The theology of C.S. Lewis
C.S. Lewis is someone who is often quoted on social media. No matter how solid a brother and sister in Christ might be, it seems Lewis always gets quoted by them. His books are sold in many respectful Christian conferences. In many seminaries, some of his books are mandatory to read. Is he, therefore, someone we should read without hesitation?
Martyn Lloyd-Jones sounds off the alarm
One of Lewisâ friends, pastor Martyn Lloyd-Jones, warned others that âLewis was essentially a philosopherâ and not a theologian. Why did Lloyd-Jones say that? Because, as Martyn Lloyd-Jones noted: â(1) Lewis taught and believed that one could reason oneself into Christianity; and (2) Lewis was an opponent of the substitutionary and penal theory of the Atonement.â The former is a cause to concern, seeing that it goes directly against Romans 8:7, but the latter is to completely deny the Christian faith.
Inclusivism
Lewis was an inclusivist. He believed that faith in Christ is not necessary for salvation, and all worship, no matter the religion, eventually leads to the same destination: the Christian God â even if the people in other religions donât know/realize it. He wrote:
There are people in other religions who are being led by Godâs secret influence to concentrate on those parts of their religion which are in agreement with Christianity, and who thus belong to Christ without knowing it. For example a Buddhist of good will may be led to concentrate more and more on the Buddhist teaching about mercy and to leave in the background (though he might still say he believed) the Buddhist teaching on certain points.â
He came to this conclusion when he considered all the people of the world who had died before the incarnation of Christ. He wrote: âMany of the good Pagans long before Christâs birth may have been in this position [that is, saved].â
Prayers to false gods
Since God is merciful, Lewis believed that God would accept worship from everyone, and that meant Heâd also listen to all prayers. Lewis wrote: âI think that every prayer which is sincerely made even to a false god or to a very imperfectly conceived true God⊠is accepted by the true God and that Christ saved many who do not think they know Him.â
While visiting Greece with his wife, he was very tempted to pray to a false god. After all, for Lewis, someone can be heard by the Christian God if they pray to any false god. He wrote: âI had some ado to prevent Joy (and myself) from relapsing into Paganism in Attica! At Daphni it was hard not to pray to Apollo the Healer. But somehow one didnât feel it would have been very wrong â would have only been addressing Christ sub specie Apollinis.â
Genesis, Jonah, and Esther
For Lewis, the Old Testament wasnât a reliable source of history because it was either pagan stories or purely poetic. As a matter of fact, for Lewis, the Bible didnât start to be real history until the New Testament. Lewis wrote:
The earliest stratum of the Old Testament contains many truths in a form which I take to be legendary, or even mythicalâhanging in the clouds, but gradually the truth condenses, becomes more and more historical. From things like Noahâs Ark or the sun standing still upon Ajalon, you come down to the court memoirs of King David. Finally you reach the New Testament and history reigns supreme, and the Truth is incarnate.
He also could not believe in the book of Jonah, or Esther, as being real stories. He wrote:
The point is that the whole Book of Jonah has to me the air of being a moral romance, a quite different kind of thing from, say, the account of King David or the New Testament narratives, not pegged, like them, into any historical situation. In what sense does the Bible âpresentâ the Jonah story 'as historicalâ? Of course it doesnât say, 'This is fiction,â but then neither does our Lord say that the Unjust Judge, Good Samaritan, or Prodigal Son are fiction (I would put Esther in the same category as Jonah for the same reason).
Evolution
Because his views of Genesis were flawed, he also believed in theistic evolution. He wrote:
For long centuries God perfected the animal form which was to become the vehicle of humanity and the image of Himself⊠The creature may have existed for ages in this state before it became man: it may even have been clever enough to make things which a modern archaeologist would accept as proof of its humanity. But it was only an animal because all its physical and psychical processes were directed to purely material and natural ends. Then, in the fullness of time, God caused to descend upon this organism, both on its psychology and physiology, a new kind of consciousness which could say âIâ and âme,â which could look upon itself as an object, which knew God, which could make judgments of truth, beauty, and goodness, and which was so far above time that it could perceive time flowing past.
