Reflections on the Psalms

No knock on the Author who obviously is amazing and I actually congratulate him on tackling the topic. But how does on bring more to something as inherently beautiful and profound as the Psalms? I have been reading many peoples interpretations of the Psalms lately and I must say I prefer the original direct translation from the Hebrew and that way I get to interpret them myself. That is where the magic is. Somethings just can't be improved on and King David is one of them. They are Divine.

The content is fantastic because it's C.S. Lewis but this particular edition was very poorly typed. There were errors on every page which made it difficult to read. The copy we purchased had no copyright information aside from "Printed April 16, 2016". It felt as if someone had taken a different edition and decided to copy it but did an extremely bad job. I will be looking for a different copy from a trusted source. I was very disappointed in this copy.

I bought this book because of one chapter that was quoted on a radio program. I always find C.S Lewis works to be great. This one is not for the light reader. C.S goes a little deep into his own on this reflection of the Psalms. Still it is thought provoking and a good starting point for fearther review of the Psalms.

C.S. Lewis' thoughts on the Psalms are, like the rest of his writing, very carefully thought out. He finds nuggets of wisdom in places most commentators overlook. Over all, a very enjoyable & thought provoking work.

C.S. Lewis' thoughts on the Psalms are, like the rest of his writing, very carefully thought out. He finds nuggets of wisdom in places most commentators overlook. Over all, a very enjoyable & thought provoking work.

Don't buy this version of the book! I'd give it a zero if I could, but one is the lowest I could go. I originally started to read this book from the library and it is a great book. I ordered this version from the store and there are major problems with it - whole sentences are left out, all scripture references are replaced by some letters that make no sense at all, there is no copyright page. It makes me wonder if the store is selling something printed illegally. These things render this version worthless.

CS Lewis is always good but here he eschews the Christ-centred reading of the Psalms in favour of psychology and that results in very odd conclusions such as the presence of demonic lurking in the Psalms.

The reader needs to be aware of this and consult a Christ-centred reading of Psalms such as Patrick Reardon's Christ in the Psalms along with this book.

Probably my fault, but I was looking for a more detailed account of specific Psalms, rather than general aspects of all of the Psalms. A useful scholarly reference but not at all what I was looking for.

The book looked ok until I tried to read it. When opened, the binding immediately broke and split open. The pages started falling out. All the pages are there but it will be a challenge to read due to the poor condition of the book. It looks like a garage sale book that should have sold for a quarter.

C.S. Lewis is always a delight to read. This particularly thin work was originally recommended as “one of the best introductions to the Book of Psalms” by my Psalms professor in undergraduate–my professor was not mistaken. In Reflection on the Psalms, Lewis faces some of the most common conflictual or confounding impressions any reader deals with from the Psalter: angry shouts of judgments and curses, death, infatuations with Torah (law) and nature, and second (or spiritual) meanings and interpretations. Lewis is not an academic theologian–much less an Old Testament scholar. He is, however, extremely lucid and well-read, and that’s something. And, perhaps, that is what’s wanted and needed for most people reading Psalms devotionally. So, let this literary sage share his insights with you.

sooholee.wordpress

C.S. Lewis was a masterful writer. His views on the Psalms are delightful and challenging. He tackles the most violent and rather ugly parts of the Psalms. He doesn't talk about trees by water, but Babylonian babies' heads being beaten in. This is the greatest thing about this book. It is short and easily digestible.

Why only three stars? This is one of the worst typed books I have seen. It is covered with typos and random spaces, commas, letters and capitalizations. At one point in goes from justified left to right. Most of the time it is still readable, but there are times it is nearly impossible to decipher the mistakes with in this book. I am certain a high school student that gets a average of c's in English could do better than the person responsible for the atrociousness this book is.

This book deserves better and certainly C.S. Lewis deserves better. I recommend finding another copy of this book, if you can. Perhaps the Kindle version is better, but the paperback is a disgrace.

Bonhoeffer really drives you into appreciating the spiritual depth of the Psalms and their Christ centred significance. I found the book difficult to put down. A great spiritual read.

Tom Davis

Lewis is a master of finding imagery and analogies that connect emotionally and intellectually with the reader. His careful prose manages to capture the heart worship expressed and felt through the ritual worship described in the Psalms and draw it into the modern world of a farmer of simple, yet deep faith or even a boy who experiences the joys of Easter remarkably connected by chocolate eggs and Jesus arisen. I also appreciated his discussion of the 'Second Meanings' of Psalms, the imagery that he references, particularly that of an orchestra tuning their instruments in anticipation of the symphony itself.

There may be a few slight weaknesses to the work. C.S. Lewis at times seems to wander a bit taking a round about path to his point. Also he references a number of classical works that may not be as familiar to the modern reader. Finally, Reflections on the Psalms is a rather brief book and it is a pity to consider what additional treasures of insight may have be discovered had Lewis let his musings run longer.

C.S. Lewis states clearly in his introduction to Reflections on the Psalms that his purpose is not to write from a scholarly perspective, but rather "as one amateur to another." He also makes it clear that his work is written for the believer and not meant to be apologetic in nature. The result is a series of topics derived from musings in the Psalms themselves rather than technical or an exegetical work psalm by psalm.

Lewis does not avoid the weightier themes of the book of Psalms. He uses his open chapters to deal with the difficult topics found in the laments. In these chapters curses, death, and judgment are reflected upon. It is from these more difficult thoughts that Reflections on the Psalms then turns to explore brighter emotions in an exploration of the joys expressed in the writers in the Psalter. Lewis also addresses creation and praising before conluding with a discussion on how a Christian believer comes to the Psalms and particularly sees Christ and Christian meanings in this Jewish Scripture.
I believe that C.S. Lewis succeeds in his goal stated in the introduction. This volume is helpful reading for the layperson or one immersed in more technical approaches to the Psalms. Lewis manages to unlock the wonder and curiosity appropriate for Psalter in reflections of profound effect. An example is the modern man's tendency to judge the laments from a supposed ground of progressive or enlightened morality, but then be struck by the simple inquiry posed by Lewis of what we really mean when we comment to another the hope "he'll live to be sorry for it."

