CS Lewis said Jesus was Wrong

I’ve always liked CS Lewis, I’ve admired his way of writing, his level of thought, and I’ve always had some reservations about him saying “Jesus was wrong.” So I found the source of the claim, because I wanted to read it for myself.

Here is some of what I found.

In 1960 he wrote a book, “The World’s Last Night: And Other Essays”. In the book, he asks the question, “What if last night was the world last night – Jesus returns today?”

I’ve not read the whole book, but the ideas contemplated are most interesting! He deals for several enjoyable pages on the idea of life being discovered on other planets and our interaction with other beings. He concludes:

The supposed threat [of life on other planets] is clearly directed against the

doctrine of the Incarnation, the belief that God of God

"for us men and for our salvation came down from

heaven and was . . . made man." (page 83)

And from there he goes on to develop five points of interesting speculation about these ‘other beings’ interacting with us as fallen beings in need of a savior. I do him a disservice by quoting only select passages but this seems, to sum up his treatise on ‘other beings’:

What we believe always remains intellectually possi- 

ble; it never becomes intellectually compulsive. I have 

an Idea that when this ceases to be so, the world will be 

ending. We have been warned that all but conclusive 

evidence against Christianity, evidence that would de- 

ceive (If it were possible) the very elect, will appear 

with Antichrist. 

And after that there will be wholly conclusive 

evidence on the other side. 

But not, I fancy, till then on either side. 

From here he abandons the idea of ‘other aliens’ and concentrates on the second coming of Jesus. Rather than summarizing such noble thoughts that Lewis develops I’ll copy him:

.HERE are many rea- 

sons why the modern Christian and even the modern 

theologian may hesitate to give to the doctrine of 

Christ's Second Coming that emphasis which was 

usually laid on it by our ancestors. Yet it seems to me 

impossible to retain in any recognisable form our belief 

in the Divinity of Christ and the truth of the Christian 

revelation while abandoning, or even persistently neg- 

lecting, the promised, and threatened, Return. "He 

shall come again to judge the quick and the dead/' says 

the Apostles' Creed. "This same Jesus/' said the angels 

in Acts, "shall so come in like manner as ye have seen 

him go into heaven." "Hereafter/' said our Lord him- 

self (by those words inviting crucifixion) , "shall ye 

see the Son of Man . . . coming in the clouds of 

heaven." If this is not an integral part of the faith once 

given to the saints, I do not know what is. In the follow- 

ing pages I shall endeavour to deal with some of the 

thoughts that may deter modern men from a firm belief 

in, or a due attention to, the return or Second Coming 

of the Saviour. I have no claim to speak as an expert in 

93 

THE WORLD S LAST NIGHT 

any of the studies involved, and merely put forward the 

reflections which have arisen in my own mind and have 

seemed to me (perhaps wrongly) to be helpful. They 

are all submitted to the correction of wiser heads. 

The grounds for modern embarrassment about this 

doctrine fall into two groups, which may be called the 

theoretical and the practical. 1 will deal with the theo- 

retical first. 

Following page 93 he develops several ideas about the Second Coming from the doubter’s and naysayers point of view.

Then on page 97 comes the quote where Lewis supposedly calls Jesus wrong. He is postulating about what the doubters might say:

But there is worse to come. "Say what you like/* we 

shall be told, "the apocalyptic beliefs of the first Chris- 

97 

THE WORLD S LAST NIGHT 

tians have been proved to be false. It is clear from the 

New Testament that they all expected the Second 

Coming in their own lifetime. And, worse still, they 

had a reason, and one which you will find very embar- 

rassing. Their Master had told them so. He shared, and 

indeed created, their delusion. He said in so many 

words, 'this generation shall not pass till all these things 

be done/ And he was wrong. He clearly knew no more 

about the end of the world than anyone else." 

End of quote – these are not Lewis’ words, but a conjured quote for the sake of argument.

Lewis acknowledges these are difficult verses and then goes on to show how they are basic proof that the New Testament writers and their copyists were honest men:

And unless later copyists were equally honest 

they would never have preserved the (apparently) mis- 

taken prediction about "this generation** after the pas- 

sage of time had shown the (apparent) mistake. This 

passage (Mark 13:30-32) and the cry "Why hast thou 

forsaken me?" (Mark 15:34) together make up the 

strongest proof that the New Testament is historically 

reliable. The evangelists have the first great characteris- 

98 

THE WORLD S LAST NIGHT 

tic of honest witnesses: they mention facts which are, 

at first sight, damaging to their main contention. 

