The Evangelical Universalist Forum

C.S.Lewis Hopeful Universalist?

Evangelical Universalism Arguments for Evangelical Universalism
#1

I couldn’t find the thread with the list of names of people for, maybe or against EU, so I planted my question here for now. Maybe Jason could give more light on CSL position.

So, last night I was reading CSL God in the Dock and can across this statement that stopped me right in my tracks. Now I kind of, sort of, know of CSL view of the final destination of folks from his other writings and his more well known statement “the doors of hell are locked from the inside”. But this just popped off the page at me.

In the chapter “Modern Translations of the Bible”, which was originally published as an introduction to J.P. Phillips’ Letters to Young Churches (1947), I came across this statement in a section where CSL is talking about how in the day, people where attacking St. Paul, that he had corrupted the Gospel of Jesus, etc, etc. In defending St Paul he says:

" All the most terrifying texts come from the mouth of Our Lord: all the texts on which we can base such warrant as we have for hoping that all men will be saved come from St Paul."

So Jason, can we say that CSL can be placed under the category “hopeful Universalist” or am I just reading too much into this?

What think ye? :wink:

#2

No, that’s one of his couple of statements along the line that we would be universalists if we only had Paul’s writing. He thought Paul as the disciple should be interpreted according to what Jesus said; or if there was any actual difference then Paul must have misunderstood and Jesus would be the correction.

He clearly respected universal salvation, though, and while affirming otherwise in The Problem of Pain, he did say he would get rid of the doctrine if he could, declaring it “intolerable”. Ironically his defense of hell was not only that it must be more tolerable to final sinners than to repent and do justice, but that we should expect God to give up when only one or two chapters earlier he had stressed at great length that we should never expect God to give up on saving sinners from sin.

A logically consistent read of his theology does lead to universalism, or so I found – when he stops contradicting himself, the result is Christian universalism. :slight_smile: (And Lewis does provide tools for identifying and correcting for contradictions, so…!)

My big essay on the topic can be found here at the forum: How close did Lewis get to universalism? This close!

#3

Thanks Jason for the insights into CSL. I will give your essay a look when I get the chance.

#4

I doubt that Lewis was even a “hopeful” Universalist. He knew that his teacher, George MacDonald was, but at the end of “The Great Divorce,” Lewis meets his teacher GMD, who in his post-mortem condition comes to learn that Universalism is false (at least “within time”). Lewis puts words into GMD’s mouth at the end of the book.

GMD: There is no spirit in prison to whom He did not preach."

CSL: And some hear Him?

GMD: Aye.

CSL: In your own books, Sir, you were a Universalist. You talked as if all men would be saved. And St. Paul too.

GMD: Ye can know nothing of the end of all things, or nothing expressible in those terms. It may be, as the Lord said to Lady Julian, that all will be well, and all will be well. But it’s ill talking of such questions.

CSL: Because they are too terrible, Sir?

GMD: No. Because all answers deceive. If ye put the question from within Time and are asking about possibilities, the answer is certain. The choice of ways is before you. Neither is closed. Any man may choose eternal death. Those who choose it will have it. But if ye are trying to leap on into eternity, if ye are trying to see the final state of all things as it will be… when there are no more possibilities left but only the Real, then ye ask what cannot be answered to mortal ears.

Paidion: (Underlining is mine).
From the Narnia Chronicles, CSL indicated belief in time progressing at different rates in different worlds. And here, he clearly believed that there is existence “outside of time.” If he was a hopeful universalist, then universal reconciliation takes place “outside of time.” Within time, one can choose eternal death and receive it.

#5

There’s one of the other two or three instances of Lewis acknowledging Paul talks as if CU is true, btw, Val!

I feel about 80% sure there’s at least one more ref somewhere in his standard works, maybe two more, somewhat parallel to the essay introducing the new translation of Paul’s epistles.

(Not counting Lewis’ letters, which I haven’t thoroughly read.)

#6

C.S. Lewis was once asked in a letter why he didn’t follow MacDonald into universalism and he gave this response:

“I parted company from MacDonald on that point because a higher authority — the Dominical utterances themselves — seemed to me irreconcilable with universalism.”

Another example of Lewis acknowledging that it was Jesus’ words that led him away from universalism, not anything else (especially not Paul). It was that, I think, that led him to forming a defence of hell, though, as Jason pointed out, he ended up getting a little confused somewhere between scope and perseverance, despite strongly affirming both.

#7

This illustrates why I think it vital to emphasize that the Greek word “gehenna” means “Valley of Hinnom”, NOT post-mortem damnation; and why it is vital to emphasize that the Greek word “hades” means “the grave”, NOT post-mortem damnation. Once people get it clear that Jesus NEVER mentioned Hell in the contemporary understanding of the word, then the rest is comparatively easy.