XPost: alt.books.cs-lewis   
   From: hayesmstw@hotmail.com   
      
   On 14 Oct 2005 11:54:57 GMT, Siwel Naph  wrote:   
      
   >Steve Hayes wrote:   
   >> You calimed to kinow little about Japanese history, then later you   
   >> claimed a depth of knowledge of the mostives of Japanese Christian   
   >> martyrs before the Meiji period that would be arrogant even if you did   
   >> know a great deal of Japanese history.   
   >   
   >I assumed that the Japanese Christians first converted by non-Japanese   
   >Christians converted because they accepted Christianity in the form   
   >presented to them by the non-Japanese Christians, and then used the same   
   >arguments on their fellow Japanese. It seemed a reasonable assumption,   
   >but I have no hope that either of you will confirm or deny that it was.   
      
   It can be dangerous to make too many assumptions.   
      
   >> If you have some factual knowledge that is relevant to the topic under   
   >> discussion, but sweeping statements like the ones you made are simply   
   >> not worth answering.   
   >   
   >It would have saved me time if you'd said this earlier, and there were   
   >other questions you overlooked (e.g. whether you believed in Hell in the   
   >traditional sense).   
      
   I'm not sure what "hell in the traditional sense". It's not really a subject   
   I've taken much interest in since the age of 13, when I stayed with a friend   
   who had a copy of Dante's "Inferno" with illustrations by Gustav Doré. At that   
   age I treated it more like a Renaissance comic book, but I'm not sure how   
   "traditional" Dante's version was.   
      
   I also don't seem to have, or can't locate, a copy of "Mere Christianity", so   
   perhaps someone else who's reading this and has one cold tell us what Lewis   
   says about hell there.   
      
   But I suppose my understanding of hell now, when i think about it, is shaped   
   by St John Chrysostom, who said:   
      
   Let no one bewail his poverty, for the universal kingdom hath   
   been revealed. Let no one weep for his iniquities, for pardon   
   hath shone forth from the grave. Let no one fear death, for the   
   Saviour's death hath set us free. He that was held prisoner of it   
   hath annihilated it. By descending into Hell, he made Hell cap-   
   tive. He angered it when it tasted of his flesh. And Isaiah,   
   foretelling this, did cry: Hell, said he, was angered when it   
   encountered thee in the lower regions. It was angered, for it was   
   abolished. It was angered, for it was mocked. It was angered, for   
   it was slain. It was angered, for it was overthrown. It was   
   angered, for it was fettered in chains. It took a body, and met   
   God face to face. It took earth, and encountered Heaven. It took   
   that which was seen, and fell upon the unseen.   
      
   O Death, where is thy sting? O Hell, where is thy victory? Christ   
   is risen, and thou art overthrown. Christ is risen, and the   
   demons are fallen. Christ is risen, and the angels rejoice.   
   Christ is risen, and life reigneth. Christ is risen, and not one   
   dead remaineth in the grave. For Christ, being risen from the   
   dead, is become the first-fruits of those who have fallen asleep.   
   To him be glory and dominion unto ages of ages. Amen.   
      
   I suppose that is traditional, but I'm not sure what Lewis has to say about   
   it.   
      
   >> But since you have raised the point, and since it does seem relevant   
   >> to the topic of this thread, perhaps you could tell us what, in your   
   >> opinion, is the difference between "mere Christianity" and   
   >> "traditional Christianity".   
   >   
   >So "Do as you would be done by" means you don't answer my questions, but   
   >you expect me to answer yours.   
   >   
   >If mere Christianity states that Christianity is the one true religion   
   >and all must convert to it because of this, it's the core of traditional   
   >Christianity. If not, it isn't.   
      
   Well maybe there is something to that effect in "Mere Christianity", though I   
   doubt it (and perhaps someone who has the book can confirm whether it has or   
   not. But I certainly don't know of anything of that sort in traditional   
   Christianity.   
      
   At the risk of saying something that has tended to become a distorted cliche,   
   and therefore of being misunderstood, traditional Christianity isn't a   
   religion at all.   
      
      
   --   
   Steve Hayes   
   Web: http://www.geocities.com/hayesstw/stevesig.htm   
        http://www.bookcrossing.com/mybookshelf/Methodius   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)