I don’t see from these passages where Lewis thought Jesus was ‘wrong’. Lewis understands us to be fallen people, Jesus is Incarnate, and he’s coming again.

The doctrine of the Second Coming teaches us that 

we do not and cannot know when the world drama will 

end. The curtain may be rung down at any moment: 

say, before you have finished reading this paragraph. Page 105

The doctrine of the Second Coming teaches us that 

we do not and cannot know when the world drama will 

end. The curtain may be rung down at any moment: 

say, before you have finished reading this paragraph.

Lewis understands the Bible says we too are to be ready for his coming at any time:

Note the therefore. Precisely because we cannot pre- 

dict the moment, we must be ready at all moments. Our 

Lord repeated this practical conclusion again and again; 

as if the promise of the Return had been made for the 

sake of this conclusion alone. Watch, watch, is the bur- 

den of his advice. I shall come like a thief. You will not, 

107 

THE WORLD S LAST NIGHT 

I most solemnly assure you you will not, see me ap- 

proaching. If the householder had known at what time 

the burglar would arrive, he would have been ready for 

him. If the servant had known when his absent em- 

ployer would come home, he would not have been 

found drunk in the kitchen. But they didn't Nor will 

you. Therefore you must be ready at all times. The 

point is surely simple enough. The schoolboy does not 

know which part of his Virgil lesson he will be made to 

translate: that is why he must be prepared to translate 

any passage. The sentry does not know at what time an 

enemy will attack, or an officer inspect, his post: that is 

why he must keep awake all the time. The Return is 

wholly unpredictable. There will be wars and rumours 

of wars and all kinds of catastrophes, as there always are. 

Things will be, in that sense, normal, the hour before 

the heavens roll up like a scroll. You cannot guess it. If 

you could, one chief purpose for which it was foretold 

would be frustrated. And God's purposes are not so 

easily frustrated as that. One's ears should be closed 

against any future William Miller in advance. The 

folly of listening to him at all is almost equal to the folly 

of believing him. He couldn't know what he pretends, 

or thinks, he knows.

I‘ll quit here – my temptation is to quote the whole book – Lewis is interesting reading.

His lines at the end of the book don’t read like he thought Jesus was wrong:

We always hope that those who so clearly think us cowards or bullies are 

ignorant and malicious; we always fear that those who 

trust us or admire us are misled by partiality. I sup- 

pose the experience of the Final Judgment (which may 

112 

THE WORLD S LAST NIGHT 

break in upon us at any moment) will be like these lit- 

tle experiences, but magnified to the Nth. 

For it will be infallible judgment. If it is favorable 

we shall have no fear, if unfavorable, no hope, that it is 

wrong. We shall not only believe, we shall know, know 

beyond doubt in every fibre of our appalled or delighted 

being, that as the Judge has said, so we are: neither 

more nor less nor other. We shall perhaps even realise 

that in some dim fashion we could have known it all 

along. We shall know and all creation will know too: 

our ancestors, our parents, our wives or husbands, our 

children. The unanswerable and (by then) self-evident 

truth about each will be known to all. 

https://archive.org/stream/worldslastnighta012859mbp/worldslastnighta012859mbp_djvu.txt

Who is Jesus?

I came across this website (see below) that talks about who Jesus is. 

You are saying Jesus was wrong when he said in Mattnew 24.34, "...This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled." You know it’s not part of my spiritual DNA to look the creator of the universe in the eye and say “You are wrong!” Nope, that’s not me now, and never will be.

You also know when I read an article I always want to know who is the author. Therefore, I feel this website helps our conversation by identifying who Jesus really is.

It’s like the formula of 10+5=3. On the surface, with a knee jerk reaction, one can quickly say it’s wrong, and anyone claiming otherwise is also wrong, and may even be evil. However, if two words are added (the assumptions are stated) everyone will say, “Of course it’s right, I do that all the time.”

Consider this: 10 o’clock + 5 hours = 3 o’clock. It’s in my DNA to project that illustration to the life of Jesus. When we understand the assumptions, then we will understand the meanings of his teachings. Until then, I contend he is always right, and if I don’t understand what he is saying, my lack of understanding does not give me the privilege to call him wrong, not now, not ever.

The website has this information:

In his famous book Mere Christianity, C.S. Lewis makes this statement, "A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic--on the level with a man who says he is a poached egg--or he would be the devil of hell. You must take your choice. Either this was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us.(emphasis: web author)"

Nobody has changed the world the way Jesus has. Nobody.

