Question on CS Lewis

[Elliewaves]

The MO of the OP and many fundamentalist. They live to put down others

The OP has bragged in the singles section of this forum that she has made CS Lewis fans mad by questioning Lewis....and has bragged several times. So, at this point I think this was all a troll thread. I'm not a huge fan of Lewis, but I find the OP's questioning reaching and laughable.

 

[Radagast]

I had a friend who worked in oxford and she said they were right snobs lol.

What, all the staff and all the students that have been there for the last 900 years? All snobs?

Right...

 

[Goodbook]

........WHAT!?

Wow. Dude, just wow.

You're a Christian, and you don't even know who your Lord is?

Let me ask you this. If Christ is not the Lion of the Tribe of Judah, then who opens the Book in Revelation 5:5?

EDIT: My apologies if I sounded kinda brash in this post, but that just took me by surprise. I couldn't believe my eyes and had to do a double-take.

ugh sorry I just came across this. Only the Lamb is worthy to open the scroll. Just read the whole chapter.

I mean thats a no brainer. Please read Revelation and don't try to make out like its a fantasy and myth like CS lewis did.

 

[Goodbook]

Thanks for replies everyone seems some ppl divided but thats ok as its always going to be like this. Some people will follow man, and have their ears tickled and others will just contend for the truth once delivered to the saints.

We are meant to be fools for Christs sakes, and not many that are noble are called.


1 Corinthians 1:26-29King James Version (KJV)
26 For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:

27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;

28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:

29 That no flesh should glory in his presence.

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

The book i read on cs lewis was by alistair mcgrath and it wasnt the greatest biography IMHO. He kept going on about how cs lewis forgot when he was converted and had the dates wrong, making it seem like he was deliberately covering it up. But it could just mean he was getting old and confused.

As for the land lady relationship, that just seemed odd. It was the daughter maureen who revealed that cs lewis had a relationship with her mother that went further than tenant or caregiver. But that may have been before his conversion. We all make mistakes.

As for theosophy well cs lewis was around that intellectual climate of ideas so porbably absorbed a lot of them when he was younger and was vulnerable to its influence. He did write that he was fascinated with the occult and had a lust for the preternatural.

If you live in a climate like oxford where theres all these atheists and occult practioners and are the only christian you might want to compromise your faith and just try and get along with them. Or you could just say, not thats wrong. And there is a way to be free, and the only way is through Jesus. I dont think its any good telling witches and wizards well ive found a better magic than you and joined church and heres why cos its true.

Its because cs lewis seems to have a low view of scripture and places more imprtance on his reasoning and arguments that I think, well. If he just stated the truth thats in the bible it would cut to the heart of whats wrong and then he wouldnt need to explain it all, just allow God to work through his Word.

Suddenly it was only the Theosophist Mileau at Oxford as opposed to having had an Theosophist mentor. You seem to be backtracking from your statements.
I think those who say you are merely trolling might be right.

 

[Radagast]

ugh sorry I just came across this. Only the Lamb is worthy to open the scroll. Just read the whole chapter.

The Lion of the tribe of Judah is the Lamb. That's what the chapter is telling us.

don't try to make out like its a fantasy and myth like CS lewis did.

Lewis said nothing like that.

Also, when Lewis uses the word "myth," he's using it in a technical sense that you obviously don't understand... or else you really are trolling us.

 

[topcare]

The OP has bragged in the singles section of this forum that she has made CS Lewis fans mad by questioning Lewis....and has bragged several times. So, at this point I think this was all a troll thread. I'm not a huge fan of Lewis, but I find the OP's questioning reaching and laughable.

Agree with you. I smell a troll

 

[Goodbook]

Im not trolling, but if I am why would you bother answering if I was. How would I know again i didnt know him personally and you dont either. So when i read something Im trying to find out if its true or not.

The alistair mcgrath book only gave a picture of ones mans view of cs lewis life and other people give different accounts. I am not bactracking, its just people give different versions of what happened and they are conflicting.

I never said cs lewis had theosophist mentor, but he certainly was influenced by their ideas. And he could have because often theosophists teach their arcane knowledge in secret and one is sworn not to tell anybody.

You can tell a person by their fruits so am judging by their fruits i.e their character, what other people say of him not just what he wrote. People can be very eloquent and convincing but they can also be self deceiving. I came a cross a poem cs lewis wrote, the bio said he was a poet manque...and he did touch in pride was the biggest thing he had to overcome. A place like oxford fosters academic pride. It was something that all academics have to fight against, the tendency to believe their own arguments, even if they are wrong.

