# Picking Apart The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe



## Arch2k (Nov 4, 2005)

What are some themes from this book that are biblical or contrary to the Bible?

I have found a couple of critiques so far:

1) Supports the ransom theory of the atonement

2) Supports evidential apologetics (The professor says to Peter and Susan that Lucy must either be 1) Out of her mind, 2) Lying or 3) Telling the truth. This relates to his apologetic of Christ's claim to be the Messiah.)

Any other criticisms or compliments?


----------



## Saiph (Nov 4, 2005)

Animals don't talk.


----------



## LadyFlynt (Nov 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Saiph_
> Animals don't talk.



Spoilsport!


----------



## Saiph (Nov 4, 2005)

"Till We Have Face" was his best fiction.
(cowritten)

Screwtape is decent. 

Space trilogy ? 

Narnia ?  for kids.

Tolkien and Williams are the masters of the group.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Nov 4, 2005)

The concepts in the Narnia series (really _The Last Battle_) that I don't care for are 1) Taslan and 2) Neoplatonic ideas of reality. 

It's a great book though, In my humble opinion, and I enjoy reading it overall very much.

[Edited on 11-4-2005 by VirginiaHuguenot]


----------



## LadyFlynt (Nov 4, 2005)

Taslan I definately took issue with!


----------



## fredtgreco (Nov 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel_
> What are some themes from this book that are biblical or contrary to the Bible?
> 
> I have found a couple of critiques so far:
> ...



I don't see how this is evidential. Not that I think an evidential approach is _contrary_ to the Bible (which is different than being less effective), but that statement could just as easily be presuppositional. That is, just because Lucy's statement doesn't make sense, does not mean that she is lying. The problem could be with the children's presuppositions: namely, that other worlds cannot exist.


----------



## fredtgreco (Nov 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Saiph_
> "Till We Have Face" was his best fiction.
> (cowritten)
> 
> ...



I personally think the space triolgy is his best fiction. I love Tolkien, but don't care for Williams.

Non res gustibus.


----------



## py3ak (Nov 4, 2005)

The space trilogy is glorious --especially Perelandra. That Hideous Strength tackled a sin that almost no one has addressed and that is probably one of the most prevalent of our time --the desire to be in. I thought it was a more insightful analysis of that particular sin than anything in Screwtape. Till We Have Faces was almost as good as Perelandra. 
Has anyone read the book he started which begins with the soldiers inside the Trojan Horse? Judging by the first two chapters (all he wrote) that would have been a magnificent book as well.
I like Williams, but after The Greater Trumps I am not sure that his orthodoxy can at all be salvaged. I liked Many Dimensions best.


----------



## Saiph (Nov 4, 2005)

Ruben,

"Many Dimensions", "All Hallows Eve", and "Descent Into Hell" are my favorites by Williams.

What was wrong with "Greater Trumps" ? ?


----------



## brymaes (Nov 4, 2005)

> "Till We Have Face" was his best fiction. (cowritten)



Absolutely! Didn't know that it was cowritten, though.


----------



## Saiph (Nov 4, 2005)

He and Joy worked on it together.


----------



## brymaes (Nov 4, 2005)

One of Lewis' biographers, Chad Walsh, claimed that Joy was the inspiration for Orual's character...


----------



## Saiph (Nov 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by SharperSword_
> One of Lewis' biographers, Chad Walsh, claimed that Joy was the inspiration for Orual's character...



I ahve heard that as well. Very cool.


----------



## py3ak (Nov 4, 2005)

I have not read "All Hallows Eve" --I'll keep my eyes open for it. I liked "War in Heaven" better than "Descent Into Hell" --the Archdeacon had more character than Stanhope. "The Place of the Lion" was extremely good too. I tried some of his poetry but I must admit I didn't find it up to the level of his novels.
In "The Greater Trumps" Williams used the phrase, "Our Lord Gautama." Other than that the book was fine (not as stimulating as "The Place of the Lion" and with an occasional banality, but still enjoyable and in places rapturous), but I found that phrase extremely dismaying. As it was not placed in the mouth of a character, and as it was not used in a historical context, it came across as an affirmation or confession concerning Buddha --and for Christians there is one Lord, Jesus Christ.


----------



## jfschultz (Nov 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by LadyFlynt_
> Taslan I definitely took issue with!



It's been a number of years, so my memory might be rusty.

Taslan is not being held up as some sort of "Christian" ideal. If anything with Taslan, Lewis was ahead of his time. Being presented by the unfaithful as the unity of Tash and Aslan, Taslan is a reflection of the modern concept that we all believe in the same god!