I want to make it clear that I am reviewing the quality of the grammar and how easy this specific version of this book is to read. The content of the book is wonderful! But I know C.S. Lewis is a better writer than what is in this book. It seems someone did a TERRIBLE job of transcribing it from an out-of-print or public domain version of the original. And by "TERRIBLE," I mean it seems like it was not proofread whatsoever... as if someone quickly typed along as they read and never bothered to give it a second glance to make sure it looked even remotely ok. Lewis's sometimes seemingly stream-of-consciousness and formal writing style, though insightful and beautiful, is challenging enough to follow in his original works. Adding misspelled words, punctuation in random places, and extraneous spacing between words or even letters makes this version almost unreadable. I'm not sure if it's the only version in print right now or not. If it is, it's worth trying to trudge through for Lewis's rich take on the Psalms. Although I'd still recommend borrowing one of the originals from a library or checking book resale shops. If there's any other version currently in print, seriously anything has to be better than this.

I enjoy Lewis and have read a good deal of his work. Overall I would say this book was pretty good, but I also feel there were some pretty substantial assumptions made in various places. I have difficulty with an anachronistic reading of Psalms from a latter developed doctrinal position. Not that I am a rightful antagonist, but in his explanation of Jesus' reference to Psalm 110:1 for example, Lewis states that Jesus' identification with the "lord" in this passage means that he was "in fact hinting at the mystery of the Incarnation by pointing out a difficulty which only it could solve." I believe this to be a misunderstanding and misrepresentation on multiple levels (which I will not go into at this time). To assert that the idea of the incarnation was being expressed by Jesus in relation to Psalm 110:1 even goes against the general outline of what Lewis was presenting regarding the role of the Psalms themselves. It does not fit with the scope of the Psalms, the Messianic/Davidic King (or any King of Israel for that matter), the suffering servant (as cited by Lewis from Psalm 22). It was still a worthwhile read, and like most of Lewis's work, there were some gems.

This edition does a terrible disservice to CS Lewis. Please buy one of the other editions. This one is littered with typos that appear to result from unchecked automatic character recognition from a legit edition. It has no copyright notice, no identification of the publisher, no Library of Congress information, and no print edition data. Footnotes at the bottom of a page on the other edition have been streamed inline in this edition in the middle of the sentence that carries over to the next page! I'm going to recommend to the store to stop offering this bootlegged affront to CS Lewis's legacy.

"The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom;
A good understanding have all those who do His commandments.
His praise endures forever." -- Psalm 111:10 (NKJV)

This is my first C.S. Lewis book, so I apologize for not being able to compare it to his other works. I can certainly attest that it's unlike any other book about the Bible that I've read to date.

Consider this statement on page 1: "This is not a work of scholarship. I am no Hebraist, no higher critic, no ancient historian, no archeologist. I write for the unlearned about things in which I am unlearned myself." He goes on to say that experts often focus on issues that beginners aren't even aware of. He wants to address the beginner's issues: ". . . I write as one amateur to another, talking about difficulties I have met, or lights I have gained, when reading the Psalms, with the hope that this might at any rate interest, and sometimes help, other inexpert readers. I am 'comparing notes', not presuming to instruct."

I was attracted to the book by the opportunity to discuss it after church services during a summer teaching series on the Psalms. From reading what Professor Lewis wrote, I can see that people bring many different reactions to the Psalms. Having just completed a year-long course on the Psalms, I was fascinated to see that Professor Lewis didn't bring up a single subject discussed in that course.

I think he succeeded in dealing with the new Psalm reader's issues. One of the reasons I've been studying the Psalms is that their contents often used to puzzle me. Now I realize that many of them are the sort of uncensored prayers of the sort that we make all the time, rather than perfect doctrine.

The sections are broken down into sections on "judgment", cursings, death, "the fair beauty of the Lord", "sweeter than honey", connivance, nature, praising, second meanings, Scripture, and second meanings in Psalms.

The comments are far from encyclopedic, often focusing on just one perspective or aspect of a theme. For instance, the section on judgments primarily contrasts the ancient Jewish rejoicing over expecting to receive justice for what others have done unjustly on Earth with the current Christian perspective as seeing justice mainly in terms of being guilty of sins oneself.

The observations don't necessarily come out where you might expect a Christian to. For instance, Professor Lewis is concerned that we not lose having a strong emotional reaction to evil doing, even though Christ calls us to love our enemies and do good to them. He is strongly appalled by those who can become conditioned to evil, even if they don't follow it.

The book abounds with sympathy for the writers and the proclaimers of the Psalms. I could feel a lot of love for those who are different from Professor Lewis in his comments. It's a good lesson for all Christians. In fact, he's a harsher critic of people in the 20th century than those in the days before Christ was born in Bethlehem.

The book raises enough fundamental issues of proper behavior in relation to God that anyone who reads it will justifiably squirm. It's good to be convicted by stylish phrasings, and I certainly felt that way at many points . . . especially in the temptation to get along with the rich, powerful, and admired . . . who aren't following God.

The section on praise will help many appreciate that praising God is for our benefit, not His.

The final sections on reading Christian theology into the Old Testament will help many new Christians to better appreciate the proper perspective to bring to reading any part of Scripture. It's a very fine discussion with good examples.

Praise God for this book that can help many people to gain more from reading the Psalms!

This book has a refreshing honesty and candor. Lewis immediately states that this writing is not scholarly, definitive, or all-encompassing. He writes as one simple Christian to another, seeking a better understanding by pondering problems he has discovered and sharing insights he has gained while reading the Psalms.

