Lewis vs Christ

Gold Dragon, thanks for the explanation. I don't specifically remember reading any posts by you on KJVO, ultra-dispensationalism, hyper-calvinism, legalism, etc., but understand you to be saying you don't agree with them since you declare them wrong doctrines. Gotta go, will try to get back later.

 

God's Truth is found in the Bible. man's "truth" is found in fables. </font>[/QUOTE]So out goes every illustration that every preacher ever used to illustrate a point in a sermon. They're not 'bible' so they're deceptive and false. C'mon guys, it's not right to throw out fictional accounts that illustrate a point.

C. S. Lewis ended wrong. As has been pointed out here, he was severely doctrinally wrong in several key points. That is true, and I agree with every criticism that has been made about him on this thread.

It's also true that he was the greatest defender of Christianity over about a 50 year period. He single handedly ressurrected the moral argument as proof for God's existence, and forced it down the throat of a godless culture. He was a staunch defender of biblical miracles, and strongly denied myths in scripture. In the culture he was in (people like Bultmann ruled the day), and the position he had at Oxford, he was able to defend Christianity against the strongest skeptics, critics, and philosophers of the day. He took on all comers, and overall did great work with his defenses. In a day of anti-intellectualism, he rallied the forces and brought troops to the wall, inspiring a whole generation of Christians to meet the challenge of the enemy. His defense of the moral argument is quite solid.

Yes, Lewis was quite wrong in many areas. He was also the greatest Christian apologist of the 20th century, and many were saved because of him. His book "The Great Divorce" is a GREAT little fantasy story that shows truth in an interesting and creative way.

Keep the good, throw away the bad. Learn from him, and don't end the way he did....there's still time for us to end wrong, also.

 

Gold Dragon, I said I'd get back to this and almost forgot. I apologize for that, and hope you notice my response.

I asked the question initially because from my point of view concerning "soul liberty" I found your statement that "I disagree with the following but since I'm a baptist who believes in Soul Liberty, I don't have a problem with Lewis believing them" to be rather curious. I wouldn't make that kind of connection with soul liberty.

To me, soul liberty is about a person being free to relate to God without the interference of government coercion and laws, and individual, religious and/or legal persecution, or anything else outside the realm of "spiritual" and "scriptural" persuasion to be used to change one's religious beliefs. Therefore I don't think of soul liberty as affecting whether I think someone's religious beliefs are right/wrong, orthodox/heterodox, or IOW, heretical. I can believe Lewis or anyone else is wrong in their doctrinal persuasions and feel free to say they are without thinking I am violating soul liberty. I still stand for their right to freely believe it.

Other things rather than soul liberty moderate my statements and feelings toward such an one - such as my understanding of the depths of depravity in my own soul, my understanding that I have only a small knowledge of the depths of God's Word, my recognition that I don't believe everything I believed 25 years ago, and such like.

So the above is the explanation as to why I found your statement curious and why I asked the question.

 

quote:

J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S Lewis

Tolkien and C.S. Lewis were both Oxford professors and members of a society among the University professors - "The Inklings". Stories go with that this society was just a friendly meeting place for them, a relaxed club where they used to read their own books and work in progress, and discuss them. This may be correct, but if there was more to it, the following is interesting. It's taken from a lecture by Bill Cooper called "The New Covenant" and is not on the subject of Tolkien or Lewis, but about the Illuminati and their beliefs. But before we discuss that, let us look at the following names the two authors used for their book characters. We already discussed Tolkien above, but also look at the name "Galgalum" here below, meaning "The Guide". Compare it with Gollum in Tolkien's world - he who guided Frodo and Sam to Mordor.

C.S. LewisC.S. Lewis on the other hand, who wrote the books of Narnia, another fantasy world, used a Lion God (also a symbol for the "God" of the Illuminati - Satan/Lucifer). This Lion God he called Aslan, compared to the Brotherhood's "Asalam" (see below).

