tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14012689.post113414994100352759..comments2024-03-24T03:21:03.154-04:00Comments on CAMPONTHIS: A Thumbnail of C.S. Lewis’s Troubling Theology...orthodox or heterodox?SJ Camphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15844201288864307481noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14012689.post-1135689163404828762005-12-27T08:12:00.000-05:002005-12-27T08:12:00.000-05:00Lewis conversion was more of an intellectual conve...Lewis conversion was more of an intellectual conversion rather then one of regeneration.<BR/><BR/>When you here quotes like number 6 from Lewis you have got to put him in the same basket as the Mother Theresa’s and the Gandhi's of this world. To me this sounds like worldly wisdom and trying to intellectualize Christianity.<BR/><BR/>-----------------------------<BR/>6. Lewis said: "I couldn’t believe that 999 religions were completely false and the remaining one true." Similarly he stated: "We are not pronouncing all other religions to be totally false, but rather saying that in Christ whatever is true in all religions is consummated and perfected."<BR/>-----------------------------Correyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10146994296794113748noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14012689.post-1134778516182839712005-12-16T19:15:00.000-05:002005-12-16T19:15:00.000-05:00How do you protestants go around and question thin...How do you protestants go around and question things you know nothing of? To repent means to change sides, which he did in a far greater sense than any of the schismatic individuals here could say. This is ridiculous!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14012689.post-1134419938013540552005-12-12T15:38:00.000-05:002005-12-12T15:38:00.000-05:00Lewis was a fairly orthodox English Anglican. A go...Lewis was a fairly orthodox English Anglican. A good apologist for belief in a deity, and a very able writer. I believe he was a believer from the stretch of what he wrote that I've read, but I reckon if he was writing today, he'd be one of my brothers that I enjoyed reading very much, but some of his pet theological theory stuff was just way off-base. Like Doug Wilson, I suppose..Kayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14873728356115837593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14012689.post-1134248418907615342005-12-10T16:00:00.000-05:002005-12-10T16:00:00.000-05:00Steve,Maybe I'm a little dense, but please confirm...Steve,<BR/><BR/>Maybe I'm a little dense, but please confirm this for me. By saying "I hope before he died he repented", are you are saying that based on what Lewis wrote, you believe that he was not a true Christian, and died as an unregenerate sinner? I assume that this is what you mean by "unorthodox".<BR/><BR/>If my assumption is correct, then which doctrine(s) did Lewis uphold (or fail to uphold) which indicate that he was not a true believer?<BR/><BR/>I certainly agree that Lewis was unorthodox with respect to several doctrines. But, of course, as a credobaptist, I believe that John Calvin was unorthodox with respect to his doctrine of baptism, and I hope he repented of that false belief before he died.<BR/><BR/>What are the essentials of doctrine by which we can judge someone's status as orthodox or heterodox? And, perhaps more importantly, by what means are we to come to distinguish those doctrines which are essential over against those that are not essential?<BR/><BR/>Obviously there are two extremes. One is full inclusivism, which would welcome into the family of God anybody and everybody, regardless of belief. The other extreme is to exclude everybody from God's family who doesn't agree with you on every little jot and tittle of doctrine, which would limit the size of God's family to perhaps only one person. Of course, there are hardly any people (who call themselves Christians) on either end of the spectrum. But where in the middle of the spectrum ought we to stand? And again, what is our basis for taking a stand at that spot verses a little to the left or right?<BR/><BR/>My wife and I were members of <A HREF="http://bclr.org/" REL="nofollow">The Bible Church of Little Rock</A> for about 4 years, and I remember that there was a document produced by the elders which outlined the relative weights of doctrines. It was called the <A HREF="http://www.bclr.org/about/pom/pom.php?id=24" REL="nofollow">Doctrinal Statement Functionality Matrix</A>, under the broader heading of <A HREF="http://bclr.org/about/pom/pom.php?id=19" REL="nofollow">Preaching and Teaching</A>. (I think the matrix has been updated since it's last posting, and I think it now classifies some doctrines as tertiary.) I agree with most of the designations made by the matrix, but not all of them (for example, I wouldn't say that someone is not a Christian if they upheld every "member primary" doctrine on the list except the one about the Great White Throne judgment). Thankfully, agreement with the matrix itself is not a primary doctrine!