Lewis writes about a variety of topics in the Psalms that strike him as significant. First, he notes the difference in the Psalms's presentation of divine judgment and the Christian's understanding of it. Christians usually think of the dies irae judgment when God separates the sheep from the goats or the wheat from the weeds at the end of time, an act full of fear and awe. The Psalms look at judgment as winning a civil lawsuit--the unjustly persecuted or deprived has their day in court and their recompense. The Psalms either praise this when it happens or implore God to make it happen. The contrast of views does not mean one is right and one is wrong; rather, a greater richness can be discovered in both views.

Other topics he looks at are death in the Psalms (which don't seem to embody the fully developed Christian notion of an afterlife), the sometimes shocking, sometimes juvenile cursing of enemies/desire for revenge on persecutors (even Psalm 23 wants God to set up a festive table in front of enemies, as if to rub their noses in it), the love for God as embodied in nature and in temple worship, the love of the law as something truly to embrace as joyful and not to fear as punishing, and several other ideas or themes.

The book is delightfully accessible. Lewis uses very down-to-earth language and explanations. It's as if he was talking with you rather than lecturing at you. He fosters a personal relationship through his writing. Isn't that what we as Christians look for in reading the Bible, to find a more personal relationship with God Himself? The book helps the reader be a better Christian by better knowing God through the Psalms.

Here's a sample where Lewis discusses the different interpretations of why certain Pagan myths are similar to the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ:

And what are we to say of those gods in various Pagan mythologies who are killed and rise again and who thereby renew or transform the life of their worshippers [sic] or of nature? The odd thing is that here those anthropologists who are most hostile to our faith would agree with many Christians in saying "The resemblance is not accidental". Of course the two parties would say this for different reasons. The anthropologists would mean: "All these superstitions have a common source in the mind and experience, especially the agricultural experience, of early man. Your myth of Christ is like the myth of Balder because it has the same origin. The likeness is a family likeness." The Christians would fall into two schools of thought. The early Fathers (or some of them), who believed that Paganism was nothing but the direct work of the Devil, would say: "The Devil has from the beginning tried to mislead humanity with lies. As all accomplished liars do, he makes his lies as like the truth as he can; provided they lead man astray on the main issue, the more closely they imitate truth the more effective they will be. That is why we call him God's Ape; he is always imitating God. The resemblance of Adonis to Christ is therefore not at all accidental; it is the resemblance we expect to find between a counterfeit and the original, between imitation pearls and pearls." Other Christians who think, as I do, that in mythology divine and diabolical and human elements (the desire for a good story), all play a part, would say: "It is not accidental. In the sequence of night and day, in the annual death and rebirth of crops, in the myths which these processes gave rise to, in the strong, if half-articulate, feeling (embodied in many Pagan 'Mysteries') that man himself must undergo some sort of death if he would truly live, there is already a likeness permitted by God to that truth on which all depends. The resemblance between these myths and the Christian truth is no more accidental than the resemblance between the sun and the sun's reflection in a pond, or that between a historical fact and the somewhat garbled version of it which lives in popular report, or between the trees and hills of the real world and the trees and hills in our dreams." Thus all three views alike would regard the "Pagan Christs" and the true Christ as things really related and would find the resemblance significant. [pp. 105-107]

I consider this one of Lewis' lesser works, or minor works, perhaps because it is not on one theme, so it is not as cohesive as other books. Lewis admits, at the beginning, "I write for the unlearned about things on which I am unlearned myself." He writes as a schoolboy discussing the topic with classmates, not as a teacher who knows so much he doesn't understand the problem. In other words, it is not so much theology as reader's reaction.

The problem is how to read the Psalms, how to interpret some of the statements. Lewis starts with the difficult themes, such as expression of hate. For instance, the cursing of Psalm 109, verses 7-11:

When he shall be judge, let him be condemned: and let his prayer become sin.
Let his days be few; and let another take his office.
Let his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow.
Let his children be continually vagabonds, and beg: let them seek their bread also out of their desolate places.
Let the extortioner catch all that he hath; and let the strangers spoil his labor.

Lewis points out, for the contemporary Christian, this is not a justification for hatred. Rather we should recognize the sentiment to repent of, and the harm done - the hatred caused - by injustice. To quote Lewis, "Take from a man his freedom or his goods and you may have taken his innocence, almost his humanity, as well."

The next chapter, Death, emphasizes a recurring lesson: beware of reading the Psalms from the contemporary Christian perspective, take into account the context in which they were written. This relates to the chapter on death as Christians think of the eternal life that awaits. In the Psalms there is no eternal life after death.

There are two chapters on Second Meanings, which justify contemporary readings and the Christian perspective. Reading some of the verses as prophetic of Christ is not wrong. For instance, Psalm 45 anticipates the Nativity. But the Psalmist may not have known it was prophecy at the time of writing it. For Lewis it is not surprising that the words would take on more meaning with time as 1) he believes God guided the writers of the scriptures, and 2) he believes in the mythopoeic, a term he uses in other essays to describe the truths expressed in myths, including pagan and other religions. Christ not only fulfills Old Testament scripture, but the pagan by "transcending and abrogating it."

In the chapter, Scripture, Lewis writes a passage important to reading all of his works:

"I have been suspected of being what is called a Fundamentalist. That is because I never regard any narrative as unhistorical simply on the ground that it includes the miraculous. Some people find the miraculous so hard to believe that they cannot imagine any reason for my acceptance of it other than a prior belief that every sentence of the Old Testament has historical or scientific truth. But this I do not hold, any more than St. Jerome did when he said that Moses described Creation "after the manner of a popular poet" (as we should say, mythically) or than Calvin did when he doubted whether the story of Job were history or fiction. The real reason why I can accept as historical a story in which a miracle occurs is that I have never found any philosophical grounds for the universal negative proposition that miracles do not happen."