Walt Disney is another example; he was a 33 Degree Freemason of the Scottish Rite, and his entire life he spun threads from the Mystery Schools into the children's minds with the purpose of getting them used to the occult, for days to come. Could it be that Disney indoctrinated the kids, and Lewis and Tolkien "took care" of the indoctrination of the teenagers and the adults? Speculations, but still ...

http://www.illuminati-news.com/tolkien-occult.htm

 

Amazing! I'm just a poor old dumb farmboy, so some nuances of progression and logic as well as understanding the Bible get by me fairly easily. This is one of 'em. I've not read this whole thread, only the first handful of posts on the first page and the last page as well. So I have a four page gap, I admit. Gap or no, how do you go from whether or Jack was doctrinally right or wrong to Mickey Mouse and the Illuminati? Never mind, I just figured it out. Another of Walt's characters, no doubt. Goofy!
Ed

 

I think believing in the true God and true Jesus Christ would be essentials vs. belief in false gods. But Lewis has a character who serves Tash (a false god called the opposite to Aslan, acc. to Aslan) being accepted by Aslan.

As I stated in my post on p. 4, God condemns the worship of false gods, yet in "The Last Battle," Aslan considers service to Tash as service to himself.

I think there are 2 issues going on here in this thread -- one is whether Lewis was a believer (which is really the topic of the other thread), and the other concerns the beliefs of Lewis, particularly inclusivism. I think that Lewis was probably saved, or at the very least, we just don't now. To me, that is not the issue and I'm not even interested in such a discussion. What I think is important is to discuss and debate some of Lewis' beliefs that seem to go against the Bible, such as inclusivism.

If service to and worship of Tash, a false god, is okay, then where does that leave God's denouncement of false gods? </font>[/QUOTE]The point about the young man (I believe he was a prince, but I haven't read The Last Battle for awhile) being accepted by Aslan was that
1. He had been deceived his entire life about where the truth lay (and, if you recall, even though Eve was not in that position, she is NOT credited with bringing sin into the world, as Adam as, since she was deceived), and
2. He was striving to serve what truth he knew, under whatever name.

God judges the heart. That was Lewis' entire point with this young man. Marcia, when you wanted the truth, you also were rescued from the lie. We read in Hebrews that we die once and are judged. Aslan judged the young man after death by looking at his heart's desire and that he had done his best to follow truth. I think Lewis was simply trying to demonstrate "Seek and ye shall find" in a way children and, perhaps a number of grownups, would understand. The point was not "Tash", but the young man's desire for the truth his entire life.

I have only read the last couple of pages of this series this morning, but I want to applaud whomever it was that mentioned that Lewis was the greatest apologist for the Christian faith of his time. "The Great Divorce" and "Screwtape Letters" will probably be discussed until the Lord comes again! His writings on "The Weight of Glory," and "Transposition" helped me tremendously in getting my focus OFF myself and onto both God and others.

How much theology does one need to be saved? The Bible answers that in one word, "Believe". It refers to Jesus Christ, of course. But that is all that is required. Not just an intellectual acknowledgement, as James demonstrates so well in his letter, but a belief that is a following. A belief that results in a new spiritual life for the person. But, essentially, just Believe.

We will all find ourselves corrected in heaven, just as, I am sure, Lewis has found.

 

Boanerges said:

It's taken from a lecture by Bill Cooper called "The New Covenant" and is not on the subject of Tolkien or Lewis, but about the Illuminati and their beliefs.

Good ol' Bill Cooper. The first time I ever heard him on the radio, he was explaining how the Bette Midler song "The Rose" was full of secret Illuminati messages. But that didn't hold a candle to his "classic" reading of The Lion King - it's "really" an allegory about the global elitists trying to precipitate a race war.

I couldn't make his brand of lunacy up even if I wanted to.