<BR/><BR/>Also, for those who are interested, Phil Johnson discussed this issue some back in <A HREF="http://phillipjohnson.blogspot.com/2005_09_01_phillipjohnson_archive.html" REL="nofollow">September</A>.jigawatthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08143042238172973060noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14012689.post-1134206455894921792005-12-10T04:20:00.000-05:002005-12-10T04:20:00.000-05:00Congratulations again, Steve, on exposing another ...Congratulations again, Steve, on exposing another heretic in our midst. I have this Baptist neighbour who teaches Sunday School, but the other day I heard him yell "SH**" upon stubbing his toe. I think this demonstrates a deeper, more evil problem. Also, i once saw him mowing his lawn on a Sunday. Can you root out this apostate in an exhaustive post sometime? Thanks.Mark Andrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02678542582671266647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14012689.post-1134169580541221822005-12-09T18:06:00.000-05:002005-12-09T18:06:00.000-05:00Littlegal: You get an "A" for "a"rthodox. You ar...<B>Littlegal:</B> You get an "A" for "a"rthodox. You are a faithful Berean and i appreciate you greatly, thank you.<BR/><BR/><B>Shawn:</B> Thank you as always for your good words of wisdom and for the affirmation of study on Lewis.<BR/><BR/><B>Bhedr:</B> LOL... Really great stuff here! The parable of the seeds answers your observations. A dry path, thorny soil and rocky ground may appear to have "real faith" for awhile... BUT only the fertile soil that the Lord prepares for Himself can receive the seed of the gospel.<BR/><BR/>Having more fun than a Reformed Baptist should be allowed to.<BR/><BR/>SJ Camp<BR/>Eph. 1:4-14SJ Camphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15844201288864307481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14012689.post-1134167612038375862005-12-09T17:33:00.000-05:002005-12-09T17:33:00.000-05:00I tell you boo, its just hard to understand aint i...I tell you boo, its just hard to understand aint it? I mean think about it. Cat Steven's repents and turns to Islam while Bob Dylan writes the most sound gospel songs dripping with doctrine after his experience and then turns to Judaism.Nichols turns to Islam as well after reading PDL. Now we have this mess about Lewis. Satan is clever isn't he? In Mark 12 a soundly biblical Scribe questions Jesus and Jesus confirms his wisdom but then says, "You are not *far* from the Kingdom." Not far is still lost. What inhibited his wisdom of Scripture from being converted to true faith? Of course the regenerative work of God even though he thought perhaps he had it. What was in his heart? Read Mark 12:38-40 and John 5:44.<BR/><BR/>Folks, do we desire Manna or do we complain against it? What do we truly seek if not Him alone and not his blessings and gifts. Oh search our hearts God and if one does not desire only you the living Manna then may the soul repent before its everlastingly too late. Indeed I pray Lewis did repent of His unbelief.<BR/><BR/>Whats that passage Piper likes so much? We do well to heed it. 2 Corinthians 4:4-6Bhedrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08091896907803479900noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14012689.post-1134166839333542892005-12-09T17:20:00.000-05:002005-12-09T17:20:00.000-05:00Very good concerns and accurate based on what I re...Very good concerns and accurate based on what I recall in my own studyShawnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06809663608386103910noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14012689.post-1134153836580479132005-12-09T13:43:00.000-05:002005-12-09T13:43:00.000-05:00So it's safe so say I earned a passing grade with ...So it's safe so say I earned a passing grade with the following comments I made to Part 1 of the lesson on Lewis' theology?:<BR/><BR/><I>From Townsend's essay, I would tend to characterize Lewis as sort of "all over the place," theologically. Decidedly heterogenous, it's as if Lewis viewed his *form of* Christianity as a theological smorgasborg, picking and choosing doctrinal elements that appealed to him at any given moment. A little bit of this, and a little bit of that, and he tied it all together as his unique take on Christianity. I'm in agreement with what John Rush said; I think that Lewis was confused with some important issues.</I><BR/><BR/>Denise, John, I think we got an "A."<BR/><BR/>(Surely, Steve, someday there will come an issue that I am in disagreement with you on. :-) Until then, I guess I'm reduced to just sitting in the choir, nodding my head).littlegal_66https://www.blogger.com/profile/09424599483109788899noreply@blogger.com