S2E34: The New C.S. Lewis Movie: Ask Max McLean (C.S. Lewis) anything.
Вставка
- Опубліковано 31 лип 2024
- Join us for this week's very special Hope One show with Max McLean, the star of the brand new movie, 'The Most Reluctant Convert: The Untold Story of C.S. Lewis.' Coming to theaters for ONE NIGHT ONLY Nov 3rd. Come hear about how one atheist became arguably the most influential apologist of the 20th century with Frank Turek.
Timestamps/Segments
0:00 - Intro
1:42 - The Most Reluctant Convert
4:57 - Who is Max McLean?
9:56 - Not the typical "Christian" movie
19:41 - Movie trailer
22:18 - The process of making the movie
33:40 - How C.S.Lewis come up with the name “Aslan”?
34:35 - When the movie will be out in the U.K.?
36:35 - Why does Max McLean look up to C.S. Lewis?
41:13 - Is the Gospel shared in the movie?
44:37 - C.S. Lewis influence over J. R. R. Tolkien
46:18 - How close to battle did C.S. Lewis get during WW1?
48:29 - What’s the biggest lesson you’ve learned from C.S. Lewis?
56:14 - What would C.S. Lewis say about our postmodern world?
1:03:52 - The argument from desire
1:07:50 - Is this movie only for believers?
1:08:57 - When will the movie be online or on DVD?
1:09:26 - Did C.S. Lewis maintain his faith at the end?
1:12:40 - Go to CSLewisMovie.com!
1:13:18 - Other projects by Max McLean
1:16:59 - Where is our hope found?
1:17:25 - Final remarks - Розваги
I just finished reading the Screwtape Letters a couple days ago. Then yesterday I lent it my mom and she mentioned she had just had a CS Lewis quote come on her phone thru her quotes app thing but never got a CS Lewis one and an audiobook she was listening to had cited The Screwtape Letters!! How serendipitous! And what an amazing book it is too! I could not put it down! And now this movie! As CS Lewis was such a phenomenal writer and teacher of deep thought, and considering how much I learned from a single book of his, I am feeling God wants me to keep learning and reading more about CS Lewis to do it at this particular time. Well, I can dig it! Lol so excited for this movie too.
Stunning and incredible interview. Can't wait to see the film. Greetings from Scandinavia. God bless!
C.S. Lewis is a great story of faith. One of my personal favorites is also the story of Corrie ten boom. It's an interesting read to be sure.
Finally some good commercials there before the video man! Nice worship songs. Sure beats what used to be there.
Where can i watch the movie in Germany ? Is it possible?
John C Lennox
That was awesome. Blessed
Wow awesome
Additionally I think the name Clive Staples is precious and when fourteen-year-old CS said in despair "mama" when his mother was sick was so sad! 😞 I think it's so amazing how deeply and profoundly we are capable of loving much less An Almighty Holy Creator that loves surpasses anything that what we can ever comprehend. This is what every human heart hungers for and is incomplete without.
In answer to the question at Minute 34, Aslan is Turkish. It means "lion".
This was a brilliant interview 🙂
Amazing! Can’t wait to listen to him orating scripture!
CS Lewis who was an atheist early on in his life, thought there was too much injustice in the world. He realized he made a mistake and he ultimately corrected his mistake in the book, “Mere Christianity”.
“As an atheist, my argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got to this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust?”
-CS Lewis
He was right the first time
@@reality1958 Christianity answers evil
You might look around and say, “How can you have hope when people are dying and there’s evil all around us? How can a good God exist if he allows these bad things to happen? Why hasn’t He answered our prayers? Why doesn’t He stop the coronavirus and a million other diseases?”
My contention is all of those questions SHOULD actually give you hope, because there are assumptions behind all those questions that can be fulfilled if God exists. See pain, suffering, and disease should actually give us hope because evil ACTUALLY shows that God exists and evil by the way is the primary reason that God, the father, sent Jesus into this world. If there was no evil there would be no need for redemption. If Earth was Heaven already, there would be no reason to come and save us because we wouldn’t need saving. But since this isn’t Heaven, we know there’s pain, suffering, disease and death. There’s a need for redemption.
People talk about the problem of evil. They think it’s just a problem for Christians. No, evil is a problem for every worldview. It just turns out that Christianity is the only worldview that can actually answer the question. When you think about what Christianity is about, Christianity really is the answer to the problem of evil. It’s the answer to why things are . After we rebelled against God, God set up a plan to enter the blood stream of humanity so that He could come into this world and take evil upon himself and take our punishment.
That’s what the whole story is about, answering the problem of evil. In fact, if you could sum up the Bible in one sentence or one word, I should say the theme of the Bible is the word redemption. You have paradise lost in Genesis, paradise gained in Revelation, and everything in between is the story of redemption. Where God literally enters the bloodstream of humanity, adds flesh to His deity, and takes our punishment on himself. That’s what the whole thing is about. And by trusting in Him, you have accepted what He has done. If you don’t want to trust in Him or you don’t want to be with Him, He WILL NOT force you into Heaven against your evil.
@@jakey3887
The ridiculous dishonesty of apologists made me an atheist.
@@Columbo-r4z I have spoken with many rational and irrational atheists. You are the latter. Also if all atheists on this page think we are lying then why are you following this page? Because they are all just instigating instead of being rational. They have nothing better to do. They don’t come here for knowledge. They are here just to instigate to make themselves feel better.