C.S. Lewis wasn't always a Christian, and even when he became one, he had some intellectual difficulties with certain aspects of Scripture. This book is a small compendium of topics and ideas that explain how he came to terms with the theology he found expressed in the Psalms. It's not to say that everyone has such difficulties, nor that his way of looking at the problems is best or even divinely inspired, but, as usual, C.S. Lewis' writings are honest and relatively thorough in describing his understanding of the issues involved. This book is one of the shortest that C.S. Lewis' wrote, so I just bought it to complete my collection of his books. It is not really one of his best writings, but I found it to be worth the reading. I would recommend this for anyone who struggles with the temperaments found in the book of Psalms, as it may help to assuage these difficulties.

Have you ever struggled with the Psalms where the author calls down curses on his enemy? Have you ever struggled with Psalms about God judging others? How about Psalm 137:9 where a blessing is pronounced on those who take babies and dash their brains out against the rocks?

C. S. Lewis deals with all these issues in the Psalms, and more. As with everything he writes, he tackles the issues head on, and writes about them with lucidity and grace. And there are no pat answers or easy solutions from C. S. Lewis. He makes you think, and at the end of the chapter, your mind is gasping for breath after the shock of seeing something in a whole new way.

The book closes with three chapters on what C. S. Lewis calls "Second Meanings in Scripture." These three chapters alone are worth the price of the book as they provide a big-picture overview of how to read and view Scripture, and give us insight into what C. S. Lewis thought about the Word of God and specifically, about the fulfillment of prophecies.

This is a challenging, insightful, and thought-provoking book. But does C. S. Lewis write anything else?

The Reflections on the Psalms is C S Lewis's most deliberate attempt at Biblical commentary and theology. His approach in this book is to examine several common themes among the 150 Psalms and draw from them systematic and practical theological implications from these poems. The author makes the statement at the beginning of the work that he is not a professional theologian or writing as an active pastor. He claims his writing to be nothing more than the writings of a layman who is highly skilled in literary study and skilled in a nonprofessional way in theological interpretation.

In Reflections on the Psalms, Lewis does not work through the themes of the book in sequence but highlights the major themes using the literary background to draw insight into the book. At the end of the book, his only objective is to have other laymen understand the themes that appear in the Psalms. He gives background to the near-eastern culture and theology, but what he most relies on is his application of literary devices to the Psalms so that readers will better place the Psalms in their proper context. His analysis of the Psalms from a poetic point of view and his struggles with some of the more difficult sayings in the Psalms makes this book an educated response and analysis to the Biblical hymnbook.

First, it is not an apologetic work or even a thorough review of the Psalms. Secondly, the work draws heavily on his knowledge of literary devices and even on some methods of culture. That said, he divides up his grouping of the Psalms into two different sections, the negative and the positive.

From a literary perspective, he goes to great lengths to remind the reader of the concept of parallelism in the Psalms. The only form of poetry that translates and still keeps its poetic nature, parallelism is common in much of the ancient world and Lewis notes this.

For modern society, this book seeks to explain how the justice of God matches up with what often appears to be contradictory New Testament claims about the mercy of God. Modern secular society, by its nature, does not worship God. By explaining the complexity of the Psalms, Lewis is trying to open up modern men to the need to worship, and to see how worship affects every part of a man's existence.

From a laymen's perspective, this book assists the believer by explaining the difficult, less merciful parts of the Psalms while opening up new avenues of depth in praise to God. The need of praise to God is stated in a positive light, because much of the modern church portrays worship in a dull and heart - separated fashion.

In a modern world with a rational, language oriented bent (like the one that was partially created by a Christian world view), the church can be quick to divide up the secular and sacred. This book is a solid reminder that the Psalms have no such division. The natural world, the religious rites, family life, the enemies within and without are all subject to the realm of worship and application of praise towards God. T

I begin my review of C. S. Lewis' Reflections on the Psalms by admitting unashamedly that I have been a fan of Mr. Lewis' work for much of my life. The mere thought of critically reviewing the work of such a great man seemed daunting only a few short months ago as I began my seminary studies. Since that time, I have (more or less) become accustomed to both the critical review of Biblical texts and what others write about those texts. I say that with the utmost respect for the much more learned authors and scholars I have the privilege of learning from. As has been said, we stand on the shoulders of giants.

In the first sentence of his book, Lewis plainly states, "this is not a work of scholarship." Though one could certainly make an argument against such a statement, I take Mr. Lewis at his word when he says he writes for "the unlearned about things in which" he is unlearned himself. Lewis continues his eight page introductory chapter by providing vivid examples of how the unlearned may learn from each other. This is a familiar approach that Lewis uses throughout the book. Lewis moves from one aspect of the Psalms to another, in no particular order, smoothly throughout the book while clearly explaining his view on each topic discussed. It is certainly possible to disagree with Mr. Lewis' views of the Psalms; one can do so with the benefit of knowing exactly where he stands and why on each topic. Though his use of Anglican terms may be, at times, a bit burdensome for unchurched readers, Lewis skillfully accomplishes what he set out to do in this book.

Lewis first addresses judgment in the Psalms and his surprise about how the psalmists talk about the judgments of God. He goes on to describe how the ancient Jews, much like Christians today, see God's judgment in terms of an earthly court. The difference in the view of the ancient Jews and Christians of today is that Christians view this as a criminal case with himself as the defendant while the ancient Jew saw God's judgment as a civil case with the Jew as the plaintiff. As one would expect from Lewis, he prefers the Christian view of judgment and goes into great detail defending this position.

Lewis follows his treatment of God's judgment with his views on the cursing passages found in the Psalms. As any student of the Scriptures knows all too well the Psalms are full of pleas to God to curse someone who the Psalter deems deserving. Lewis points out that this is true even in some of the most beloved of the Psalms such as 143. It is in Lewis' reflections on how these verses came to be that he finds fault in man. That is to say that what the men did to harm the Psalter is far worse for creating a new temptation or, worse still, a new sin in the life of another. Lewis also points out that the reaction of the Psalmists to injury is equally wrong although it is a natural reaction.

