Is C.S. Lewis the greatest philosopher of the 20th century?

His argument is literally "I have a consciousness and I can't explain why so obviously God game it to me!"

Not very impressive logic.

>youtube.com/user/CSLewisDoodle/videos

Pretty good introduction to Lewis, saved.

Stop baiting people with this shit. You've been doing it for days now.

>Nietzsche's argument is literally: hurr i dont believe in god, therefore he's dead!

see, i can strawman too.

He's completely irrelevant in the academia. Should have stuck with writing children's books t.b.h.

Yes but Albert Mohler is better imo when it comes to the subject of post-modernism and post-christian society.

I think I may have accidentally given him the idea by mocking him for using C. S. Lewis as a proponent of natural law over someone like Cicero.

spot the pissed off atheists.

look how fast they come out of the woodworks when their precious prophet nietzsche is proven wrong

Mohler is alright, but Lewis was way ahead of his time. He wrote during the climate of WW2 and destroyed the illusions that early atheists held on.

I'm not even atheist, you baiting clown.
You've created a monster. He's in every single thread that involves Christianity or will at some point bring up Christianity. No person on Veeky Forums is going to be a filthy creationist so why others can't see through his bait is mind boggling.

A top contender for sure. Mere Christianity is a must read.

Ælian, people on here don't hate you because you're a Christian, they hate you because you're an autistic faggot who doesn't know the first thing about social interaction.

And I don't hate you at all, I just feel sorry for you. To be permanently on Veeky Forums, spouting pop-theology that people on here either don't read at all or laugh at you for, to be constantly obsessed over nonbelievers and trying to "win" "debates" with them, to be obsessed with how people perceive you and your posts to the point where you seem to constantly monitor Veeky Forums in order to immediately respond to set the records straight if someone criticizes you, to do all of this shows to me just a desperate, pathetic and incapable of normal social interaction you are, and how you leave doubt that you have some several disorder when it comes to social interaction and the ability to empathize with people who disagree with you

>filthy creationist
That's ironic, because creationists tend to look clean, shaven and optimistic whereas evolutionists tend to look hairy, depressing and suicidal.

2/10 for making me reply to your bait

Reminder that there is no credible source Heisenberg ever said that.

If there is a god, would he approve of low-quality threads on Veeky Forums?
What sort of cruel and angry god would subject us to the likes of OP

People hate us because pic related.

That's the real reason, and you know it.

samefag

You're officially my mortal enemy on this site.
What should I call you?

>You've created a monster.

Nah, he's been posting YEC stuff for a while. The Lewis stuff is new, and came after the previously mentioned mocking. So I added a new dimension to the monster, but the monster has always been around.

At least he isn't sperging out about the Shroud of Turin.

>I believe in myths

way to discredit yourself

>No person on Veeky Forums is going to be a filthy creationist so why others can't see through his bait is mind boggling.
We have unironic flat-earthers on Veeky Forums. What with all the conspiracy theorists and reactionary Christianity a YEC isn't actually all that farfetched, though yeah this guy is too cliche to not be baiting.

>If you post scientific facts, you're cliché

Sorry to burst your bubble but facts don't care about your feelings, Timmy.

I know you're baiting; but there are people out there who believe stuff like this in earnest and it worries me deeply.

I'll name you Melvin after another off-board tumor.
Obviously.
He just called you Timmy which is again, why I don't understand the people who take his bait.

>debunking someone who did not believe in objective truth

You don't need to worry about me, I believe in actual history.

You need to take care of yourself, you're a victim of brainwashing.

If I call grass purple that doesn't change the fact grass is green.

Nietzsche can spout all he wants, but his arguments were torn apart by C.S. Lewis a few decades later.

how can you NOT be a flat earther after seeing eric dubay's videos? so much evidence

So it's settled.

We have come to a unanimous decision that Lewis is the greatest philosopher of the 20th century, OP we have answered your question.

/thread

>we have unironic flat-earthers
I refuse to believe this and I don't want to. They have to be advanced trolls.

EVEN THE TOOTHLESS PEASANTS DURING THE DARK AGES KNEW THE EARTH WAS ROUND.

>Haha dude say cognitive dissonance twice in the same thread without explaining myself once

>Yeah bro that wins arguments

>But dude, aren'the we the ones with cognitiveach dissonance for being unable to see the holes in the much longer standing Christian faith?