@@jakey3887
Why would I come here for knowledge?
You don’t have any.
You just repeat the rubbish ancient men wrote in a book.
nothing gets a christian off more than mentioning cs lewis.
Nice! looks like there's a location nearby me. Have to go see it. Thanks for sharing
CS Lewis died the same day as President John F. Kennedy
First
Where your treasure is there your heart will be also ,was it an evil that his wife was taken from him, yet all god does is good ,was it an evil that job had suffered, yet all god does is good, if CS Lewis was devastated in the loss of his wife then it reveals one thing where his heart was, what gave him life now produce death in him, he had his heart and what is perishable and when it perished so did his heart, which reveals he did not have his heart on what is eternal, in eternal life there is only life, if CS Lewis was such an intelligent man then his intelligence failed him, when the storm comes it is a revealing of the truth of yourself, if you love the world then the love of the Christ is not in you, CS Lewis tasted death with himself, then where was eternal life, and this is what so many of you fail to understand, that even the most intelligent man will be blind to the truth of himself.
What!?!
No other comments yet?!?
Huh. I'm wondering if it means that everyone has a school night, or preparations for Reformation Day/All Hallows Eve...
John C Lennox??
Hello. I am an atheist. I define atheism as suspending any acknowledgement as to the existence of gods until sufficient credible evidence can be presented. My position is that *_I have no good reason to acknowledge the existence of gods._*
And here is the evidence as to why I currently hold to such a position.
1. I personally have never observed a god.
2. I have never encountered a person whom has claimed to have observed a god.
3. I know of no accounts of persons claiming to have observed a god that were willing or able to demonstrate or verify their observation for authenticity, accuracy, or validity.
4. I have never been presented a valid logical argument which also employed sound premises that lead deductively to a conclusion that a god(s) exists.
5. Of the 46 logical syllogisms I have encountered arguing for the existence of a god(s), I have found all to contain multiple fallacious or unsubstantiated premises.
6. I have never observed a phenomenon in which the existence of a god was a necessary antecedent for the known or probable explanation for the causation of that phenomenon.
7. Several proposed (and generally accepted) explanations for observable phenomena that were previously based on the agency of a god(s), have subsequently been replaced with rational, natural explanations, each substantiated with evidence that excluded the agency of a god(s). I have never encountered _vice versa._
8. I have never experienced the presence of a god through intercession of angels, divine revelation, the miraculous act of divinity, or any occurrence of a supernatural event.
9. Every phenomenon that I have ever observed has *_emerged_* from necessary and sufficient antecedents over time without exception. In other words, I have never observed a phenomenon (entity, process, object, event, process, substance, system, or being) that was created _ex nihilo_ - that is instantaneously came into existence by the solitary volition of a deity.
10. All claims of a supernatural or divine nature that I have encountered have either been refuted to my satisfaction, or do not present as falsifiable.
ALL of these facts lead me to the only rational conclusion that concurs with the realities I have been presented - and that is the fact that there is *_no good reason_* for me to acknowledge the existence of a god.
I have heard often that atheism is the denial of the Abrahamic god. But denial is the active rejection of a substantiated fact once credible evidence has been presented. Atheism is simply withholding any acknowledgement until sufficient credible evidence is introduced. *_It is natural, rational, and prudent to be skeptical of unsubstatiated claims, especially extraordinary ones._*
I welcome any cordial response. Peace.
Hello. You sir are an agnostic, not an atheist.
Atheism is a positive claim, i.e. "God doesn't exist, because...".
You are saying that you are suspending acknowledgement until credible evidence is presented, which is exactly the agnostic position.
You could try to switch to more common, but still false, atheist description/definition, which is a "lack of belief" , but that wouldn't help you either, because saying that you lack a belief is like saying nothing, Its not an argument, so it cant be addressed, i.e. no one cares.
Lastly, saying that you haven't experienced nor any credible supernatural event was ever presented to you = God doesn't exist, is a fallacious reasoning.
God bless you.
How can that which is predictable come out of the power of chance, it cannot, for that which is predictable must be designed, and if we live in a predictable world then who designed it.
Atheism can either be positive or negative. Does it necessarily have to be one or the other?
@@Godlimate no, it can't be, check etymological meaning of the word:
atheism (n.)
"the doctrine that there is no God", positive claim.
the neutral claim again, is called agnosticism.
@@bany512 wholly disagree.
And you skipped a step. You need to check morphology first before checking etymology.
‘A’ is the derivational prefix to mean “without”.
“Theism” is the root morpheme to mean “belief in God”
We say this is “without a belief in god”. We know this to be valid because we can extrapolate on the same use of morphological components with other words such as “amoral”, “abiotic”, “asexual”.
Where you’re coming from uses the morpheme “atheos” + “ism”, meaning “godless belief”. Atheos isn’t really a prefix though… but some would argue that atheos carries precedence because of its etymology. But in no sense do either of these 2 definitions take precedence since they are both valid in their own way. We can only go as far as to suggest that atheism is ambiguous. This is also quite a normal thing we come across with some words and it can only be determined by contextualising it.
“agnostic” is not the neutral claim, and I know this because it has a different morphological set… predominantly in the root “gnostic” which is not at all synonymous to the root “theos”.
Agnosticism is more like the neutral claim to Gnosticism… don’t you think? That is… if you think no knowledge of god is neutral to knowledge of god.
John C Lennox
John C Lennox