Throughout history, the influence Jesus had on the lives of people has never been surpassed. No other great leader has inspired so many positive changes in the lives of his followers. People who encounter the risen Christ are totally transformed. Their outlook on life is altered forever. Staying true to their faith, they do not hesitate to face hardship, persecution and even death. Many devote their lives to serving others, minimizing their own needs and desires.

The Resurrection

The resurrection is central to the Christian faith. If Jesus was not raised from the dead, then Christian beliefs don't amount to much, since Jesus himself said that he would be raised from the dead on the third day. On the other hand, if Jesus did rise from the dead, all his claims are true and we can know for sure that there is life after death.

A large volume of evidence exists to support the resurrection claims. In fact, there is more legal-historic evidence (the kind used in courtrooms) for the resurrection than there is for Napoleon's defeat at Waterloo. There are several reasons why those who have studied the resurrection are convinced beyond a doubt that it is true.

http://www.whoisjesus-really.com/english/claims.htm

The Gospel

I ran across this bit on a website I was visiting, and I thought it was really good.

I like the analysis of all of us living as death row inmates. I hope you enjoy it as much as I did.

The Gospel

The Bible says the penalty for sin [pushback against God] is death, which makes all of us death row inmates.

The only way for us to be spared the death penalty is if someone else pays it for us. But sinners die to pay their own death penalty; only a sinless person can die to pay it for others. Since the latter does not exist, God in His love became man, lived a sinless life and then died on the cross to pay our death penalty for us.

The Bible says that those who sincerely believe having been thus purified go to heaven while those who reject Jesus' sacrificial gift go to hell, as follows:

"The wages of sin is death but, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." (Romans 6:23)

"For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

What about doing good works?

Christians do good works not to gain salvation but to obey, thank and honor Jesus for having saved us. Believing that good works saves is akin to death row inmates believing that good behavior while on death row will gain their freedom.

http://www.billionbibles.org/true-gospel.html

Assumptions Matter

Kurt,

Over the years, we’ve talked long and hard about what is true, and what is not true about the meaning of life. Most of our discussion has center on the Jesus, Paul, and the Bible. We both read the same verses but come to very different conclusions. It’s like people looking and describing the Golden Gate bridge (in the earlier post).

I want to illustrate what I feel is our lack of communication with the following illustrations.

If I write, “10” and ask how many coins that represents some will say ten, and some will say two, and some will say sixteen and they can all be right.

If I write, “11” and ask the same question some will say eleven and some will say three, and they both can be right.

If I write, “14” and ask the same question some will say fourteen and some will say twenty, and they both can be right.

If I write, “10+4” and ask for the answer some will say fourteen and some will say two, and they both can be right.

The point is, no one can agree on the ‘right’ answer until they agree on their assumptions.

We usually assume people use a decimal system for numbers. But computer programmers work in both binary (base 2) and hexadecimal (base 16).

Decimal	Binary	Hexadecimal
0	0000	0
1	0001	1
2	0010	2
3	0011	3
4	0100	4
5	0101	5
6	0110	6
7	0111	7
8	1000	8
9	1001	9
10	1010	A
11	1011	B
12	1100	C
13	1101	D
14	1110	E
15	1111	F
16	00010000	10

This principle applies to many areas of life, but none so important as the assumptions we make about Jesus and the Bible.

The difference you and I have Kurt, is we don’t agree on the assumptions we bring to the Bible. Until we can agree on those assumptions, then we will not be able to agree on our understanding and application of what the Bible says.

If you will allow me to cherry pick a verse – (so I don’t have to quote the whole Bible) I will give you a basis for my understanding:

2Pe 1:16-21 NLT  For we were not making up clever stories when we told you about the powerful coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

We saw His majestic splendor with our own eyes  (17)  when He received honor and glory from God the Father. The voice from the majestic glory of God said to Him, "This is my dearly loved Son, who brings me great joy."[Jesus is the Son of God]  (18)  We ourselves heard that voice from heaven when we were with Him on the holy mountain. 

(19)  Because of that experience, we have even greater confidence in the message proclaimed by the [Old Testament] prophets. You must pay close attention to what they wrote, for their words are like a lamp shining in a dark place—until the Day dawns, and Christ the Morning Star shines in your hearts. 

(20)  Above all, you must realize that no prophecy in Scripture ever came from the prophet's own understanding,  (21)  or from human initiative. No, those prophets were moved by the Holy Spirit, and they spoke from God.

I assume from those verses, and a lot of others, and from the extra-biblical historical records, and from my own personal experience, that the Bible is reliable and is for us the word of God.

