I’ve long loved C.S. Lewis, though as I get older I gradually see that he is not the be-all, end-all fountain of Christian wisdom I may have believed while I was growing up. A book written by one of my college professors, Dr. John Beversluis, is being updated and will be reissued next year, and I await it eagerly. It purports to show that Lewis failed in his attempted rational defense of Christianity. Lewis’s premise was that nobody should accept Christianity if his best reasoning tells him it doesn’t make sense. Beversluis’s book promises to show that it doesn’t.

Victor Reppert at Dangerous Idea notes the upcoming release and both reasonably anticipates arguing Beversluis’s points and also reminds us that if Beversluis isn’t 100 percent right, at least he’s “a good antidote” to anybody who’s willing to wrap themselves in wholesale Lewis. But he’s wrong about Beversluis as “consummate Lewis-basher.”

How do I know without reading the book? And why do I so eagerly await a book that purports to show that one of my childhood heroes failed in the object of his writings? Simply this: in college I took a class from John Beversluis, on C.S. Lewis. He did not use his own book as a teaching tool in the course (I didn’t know the book existed until last month), I didn’t know he was an agnostic rather than a Christian until many weeks into the course, and I think it was in private conversation that he revealed this, rather than in class. In other words, he set out to teach a course on C.S. Lewis, and Lewis was what he taught–not Beversluis. In this academic climate, that’s somewhat remarkable, and in addition, it makes me far more receptive to what he has to say about Lewis–now that I’m aware of the book, now that Dr. Beversluis is retired–than I would have been as a wide-eyed undergrad.

Update: Speaking of wide-eyed undergrads, I wrote like one last night when I attributed the opinion of Beversluis as “Lewis-basher” to Victor Reppert. He was observing that many people think of Beversluis that way, not that he himself does. He observes below in the comments that he doesn’t share that opinion of Beversluis but that passages in Beversluis’s book can come across that way. Apologies and welcome, Victor.

… to Mr. and Mrs. SeeDubya, Baby SeeDub #1 and the new and shiny Baby SeeDub #2.

PSA to new moms in hospital: bend the nurses to your will. Your baby, your rules.

Kate has asked me to come on board at Electric Venom, and I’m honored to do so. Look for some cross-posts as well as different posts both here and there. Thanks, Kate!

Emmitt and Cheryl won.

I have been a wee little bit too invested in Dancing with the Stars the last couple of weeks, as it came down to the wire between Mario Lopez and Emmitt Smith. For a long time I was okay with both, thinking “Mario’s the better technical dancer, so that’s fine, he deserves it …” but in my little fangirl heart, Emmitt had it locked up. His earnestness in devoting himself to an unfamiliar discipline, his running back’s grace and footwork, his gorgeous smile, and his laid-back charm, dubbed “The Big Easy” by the judges, totally won me over. Mario is good, but everybody loves the underdog–Mario had a dance background and a little too much defiance in the early going. But what really tore Mario’s chances with me was his mimicking of Michael Jackson a few too many times. Dude, I know you grew up in that era; I did too, but please understand, Michael Jackson is done, forked, and totally disgusting, and idolizing him doesn’t win you points with any sensible fan.

But back to Emmitt. As good or better than watching him become an accomplished dancer, for me, was finding out a little bit about the person he is. I’ve grown to expect so little out of sports figures, and knew so little about Smith going into this show, that it was really nice to see that the career rushing champion is a genuinely good guy, a hard worker, and yes, a good role model. And major kudos to his partner, professional dancer Cheryle Burke, for making the most of his strengths and showing them off.

Nice work. And good show.

A forthcoming book, Who Really Cares by Arthur C. Brooks of Syracuse University, purports to demonstrate that “compassionate conservatism” is more than just a clever name when it comes to the private giving and volunteering of conservative citizens as opposed to their liberal counterparts.

I am not surprised.

Yes, really. Like fantasy football, except that they apparently don’t lose points for letting the opposition roll them. And like real Congress, except that if you don’t like how your MC is performing, you can swap him/her out over the weekend for somebody you think will do a better job. If introducing/passing legislation were the only rating needed to measure an MC’s capability, this page would be invaluable to voters. Real ones.

Support the troops, ladies.

Via Alarming News.

Music jumping genres. This is great. (h/t Allah at Hot Air, reminding you that if it’s acoustic, it’s “hippie.”) I suppose it would be funnier if I had known anything about the song or Outkast before I watched it, but since I didn’t, it was more musically impressive than funny, especially since I garnered from the context of the video what he had to work with going in. The original lyrics seem to consist of the idea that love is sex and thus not an exception to the adage “nothing lasts forever.” But since Mat Weddle of Obadiah Parker leaves out the overt sex stuff, the song morphs into a lament over being stuck in a relationship that is really over. Better song, to my way of thinking.

And since we’re on the subject, check out my favorites, Nickel Creek, and their stirring rendition of “Toxic,” performed originally, I am reliably informed, by Britney Spears. They did this when I saw them play last winter, too, but I am just too unhip to recognize Spears songs when I hear them and had to ask my neighbor in the audience. Didn’t stop me from enjoying watching Chris shake it, though. This YouTube version was the pick of a bad lot in the sense that it 1) had audio and video tracks synched up; 2) showed all of the band members (I always get a kick out of watching Sean on guitar, solid as a rock, while Chris hotdogs); 3) wasn’t blocked by somebody’s head in front. It’s not as close up as would be optimal, especially if you haven’t seen Nickel Creek before, but … c’est la vie. Enjoy.

This is cool. (h/t Bryan at Hot Air and Hot Air commenter RobertCSampson for the full ad.)

In contrast to this piece of ignorant tripe (h/t Mike Lief) signed by some of the usual suspects, including Sarandon and Penn, it is refreshing, to say the least, to see some of my favorites who know how to put the blame where it belongs. Particularly I was tickled to see the name of Joshua Malina on the list–he made me love him in Sports Night but unfortunately only made it to The West Wing just as I wrote it off as ER in the White House.

I wonder why ad signer Pat Sajak doesn’t write for Human Events any more? That piece pretty much sums up my view on celebrities preaching politics: Do it all you want, but don’t whine when it affects your popularity far more than it affects national policy.

Allah doesn’t believe they mean it. (See this comment thread.) I don’t believe they’d even bother unless they do mean it. They have nothing to lose by keeping silent, and much to lose by putting their names to that ad.

And what a charity. Via Whedonesqe.com comes the word that Adam Baldwin will auction off all of his shooting scripts from Firefly and Serenity, proceeds to benefit the Marine Corps–Law Enforcement Foundation, mission to “encourage the spiritual, moral, intellectual and physical development of children through education.” Adam Baldwin: stand-up guy in a pretty cunning hat.