Case in point:

C.S. Lewis on the other hand, who wrote the books of Narnia, another fantasy world, used a Lion God (also a symbol for the "God" of the Illuminati - Satan/Lucifer).

Of course, it never occurs to Black Helicopter Boy that the lion is a Biblical symbol for Christ, does it? Gee, Kooker, maybe that's why Lewis chose that symbol.

It's worth noting, additionally, that Cooper committed "suicide by cop" in 2001 - when some police tried to arrest him for aggravated assault and endangerment after he threatened some folks with a gun. Instead of submitting to their lawful authority, he very unwisely opened fire on the police with a handgun, shooting one of the officers twice through the head. This is the sort of unstable freakazoid Boanerges cites as an authority on Tolkien and Lewis.

[ January 15, 2006, 01:56 PM: Message edited by: Ransom ]

 

I didn't cite him as an authority. I just wanted to shake the tree a bit, and you fell out.

 

I just wanted to shake the tree a bit, and you fell out.

Unlike notorious UFO kook Bill Cooper, I wasn't out of my tree already.

 

Although I haven't read every word in this thread I did do a quick review of it and in my opinion the biggest problem with works of fiction like "Narnia" and others is that they take our attention away from the importance of the Word of God and our need to immerse ourselves in it and grow in the "grace and knowledge" of it.Throughout this entire thread I found ONLY ONE verse of scripture even QUOTED(thanks Dr.Bob)and that didn't occur til PAGE 5.No wonder we have so little discernment when it comes to whether an issue or subject,etc.,is scriptural or not.Ultimately,spiritually,ONLY the Word of God is truly profitable(2 Timothy 3:16-17).I'm not against good christian books but we need to remember not to get sidetracked.

2 Timothy 3:16-17 :
vs.16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God,and is profitable for doctrine,for reproof,for correction,for instruction in righteousness:
vs.17 That the man of God may be perfect,throughly furnished unto all good works.

Seems like that is all we really need in the long run.Also THAT(the Word of God)is the source of our faith(Romans 10:17)and our sanctification(John 17:17).God Bless You all.

Greg Sr.

 

I missed you Ransom, and I just wanted to see if you would turn out.

 

Posted by Helen

God knows the heart and it is wicked (Jer 17.9). Good intentions or seeking truth do not save.

Not sure what you are talking about. I was not seeking THE truth, only whatever I wanted truth to be, which was something that would suit me. I also beleived there were different levels of truth and that they could contradict each other. I did not even want to be a Christian up until the moment I was saved!

There is no biblical way that one can demonstrate that worship of a false god brings salvation. In fact, the Bible tells us that false gods are actually demons. So Tash was a demon. Worship of a demon, even in ignorance of that fact, certainly cannot bring salvation as it does in this book.

 

Never mind, Marcia.

Something I have noticed, which is almost sad -- none of the children I know who read or have seen Narnia have missed the Christian message. It's clear as day to them.

It's just the adults...

 

My 4 year old got it. And we didnt prompt her at all. Of course she didnt get ALL of it, but she got Aslan, all the way. Now we are reading another Chronicle to her and she loves it.

 

You are changing the subject. If you're talking about TLTWTW, then that's different. Tash is not in that.

I didn't say there was not a Christian message in Narnia. I am specifically addressing the Tash issue.

You might be surprised to know I saw and liked the Narnia movie and just finished TLTWTW yesterday. I can like this and still have issues with the Tash episode. It doesn't have to be all or nothing.

 

Marcia, Barry and I spent about two hours late last night purposely reading everything we could find on the net negative about CS Lewis and his work. Some of it was totally absurd and a lot was guilt by association. But one thing started to hit us: those who were most upset by him seemed to come in two major groups: those who had formerly been involved in the occult and those who were seemingly specializing in knee-jerk and often ignorant reactions.

You were saved out of the occult and the more we read last night, the more your responses to a number of things made sense to me. I don't agree with all of them, but I do understand them better now.

