Lewis is an Inclusionist
| Posted On: 01/24/10 12:01:08 AM |
Age 42, IN |
Lewis was an inclusionist, not a universialist. Lewis defended the idea that hell exists. A universalist would not.
Why does the story make you want to "tear your hair out?"
Does it bother you that Emeth got into heaven, even though he didn't beleive in the correct faith? But the word "beleive" doesn't mean in the Biblical sense what you and many others think it does. Emeth was ernestly seeking truth all his life. And Christ IS the truth he was seeking. The good works didn't buy his way in. They were merely proof that he really did have faith in Christ, even though he didn't know it.
|
Something to consider.
| Posted On: 05/23/08 07:48:53 AM |
Age 24, FL |
You basically say that you are not a sci-fi fan, have never been attracted to the Narnia books (and I assume, therefore, that you have never read them), and that you are not a big Lewis reader in general. From personal experience, it would be wiser to go out of your way to read the actual text(s) and author in question so as to get a first-hand view of the issue. It is so easy to take things out of context, or to misunderstand an author based on only one of his or her works. In other words, know the book, know the series, know the context, and know the author's views personally. Never just take another person's word for it. Am I saying the author of the article above is wrong? No, not necessarily. I am, however, going to actually take the time to look into the issue myself rather than just assuming that the author of the article has understood everything correctly. If we love the truth as Christians, then it is in our best interest to try to research things ourselves, that way we avoid spreading falsehoods or misinterpretations accidentally.
|
Thank you.
| Posted On: 05/20/08 09:50:01 AM |
Age 20, MN |
You said what I was going to say in regards to universalism and C.S. Lewis. :) Two things to add. One: For those who forgot or haven't read the book, Lewis makes it extremely clear that Tash and Aslan are NOT the same at all. But I do share in the concern about Hollywood. If you read it in context, you get what GA 45 got. If you leave out some key parts, which the directors could easily do, then it becomes universalism. Have a great day and God Bless!
|
Just an Allegory.
| Posted On: 05/15/08 09:58:32 AM |
Age 18, MN |
It should be kept in mind that this is an allegory. Allegories break down when you take them too far, that is why they are only allegories and not the Bible.
For example look at The Magicians Nephew when Aslan "sings" Narnia into being. Yet in the Bible God "spoke" and the Earth into being. Heretical? Or literary creativity?
Another example is when Aslan dies in The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe. Jesus died for all and yet Aslan only died for Edmund. Again, just an allegory.
This is a fantasy not a work of theology and I think it would be good to remember that and not rely on C.S.Lewis's novels for our doctrine and not to rely on movie industry for solid evangelical tools.
Peace,
Elise
|
Lewis pretty spot-on
| Posted On: 05/14/08 07:58:24 AM |
Age 28, SOUTH AFRICA |
I think Lewis was pretty spot on with this, as (with all the characters in Narnia) Aslan is incredibly personal with Emeth. In other words, he wasn't saying something true of ALL those who served Tash, only Emeth. God is a lot more just and loving than us-- he doesn't throw a blanket rule over everyone, rather he treats all individually while treating them impartially. I won't be surprised if I find Buddhists and Muslims who were taught incorrectly about Christ/never heard of Christ etc. in the New Heavens and New Earth one day. I guess that's why I'm not Calvinist :) As for Lewis' Universalism-- I'd love to know where it is 'documented.' The closest Lewis comes is a 'hope' (illustrated through many of his writings and The Great Divorce) while affirming an eternal hell in books like Mere Christianity. He probably got this hope from one of his heroes - George MacDonald - who was a Biblical Universalist (one must be careful about the phrase 'universalism' as most Christians who believe all will eventually be saved do believe in a hell, they just believe all will be restored after a chastising age.) Any God-loving and God-fearing person ought to question the notion of hell and find out what Scripture TRULY says. I'm not saying that it does say a restorative universalism outright, but there are hints at it. Especially when you look at the actual word usage ("forever" is Aieon in Greek, which means 'age' or 'age upon age.' 'Age' has an end.) The bottom line is the Bible doesn't really tell us enough about hell to really know for sure, and it certainly doesn't make what you believe about hell as a prerequisite for your entrance into heaven.
|
Narnia chronicles are not christian
| Posted On: 05/14/08 03:21:56 AM |
Age 56, AUSTRALIA |
An excelent article which points out many of the very pagan references in The L,W&W is on a webste www.lasttrumpet.org . Lewis Carrol admitted his Narnia series are NOT allegories and should be read as such. They are fantasy with a strong pagan emphasis as were much of his writings. If people wish to draw paralells from the Narnia books they are welcome to do so but I suggest that they keep them to themselves. I will not support thes books or films as it takes only a little cyanide in the softdrink for it to be harmful. The lie in the garden was mixed with alittle truth.
