C. S. Lewis was not a Christian

The topic of this thread is related to all man's works of righteousness wherein he seeks to cover himself, though without seeking the garment of righteousness from God through Christ which is without seam and is non-organic.

The Bible agrees with C.S. Lewis;

You do not know whether one who disagrees with you on some, several or multitude of points possesses an eternal hope in the promise of the kinsman redeemer; this is the faith of Abraham dear brother and this is what that we need to recognize so that we can feed the sheep who are there the word of God rather than of man and his doctrines of works.

Our rest is in Christ Alone. No man is denying that; C.S. Lewis did not deny that, the topic is concerning the degree of light that some receive; that topic is related to the acceptance of false teaching of man, such as evidential finding of a 'true' scriptural baptism, of which scripture declares nothing in regards to the eternal hope.

It is a 'works' related discussion and the attempt of some to creep in to spy out the liberty of the children of God whereby they may know how to bring back into the bondage of the weak and beggarly things of this world and thereby weaken their expectation, their anticipation, their hope of the redemption to come.

A binding of that hope in this world rather than in the blessed hope of the church.


Bro. Dallas

 

The issue raised in this post is that C.S. Lewis said a man can be saved without believing in Jesus Christ. That is heresy. Period.

Abraham was justified by believing a specific promise made to Him by God. That promise was the Christ. And Paul said that we are justified by having the same kind of faith that Abraham had - faith in Christ.

A man who does not have faith in Christ is not justified in any sense of the term. Period. The end.....C.S. Lewis and his fairy tales notwithstanding.

"For there is none other name given under heaven among men whereby ye must be saved."

Mark Osgatharp

 

How do you know a man has faith in Christ?

What is your list?

Is it first because he submitted to your baptism? Your answer here must be yes or else you could not say a man who did serve God and did 'persevere' is lost simply because of the statement he made in the op.

No matter how you divide it brother you are pretending to be able to see the belief unto righteousness, Rom. 10:10 the circumcision of the heart.

You are placing burdens upon men because of their experiential hearing of false teaching, not because of their 'lack' of faith in Christ.
Bro. Dallas

 

Frogman,

You are the one who introduced baptism into this discussion, not me. But let me state for the record that I have no doubt there will be many in heaven who were not baptized - perhaps more than were baptized. So don't ever again imply that I think people who aren't baptized aren't saved.

Of course, the baptism question is just a ruse you raised to avoid the real issue here. Which issue is that C.S. Lewis wrote that men can be saved without faith in Jesus Christ and that some men belong to Jesus and don't even know it. Let's quote the passage from "Mere Christianty" (boy, that's a misnomer if ever there was one) which started this discussion:

""There are people who do not accept the full Christian doctrine about Christ but who are so strongly attracted by Him that they are His in a much deeper sense than they themselves understand. There are people in other religions who are being led by God's 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."

Those words cannot be interpreted in any other way than that Lewis thought men can be saved without believing in Jesus Christ. Well my Bible doesn't say a word about "God's secret influence." That is the stuff of fairy tales - or Narnia and secret wardrobes.

My Bible says:

"Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned."

Mark Osgatharp

 

Dear Brother Mark,
I believe the Bible does support Lewis' statement.

I believe passages of scripture have been shown to that provide adequate evidence of the Biblical support of Lewis' statement.

Now, I introduced the outward work of baptism because it is that work along with so many others that many many are hanging eternal life upon.

Ignoring the circumcision of the heart; but seeking first for an outward agreement and when that is not first established condemning those who disagree immediately without hope or willingness to teach in meekness the truth that they may be granted repentance.

Again, I agree with Lewis' statement.

Bro. Dallas Eaton

 

Marcia, Paul is quoting from Psalm 19. The full context of that verse is appropriate here:

Ps 19:1-3
19:1 The heavens are telling the glory of God; they are a marvelous display of his craftsmanship. 2 Day and night they keep on telling about God. 3 Without a sound or word, silent in the skies, their message reaches out to all the world. (The Living Bible)

You can't say this passage in Psalms refers to anything but all the people of all the earth; the stars are there for everybody!

And Paul says right there in Romans that this counts as preaching for the purposes of interpreting his verse about the necessity of having a preacher.

Now of course it is absolutely impossible for anyone to be saved except that their sins are covered by the blood of Christ. It is Christ who is our salvation.