>dude fedora lmao

>Lewis
>tearing apart anything

Guy couldn't even write a decent children's book for fuck's sake.

>He debunked Nietzsche, Stirner
>Stirner

Neat, got any of his quotes or arguments?

have you even looked at the arguments for flat earth? people have known for thousands of years that the earth is fixed and immovable.

the idea that we live on a spinning globe is only 500 years old.

youtube.com/watch?v=fk4YqPtvJao
youtube.com/watch?v=h5i_iDyUTCg
youtube.com/watch?v=TFsuOFoolW8
youtube.com/watch?v=xRr0B-l3gAY
youtube.com/watch?v=pnzUgKZ8m2k
youtube.com/watch?v=k0xClWgidZU
youtube.com/watch?v=pEm91zxBaa4

the flat earth movement is rapidly gaining popularity and is going viral. millions of people are starting to wake up.

i remember when i was a globe head, man did i live in fantasy land..

youtube.com/user/CSLewisDoodle/videos

This is untrue. The ancient Greeks calculated the circumference of the Earth before the Bible was even made dummy.

wrong.

youtube.com/watch?v=fk_NzMejP-0

Again, Ælian, you didn't respond to a single word I said. People don't hate the fact that you're a Christian, not even your autistic, literalist interpretation of it, they simply hate you, because you're completely incapable of interacting with people you disagree with.

That's how I recognize you without your tripname. It's your own repetitive behavior that gives it away. You come here on Veeky Forums, spout Christian propaganda, and then never engage with people who disagree with you. You always do it in the same fashion, and only change the scripts you use. Just a few weeks ago you had an obsession with spelling Nietzsche as "Neetzsche", and his picture wearing a dumb hat, before that you had an obsession with /pol/ words like 'cuck' and 'cringe', and now your obsession of the month is C.S. Lewis and the term cognitive dissonance.

Stop it, please. You're not fooling anyone, you're not convincing anyone and you certainly aren't successfully hiding your own obvious personal shortcomings in socially interacting with people, which is probably why you're here in the first place. You're probably on here because you do this stuff in real life as well, and people, just like on here, openly wonder what your problem is. You then take your own isolation, and interpret as persecution for your obviously righteous beliefs. Stop it already, you're not helping anyone, but most importantly, you're not helping yourself

Which video in particular?

>Erastothenes lived in 270 BC
>Bible was made by Moses around 1900 BC

He can't be Ælian because he's capable of not sperging out and link-dumping when someone criticizes the Turin shroud.

>spelling Nietzsche as "Neetzsche"
>picture wearing a dumb hat
>words like 'cuck' and 'cringe'

Never did any of that.

You might be paranoid schizophrenic.

Retard.

Go hop on a plane and fly into the sun please.

No that's the Torah dummy

I had nearly forgotten about that one.

Who knew that endlessly posting the same stuff over and over again without ever enaging with anyone doesn't convince people?

so you have no argument?
cant prove the earth is a ball?

I should also mention that you have circumstantial evidence and no facts.

It's still the Bible.

Bible or biblias simply means library. Moses started the Bible, and it was finished when John wrote Revelation around 70 AD.

I have a tremendous amount of arguments. So do all the scientists who don't get laughed at in public. No matter what I tell you you'll just say it's either a hoax or provide some nonsensical """"argument"""" without any physical evidence for your preposterous claims.

It'seems not the bible though. It is one book. Is one book a library? Rather, it is the whole collection.

You did that just a few weeks ago. And it isn't the actual content that gives you away, Ælian, it's the repetive way you post it, and the fact that after you post it, you never engage with people who call you out on your beliefs. Also, you tend to use namecalling whenever you give away your identity, another clear signal on who you really are.

So tell me, Ælian, why did you throw the shroud of Turin and your brilliant NEETzsche memes under the bus? Did you sperg out when it convinced no one?

i just linked a bunch of 2-hour long flat earth documentaries, the burden of proof is on you now.

the earth is flat, scientifically proven after numerous tests. the "moon landing" was done in a hollywood basement directed by kubrick.

have a nice day, retarded globe nut

We literally had an argument about this yesterday where you got destroyed.