|
ONLY THE HUMBLE WILL ENTER HEAVEN
| Posted On: 05/13/08 11:08:35 PM |
Age 64, OH |
The reasoning I give is pretty elementary. Did many speak the name of Jesus and claim to follow Him but were not. This reasoning proves that it is not the sounds of a name that possess the power, but it is the person of The Lord Jesus Christ who holds all the power that exists. If a person uses the name of Jesus, is it magic and Jesus is forced to obey, the same as the magic Abra Kadabra or open seesame. Jesus judges all of us by the intentions of our hearts as He writes in the scriptures. You or I are not going to judge one person to see if they get into heaven. Jesus is the One and Only Judge. I think C S Lewis was just trying to get us to be humble and see that we do not get to decide who gets in. Have you never read the parable of the sheep and the goats. Of ALL those that knew they were going to heaven, not one went. But all of those who did not think they had served the Lord Jesus entered into heaven. As Jesus said there will be much weeping and gnashing of teeth. Please be so kind as to read my post below titled SOME SPOKE THE NAME OF JESUS ONLY TO BE BEATEN BY DEMONS. May the light of the Holy Spirit shine down on us all. Lou
|
THERE IS BUT ONE HEAD AND THAT IS THE LORD JESUS CHRIST
| Posted On: 05/13/08 10:49:03 PM |
Age 64, OH |
I preach every Sunday at the church I attend. But this fellowship has NOT been entrusted to me but it is the Holy Spirit of The Lord Jesus Christ that we all trust in. For a mere man who is called to be a pastor to be the head of any church is no different than the pope being head of the catholic church. Where do you ever see in the scriptures that a man is to be the head of any church. You say "I would not let" and this says volumes. One of the reasons the church of this nation is in such poor shape is the dictators that have been the head of the churches. God tells us in The Book of Samuel what would happen to any people who made a man king instead of making God their King. Have you never read what the Holy Spirit had Paul write in 1 Cor 14:26 What then shall we say, brothers? When you come together, EVERYONE has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. ALL of these MUST be done for the strengthening of the church. 27If anyone speaks in a tongue, two—or at the most three—should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret. 28If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God. 29TWO or THREE prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said. 30And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop. 31For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged. 32The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets. 33For God is not a God of disorder but of peace. -- Do you know more than Paul. Where does it say that one man should run the show and decide who should speak or what is to be said. There is to be no mediator between any person and Jesus. When you make yourself the head you are putting yourself in the position to be held only by the Lord Jesus Christ. Lou
|
LOU MEANS VICTORIOUS WARRIOR
| Posted On: 05/13/08 10:33:04 PM |
Age 64, OH |
Thanks for your kind support. But I know personally and he would be very offended to be called a she. Lou is short for Louis which means "victorious warrior" and the Holy Spirit has made it very clear that he was the one who named me. He has made my forehead as hard as flint as you can see by my posts. May the grace and mercy of Jesus be with you. Lou
|
Thanks for the Heads-up (not a CS Lewis reader)
| Posted On: 05/13/08 09:11:54 PM |
Age 51, VA |
Thanks for the education on Lewis. I am not a sci-fi fan and the Narnia books never attracted me. I am not a Lewis reader in general, so I really appreciate the heads up and will pass on the info to others before deciding to see the movies.
|
Too harsh?
| Posted On: 05/13/08 07:43:28 PM |
Age 61, MO |
Perhaps I am a bit too harsh on Lewis. I guess I just prefer to hear about Christianity from the likes of T.Austin Sparks, or Hendrickson, or Spurgeon. Pilgrim's Progress is the only Christian allegory I have ever appreciated. Actually, "Mere Christianity" was the only writing of Lewis that I did like, and, yes, it has been a while since I read it. George Cancilla
|
Are you kidding?
| Posted On: 05/13/08 07:08:04 PM |
Age 45, GA |
"A few catchy phrases he has uttered about Christianity"? Surely you don't think that's all there is to Lewis, do you?
|
That's not universalism
| Posted On: 05/13/08 07:03:11 PM |
Age 45, GA |
I believe Lewis was wrong to include the story of Emeth, but to call it universalism greatly and unfairly exaggerates his error. Universalism is the belief that all people are eventually saved. Lewis didn't believe that. In The Last Battle, plenty of creatures didn't get into the new Narnia (symbolic of heaven). Some characters were forever imprisoned in darkness and others died a well-deserved, brutal, permanent death. Emeth was a single character who made it through, and I think Lewis was making a statement about those who seek God faithfully without ever learning who he is. I don't agree with that belief--that someone can be saved without knowing who Jesus is--and I wish Lewis didn't put that part in there. But don't use it as an example of universalism, because it isn't.
|
Lewis Wasn't A Universalist
| Posted On: 05/13/08 07:02:21 PM |
Age 40, NH |
Lewis wasn't a universalist but an inclusionist. There is a distinct difference between the two.