But God's mercy can indeed include those striving after Him that were not fortunate enough to have heard of His atoning sacrifice for us. Nobody on judgement day that is condemned to hell will be able to say "hey, I never had a chance . . . "

they will be shown where they had a chance and rejected it.

 

Then you are a heretic.

Mark Osgatharp

 

Yeah, by your standards only.

The 20 years of landmarkism are difficult to put down, I have been there for only eight years and have struggled harder with laying aside those errors than anything I have thus far accomplished.

Remember Christ declared that God is seeking them that will worship Him in Spirit and in truth; He mentions the Spirit first for a reason dear Brother; to focus so much on the outward is to ignore the Spirit;
bro. Dallas

 

Mark,
Read Lewis' statement slowly.."There are people who do not accept the full Christian doctrine about Christ"

The key words are "full Christian doctrine"

In his view and theology, what do you think he meant by the word "full"

According to his church's teaching that would have meant accepting transubstituion. Which I am sure you don't, so brother when he is talking about "There are people who do not accept the full Christian doctrine about Christ"
from his way of thinking, he was talking about you!

How much of the Doctrine of Christ, must one accept to be a child of God?

 

Dear Brother TinyTim,
Thank you for pointing that out so clearly. It was obvious to me and I thought others could see it as well.

In answer to your question I say that there is no more required of the household of faith than what was required of Abraham, that is of faith in the promise of God to redeem a people for His name's sake through the life, death and resurrection of the lamb of God; Himself (Gen. 22 and Heb. 1-3).

Anything more is a blessing to be able to understand and to see; the promise is to you and to all your children and to as many as the Lord shall call;

Note that it is the Lord who does call them; not a gospel ministry; the gospel ministry is commissioned to teach them all things that Christ has commanded us in the church.

Divisions of His people are not by His doing, but by our own depravity:

Lu 12:49 (KJV) I am come to send fire on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled?

Brother Dallas

 

Then you are a heretic.

Mark Osgatharp </font>[/QUOTE] wow

I must have missed the memo where God appointed you the official heretic monitor...

 

I don't know who is saved or not and, to be really honest with you, I don't want that responsibility. I only know what the Bible says about how men who don't have the full revelation of the Gospel can be saved. </font>[/QUOTE]It does not say that men can be saved without knowing Christ. It says that no one is excused for not believing in God, if Rom. 1 is what you are thinking of.

Are you saying that the NT clearly states that men can be saved without knowing Christ?

 

TinyTim,

Read the rest of the statement slowly:

Lewis was talking about two groups of people. And even if you could get the first groups he mentioned saved - which is by no means certain - the second group are those who do not believe in Christ in any sense of the term. As Lewis said,

"people in other religions who thus belong to Christ without knowing it"

Now that we cleared that up, why don't you go slowly read II Corinthians chapter 6 and, in light of it, meditate on the fact that you are still part of an association which embraces infidel and sodomy advocating churches.

Mark Osgatharp

 

Dear Brother Mark,
Until we embrace the truth that 'we' cannot get anyone saved, we must always be frustrated in our efforts to minister to the children of God.

'We' do not get anyone saved. It is that attitude that they who are being saved are fleeing from because it is the voice of man and not their Shepherd.

Bro. Dallas

 

Then you are a heretic.

Mark Osgatharp </font>[/QUOTE]Will you please define the word "heretic"?

 

I used to be in landmark churches growing up, until the Lord showed me the error of their ways, and opened my eyes to see that there are Christians out there that are not Baptist.

BTW, ABC does not. Just a few stray infidels, but hey, all denominations have them. I bet there are even some Landmarkers that are sinners.

 

I think it is pretty clear from "The Last Battle" and other writings from Lewis that he considered some validity to inclusivist soteriology where all come to the Father through Christ but not necessarily Christianity. The question is whether that view is heretical or makes him a non-Christian.

 

TinyTim,
Hush your mouth child.

I agree with you though.

Exclusivism is practiced by man.

But many of the same will cry out against God having a particular people that He has redeemed to Himself through Christ.

Bro. Dallas

 

I'd really like some clarity here. Are you saying that men today can be saved without knowing Christ? That is the issue here.

Lewis has a character who worships a false god called Tash and yet this person is saved, because God tells him that worshiping Tash is the same as worshiping him. This is the inclusivism of Lewis. This is like saying that worship of a false god is the same as worship of the true God. Do you agree with this? If not, what is your position?