----------



## brymaes (Nov 4, 2005)

Tashlan was an invention of the ape for the purpose of deception. As such, I have no problem with that. What I do have a problem with is Aslan's speech to the Calormen soldier explaining that all "good" service, even if done in the name of Tash, was actually service to Aslan, and that all "bad" service was actually service to Tash, even if done in the name of Aslan. This is consistent with Lewis' universalistic tendencies, implying that God accepts our "good" service, even if it is done in hommage to a pagan god.

Andrew, is this what you were refering to in the first place?


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Nov 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by SharperSword_
> Tashlan was an invention of the ape for the purpose of deception. As such, I have no problem with that. What I do have a problem with is Aslan's speech to the Calormen soldier explaining that all "good" service, even if done in the name of Tash, was actually service to Aslan, and that all "bad" service was actually service to Tash, even if done in the name of Aslan. This is consistent with Lewis' universalistic tendencies, implying that God accepts our "good" service, even if it is done in hommage to a pagan god.
> 
> Andrew, is this what you were refering to in the first place?



Exactly!


----------



## CalsFarmer (Nov 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Saiph_
> "Till We Have Face" was his best fiction.
> (cowritten)
> 
> ...



Space Trilogy...best of breed


----------



## JohnV (Nov 4, 2005)

I don't agree with this appraisal of Lewis' Narnia books. I will give way, to quite a degree on the last one of the series, because I think that he made a mistake including it. Though I read six of the books a number of times for my children at bedtime, I never read the seventh for them. But to compare this allegory to his theology is a mistake, I think. It wasn't meant to be that way, as I recall from Pilgrim's Regress.

But these books are more of a distant memory for me right now. The last time I read the Lewis books it was the Space Trilogy, and that was now about two years ago. A lot has happened since that time. I'm just recalling these things from memory, somewhat faded memory.


----------



## turmeric (Nov 4, 2005)

The Last Battle is pleasingly amillennial, I don't like the ransom theory in TLW&W, but was looking at it last nite - can't beat his "Aslan isn't safe-but he's good" comment! Loved Till We Have Faces, also That HIdeous Strength. Boy, did he have modern wickedness [email protected]


----------



## Saiph (Nov 4, 2005)

I will have to try the space trilogy again. I just rember wishing it was over so I could say that I read it. But, when it comes to sci-fi I am somewhat of a fascist. Frank Herbert is the only author I like.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Nov 4, 2005)

Read all the Chronicles years ago. I thought they were a bit occultic but a good read. I was wondering if it is a breaking of the 2nd Commandment to portray Christ other than He is, as in a Novel such as Lewis did. I get kind of scared portraying Christ by other means outside of scriptural boundaries. I don't know exactly what to make of Pictures of Christ but I don't have any either. The characterister of allowing a pagan to be included in the Kingdom when he definitely served a foreign god was terrible. The end of the books was a bummer as stated above by Rev. Maes. I was greatly disappointed by that part.


----------



## Saiph (Nov 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by puritancovenanter_
> Read all the Chronicles years ago. I thought they were a bit occultic but a good read. I was wondering if it is a breaking of the 2nd Commandment to portray Christ other than He is, as in a Novel such as Lewis did. I get kind of scared portraying Christ by other means outside of scriptural boundaries. I don't know exactly what to make of Pictures of Christ but I don't have any either. The characterister of allowing a pagan to be included in the Kingdom when he definitely served a foreign god was terrible. The end of the books was a bummer as stated above by Rev. Maes. I was greatly disappointed by that part.



As in Tolkien, the authors are not portraying Christ, but "Christ figures".
So loosely taken it is just fun fiction. . . mind candy.

[Edited on 11-4-2005 by Saiph]


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Nov 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Saiph_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by puritancovenanter_
> ...



I am not so sure that God is someone who we ought to be having fun fiction with. 
*Our Father, who art in Heaven, Hallowed Be Thy Name*. 

I think we ought not be doing such things as Lewis Did. He made Aslan Christ who travels from astro plain to astro plain. .Just my humble opinion.


----------



## Saiph (Nov 4, 2005)

Good point.


----------



## Augusta (Nov 4, 2005)

> - can't beat his "Aslan isn't safe-but he's good" comment!



Meg, that is mine and my husbands favorite line also. 
Frank Herberts Dune series was great although the last one was racy.

[Edited on 11-4-2005 by Augusta]


----------



## Michael Butterfield (Nov 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Augusta_
> 
> 
> > - can't beat his "Aslan isn't safe-but he's good" comment!
> ...



 One of the best lines ever written by Lewis In my humble opinion


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Nov 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Michael Butterfield_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Augusta_
> ...


 That is a great line. 

No... He isn't safe but He is good.


----------



## py3ak (Nov 8, 2005)

I thought of another issue with The Greater Trumps (sorry, old news by this time, huh?). Sybil says that the central mystery of Christianity is the deity of love and the incarnation of love. The first part of that is backwards (as I think Lewis himself would have said) and the second part minimizes the Resurrection. Given Sybil's role in the book, she is William's mouthpiece if he has one.