But christians know only God has the last word. He is the alpha and the omega.

Its intresering that he made out a lion to be a christ like figure in narnia, because lions are a symbol of pride. But in the bible they are likened to the devil and devouring the innocent, prowling around. He kinda inverted the whole thing which is disturbing and then when ppl attributed christian morality to his narnia fantasy he didnt disabuse them of it. But it didnt seem to be his intention at all. Notice that began writing narnia after tolkien was writing the Hobbit.

The hobbit in itself was a complete story and superior to the lord of the rings when tolkien got deeper into myth, runes, magic etc. but also the hobbit wasnt trying to be christian at all. Ok theres some dragon slaying, and maybe some 'fellowship' but its not obviously a christian story. The movie made of it, well its basically a video game! I tell you I fell asleep.

Children wouldnt think of it as anything other than entertainment.

 

[Goodbook]

Lol its funny that others say im trolling, as if im some kind of fantasy figure thats going to turn into stone.

When you ask a question on General theology, wow some people just get annoyed. Well look you dont have to answer or discuss things if it makes you uncomfortable. Theres heaps of other threads you can go on.

I do believe this topic is relevant to general theology since on the sticky hes one of the prominent people and we cant just blindly follow what anyone says without checking scriputre. The bereans did this with Paul.

It would be the same if i had questions about aw tozer, or ravi zacharias or francine rivers or any other professed christian writer.

 

[topcare]

Im not trolling, but if I am why would you bother answering if I was. How would I know again i didnt know him personally and you dont either. So when i read something Im trying to find out if its true or not.

That is far and away what your doing, what your doing is besmirching a good Christian's name because he does not agree with your fundamentalist agenda.

 

[MournfulWatcher]

You can tell a person by their fruits so am judging by their fruits i.e their character, what other people say of him not just what he wrote. People can be very eloquent and convincing but they can also be self deceiving. I came a cross a poem cs lewis wrote, the bio said he was a poet manque...and he did touch in pride was the biggest thing he had to overcome. A place like oxford fosters academic pride. It was something that all academics have to fight against, the tendency to believe their own arguments, even if they are wrong.

This statement is rather hypocritical.

 

[angelos17]

The hypocrisy of this statement is hilarious.

Lol the Mod is coming to get you MWatcher. But I must say that was a pretty funny comment you made. Lol [emoji23]

Anyhooo, let's just all calm down and 're-evaluate things

 

[Open Heart]

The MO of the OP and many fundamentalist. They live to put down others

Sometimes. I grew up fundamentalist, and it was my father who gave me the Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe to read. We read the Chronicles of Narnia together, and it was a wonderful Father/Daughter thing.

 

[Open Heart]

You can tell a person by their fruits so am judging by their fruits i.e their character, what other people say of him not just what he wrote. People can be very eloquent and convincing but they can also be self deceiving. I came a cross a poem cs lewis wrote, the bio said he was a poet manque...and he did touch in pride was the biggest thing he had to overcome. A place like oxford fosters academic pride. It was something that all academics have to fight against, the tendency to believe their own arguments, even if they are wrong.

Is it pride when you really ARE right most of the time?

 

[Goodbook]

I was at the christian bookstore the other day looking for new christian books to buy for our church library.
They do have CS lewis box sets but I don't have an interest enough to buy them (which I already shared) and other christian authors besides Lewis of course.

Then I was looking in the theology section and I came across this book and it was all about CS Lewis and women. I thought, how odd, why should there be a book on CS Lewis and women?! In the theology section?? Well reading the back of this book, it was saying how he got accused of various things, like sexism and this book was to set the record straight by all these other different authors. I think it was about his marriage and also his landlady liaison that people were questioning. Enough to write a whole book on though?

I don't really see any other books like this about other christian writers on the shelves, going into their personal lives and defending them from whatever perceived accusations. Maybe they are just observations that cs lewis fans take the wrong way? Anyway, I just thought it was odd. I mean if you going to flat with a landlady and you a young male, but you lie about this to others and cover up, of course people are going to question this, and also marry someone on their deathbed, who is divorced, (and an american seeking residency) well, yea. But thats not accusing him of anything, its just what he did.

