I Don't Want To Be Accused
I don't want to be accused of misrepresenting Dr. Mohler on the topics of Lewis and Tolkien that I discussed below, so I will post a few quotations from Dr. Mohler's website.
"C. S. Lewis was one of the most influential Christian intellectuals of the twentieth century. For American evangelicals, he has become a model and mentor for literary expression, apologetic engagement, and the dignity of intellect. Nevertheless, Lewis was often not a careful theologian. He was an inclusivist on the question of salvation, believing that at least some who did not consciously believe in Christ would be saved. He rejected the inerrancy of Scripture and was never adequately specific about his understanding of the atonement. He was a firm defender of orthodoxy on doctrines such as the Trinity, but apparently accepted baptismal regeneration and never adequately affirmed justification by faith." (Article)
Now, I don't know if there is any excuse for Mohler. What, then, is a Christian? Yay, Lewis supported the Trinity but denied just about everything else!
As for Tolkien, Mohler says:
"J. R. R. Tolkien was a deeply Christian man whose literary vision and fantastic tales were intended to point to eternal realities. A fervent Roman Catholic, Tolkien was influenced by John Henry Cardinal Newman, in whose oratory Tolkien and his brother received early education." (Article)
Wait, wait. Correct me if I'm wrong here. A fervent Romanist would include denying the gospel right? But, according to Mohler, Tolkien was a "deeply Christian man". What does "Christian" even mean to Mohler?
Ah well. Just wanted to cover my bases.
posted by Zac @ 3:41 PM
3 comments
3 Comments:
My point has never been to say "They are definately NOT Christians." In fact, I've repeatedly stated that my main point is that Mohler and evangelicals are wrong to claim that both are Christians without argument or very good qualification.
And if it is true that C.S. Lewis believed what he said he believed, I do not see how, according to the Scriptures, he could have been a Christian. What does the term Christian mean?
And as for Tolkien being a Romanist: I also stated several times that I thought it possible for Catholics to be Christians under one of two conditions. Namely that they either do not agree with the doctrine of Rome or are ignorant of it. I think these are the only two options for, say, a Mormon being a Christian as well. However, I would never say that a mormon was a Christian without offering an argument that one of these two conditions were true (i.e., that they disbelieved the doctrines of mormonism or they didn't know them). Mohler, nor any evangelical I'm aware of, has done this for Tolkien.
My lack of holiness and zealousness is not leading millions into having wrong thoughts about doctrine and what makes someone a Christian.
If you're suggesting that we don't call people who make major public doctrinal mistakes, then I can't agree with you.
Now, you're opening up the conversation as to what makes a Christian a Christian; to this we might not agree. And in fact, with some of Lewis comments about the Scriptures, I think it is equivalent to denying that the Scriptures are the Word of God And if Tolkien was a fervent Catholic then I can only presume that he rejected the gospel.
I would be gracious to the men by not beating them up or burning them at the stake. I do not consider it graciousness to do what I think you are implying. :)
Perhpas there has been some misunderstand, I said in a previous post:
"My point has never been to say "They are definately NOT Christians.""
My point has been:
The things that Lewis and Tolkien apparently believed would disqualify them (as I understand the Scriptures) from being Christians. I readily affirm that I could be mistaken about what the Scriptures teach AND perhaps Lewis nor Tolkien believed what I think they believed.
But my MAIN point was to rebuke Mohler for making broad claims that they were Christian. If you are not willing to say someone is definately not a Christian, I don't see how it can be consistent to say that someone is, especially given what they supposedly believe.
Post a Comment
<< Home