Following God's judgment and the cursings found in the Psalms, Lewis next addresses death in chapter four. He expresses his belief that the much of the Old Testament there is little or no belief in a future life. Lewis explains that this is, perhaps, part of God's plan in revealing Himself to man and to have done so sooner may have hampered man's ability to learn to adore God and seek Him. Lewis' knowledge of the history of ancient religions and cultures shines through as he ably makes comparisons to other belief systems at the time the Psalms were written.

After first dealing with more unpleasant topics (something for which he admits a preference), Lewis moves on to the beauty of the Lord. Lewis describes in his characteristic detail how experiences with the Lord in many instances referred to an event in the Temple. He also goes on to point out the difference between truly worshipping God and merely enjoying what Christians today might refer to as a good service. The ancient Jews likely would make no such distinction though, as Lewis points out, it is necessary and inevitable much like when a child realizes that the candy they receive at Easter has little to do with the significance of our Risen Lord.
It is difficult for the modern Christian to imagine the Law being sweeter than honey but Lewis's next chapter brings to the reader's attention that this is exactly the view ancient Jews held. A friend of Lewis' once told him that he thought it implied the satisfaction that the ancient Jew felt knowing he had obeyed the Law. Another view of what the ancient Jews thought of the Law could be compared to someone today expressing their love of history. This could be innocent enough but could also lead to other problems. Lewis' time is well spent unpacking his thoughts on this topic.

Chapter seven finds Lewis dealing with the subject of connivance (a topic many pastors today should consider for an upcoming Sunday morning sermon). First Lewis addresses the lack of penalties for bad behavior in society (oh how Mr. Lewis would be appalled to see how much further things have fallen since his death). Second, Lewis discusses how the problem of connivance is present in the lives of Christians. Lewis concludes this chapter by expressing his surprise in the fact that the Psalter mentions sins of the tongue far more often than any other even though the modern reader assumes, like Lewis himself did at one time, that ancient society was far more violent than the civility we enjoy in our modern times.

Next, the reader finds Lewis addressing the seemingly simply topic of nature. Of course, when discussing Scripture (Old or New Testament) there is little that is truly simple. Lewis reminds his readers that the ancient Jews lived in an agriculturally focused society. When the Psalmist talks about the country in his poetry he is most likely referring to the world at large. God and nature are clearly distinct with God having created nature. Lewis uses this as segue into a larger discussion about creation. He brings to the reader's attention the fact that other religions at that time did not have the type of creation story found in the Old Testament. Lewis goes on to make mention of God's forgiveness in the times of ignorance (Acts 17:30), even suggesting that God may have accepted a gesture of homage to the moon in those times. Lewis again demonstrates his knowledge of history including the Egyptian Pharaoh Akhenaton's Monotheism in his discussion.

Expressing his hope that the chapter will be unnecessary, Lewis continues with a short discussion on the topic of praising. He reminds his readers what praise is and why it is necessary. Of course our Lord commands us to praise Him but this command is not out of a sense of narcissism. Rather, in recognition of the fact that we delight to praise what we enjoy, our praise not only expresses that joy but completes the enjoyment. Lewis further reminds us that this is true even when that praise is inadequate.
Moving on to a more difficult topic, Lewis discusses second meanings and how they are applied to Old Testament Scriptures by the modern Christian. As an author well versed in the use of allegory in his works of fiction, Lewis' approach to the second meanings of Old Testament Scripture is interesting. Lewis makes the case that though the Psalter and other writers of the Old Testament did not intentionally have a dual meaning in mind at the time of their writing but perhaps God did. Lewis goes a step further and suggests that were that second meaning put to those writers today they may even admit their words meant more than they realized at the time.

As the end of Lewis' short work draws near, he discusses Scripture, what it is, where it came from, and plainly accepts the possibility that some of the Biblical stories, such as Genesis, may have been derived from earlier, pagan sources. Lewis makes it clear that if this occurred, it did so with aid from "the Father of Lights". To help clarify, Lewis carefully defines what "derived from" means. A description of other pagan views of how things came to be is included. Lewis then reminds his readers of a simpler reason for accepting the Old Testament Scriptures as true: we are "committed to it in principle by Our Lord Himself".

Lewis closes by returning to second meanings focusing on those meanings as they pertain to the Psalms themselves. Here Lewis discusses at length the various Scriptures modern Christians claim clearly point to Christ long before the Incarnation. Here, too, Lewis also tells us that there need not necessarily be a second meaning but rather simply a few additional words added to Old Testament Scripture in the New Testament that complete an incomplete thought as in Psalm 84:10. Lewis concludes with his hope that we will one day be freed from the bonds of time.

A number of strengths can be mentioned with little effort on the part of any reviewer. First, Lewis' writing style is gentle and easy for even someone with little more than a passing interest in the material to understand fully. Second, Lewis does an excellent job of articulating each of his points and providing plenty of examples in support of his positions/beliefs. Third, Lewis also demonstrates a very broad knowledge of history that seems lacking in other works I have had the pleasure of reading during my seminary studies. Fourth, Lewis is accepting of other notions about the origins of the Bible but always turns back to God as its author in one way or another almost before his reader realizes he has done so. I could go on but to do so would be nothing more of a reminder of the fact I stated at the beginning of this review: I am a fan of C. S. Lewis.

