I recently read a paper recommended to me by a friend about C.S. Lewis's views on predestination and free will and comparing them to John Calvin's. I have been a big fan of C.S. Lewis since I read the Chronicles of Narnia, but one thing I never realized (probably because I have not had a chance to read any of his non-fiction yet) was that he firmly believed in free-will. The paper described Lewis and Calvin as two of the greatest and most influential thinkers in Christianity, while I'm not sure that Lewis is quite up there with Calvin (it's a bit early to say!), I did appreciate the author of the paper's efforts to reconcile the two opposing beliefs.
The first thing that stuck out about the paper was the use of scripture to back up most, if not all of it's claims, albeit, some of the claims are out of context. Not far into the paper, the writer hit on exactly what my issues with Calvinism: "those therefore, whom God passes by he reprobates, and that for no other cause but because he is pleased to excludes them from the inheritance which he predestines to his children". If someone is not predestined for Heaven, they are by default, predestined to Hell. He also hit on the next loophole I found in the theory... that God only predestined and regenerated those He knew would choose him on their own, saying that by taking this stance, Calvin would be taking the "easy way" out.
Throughout the whole paper, the characteristic of God's sovereignty was put in the forefront. It was something that both Calvin and Lewis heartily agreed on. They disagreed, however, on how God exercised that sovereignty. Calvin came to the logical conclusion, that if God were sovereign, then he inevitably controlled humans destiny and decided who would go were.
Lewis offers that while God is sovereign, he is also Love, and out of Love, he created humanity. And in love, he created free will in order for us to choose to love him back. Lewis made the assertion that "[The Christian] does not think God will love us because we are good, but that God will make us good because He loves us."
One glaring mistake I see in Lewis's thinking process is that he believes that happiness is God's desire for humanity. This sounds very close to the teaching of Joel Olsteen and the "prosperity gospel", which is far from true. (It really pains me to compare C.S. Lewis, to Joel Olsteen...). The goal of God, the will of God, the plan of God, is to glorify Himself, in whatever method that may be. NOWHERE in the Bible does it say that God's desire for us is to be "happy".
In the paper, it claims that there is scriptural support for both Calvinism and Arminianism, and to a point I think this is correct, but I really can't know for sure. That is why I'm wrestling with it as I am now.
One thing I do think, and I'm not claiming to be a theologian, a philosopher, or really all that smart at all... but knowing that God is sovereign, and thinking that His ultimate goal is to bring glory to Himself, I would think that the best way to do that, is to allow, at least a degree of free will. To let people choose for themselves whether or not they want to follow Him. That robotic, predisposed love and worship towards God is not as rewarding, fulfilling, or as glorifying as a choice to love Him, and not something else. I have to admit though, no where is that thought process found in scripture, and scripture is authoritative, it's inerrant, and it's God-breathed. So, I will take scripture, and give scripture more validity than my own meager thoughts and philosophies.
Hi Stephanie,
ReplyDelete"If someone is not predestined to Heaven, they are by default, predestined to Hell."
This is where Calvinists go off the rails, in my (Lutheran) view of things. The Scriptures do indeed teach that God predestines people to heaven in Christ and that salvation does not depend on man's choice. It teaches that man is dead in trespasses and sins and that no one can come to Christ unless the Father draws him (I've heard it said that the Greek word for "draw" in this passage refers to dragging things that can't move under their own power). It does not, however, teach that God therefore predestined (from all eternity) everyone else to go to hell.
This might be a logical conclusion one could come to from the doctrine of election, yet the Scriptures tell us that God wants everyone to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth, and that Christ died not only for our sins but for the sins of the whole world. Both election and the fact that God wants all to be saved are Scriptural truths. Both Calvinists and Arminians overlook or try to reinterpret one in favor of the other. Lutherans would say that both are true because they are both taught in Scripture, though it may be beyond our understanding as to how both can be true.
This may not be intellectually satisfying to some but I'm not sure that God is always out to satisfy our intellectual curiosity. I really don't say this lightly - this topic used to literally keep me up at nights back in the day when I was wrestling with the same topics.
Regarding C.S. Lewis...I too was first introduced to him through the Chronicles of Narnia, and then from there read quite a few of his non-fictional works. With the way he is (selectively) used and quoted by evangelicals I was rather shocked to find that he was rather Catholic and slightly liberal in his thinking (and that I disagreed with him in many places). However, I think to compare him to the likes of Joel Osteen does him a great disservice. Some quotes in context would be helpful. His message was most certainly not that of the prosperity preachers of our day, and whether you agree with him or not he was a brilliant writer, NOT a purveyor of banal platitudes like Osteen. I would definitely recommend you read some of Lewis's non-fictional works - Mere Christianity and The Problem of Pain are good places to start.
Dawn
Hey Dawn!
ReplyDeleteI really appreciate your thoughts, I've never given this much time or energy into this particular issue as I have been these past few days. I've really been trying to seek what is biblically true and not just what I'd like to believe or what sounds nice.
It sounds like the Lutheran way of thinking in that both ideas are sound, just beyond our understanding as humans. (much like the Trinity) Sounds logically, as well as scripturally solid.
I do have an enormous respect for Lewis, and I really debated putting that comment comparing him to Olsteen (who I find despicable)! I absolutely don't think there's a comparison to the two, but at the same time, I do not think that God's intention for humanity is our happiness. I think when I was writing the post, I was a little frayed from mulling everything over in my head for those couple hours prior to and during the writing of the post. (Much like I'm getting now... I should probably not stay up so late all the time!)
Anyway, all that being said, I appreciate your thoughts and will continue to trudge through it and write and blog about it!