Birth (4)

Samson Slaying a Lion
by Gustave Dore

There was a certain man of Zorah, of the tribe of the Danites, whose name was Manoah. And his wife was barren and had no children. And the angel of the Lord appeared to the woman and said to her, “Behold, you are barren and have not borne children, but you shall conceive and bear a son. Therefore be careful and drink no wine or strong drink, and eat nothing unclean, for behold, you shall conceive and bear a son. No razor shall come upon his head, for the child shall be a Nazirite to God from the womb, and he shall begin to save Israel from the hand of the Philistines.” Then the woman came and told her husband, “A man of God came to me, and his appearance was like the appearance of the angel of God, very awesome. I did not ask him where he was from, and he did not tell me his name, but he said to me, ‘Behold, you shall conceive and bear a son. So then drink no wine or strong drink, and eat nothing unclean, for the child shall be a Nazirite to God from the womb to the day of his death.’” (Judges 13:2-7 ESV)

And the woman bore a son and called his name Samson. And the young man grew, and the Lord blessed him. (Judges 13:24 ESV)

Reading the Classics: Mere Christianity

I’ve been reading along with Tim Challies in his Reading the Classics Together reading program. This week’s reading was Book 1 (Right and Wrong As a Clue to the Meaning of the Universe) from C. S. Lewis’s Mere Christianity. This section consists of five short chapters that together argue for the existence of some sort of god—not necessarily the Christian one—from the existence of a universal moral law. (He puts “moral law” in caps. That seems a little quaint, so I’m not going to do it.)

I remember reading this argument when I was still a teenager and being blown away by it. It was the first time I’d read an apologetic work and I loved logical arguments, so I was delighted to discover that my faith could be defended reasonably.

This time around it was the writing that impressed me. I’m experienced enough to understand that while the argument Lewis makes is a fine one, there are limits to the usefulness of arguments like this. But no one explains difficult concepts using illustrations better than C. S. Lewis and that makes his writing captivating.

I had a few thoughts about the argument itself as I read and here’s one of them. I wondered if in chapter 5 where Lewis discusses what we can know about God from the existence of the universe alone, and then what we can know of God from the additional evidence of the moral law that God has put into our minds, if he wasn’t shortchanging (just a little) what the universe itself can tell us about God. Romans 1 informs us, I think, that we know something more than that God is a great artist (Lewis’s conclusion) from the witness of the universe. We can also know that human beings are obligated to worship this great artist that made the universe. In other words, it is not absolutely necessary to argue for a universal moral law written in our minds to come to the place Lewis is trying to put us, the place where we realize that we have “put [ourselves] wrong with that Power” that made the universe.

Does the use of the existence of a universal moral law make the argument stronger? I’m sure it does. But it also it took four chapters to establish the existence of a universal moral law. (And as a side note, I think, sixty years later, when, for example, it seems less certain that everyone agrees that “you ought not to put yourself first,” it might take more than that to do a bang-up job of it.) It doesn’t take four chapters (or more) to establish the existence of the universe, so I’m wondering if the presence of the universe as an argument in itself might be useful if it were pushed further than Lewis takes it. What say ye?

Oh! One more thing. On the ever-exciting punctuation front, I found a comma splice on page 37.

Pumpkin Squares

I made a pan of these on Monday. It’s a recipe I got from Taste of Home Magazine several years ago. I’ve made them once or twice before, but I’d forgotten what a big hit they were with my family. I’ll be making them more often from now on.

• 4 eggs
• 1-2/3 cups sugar
• 1 cup vegetable oil
• 1 can (15 ounces) solid-pack pumpkin
• 2 cups all-purpose flour
• 2 teaspoons ground cinnamon
• 2 teaspoons baking powder
• 1 teaspoon baking soda
• 1 teaspoon salt

Icing

• 1 package (3 ounces) cream cheese, softened
• 2 cups confectioners’ sugar
• 1/4 cup butter, softened
• 1 teaspoon vanilla extract
• 1 to 2 tablespoons milk

Directions

1. In a large mixing bowl, beat the eggs, sugar, oil and pumpkin.
2. In a medium mixing bowl, combine the flour, cinnamon, baking powder, baking soda and salt.
3. Little by little, add the dry mixture to the to liquid mixture and mix well after each addition.
4. Pour the batter into an ungreased 15-in. x 10-in. x 1-in. baking pan and spread evenly.
5. Bake at 350° for 25-30 minutes.
6. Cool on a baking rack.
7. Meanwhile, beat the cream cheese, sugar, butter and vanilla in a small mixing bowl.
8. Add enough of the milk to make a spreadable icing.
9. Once the pan of bars is completly cool, spread the cream cheese icing evenly over them.
10. Cut into 24 bars and serve.

I made a double batch and froze half of them to serve later. What treats have you been baking for Christmas?

Some holiday recipes posted previously:

• Rasberry Coffee Cake
• Frosted Sugar Cookies (I made these today.)
• Rosettes
• Cranberry Apple Pie