Opinions on C.S. Lewis

[RickyReformed]

Hermano Paul,

I confess - I do like reading Robbins; he can be quite entertaining and usually has some good insights. I would certainly fall on his side of the issue concerning the current Auburn Avenue controversy involving Wilson, Schlissel, Barach, Wilkins, etc. I would certainly caution new and/or undiscerning Christians from wandering around the Trinity Foundation website haphazardly. But I would caution the same persons to be even [u:a609a4cd54]more[/u:a609a4cd54] discerning about wandering around the Covenant Media Foundation website. On their homepage, they are currently offering "The Federal Vision: A Collection of Essays on the Covenant", "Reformed" Is Not Enough: Recovering the Objectivity of the Covenant", "Against Christianity", and "The Call of Grace": all of which, in the opinion of many (ask Fred, for instance), undermine the doctrine of Justification By Faith Alone. So while this certainly is a bifurcation, I would rather have a defective apologetic than a defective view of justification. Wouldn't you agree?

I too have read those articles by Michael Sudduth on Clark, which to my knowledge remain unanswered by the Clarkians. Do you have any idea why Michael Sudduth pulled his articles on Clark from his website? Luckily,er, I mean Providentially(!) I have some hardcopies somewhere that I printed when I first read them.

Ricky Reformed

 

[fredtgreco]

Discernment is Essential !

I think I mostly agree with both Paul and Ricky on this one. I have interacted with Robbins on another list, one on which you would have expected him to be able to participate well - it was a list owned by Rev. Andrew Webb, an opponent of the Federal Vision and Auburn theology, and the membership is generally opposed to the same. But it took about a week of Robbins' interaction to get himself removed from the list, for maligning the list owners, declaring the Apostles Creed to be heresy, and other such things. He also wrote a critique of Tabletalk that depended ([i:4d78b49de5]pace[/i:4d78b49de5] Phillip) upon a baptistic exact identity of the Covenant of Grace and the New Covenant in order to show Tabletalk was supporting heresy.

At the same time, I think that Robbins has been pretty much on the mark with the Federal Vision stuff. The irony is that while he does so, he does it arm in arm with the Theonomists and Van Tillians of the RCUS.

As for CM Foundation, since I am not a huge Bahnsen fan (not against him per se, but just not one of my main sources) and not a Theonomist (rather a vanilla-Westminster theonomist), I rarely look at articles there. The only time I usually do is on a recommendation from Paul Manata. I too am very concerned by the trajectory taken by CMF - they are clearly interested in promoting Shepherd, Schlissel and the Federal Vision (even to the extent of trying to dig Bahnsen up out of the grave as a Shepherd supporter). For that reason, unless someone is very discerning and aware of the issues involved I would not recommend "looking around" at CMF. Stick to the links provided by Paul and others here.

 

[RickyReformed]

Believe it or not I'm on "Scary Gary's" economic email list! He's got me convinced the economy is going to tank in the near future so I'm caching food and stocking up on ammo here in East Texas! :no:

Thanks guys, I'm glad we all agree:

Federal Vision :thumbdown:

Presuppositionalism :thumbup:

Uh, wait, did I say that? I meant, er, reformed classipistemologists...or sumthin like that!?!?!

 

[RamistThomist]

Digging Up Bones

Although I would take issue with his quasi-Arminiansim, his stuff is too valuable to pass up. Another guy on PB and myself were talking about popularizing presuppositonalism. Who were the two (arguably) most influential apologists of the 20th century? CS Lewis and Francis Schaeffer. Yes, Van Til's stuff is tighter and more biblical, but those two wrote with beauty and passion and immediately applied their apologetic to real life (think Francis Schaeffer arming the Christian populace against abortion). Lewis's writing is some of the best, ever.!. (that in no way takes away my appreciation for Van Til and Bahnsen. The Stein debate was the defining moment in my intellectual life).

I don't normally go to Lewis for theology (ok, I almost never go to him for theology), but for him illuminating reality. He can write some stuff that is so brilliant, that shines light on a new facet of human existence that I have never thought of before--and it usually stays within the bounds of orthodoxy.

I would recommend his non-religious works
A Discarded Image

I have yet to read the other stuff.

A Study in Words
Experiment in Criticism

What I think is needed is for people like me to hone my apologetic/reasoning skills to an edge, and then polish it with the above rhetoric (wait a minute! That's the mentality behind the Trivium!)

Hagiography coming later.

[Edited on 8--20-05 by Draught Horse]