… he had some non-”evangelical” leanings. Besides not believing in inerrancy, he also believed in the theory of evolution, denied substitutionary atonement in favor of a “ransom to Satan” view, bordered on a Pelagian idea of human freedom, seemed to advocate baptismal regeneration, and regularly prayed for the dead. To top it all off, he held out hope for the destiny of the unevangelized, believing that Christ might save them outside of direct knowledge of him (inclusivism).
You see, while C.S. Lewis has a great deal of theological foibles, his ministry is defined by a defense of the essence of the Gospel. The essence of who Christ is and what he did are ardently defended by Lewis, saturating every page of his book. His purpose was clear: to defend the reality of God and the Lordship of Jesus Christ. . . . However, with Rob Bell, the essence of who Christ is and what he did seem to be secondary. One has to look for them as they weed through his defense of non-traditional Christianity. Whereas Lewis’ ultimate purpose is to define and defend “mere” Christianity, Bell’s “mere” Christianity is but a footnote to a redefined Christianity.
Another way to put this is to say that in the ministry of C.S. Lewis the central truths of the Christian faith are the chorus of his song with an occasional problem in the stanza. However, with Bell, the chorus of his song is filled with challenges to tradition Christianity and if you listen really close to the stanza, you might get an occasional line of orthodoxy.
I believe that one’s theology and worldview is holistic, complete, or comprehensive and wrong beliefs will affect and change Biblical beliefs one holds to over time. Of course God uses people with imperfect theology – God uses crooked sticks to draw a straight line. The question is it better to have people read more orthodox or Biblical books. We must remember that it takes discernment to read anything by a man or woman. So for growth, I believe that this paradigm is helpful to see the core of anyone’s worldview and theology. I think it is generally helpful to read people who have a Gospel centered focus, but know that some of the Stanzas may be a point of departure from the truth of Gospel and Scriptural emphasis and truth. In the end I would have people read C.S. Lewis (but not Rob Bell – except for a understanding of false teaching), and could teach from one of his books because I could frame it well, and it would help people understand the central tenants of Christianity.
Read Michael Patton’s article at:
Comments are closed.