The way I see the Tash episode is simply that God judges the heart. My dad was a lot like that prince in a way -- because of his upbringing and then, later in life, being exposed every Sunday as a radio station announcer/engineer, to the arguments of fourteen different ministers with each other as they passed in and out of the radio station giving their respective sermons/homilies, he simply did not associate the truth he loved and lived for with Jesus Christ. It was not until sometime around a week or even days before his death (he had been sick for a few months) that God finally showed him -- I don't know how -- that Jesus was the very truth he had been living for and seeking his whole life. My Dad died a brother in Christ, full of joy at the discovery he had made.

In the Tash episode the truth is not shown to the young man until after his death, but that may be the only thing I would theologically have a problem with. You see, it wasn't just my Dad, although that made a profound impression on me, but so many others who want the truth but "not that Christian garbage." And by 'garbage' they are usually referring to all the man-attached bits and pieces which obscure the true Gospel of Christ -- man's sin nature, His atonement, and the reality of the choice of being born again in Him.

Sometimes, when one can patiently make friends with one of these people and slowly strip the garbage away from the message, the light will dawn and the person will joyfully and gratefully turn to Christ for salvation. In the long run, the Lord knew what was in that person's heart all along and answered that silent search for truth and meaning. This is something my husband and I have both seen in people and been blessed enough to have been part of several times.

So that is how we see the Tash episode. I hope that makes a little more sense to you. There is no way we are advocating that the worship of a false god can lead to salvation. I think the point Lewis was attempting to make, however well or badly, was that one can seek the truth and love the truth no matter the culture one is raised in or the things one is taught -- and that God knows the heart and knows what is right judgment.

Maybe Aslan made a wrong judgment -- but we know God never does.

One thing that interested Barry and me after reading all the negative net material was that -- and we have been doing this for awhile -- we are in the middle of the entire Narnia series which I read aloud for a chapter or two at night before we turn out the light and have prayers (we do Bible study when we are more awake during the day!) -- and we saw even more clearly the points Lewis was trying to make regarding sin, repentance, the results of sin, the concept of forgiveness, obedience to the Lord's directions, resisting temptation, and all manner of biblical things.

I'm sure the authors of all those negative pieces did NOT intend that result, but as we read some Lewis after reading so many essays on how horrid he was and hell-bound, we actually found more to appreciate in him from a Christian point of view!

 

Helen said:

In the Tash episode the truth is not shown to the young man until after his death, but that may be the only thing I would theologically have a problem with.

And that little distinction makes all the difference. Lewis was saying, in effect, that one may serve a false God all his life, but as long as he was sincerely seeking the good, it turns out he was really seeking the true God all along.

That simply does not square with the testimony of Scripture, which paints idolatry as the most fundamental of all sins. In Romans 1, Paul uses idolatry, along with sexual perversion, as a paradigm for what is wrong with unregenerate man.

What Lewis suggests, on the other hand, is that if you spend your life being the very best idolator that you can, God will accept you anyway.

Were this simply a plot point in his fictional world, it would be only fair to overlook it - and indeed there are other moments of bad theology in the Narnia chronicles that can be seen in that light (such as the ransom owed to the White Witch for Edmund the traitor in The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe). But this particular point was something that Lewis himself seemed to believe. His biographer, George Sayer, writes, for example:

Keep in mind this is not a critical biography of Lewis written by his critics, but a sympathetic one written by a close friend and former student of Lewis'.

I'm sure that the vast majority of criticism of Lewis is unfounded or overblown. But in this case, it's simply shoddy theology, and there's no way around it.

 

Helen, my background has little to do with what I say about Lewis; what I say has to do with what the Bible teaches. This is not about Lewis bashing but about the Tash episode.

I am not against Lewis nor am I one of his detractors, and I believe that he was a believer, so please do not put me in that category. But I have profound issues with the Tash incident.

I think Ransom said it best in his post responding to yours.