to believe the Bible being okay to believe the Bible Paul who wrote two-thirds of the New Testament, said if I'm doing what matches the scriptures then go ahead and do what I do. There are lots of teachers who became respected and honored and the site and mines and understanding of their students who went skepticism went to see if the scriptures really said those things who believed because of believers. There's absolutely nothing wrong with believing the Bible because someone like CS Lewis says it's okay to believe the Bible let's see S Lewis himself came to Faith from not having believed the Bible before because friends reasoned with him about whether the Bible was myth or history. Good grief this guy! I think I may have to move on.