Purgatory and praying for the dead
Lewis held to certain Catholic beliefs. For instance, he believed in purgatory and praying for the dead. He wrote:
Of course I pray for the dead. The action is so spontaneous, so all but inevitable, that only the most compulsive theological case against it would deter me. And I hardly know how the rest of my prayers would survive if those for the dead were forbidden. At our age, the majority of those we love best are dead. What sort of intercourse with God could I have if what I love best were unmentionable to him? I believe in Purgatory. I assume that the process of purification will normally involve suffering. Partly from tradition; partly because most real good that has been done me in this life has involved it.
No literal, or eternal, hell
For Lewis, hell wasnât a place where there âshall be weeping and gnashing of teeth,â but rather he believed those in hell would âenjoy forever the horrible freedom they have demanded, and are therefore self-enslaved.â
Lewis couldnât tell how long someone would be stuck in this made-up hell. He wrote: â[The Bible] usually emphasizes the idea not of duration but of finality⊠but whether this eternal fixity implied endless durationâor duration at allâwe cannot say.â
Lewis also talked about a possible version of hell where you are stuck in a solitary existence â a self-imposed mental prison while in purgatory. He wrote: âWhether [hell] being left to a purely mental existence, left with nothing at all but oneâs own envy, prurience, resentment, loneliness & self conceit, or whether there is still some sort of environment, something you could call a world or a reality, I never pretend to know.â
The existence of the devil is unimportant
For Lewis, whether you believe in the devil or not, is unimportant. He wrote: âNo reference to the Devil or devils is included in any Christian Creeds, and it is quite possible to be a Christian without believing in them.â
The Bible has errors and contradictions
In various publications, he expressed the idea that the Bible is not without error; he didnât believe in the inerrancy of Scripture. He believed the Bible was inspired by God, but there are errors are within Scripture. He wrote:
The main difficulty seems to me not the question whether the Bible is 'inspired,â but what exactly we mean by this. Our ancestors, I take it, believed that the Holy Spirit either just replaced the minds of the authors (like the supposed 'controlâ in automatic writing) or at least dictated to them as to secretaries⊠Errors of minor fact are permitted to remain.
Regarding certain events found in Scripture, even though he believed they were wrong, he still held the opinion such events were at least close to reality. Lewis wrote: "Either this is reportageâthough it may no doubt contain errorsâpretty close up to the facts⊠If it is untrue, it must be narrative of that kind. The reader who doesnât see this has simply not learned to read.â
When talking about the contradictions, or accurate portrayal of history, in the Bible, Lewis wrote: "NaĂŻvety, error, contradiction, even (as in the cursing Psalms) wickedness are not removed. The total result is not 'the Word of Godâ in the sense that every passage, in itself, gives impeccable science or history.ââ And because the Bible canât be trusted to properly describe historical events, we should not be "using it as an encyclopedia or an encyclical.â
Jesus was capable of errors
Lewis believed that for Jesus to be truly human, He had to have made mistakes and committed sins â especially when He was young, for Lewis believed that Christ came to understand His divinity as He grew up. For Lewis, a sinless Christ would make Him less capable of understanding us. He wrote: âWas our Lord himself incapable, qua Man, of such errors? Would it be a real human incarnation if he was?â
And last but not least, one of the worst takes from Lewis regarding Jesus. He wrote:
It is clear from the New Testament that [the first Christians] all expected the Second Coming in their own lifetime. And, worse still, they had a reason, and one which you will find very embarrassing. Their Master had told them so. He shared, and indeed created, their delusion. He said in so many words, 'this generation shall not pass till all these things be done.â And He was wrong. He clearly knew no more about the end of the world than anyone else.â It is certainly the most embarrassing verse in the Bible.
Lewis believed that the fact that Jesus was wrong, and that embarrassing errors said by Jesus were never removed from the Bible, is proof that the New Testament can be relied on as true historical events. Lewis wrote: âThis passage (Mark 13:30-32) and the cry 'Why hast thou forsaken Me?â (Mark 15:34) together make up the strongest proof that the New Testament is historically reliable.â
Conclusion
C.S. Lewis is one of the most well-known names in Christianity. Narnia is a book (turned into movies) that is loved by not only Christians but unbelievers alike. His theological books are recommended by false and solid teachers alike. However, the man behind Narnia held to some very dangerous beliefs and we must be aware of them. Be aware of the dangers that often go unnoticed in Lewisâ writings. Always guard your heart when reading the literary works from anyone who isnât a Christian.
