“Take, eat; this is My body which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of Me.” 1 Corinthians 11:24

The incarnation is and forever will be one of the greatest theological mysteries of the Christian faith. A heavenly being took on human flesh simultaneously preserving His divinity. I am by no means the first, nor the most qualified to explore this topic. There have been hundreds of thousands of books centering around this conundrum composed by authors much more intelligent than I. While I don’t claim to have an extensive understanding of each aspect of theology- I do have extensive personal experience on one defining feature of the incarnation: I too am human. 

In various evaluations of the incarnation, the emphasis tends to separate the wonders of humanness from Jesus. There is a temptation to view the incarnation as negative, that Jesus’s humanness itself was a cruel punishment. I will examine how C.S. Lewis’s rejection of dualism in light of the incarnation allows for a critical analysis of the Christian faith and search for objective truth. 

First, it is important to examine this theme in light of the cultural critique of dualism. In both traditional Christianity as well as other deistic-based religions dualism has wriggled its way into both cultural norms and theological doctrine. Dualism is essentially the belief that there is a sharp dichotomy separating the sacred and the secular. This notion suggests that there are particular elements of living that are “divine” and others that are “dirty”, as such the two should not be intertwined for the risk of infection. Extremes of this belief are represented in Amish communities or certain sects of Catholicism simulated in isolated monasteries, in both instances, there is a clear separation of “good” religion and “bad” physicality. 

Lewis dismisses this sentiment by explaining his posture on the concept of humanness. Lewis speaks on the incarnation of Jesus Christ by explaining that he became fully human. 

Lewis draws a distinction between personhood and humanness, humanness is a state of being we cannot rid ourselves of our humanity. While personhood is acquiring maturity into increasingly relational beings as Christ restores us to our humanity. Jesus through becoming human divinely restored the “dirty”. Lewis explains how the incarnation brought life or “Zoe” to our humanness, he writes, “The Son of God became a man to enable men to become sons of God”. Dualism is dangerous, pre-crucifixion theology. 

This line of thinking introduces a myriad of concerns- for example, at one time or another we may have heard: “we don’t talk about x, y, or z in the church.” This is not only harmful but also I will be as so bold as to claim that embracing the sacred and secular divide is rejecting the power of the crucifixion. 

I will be as so bold as to claim that embracing the sacred and secular divide is rejecting the power of the crucifixion. 

Refusal to embrace dualism empowers one to comprehend the divine in the dirty. The purpose of the incarnation was to redeem humanness- not reject it. Jesus became man. Being human is not a sin itself. Similar to Plato’s cave analogy, Lewis illustrates that there is a distinction between the shadow of what man is and what he is should be. 

The crucifixion reestablished man to reflect this type of humanness, Lewis emphasis the power of the death of the old man by writing, “The Man in Christ rose again: not only the God”. Christ’s birth, life, death, and resurrection abolished dualism- it fused the divine and the dirty through a compelling act of reconstruction. He goes on to write, “…For the first time, we saw a real man. One tin soldier—real tin, just like the rest—had come fully and splendidly alive”. God through His Son brought meaning to their humanness. Christ did not simply have a body but He was a body. He laughed, he cried, he experienced the joys and sorrows of being human. We cannot rid ourselves of our flesh- but through Christ, we can redeem and restore our broken vessels. 

I have previously emphasized how damaging the Church’s embracing of dualism is from a philosophical perspective, this harmful mindset leaks into our everyday lives as well. Unfortunately, a further consequence of dualism leads to a rejection of any literature or philosophy outside of the Bible; because it is seen as “worldly”, and therefore, unholy. This retards our ability to a holistic approach to truth. 

Lewis- while he believes in an objective standard for truth- has a past riddled with an exploration of numerous sects of religion from agnosticism to polytheism. Perhaps this view is what makes Lewis so welcoming to exploring other beliefs and worldviews. His recognition that the divine has seeped into every aspect of our life is a starting location for discovering the road to truth. Lewis is not a “cookie-cutter” theologian, he’s rough around the edges. In light of this, he provides a deep significant analysis of the definition of the divine discovered in the dirty. In fact, he opens up chapter one of Mere Christianity by writing that all religions “contain at least some hint of truth”. This stems from his struggle with faith, he explored various religions before settling on Christianity. 

He warns against easy answers by claiming that Christianity is not at all simple. One of my favorite sections in chapter two is, “Christianity is a fighting religion”. Lewis, because of his intellectual, rather than an emotional journey with Christianity allowed him to explore other worldviews through a lens of reason and empathy- in other words, he fought for his belief system. He summited the mountain of faith, not by slowly meandering through flowery fields and dipping in peaceful streams, but rather through wandering the unanswered desert and fighting the elements of the snowy alps of disbelief. 

Lewis worked out His faith- not with apathy, but with courage. He muses that “reality, in fact, is usually something you could not have guessed”. He wrestled with truth, despite black and white objectivity for truth, there are still complicated grey areas that deserve to be explored. For example, He argues that in order to call something unjust, you must have a standard of justice. In the same way that in order for something to be “evil” or “bad” you must have a standard for good. He uses this analogy to support his point, “Evil is a parasite, not an original thing”. Based on the ideology that bad is only a perversion of good. There is a solid argument that there is high power of good. 

My proposed conclusion based on the arguments presented is that Lewis could not have reached the Divine Shore of Objectivity without first wading through the Dirty Water of Disbelief. Lewis possesses the unique capacity to perceive the sacredness of Christ in every aspect of existence while also comprehending the hope of restoration and healing. The marriage of the sacred and the secular is the heart of redemption it is what will eventually melt our icy bones and breathe life into our flesh making us not less human- but instead fully human as God intended us to be. 

Direct quotes pulled from: Lewis, C. S. 2012. Mere Christianity. C. S. Lewis Signature Classic. London, England: William Collins.