This was shockingly rich and joyful. I loved every minute of it because Jesus is at the center, not because Lewis was. Lewis is great, and Wilson's a fun fellow, but Jesus is clearly Lord of both.
Why I am NOT a Calvinist: 1 Corinthians 1:12 "What I mean is that each one of you says, “I follow Paul,” or “I follow Apollos,” or “I follow Cephas,” or “I follow Christ.” 13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?" Was Calvin crucified for you? Were you baptized in the name of Calvin? Mark 9:7 "And a cloud overshadowed them, and a voice came out of the cloud, “This is my beloved Son; listen to him.” 8 And suddenly, looking around, they no longer saw anyone with them but Jesus only." John 12:2 "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw ALL men unto me. 33 This he said, signifying what death he should die." 1 Timothy 2:1 "I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for ALL men; 2 For kings, and for ALL that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in ALL godliness and honesty. 3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; 4 Who will have ALL men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; 6 Who gave himself a ransom for ALL, to be testified in due time." 2 Peter 3:9 "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish, but that ALL should come to repentance." Revelation 3:20 "Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me." ETC., ETC...
Why do Americans do this? We hear about the faith of Christopher Hitchens and the Calvinism of C S Lewis. One American lady has written a book about the feminism of C S Lewis! C S Lewis's acceptance of the coincidence of freedom and necessity (though he prioritised freedom) does not require that he was a Calvinist. Mr Wilson cannot legitimately co-opt C S Lewis to his Calvinist theology. It is clear from his writings that C S Lewis believed in free will (or at least a will able to respond to grace) - and not in total depravity or irresistible grace. “God created things which had free will. That means creatures which can go wrong or right. Some people think they can imagine a creature which was free but had no possibility of going wrong, but I can't. If a thing is free to be good it's also free to be bad. And free will is what has made evil possible. Why, then, did God give them free will? Because free will, though it makes evil possible, is also the only thing that makes possible any love or goodness or joy worth having. A world of automata -of creatures that worked like machines- would hardly be worth creating. The happiness which God designs for His higher creatures is the happiness of being freely, voluntarily united to Him and to each other in an ecstasy of love and delight compared with which the most rapturous love between a man and a woman on this earth is mere milk and water. And for that they've got to be free. Of course God knew what would happen if they used their freedom the wrong way: apparently, He thought it worth the risk. (...) If God thinks this state of war in the universe a price worth paying for free will -that is, for making a real world in which creatures can do real good or harm and something of real importance can happen, instead of a toy world which only moves when He pulls the strings- then we may take it it is worth paying.” This is an unmistakable disavowal of Calvinism.
I don't know why part of the above is scored out. That was not my intention. I should also say 'some Americans'. Listening to Walter Hooper speak about C S Lewis is a delight.
Absolutely, and the talk is rife with inaccuracies anyway. He seems to imply that Lewis's main influence was Chesterton, when in fact it was MacDonald (who if anything opposed Calvinism even more strongly than GKC, calling it "a stone rampart between your child soul and the Father"), he gets the title of the main book he's drawing from wrong (it's English literature in the 16th century EXcluding drama, not INcluding), He not only draws the opposite conclusion about Lewis's conversion from the one Lewis arrived at (Lewis specifically says "I am what I do", not the Calvinistic "I do what I am") but he fails to clarify that this was Lewis's conversion to theism, not to Christianity, and to top it off he takes aspects of the Chronicles of Narnia which are simply gospel and tries to shoehorn them into his imaginary "Narnian TULIP" shape. None of us think we have the power to save ourselves, and if he doesn't want Calvinism misrepresented, why does he imply that Calvinism has a monopoly on believing the things that all Christians hold in common?
Douglas' attempts to absorb Lewis into Calvinism are simply ridiculous and eisegetical. Lewis clearly states many times that he is not a Calvinist and rejects it. Douglas has to know this, yet still persists in attempting to read it into Lewis's work.
Just exceptional - one of the best talks I have ever heard.
SAME HERE!
This was shockingly rich and joyful. I loved every minute of it because Jesus is at the center, not because Lewis was. Lewis is great, and Wilson's a fun fellow, but Jesus is clearly Lord of both.
WONDERFUL VIDEO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
A humorous but candid message🙂👍
Thank you for being both learned and engaging. You have opened up my mind to new ways of thinking. God bless you.