More difficult, at least for me, is to discuss weaknesses in Reflections on the Psalms. The task is made somewhat easier given the fact that the book was written more than 50 years ago. Lewis begins by stating that his book is not a work of scholarship. From the view of a seminary student reading the work 50 years after its publication, I disagree. As Lewis mentions in his discussion about second meanings, perhaps it was not intended to be a scholarly work but it could certainly be used as a primer to a host of topics, both Christian and secular alike. Also, even in his time, Lewis' choice of language is questionable. For example, rather than using the term prig, thief would have suited his first readers and the generations that have followed much better. I will concede that it is possible that such words were commonly spoken in 1950's England but stand by the assertion that Lewis' readers may have benefited from using more common language. Perhaps it is difficult for an Oxford professor to "dumb down" his language after having taught at that distinguished institution for so many years prior to authoring this book.

Given the stated strengths and weaknesses of Mr. Lewis' work, it is easy for me to conclude that Reflections of the Psalms accomplished exactly what the author intended. Though I do not buy into Lewis' stated belief that he is unlearned writing for the unlearned. Lewis was widely recognized as a lay theologian in his day. Lewis' readability and gentle writing style is not unduly hampered by his use of uncommon words though. Throughout the book, Lewis always steers the reader back to Our Lord. Employing diverse sources such as pagan religious rites and ancient literature and multiple translations of the Biblical text, Lewis accomplishes his goal by skillfully guiding his readers through his personal views on the Psalms. There is obviously more that has been written of the Psalms and Lewis could likely have written much more himself. The seminary student, faithful church-goers, the curious and those casually interested in Christianity would all do well to take the time to read this book.

Written near the end of his life, Reflections on the Psalms reflects Lewis' subtlety, insight, and intellect. His prose sparkles and dances as he explains his perception of the Psalms and the Psalmists on multiple levels. He does not lecture as much as he invites you into a conversation about faith, scripture, wonder, and, at times, perplexities. I read this volume 45 years ago and rereading it has been a fresh delight.

The publisher of this version was and is probably more interested in making a quick buck. It is clear that OCR has been used. The publisher didn't even attempt to correct the annoying number of clear typos and bad filling. A very, very bad job.
It doesn't affect the content but it definitely distracts from focussing on that content. Just look at a scan of these two pages.

I was a bit confused when I started reading "Reflections on the Psalms", because at the beginning I felt C.S. Lewis was being a bit harsh on the Psalmists, particularly his discussions about their singing about their anger. I can kind of see now that maybe he was sympathising with his readers, who might find those kind of Psalms difficult. He does say early on that he is kind of writing this book, not as a teacher, but as advice from one student of the Psalms to another. Still, there were some moments at the beginning when I thought, being written in 1958 (A year or so after he'd finished the Chronicles of Narnia) the success might have gone to his head, and he was pleasing people and trying especially hard to say that he felt the same way the Christians who read him felt about the angry and confronting Psalms. I thought at the time, wasn't this the author who had harsh punishments for the enemies in "Perelandra" and "That Hideous Strength"? In "That Hideous Strength" not even Lord Feverstone got away (who I thought was rather half-hearted in his villainy and deserved a second chance). Surely, I thought, he would understand being annoyed at one's enemies. And he does, having read the whole book, he definitely does. It's just the way he words this understanding that bugs me. Muddied the waters a bit for me. There's a couple of short references to his views on evolution too, which I wished he'd explained more fully. As it is, they sort of got a bit in the way. There's a metaphor he uses about a fish who is to become a land animal, and I'm wondering why he used it...

Still, there's a lot of great points in this book, particularly about how the Israelites may have seen the world, God, the wildlife around them, joy and their sense of justice. There's little asides about Egypt, Greece, Rome and World War II that I found interesting too. He talks a bit about double meanings in the Psalms, and though I found his theories of how they came to be a bit hard to follow, its nice to have read him. I like his stories better than his studies, but still it was a nourishing book I think. Plus, you get some Psalms in the back, which is handy, and an index of the Psalms with their Latin names. You can look them up in the back when he talks about them in the book.

I'm looking forward to reading more from him.

Reflections on the Psalms has become one of the most significant books in my life. I've read it three times through in as many years. Ostensibly, it is a book about the Psalms. In reality, it is much more than that. It offers a way of understanding Scripture that manages to make sense of what has increasingly bewildered me in the Bible--a framework for navigating things that heretofore seemed entirely irreconcilable.

Lewis opens this short volume by posturing himself as just your typical layman--someone who is trying to understand the Bible without the benefit of a seminary education. But after assuring the reader that it is "not a work of scholarship," he goes on to run circles around the contemporary seminarians who fill most Christian bookshelves today. There may be no such thing as a truly original thinker, but Lewis is as close as you'll find. Nothing feels tired or contrived; rather, it is simple, unassuming brilliance. And while C.S. Lewis is no stranger to such glowing praise, I wonder how many of those issuing the praise have actually read much of what he wrote.

Lewis, after all, holds positions that many evangelicals would call heretical--not least of which is his view of Scripture. On the other hand, Lewis' influence on pastors like John Piper and Tim Keller can hardly be overstated. The doctrine of "Christian Hedonism" was articulated in this book long before the publication of Desiring God--which I also count among the more significant books of my life. Lewis wrote in his section on praising that all believers are moving towards the eternal condition in which glorifying God and enjoying God are one and the same thing--and though we fall short of such union "99.9 percent" of the time, that is the ideal God is drawing us into.

So, what is Lewis' position on the authority and inspiration of scripture? Simply put, Lewis believes that "all Holy Scripture is in some sense--though not all parts of it in the same sense--the word of God." His is a small "i" inspiration, not a big "I" Inspiration. Why the distinction? Because, as Lewis puts it, "The human qualities of the raw materials show through." What are these human qualities? "Naivety, error, contradiction, even (as in the cursing Psalms) wickedness." The total result, he believes "is not 'the Word of God' in the sense that every passage, in itself, gives impeccable science or history." Rather, "It carries the Word of God; and we (under grace, with attention to tradition and to interpreters wiser than ourselves, and with the use of such intelligence and learning as we may have) receive that word from it not by using it as an encyclopedia or an encyclical but by steeping ourselves in its tone or temper and so learning its overall message."