>C.S. Lewis
>ever being destroyed

Butthurt atheist I see.

If you open up a library, it doesn't matter if it's empty and most books have yet to hit the shelves.

It's still a library. It started some day.

To say that Erastothenes lived before the Bible is retarded, because the entire Old Testament existed centuries before him. The Tanakh is the Jewish Bible.

No, the burden of proof was on the scientists who were brilliant enough to prove all these things. Face it kid, your 2 bit documentaries are eclipsed by the progresses made by modern physicist. You're a monkey smearing shit on the wall and claiming it's a black board outlining physics

"You cram these words into mine ears against the stomach of my sense"

Our interpretations of the bible differ. Either way, the Greeks figured this out a very long time ago.

>Aelian
What is this supposed to mean?

>you never engage with people who call you out on your beliefs
That's because nobody is posting arguments. Evolutionists only shitpost and throw ad hominems around. I've never seen a darwinist on Veeky Forums willing to have an actual debate regarding the origin of mankind.

We're dealing with denial, cognitive dissonance. Atheists dogmatically defending a cult, denying science and archeology when it shows scripture is accurate.

>Shroud of Turin
Never talked about this on Veeky Forums either. Clearly you're mistaking me from someone else.

I know you suffer from delusion. Not everyone who disagrees with you is the same person, my mentally ill friend.

Creationists of Veeky Forums, if evolution isn't true why is it that the scientific community largely insists that it is?

>1 man puts a stick in the ground
>"the Greeks figured this out"
pick one.

the video i posted debunked your one (1) precious proof for heliocentric model.

pagans worshipped the Sun, thats why they glorified it and made earth revolve around it.

Hey now. The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe was pretty good.

This is why:

"How often have you heard evolutionists say: "There's really no disagreement among reputable scientists when it comes to evolution." Or: "Evolution is settled science." Creation Moments has heard such statements fall from the lips of Richard Dawkins, PZ Myers, Eugenie Scott and many others, too numerous to mention.

Clearly these evolutionists are all working off the same page in their playbook. They're also showing that they aren't thinking clearly. Why? Because they are writing books, making films and giving speeches tearing down scientists who disagree with them. But wait - didn't they just say that there's no disagreement among reputable scientists and we're dealing with settled science?

By saying things like this, evolutionists believe that people can be easily fooled by one of the oldest logical fallacies in the book - the argumentum ad populum. As used by evolutionists, this fallacy can be stated like this: "Since all scientists believe in evolution, evolution must be scientifically correct."

Even if the first part of this assertion were true - which it isn't - the second part does not logically follow. It's like the child who tries to justify some undesirable behavior by saying, "It must be okay because all the kids are doing it." Besides, if scientific truth is determined by majority vote or by what most scientists believe at a certain point in time, then Darwinism itself would have been rejected when it was first proposed."

Authority opinion is not evidence for evolution. The majority used to believe the earth is flat. The common consensus among doctors used to be that draining out blood can cure diseases, etc.

Ad populum logical fallacy.

Why is AElian so obsessed with Nietzsche?

Like, seriously, there's innumerable atheist philosophers out there. Why does he zero in on this one in particular?

>Ælian
>Memory longer than that of a goldfish

That's not what I meant. I wasn't making a counter-argument.

I just want to know why you think, if it is abundantly clear that evolution isn't true, then why don't most scientists admit this?

"Most people agree, and they are aware of this majority agreement, and bring it up" is not an argument against those people who agree. It is an observation of the fact that they agree.

Since you think a stick is the only thing that happened you clearly have no grip on reality.

>General relativity
>Constant gravity
>Constellations
>The horizon
>Actual images from space
>You can send a baloon with a Camara higher than the sun according to a flat eat model
>Drains going opposite directions
>Magnetism
>Circumnavigation in straight lines
>Timezones
>Lunar cycles
>The Coreolis Effect
>1915 General Relativity experiment
>Reliance on heliocentrism for any astrophysics model
>Tectonic plates and the necessity of a core of earth
>Modern cartography and map shape

You're a bullshitter, through and through.

>>General relativity
>Someone actually buys this pseudoscience

There are several reasons. Scientists are humans, just like you and me. They are not immune to bias, will and desires.