I LOVE THE JOKE ABOUT THE DAISY!!!!!!
Good stuff fully entertained
I thought this was a masterful talk.
Two moons in the sky(41:28) - is that a reference to the Dune trilogy?
Why I am NOT a Calvinist:
1 Corinthians 1:12 "What I mean is that each one of you says, “I follow Paul,” or “I follow Apollos,” or “I follow Cephas,” or “I follow Christ.” 13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?"
Was Calvin crucified for you? Were you baptized in the name of Calvin?
Mark 9:7 "And a cloud overshadowed them, and a voice came out of the cloud, “This is my beloved Son; listen to him.” 8 And suddenly, looking around, they no longer saw anyone with them but Jesus only."
John 12:2 "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw ALL men unto me. 33 This he said, signifying what death he should die."
1 Timothy 2:1 "I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for ALL men; 2 For kings, and for ALL that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in ALL godliness and honesty. 3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; 4 Who will have ALL men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; 6 Who gave himself a ransom for ALL, to be testified in due time."
2 Peter 3:9 "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish, but that ALL should come to repentance."
Revelation 3:20 "Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me."
ETC., ETC...
Why do Americans do this? We hear about the faith of Christopher Hitchens and the Calvinism of C S Lewis. One American lady has written a book about the feminism of C S Lewis! C S Lewis's acceptance of the coincidence of freedom and necessity (though he prioritised freedom) does not require that he was a Calvinist. Mr Wilson cannot legitimately co-opt C S Lewis to his Calvinist theology. It is clear from his writings that C S Lewis believed in free will (or at least a will able to respond to grace) - and not in total depravity or irresistible grace.
“God created things which had free will. That means creatures which can go wrong or right. Some people think they can imagine a creature which was free but had no possibility of going wrong, but I can't. If a thing is free to be good it's also free to be bad. And free will is what has made evil possible. Why, then, did God give them free will? Because free will, though it makes evil possible, is also the only thing that makes possible any love or goodness or joy worth having. A world of automata -of creatures that worked like machines- would hardly be worth creating. The happiness which God designs for His higher creatures is the happiness of being freely, voluntarily united to Him and to each other in an ecstasy of love and delight compared with which the most rapturous love between a man and a woman on this earth is mere milk and water. And for that they've got to be free.
Of course God knew what would happen if they used their freedom the wrong way: apparently, He thought it worth the risk. (...) If God thinks this state of war in the universe a price worth paying for free will -that is, for making a real world in which creatures can do real good or harm and something of real importance can happen, instead of a toy world which only moves when He pulls the strings- then we may take it it is worth paying.”
This is an unmistakable disavowal of Calvinism.
I don't know why part of the above is scored out. That was not my intention. I should also say 'some Americans'. Listening to Walter Hooper speak about C S Lewis is a delight.
I think you mean Peter Hitchens
No, there is a book about the 'faith' of Christopher Hitchens by Larry Alex Taunton. The point would have been lost if it had been Peter Hitchens.
Oh I getcha now - thanks :)
Absolutely, and the talk is rife with inaccuracies anyway. He seems to imply that Lewis's main influence was Chesterton, when in fact it was MacDonald (who if anything opposed Calvinism even more strongly than GKC, calling it "a stone rampart between your child soul and the Father"), he gets the title of the main book he's drawing from wrong (it's English literature in the 16th century EXcluding drama, not INcluding), He not only draws the opposite conclusion about Lewis's conversion from the one Lewis arrived at (Lewis specifically says "I am what I do", not the Calvinistic "I do what I am") but he fails to clarify that this was Lewis's conversion to theism, not to Christianity, and to top it off he takes aspects of the Chronicles of Narnia which are simply gospel and tries to shoehorn them into his imaginary "Narnian TULIP" shape. None of us think we have the power to save ourselves, and if he doesn't want Calvinism misrepresented, why does he imply that Calvinism has a monopoly on believing the things that all Christians hold in common?
Douglas' attempts to absorb Lewis into Calvinism are simply ridiculous and eisegetical. Lewis clearly states many times that he is not a Calvinist and rejects it. Douglas has to know this, yet still persists in attempting to read it into Lewis's work.
40:54
Arminian daisy 😂😂
From his own words I cannot accept Lewis was saved.
Why? I'm confused.