Lewis continues:

"To a human mind [the Bible]... seems, no doubt, an untidy and leaky vehicle. We might have expected, we may think we should have preferred, an unrefracted light giving us ultimate truth in systematic form... One can respect, and at moments envy, both the Fundamentalist's view of the Bible and the Roman Catholic's view of the Church. But there is one argument which we should beware of using for either position: God must have done what is best, this is best, therefore God has done this... We may observe that the teaching of Our Lord Himself, in which there is no imperfection, is not given us in that cut-and-dried, fool-proof, systematic fashion we might have expected or desire. He wrote no book. We have only reported sayings, most of them uttered in answer to questions, shaped in some degree by their context... He uses paradox, proverb, exaggeration, parable, irony; even (I mean no irreverence) the "wisecrack". He utters maxims which, like popular proverbs, if rigorously taken, may seem to contradict one another... He hardly ever gave a straight answer... Descending lower, we find a somewhat similar difficulty with St. Paul. I cannot be the only reader who has wondered why God, having given him so many gifts, withheld from him (what would to us seem so necessary for the first Christian theologian) that of lucidity and orderly exposition."

If such remarks strike you as blasphemous, I invite you to read the book. If such remarks begin to scratch an itch that gnaws at you with increasing fervor, I invite you to read the book. If you're not yet familiar enough with Scripture to feel the tension Lewis addresses, give it a few more years, then read the book. Above all, read the Bible, then read this book!

This was a lovely book: not what I thought it'd be and all the better for it. Lewis's clear and reassuring insights into Christianity here combine with his adroit literary criticism, making this one of his most "formal" books--this is true despite his typical disclaimers about its seriousness or depth at the beginning. It is not so much a set of "postcard" or fortune cookie reflections, as might be found in various mediation books, as a thoughtful pondering of the Psalms' formal characteristics.

Beginning with the elements and characteristics of the Psalms that he finds most troublesome--"to polish off the nasty things first and leaves the titbits for the end"--Lewis looks at themes and recurring subjects without ever forgetting that the Psalms are poems, and Jewish poems at that. He weaves historical contextualization and a keen understanding of poetics into his frankly Christian assessment. For my money, the late chapters in the book on "Second Meanings" and "Scripture" are worth the price of the book. Lewis is very helpful on "reading too much" into scripture, and on appreciating the subtleties of scriptural interpretation generally.

It ends raggedly and abruptly, and there were plenty of things I wish Lewis had discussed more fully. But so excellent and helpful was the book that what I really wish is that he had done this kind of examination with more books of the Bible. Lewis had such a remarkable gift for articulating the common misgivings and doubts of believers, and for finding memorable and plausible ways of answering them.

It's a shame that so many of the people who enjoy Lewis's theological works never read his enlightening discussion of the Psalms. This book does not have the polemic approach of some of his other works. This is (by Lewis's own admission) not a work of scholarship, being more like one schoolboy comparing notes with another in describing the difficulties met and joys gained in reading the Psalms. Lewis notes that the Psalms are poems, intended to be sung, and not doctrinal treatises on which to base a system of theology. He selects various psalms for his discussions, enlightening them with his usual good sense, using illustrations from daily life and the literary world. Lewis's approach is far more helpful than most others who comment on the Psalms and should be read with interest by those familiar with this part of the Bible.

It had been awhile since I read any CS Lewis when I picked up this book. It is much different than others I have read, but it was quite enjoyable. Instead of analyzing specific Psalms in detail, Lewis takes a more thematic approach. This method allows him to connect the dots between specific Psalms, and other passage of Scripture as well.

Overall, Lewis does a tremendous job of making his points, and highlighting the fact that the Psalms are poems, and not doctrinal statements. Although I do not agree with all of his conclusions, Lewis really does make you think. I appreciate the fact that I felt like I had completed a successful journey through the book of Psalms after reading the book. It really opened my eyes to some new insights - which is refreshing.

If you like CS Lewis, or are interested in learning more about the Book of Psalms, then I highly recommend this book. You will see something there that you did not see before.

The first time I read this book, many years ago, I was bothered by what I took as Lewis' disrespectful approach to the OT. One chapter of the book is called "Cursings," and in it Lewis forthrightly notes his initial impression that "the Jews are much more vindictive and vitriolic than the Pagans." While he finds something of great value (even refreshing) in their honest anger at injustice, (see Rene Girard's The Scapegoat for a fascinating perspective on violence and religion) some passages he still labels "diabolical." In the following chapter, "Death in the Psalms," Lewis frankly admits that most of the psalmists did not appear to know about heaven and hell. And in his chapter on "Scripture," he admits to the presence of "naivite, error, contradiction, even wickedness," in the OT.
I did not like this. Nor did I know enough about nature poetry and paganism, monotheism in other cultures, or Meditteranean cultures, to appreciate all his insights.
What I think I did appreciate, and still do, was the way in which Lewis explains the poetry of the Psalms, the "beauty of the Law," (as in Psalm 119), love of nature, "second meanings" in the Psalms, and most of all, the life-enhancing chapter called "A Word about Praising." John Piper developed this chapter into a whole theology. (See Confessions of a Christian Hedonist.) But the most poetic explanation lies here: "I had never noticed that all enjoyment spontaneously overflows into praise . . . I had not noticed how the humblest, and at the same time the most balanced and capacious, minds, praised most, while cranks, misfits and malconents praised least . . . Praise almost seems to be inner health made audible . . . The Psalmists in telling everyone to praise God are doing what all men do when they speak of what they care about."
That chapter is one of the most enlightening and enchanting (in the literal sense) series of marks that have ever been made on paper, I think. Lewis works a powerful counter-spell to the curse of the reductionists, whom he soundly defeats in argument, re-enchanting the world with the glory of God. I see Lewis' idea confirmed every day -- when my children call me to see a funny scene in a cartoon, or a beautiful sea shell on the beach, for example.
What I found on my first reading of this book remains with me, and grows as I learn more of life. I've also come to appreciate Lewis' take on Scripture, though I am not sure he is completely right. Lewis differs from both skeptic and inerracist in that he makes no a priori assumptions, either that there are no mistakes in Scripture, or that God cannot do miracles. This allows him to be frank and take a truly empirical approach. His conclusion is that the Bible is inspired not like the Koran is said to be, written word-for-word in heaven before time began, but as "the same sort of material as any other literature . . . taken into the service of God's word." Those who see only a human literature are like illiterates who see only ink blots on paper, and are unable to see a poem. Lewis also hints that the best pagan philosophy and poetry can be "taken up" into God's revelation in a similar, though less authoritative, manner.
If all that gives you the impression that Lewis covers a lot of territory, with little detailed discussion of most individual psalms, that's true.
Author, Jesus and the Religions of Man

