“C.S. Lewis (1898-1963) is loved with an equal fervor by conservative evangelicals, emergents, Roman Catholics, Mormons, even atheists, a fact that speaks volumes to those who have ears to hear” (David Cloud, “C. S. Lewis’s Denial of the Blood Atonement”).
I have no desire to trash C. S. Lewis. He said a lot of good things, and is eminently quotable. He excelled as a writer. On the other hand, there are so many starry-eyed love-struck devotees among American evangelicals when it comes to Lewis, I also believe it is imminent that we orthodox “Biblicists” fire a warning shot across the bow. The fundamental theology of Lewis lacked orthodoxy, and folks should be told that.
“…the whole point of that book [The Pilgrim’s Regress by C. S. Lewis, rlv] is to say that by clear thinking, you can think yourself from a rationalist or atheistical position into the Christian position. And he actually, at one time, founded in Oxford what he called the Socratic Club, which used to meet on Monday nights, in which he used to try to show people how to reason themselves into Christianity. ‘With the heart man believeth unto righteousness.’ You cannot do it merely by a process of intellectual reasoning” (D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, “A Change of Heart,” a sermon on Romans 10:9-10). Martyn Lloyd-Jones also said:
“C. S. Lewis had a defective view of salvation and was an opponent of the substitutionary and penal view of the atonement.” (Christianity Today, Dec. 20, 1963; as requoted in “Mere Atonement,” Ariel James Vanderhorst, Touchstone Magazine, March 2009)
David Cloud further points out that C. S. Lewis not only “denied Christ’s substitutionary atonement,” but also “held a sacramental view of salvation…did not hold to the infallible inspiration of Scripture,” and called the six-day creation “a Hebrew folk tale.” In The Problem of Pain, Lewis wrote, “If by saying that man rose from brutality you mean simply that man is physically descended from animals, I have no objection.” I cannot see how such a statement can be recycled into orthodox biblicism.
None dare say lost. If he wasn't popular and well spoken, if he was the local Episcopal priest, we would openly condemn him as a wolf in sheep's clothing. Which he was. To me, this is very like Billy Graham. If you cherry pick just the good parts, he is fine, but the ugly truth is that he was a false prophet.
ReplyDeleteDid not mean to post anonymously.
ReplyDeleteJim Camp
Yes, I think that is what most everyone does with C. S. Lewis -- they pick out the good quotes and use them and never say you better be careful of what he says about lots of things. I mean creation, inspiration, and the blood atonement are pretty serious and fundamental issues!! When we just get the good quotes here and there, he sounds quite orthodox. But he wasn't.
ReplyDeleteThanks.
On this topic also see Jerald L. Manley, "The Imaginative Christianity of C.S. Lewis" quoted below:
ReplyDelete"C. S. Lewis did not mix a little harmless error with Christianity; he included a little harmless Christianity in his error. The testimony of both his life and his writings is that his error was not merely a side porch to his teachings, but was instead foundational of his writings; his false views are not peripheral literary touches, but are central and vital to his beliefs. It is impossible to endorse the one (his writings) without attaching some measure of acceptance to the other (his teachings). The writings and the teachings are indivisible; they are a unified whole and it is dishonest to present selected fragments as an organic whole. No verbal gymnastics can justify promoting the writings of C. S. Lewis while walking a tightrope separating his teachings from those writings. To promote Lewis is to advocate and to propagate his heresies. His most loyal friends, his most adoring disciples, and his most fawning supporter do not deny his erroneous teachings, but they accept, excuse them, or ignore them, seeking to “drink around the poison.” This is a practice that is itself an error. The consequences of this duplicity have been devastating and are discernible in the lifestyle and the faith of this generation of adults that were Christian school educated and of churches pastored by men influenced directly or indirectly by writers such as C. S. Lewis."
J. Grassi
Thanks for the excerpt from Jerald L. Manley on Lewis. He makes some good observations. The first sentence says it well!
ReplyDeleteI think we can warn folks to avoid Lewis, but overall we can probably assume that "most folks" have read or are going to read Lewis and need to be warned after the fact.