----------



## Readhead (Nov 18, 2005)

I'm glad to read these comments. I'm in the same boat with many of you here - I love the books, they are cracking stories and I know he said that that was primarily what they were supposed to be - not Christian books. BUT his Christian faith is apparent in the material. So how do you know what has a hidden meaning and what doesn't? 

I've always had an issue with the last battle for the reasons quoted in previous posts and it was only recently when I went back to the books after several years. It was then that I picked up on the whole problem with the ransom theology. I would be interested to know if anyone has any Christian fantasy/allegory that they feel actually works, where there is not a problem like this? I haven't come across any - or any that I really enjoy reading in the way I enjoyed reading the Narnia books. The Pilgrim's Progress and The Holy War would be the traditional alternatives I suppose. 

So don't get me wrong. I still love C.S. Lewis' books. The Narnia books are still amongst my favourite children's books alongside Patricia St. John's fiction. 

If it's o.k. to do this - I'm not sure being new to the page - does anyone else have favourite Christian children's books from their childhood? Why did you like them?
Readhead


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Nov 18, 2005)

Read Head,
Just start a new Thread with your question. It would be off topic to continue with your queston. Post it in the Library. BTW we have a set of books called 'The Sugar Creek Gang' that I love.

[Edited on 11-19-2005 by puritancovenanter]


----------



## biblelighthouse (Nov 18, 2005)

> _Originally posted by puritancovenanter_
> I was wondering if it is a breaking of the 2nd Commandment to portray Christ other than He is, as in a Novel such as Lewis did. I get kind of scared portraying Christ by other means outside of scriptural boundaries.



Hmmm . . . If I remember correctly, it is _Scripture_ that first portrayed Christ as a lion. So for that particular image, Lewis wasn't being original.

(cf. Genesis 49:9, Hosea 5:14, and especially Revelation 5:5.)



[Edited on 11-19-2005 by biblelighthouse]


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Nov 18, 2005)

> _Originally posted by biblelighthouse_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by puritancovenanter_
> ...



You didn't read my following post Joe.


> I am not so sure that God is someone who we ought to be having fun fiction with.
> *Our Father, who art in Heaven, Hallowed Be Thy Name*.
> 
> I think we ought not be doing such things as Lewis Did. He made Aslan Christ who travels from astro plain to astro plain. .Just my humble opinion.



BTW, Good to see you again Joe.

[Edited on 11-19-2005 by puritancovenanter]


----------



## biblelighthouse (Nov 19, 2005)

> _Originally posted by puritancovenanter_
> 
> You didn't read my following post Joe.
> 
> ...



Actually, I did read your following post. I do respect your opinion, but I also disagree with it.

Like I said, it is Scripture that first portrayed Christ as a Lion. And how about Him travelling from "astro plain to astro plain"? Well, how about him appearing in the room with the apostles without using the door? How about the ascension in Acts 1, where he is lifted up out of sight, and then transferred from the plain of Earth to (I assume) the plain of Heaven? And how about the appearances "out of nowhere" of the Angel of the Lord throughout the O.T.? I am not a person who would argue that Lewis was completely without Biblical grounds in such imagery. On the contrary, I DO believe that men and angels, etc., live on seperate plains. That is the only way I can make sense of Acts 1, for instance. (After all, Jesus didn't just keep going up, up, up from the Earth forever . . . point a powerful telescope directly up from the mount of olives, and I guarantee that you won't discover the location of Heaven.)

I do not think Lewis dishonored Christ in any way by writing the first 6 books in the CofN series. Of course, if I thought that he had, then I would be opposed to his books too.

But on the contrary, I think the books are very good. I can't wait to see the movie on Dec. 6!

In fact, I personally know at least one person who became a believer in Christ after reading the Chronicles of Narnia. The books brought the Gospel message into a format which really clicked with her. God used the CofN to bring her to belief in Christ, and to a love of the Bible.



> _Originally posted by puritancovenanter_
> 
> BTW, Good to see you again Joe.



Thank you! It's good to see you again, too. I appreciate your posts. I have just been WAY too busy lately to spend much time on the PB. I hope to get back on here more regularly in December.

Your brother in Christ,
Joseph






[Edited on 11-19-2005 by biblelighthouse]


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Nov 19, 2005)

> _Originally posted by biblelighthouse_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by puritancovenanter_
> ...


Joe,
I guess it just weirded me out a bit. The going from one demention of created beings to another which had created beings in times that didn't equal the same time. It was a good read. I will go see the Disney movie. 

[Edited on 11-19-2005 by puritancovenanter]


----------