>Evolution is the hot, new, fresh thing
A trend, cultural phase, etc. New things tend to appeal.
>Don't want to believe in God
Creation points to a creator, and atheists don't want that
>Jobs are at stake
There have been occasions when scientists were fired from their job for questioning Darwinism or daring to bring in intelligent design.
>Philosophy of naturalism/materialism
The idea that the physical world is all there is.

So we're dealing with a cultural meta-narrative. Atheism, evolution, naturalism, humanism goes hand in hand. It's the entire package. The atmosphere of today eschews creationism because of cultural reasons.

Creationist scientists are also heavily suppressed or even silenced. Evolutionists like to portray a straw man caricature so that people mock/ridicule creationists, who are honest and legitimate scientists who could no longer reconcile evolution and the evidence that points towards creation.

You know what's missing? The actual arguments. Evolutionists are afraid to debate creationists because they know they would destroyed when talking about actual proof and evidence.

The theory of evolution is nothing but hot air, but I digress.

Nice argument
I have more important shit to do
"To say nothing, to do nothing, to know nothing, and to have nothing, is to be a great part of your title, which is within a very little of nothing"

Okay, why wouldn't atheists want to believe in god?

These kinds of images make slightly sick to be stomach.

>tfw too intelligent for too intelligent memes.

>Philosophy of Naturalism
>Theory of evolution
These 2 things are the main reason people become atheists.

If you believe in "millions of years" and that people used to stupid primitives, of course it becomes hard to accept the Bible's story of how it all began.

>People believe in evolution because they're atheists
>People are atheists because they believe in evolution.

Doesn't that seem like circular logic?

These things do not take place in a vacuum.

It started with the "enlightenment". People gradually wanted God out of their lives. Darwin made it intellectually fulfilling to be an atheist because now you have a full-fledged alternative worldview.

No, people believe in evolution because there is evidence. Conclusions drawn from evolution drawn from evidence lead people to Atheism

>People gradually wanted God out of their lives
Why though?

That's not what I meant. I meant his thinking seems like circular logic.

Evidence is interpreted, it is not "self-evident".

Evolutionists look at an old human skull and think it's from a primitive caveman. Evidence for evolution.

Creationists look at an old human skull and think it's from the Adamic era when people lived to be hundreds of years old. Evidence for creation.

>Creationists look at an old human skull and think it's from the Adamic era when people lived to be hundreds of years old. Evidence for creation.

>naturalism
The belief that that everything arises from natural properties and causes does not exclude an initial spark that started the process, nor does it question worshiping that spark.
>evolution
Its called natural selection, and it doesn't exclude that the first life was created by some supernatural force, only that since life has changed naturally.

Basically naturalism and natural selection (which follows from naturalism) can be used to argue against creationism and intelligent design, not against an unmoved prime mover.
Unless you are the kind of christian who insist the world was created 6000 years ago by a human-like space being, these ideas shouldn't bother you. And if you are, you shouldn't be in the sciences and education.

Protip: catholics have long since accepted and rationalized both natural selection and big bang theory, to name some, with their faith.

Not even creationist but the Catholic church is also hideously corrupt and a terrible example of Christians "doing it right".

Trying to find the argument in your post, can't find it.

Natural Selection is in favor of creationism, not evolutionism.

evidentcreation.com/DE-Natsel.html

Dude, natural selection IS "evolutionism".

And when your interpretation ignores proven methods of evaluating remains, including methods used every day in crime scene investigation, your "interpretation" becomes laughable

>Unless you are the kind of christian who insist the world was created 6000 years ago
Like literally Christians did for centuries until Darwin came along? Our lord and savior was a young-earth creationist. All the apostles were young-earth creationists. The Israelites and Hebrews were young-earth creationists.

>by a human-like being
God does not look like us.
We look like God.
We are made in His image.

trueorigin.org/dating.php
icr.org/creation-radiometric
biblicalgeology.net/blog/fatal-flaw-radioactive-dating/

>proven methods
I don't think so.

Any dating method occasionally produces anomalous results, especially when used wrongly.
That's why one study usually isn't trusted until more studies confirm the results.

I assure you those methods have been tested over and over again to see if they are accurate

We use many of the same methods to date artifacts form say the roman empire and get results that say the artifact is from roman times.