C.S. Lewis points out some very interesting facts and shows you his perspective on the psalms. He uses several different aspects to review such as their view of death, afterlife, suffering, etc. He points out that the Psalms are songs and should be interprated with that fact in mind. That alone adds a new perspective to the Psalms. He also makes it clear that the Psalms are not neccessarily to be viewed from a Christian perspective because the writers were not Christians.

The only downside I can see in the book is C.S. Lewis' writing style. He supposes his readers know certain historical figures and are versed in numerous literary writings on certain subjects. If you are not a person who reads these types of things all the time it may come difficult for you. Either way you will still get something out of it. Many time Christians, such as myself, try to make something in the Bible what we want it to be, and I believe we have done that to the Psalms over and over again. Have a read!

a neat book to read, i have long liked C S Lewis as a religious thinker, he is able to explain the Christian theology very well. the Mere Christianity should be given out at churches as the first book along with the Bible to read to explain what it means to be Christian. i seem to have just bought a whole handful of Lewis's books this month, and i will read them all for the rest of this year.

In one of this most enlightening books, Lewis deals with difficulties he has met and joys he has gained in reading the Psalms. He points out that the Psalms are poems, intended to be sung, not doctrinal treatises, nor even sermons. And they must be read as poems to be understood. He proceeds with his characteristic grace and lucidity to guide readers through both the form and the meanings of these much beloved passages in the Bible. This is the first time that in print Lewis attempts to deal at length with one particular part of the Bible. High recommended.

I love reading C.S. Lewis’ books so much. He is a real joy to read. His writings are both enjoyable and intellectually stimulating, and this book fits that description.

In this book, C.S. Lewis looks at the different themes discussed in the Psalms, and addresses them chapter by chapter. In this way, the chapters don’t really build upon each other, however it still makes for a good read, with classic Lewis insight.

C S Lewis comes through again! There is so much in this book each chapter could stand alone. I thought perhaps this would be a little boring but Lewis is so good that this is quickly becoming one of my Lewis favorites! Great read by a GREAT author!

This is a review of the audiobook version. So, knowing it was Lewis, I should have known the text would be a little bit too involved to listen to without the actual book in front of me.

The narrator's droning monotone can detract from the text. I find him a little difficult to listen to, although I did adjust to it within about ten minutes of listening.

Classic Lewis to be sure. He's happy to admit early on that he's no expositional Bible teacher. Written in layman's terms, it's insightful and thought-provoking. Worth the read if you're spending time reading and/or studying the Psalms.

Most of the time I love C. S. Lewis. Even when I disagree with him he provides food for thought. However, I was cringing through most of this book. Lewis did not hold an especially "high" view of Scripture, and his belief in dynamic inspiration (the Bible contains divine truth, but is by no means free of human errors) is very much on display in this book. He also accepts ideas derived from higher criticism in how he describes the development of the Jewish religion, the mechanics of typeology in the messianic Psalms, etc.

The chapter on praise was excellent and though-provoking, but that and the introduction were the only parts of the book that I found to be worth reading. The assumption of an error-prone Bible and quasi-pagan Jewish religious development heavily color the exposition in most other parts of the book. If you believe the whole Bible to be equally the Word of God, this book probably isn't worth your time or money.

Again, the biggest problem I have with Lewis is that he doesn't apply to same status to some parts of the Bible as he does to other parts like the words of Christ. I think he does a good job at getting people, mostly Western people, to realize that the Psalms aren't written in "their language" but in Hebrew type. However, he sometimes takes to the extremes what to read into them...even after an entire chapter on being careful on not reading into any book things just because you can. Far and above, my biggest slight against Lewis in this book is that if you're going to take God speaking truth in the Gospels than why not Jonah and Genesis? I do not know if Lewis ever revised his thinking on these subjects but he falls from his logic when he ascribes to God the ability, if not to lie then to tell half-truths.

Getting back to Lewis' main point of the book, the reason why I didn't care for this one too much is that he seems to go away from his main point too often. I'm use to Lewis' writing now that I have patience with him. When he tries to make a point, he likes to saunter up to it rather than attack it head on. Here, he starts out ok with some aspects of the Pslams main themes but looses his way about half way in. It was worth the read but definitely not my favorite Lewis book. Final Grade - D+

Lewis was a gospel denying heretic and his treatment of the Psalms is awful. Pay, or please don't, careful attention to his wicked exegesis of the beloved 23rd Psalm. The ol' heretic Clive despised much of scripture and that becomes even more apparent when he describes the imprectatory Psalms. It is better to get your exposition from a Christian, stay far away from this garbage.

I didn't get very far with this book because his ideas were so dodgy!
When talking about the imprecatory Psalms he described the imprecations as devilish and sin on the part of the Psalmists. I decided I'd give him a chance to redeem himself with the rest of the book and read on.

In the next chapter he went on to say the Psalmists did not believe in life after death. After reading this I had had enough.
If you're looking for enlightenment on the Psalms, keep looking!