Grace and Peace,
Jim
|
SOME SPOKE THE NAME JESUS ONLY TO BE BEATEN BY DEMONS
| Posted On: 05/13/08 03:35:53 PM |
Age 64, OH |
You need to learn to read with more care. I NEVER said names have no meaning. 1st - You or no one else but the Lord Jesus Christ has ever cast out a demon. The Lord is the one who does all that is good and we can do nothing but call upon His name. 2nd - Have you never read Acts 19:13 Some Jews who went around driving out evil spirits tried to invoke the name of the Lord Jesus over those who were demon-possessed. They would say, "In the name of Jesus, whom Paul preaches, I command you to come out." 14Seven sons of Sceva, a Jewish chief priest, were doing this. 15(One day) the evil spirit answered them, "Jesus I know, and I know about Paul, but who are you?" 16Then the man who had the evil spirit jumped on them and overpowered them all. He gave them such a beating that they ran out of the house naked and bleeding.- It did these men no good to say the Name Jesus with their lips. For they knew Him not. The power is not in us or the sounds but The Lord Jesus is The One who has the power. He is sovereign and He decides what actions He will take. 2 Peter 1:20Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. 21For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.-- It is NEVER man that decides the actions or the words of God but it is The Holy Spirit who first inspires men to speak, then the Holy Spirit does as He said He would do. -- No man can decide to speak healing, prophecy, or any other action and then speak it and have God do it. The Holy Spirit of The Lord Jesus Christ has to speak to a man to speak or act in a certain way and when the man does as the Holy Spirit says then The Holy Spirit acts. If any man speaks a prayer of healing for someone and the person is not healed then there is much evidence to say that the Holy Spirit never said to pray for the person but it was their own idea. Lou
|
Misrepresentation, but I agree...
| Posted On: 05/13/08 02:55:11 PM |
Age 43, IL |
First off, I think you make a few crucial errors in your article, Russ.
1)What Lewis represents in Emeth's encounter with Aslan is not Universalism in the "purest" sense (mere universalism?). Nothing in the book suggests that ALL of Tash's followers were saved, which leads to
2)Your article would suggest to the uninformed reader that Emeth lived an evil, destructive, and hateful life. I don't doubt that this episode reflects Lewis's position with regard to "faithful unbelievers," and on that issue I think he is probably wrong, but it is miles away from saying "anything goes."
Related to this is your statement about Lewis's "documented theology of universalism." Documented where? I'm not saying it's not; I'd just like to see the documentation (and I'm assuming you're not merely referring to "The Last Battle."
Having said all that, I think you have hit the nail squarely on the head re the likelihood of Hollywood's take on this scene. Might hinge on how much creative control Lewis's estate retains in the production, but odds are, you are right, and by presenting these movies as evangelistic Christian allegories (a claim Lewis never made about the stories, as already pointed out by some on this board), the church may find itself painted into a corner trying to explain this away.
|
read first; then comment
| Posted On: 05/13/08 02:35:47 PM |
Age 43, IL |
No personal offense meant here, George, but if the title "Mere Christianity" offends you for the reasons you imply, then you either haven't read it or it has been way too long since you have for your commentary to be meaningful. Lewis himself explains, at length, in the text, what is meant by the title. In a nutshell, he is stressing that it is his intention not to offer a defense of any particular denomination or sect, but Mere(ly) Christianity as a whole, focussing on the doctrines with which most Christians of any stripe would agree.
|
A shallow interpretation brilliantly corrected by Lou - Age 64, Ohio
| Posted On: 05/13/08 02:18:21 PM |
Age 38, IN |
This article shows a clear misunderstanding of both C.S. Lewis, who was not a universalist, and The Chronicles of Narnia, which does not teach universalism. Context is everything. Study your literature.
p.s. Very well put, Lou. Kudos!
|
What is in a name?
| Posted On: 05/13/08 02:06:51 PM |
Age 32, MN |
Then, by your reasoning, should we say "Jesus" or should we say "Yeshua" or should we say "Yehoshua"? Seriously. Lou did not say the meaning was irrelevant. She said the name represents the nature of the person--it is not the "sound" of the name that matters.
|
How does salvation happen?
| Posted On: 05/13/08 01:36:10 PM |
Age 37, OH |
"Even if there are any [converts], it is only because of the exceeding grace of Christ and has nothing to do with any evangelical quality of the film or story."
So you're saying that the salvation of souls is dependent upon the "evangelical quality" of the evangelistic sales pitch?
The "exceeding grace of Christ" is not an anomoly in salvation, it is the sole ingredient. God does not depend on us for the salvation of His elect. He uses whatever method He desires according to His pleasure to regenerate the lost.
|
|
|
|
|