The english are eccentric after all and extremely private. I don't know if this eccentricity is actually redeemed by Jesus and they suddenly become these open extroverts upon conversion lol. But maybe the church in england at the time wasn't so accepting of things outside of traditions.

 

[Goodbook]

well, i'm glad you can see the funny side of hypocrisy. Christians are hyprocrites, Paul after all said he was the chief sinner.

Its funny because I was clearing out the church library the other day with the fiction section, I kind of expected Narnia books other cs lewis to be on the shelves but there werent any, but there was one in the childrens section about 'the magical world of Narnia' and I thought, oh yea, another magical world. Next thing you know, maybe another writer might think to one up and create 'the magical world of Jesus'

cos you know, children just love all that fantasy stuff. But the office admin was more gagging at the 'inspirational romance' type books and Left Behind series that were still there.
Anyway, the whole fiction section is going because its out of date, but we might get other fiction if theres actually a demand for it, but otherwise, I don't think the bible really mixes well with sci-fi apocalytpic fantasy or mills and boon type romance. Or occult wizards and witches for that matter. I mean, obviously people try, but its always the sum of it is less than its part.

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

I was at the christian bookstore the other day looking for new christian books to buy for our church library.
They do have CS lewis box sets but I don't have an interest enough to buy them (which I already shared) and other christian authors besides Lewis of course.

Then I was looking in the theology section and I came across this book and it was all about CS Lewis and women. I thought, how odd, why should there be a book on CS Lewis and women?! In the theology section?? Well reading the back of this book, it was saying how he got accused of various things, like sexism and this book was to set the record straight by all these other different authors. I think it was about his marriage and also his landlady liaison that people were questioning. Enough to write a whole book on though?

I don't really see any other books like this about other christian writers on the shelves, going into their personal lives and defending them from whatever perceived accusations. Maybe they are just observations that cs lewis fans take the wrong way? Anyway, I just thought it was odd. I mean if you going to flat with a landlady and you a young male, but you lie about this to others and cover up, of course people are going to question this, and also marry someone on their deathbed, who is divorced, (and an american seeking residency) well, yea. But thats not accusing him of anything, its just what he did.

The english are eccentric after all and extremely private. I don't know if this eccentricity is actually redeemed by Jesus and they suddenly become these open extroverts upon conversion lol. But maybe the church in england at the time wasn't so accepting of things outside of traditions.

I don't think it was about Mrs Moore or his wife at all, as it was in the Theology section. It was probably on the question of Susan in the Narnia books and the role of women in Christianity according to Lewis.

Susan is the only one to survive the train accident at the end of Last Battle and remain in our world. Therefore she doesn't enter the New Narnia. Peter says she is "no longer a friend of Narnia" and Jill says she is "just interested in lipsticks, Nylons and Invitations".

Lewis said of her:
"The books don't tell us what happened to Susan. She is left alive in this world at the end, having by then turned into a rather silly, conceited young woman. But there's plenty of time for her to mend and perhaps she will get to Aslan's country in the end... in her own way"

This has made her a rallying point of feminists and atheists who said she was thrown out for discovering sexuality and other such nonsense. Notably Philip Pullman condemns this. People miss the point that Susan was at the Stone Table and stroked Aslan's mane, was closer to him than many of the other characters. It illustrates how easily one can be led astray by the seemingly innocuous and is a good counterpoint at the end of the book. As the quote above illustrates, Lewis doesn't say she is condemned either.

Sufficed to say, I think that book is probably on CS Lewis's perspective on the Christian role of women, which tended to the conservative. But one would expect this from someone born in 1898.

 

[Goodbook]

? Well I didn't read it just the blurb on the back, it didn't seem to me anything to do with Theology.
I mean in his fantasy world of Narnia, he can keep whoever he wants in and out. If he doesn't like silly conceited women in there than fair enough. She's a fictional character, not a real person.

 

[Goodbook]

people writing today can't impose their views on someone who was living by different society standards half a century ago. That doesn't make sense.

All we can say is if he showed christian fruits of the holy spirit then thats enough. I didn't get a sense (from the books I read about him) of much of that specifically.
It does seem to me he was eccentric and very english i.e. very guarded and private person and reserved. Also someone academically argumentative, and very polished at that, I know people like that they can talk a dime a dozen and make things that are actually simple very complicated if they want to frame it as an argument/rhetoric.