I don’t think we have a problem of agreeing that there is a God. And we can agree with Paul:

Rom 1:20 NLT  For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see His invisible qualities—His eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God.

The problem we seem to be having is what do we do about/with the God that created us.

I assume that God has given us his word to help us be conformed to the image of his son, and that his word is:

Heb 4:12 NLT  For the word of God is alive and powerful. It is sharper than the sharpest two-edged sword, cutting between soul and spirit, between joint and marrow. It exposes our innermost thoughts and desires.

Because of my understanding, I like Joshua, have decided, “That for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.” And I’m like Peter:

Luk 9:20 NLT  Then He asked them, "But who do you say I am?" Peter replied, "You [Jesus]are the Messiah sent from God!"

Luk 9:20 ESV  Then he said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” And Peter answered, “The Christ of God.”

Also, I try to learn from people that have made the same decisions I have made, paid the price that I want to pay, and that will continue helping me to become conformed into the image of Christ.

Perhaps we should spend more time on our assumptions, what we bring to the Bible, and less time discussing conclusions and meanings when they are not derived using the same assumptions.

If we don't agree on the facts, we'll never agree on the conclusions.

Jesus in the Old Testament

Kurt,

Your last two text messages are intriguing:

I have a feeling you don't apply this 'bridge' and 'key' and 'words don't always mean what they say' principle in any verse you agree with. It is always verses with teaching you don't like that you apply this to.

You are cherry picking and you don't realize it! What you love and what tickles your ears - you take as 'thus sayeth the Lord' what you don't like you use anything to wiggle out of the plain meaning.

First, you didn’t respond to the application of your feeling that words mean what they say to the Adam and Eve illustration in “Words don’t always mean what they say”. You didn’t acknowledge the principal is valid and applies to context. Therefore, I assume that in the Adam and Eve illustration you’d agree that the words don’t convey the meaning of the story. So, yes, I do apply that principle and the ‘bridge’ principle and the ‘Key’ principle to all the scripture as they apply to each case.

Second, this phrase, “You are cherry picking and you don't realize it!” is really interesting because that is exactly what I thought you were/are doing and you thought that is what I was doing. I don’t really know where we passed each other on that idea.

I thought/think I consider the whole council of God, and not just a few key ‘cherry picked’ verses. As you bring up verses that are a problem for you I try to expand our conversations to other verses that apply or illustrate a concept. Since I can’t quote the whole Bible at a time I do select verses that apply. If the selection of applicable verses means cherry picking to you, then I’m guilty.

On the other hand, when you only use a few verses, over and over and over to make the same point again and again that seems like cherry picking to me. You consistently talk about Jesus’ errors, and never his miracles, love for people, his creation of the world, his death and resurrection, his born-again ideas, his mercy, that this is his world – the one he created, and on and on and on. Even if you think he made a mistake, which I don’t, then some of the other statements he made about love and the abundant life might apply. In our human relations with each other, we don’t condemn people to ‘nothing’ because they made a mistake. I assume that is what you’ve done with Jesus based on your text:

No your not left with Hinduism or Buddhism. You are left with the God of the Old Testament- and that works for me.

There is nothing pointing to Jesus in the OT. But a lot of imaginative quote mining of it trying to make it seem as if there was.

That idea seems harsh to me, and I don’t accept it as true (in my world, using the application of Key, Bridge, and Words and the whole council of God).

Jesus didn’t think your analysis of the OT is true:

Luk 24:25-27 NLT  Then Jesus said to them, "You foolish people! You find it so hard to believe all that the prophets wrote in the Scriptures.  (26)  Wasn't it clearly predicted that the Messiah would have to suffer all these things before entering His glory?"  (27)  Then Jesus took them through the writings of Moses and all the prophets, explaining from all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.

Luk 24:44-49 NLT  Then He said, "When I was with you before, I told you that everything written about Me in the law of Moses and the prophets and in the Psalms must be fulfilled."  (45)  Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures.  (46)  And He said, "Yes, it was written long ago that the Messiah would suffer and die and rise from the dead on the third day.  (47)  It was also written that this message would be proclaimed in the authority of His name to all the nations, beginning in Jerusalem: 'There is forgiveness of sins for all who repent.'  (48)  You are witnesses of all these things.  (49)  "And now I will send the Holy Spirit, just as My Father promised. But stay here in the city until the Holy Spirit comes and fills you with power from heaven."

There you have it in plain English, using your ideas and terms, there is no wiggle room, Jesus said it – the Old Testament points to Messiah. You don’t need to do a lot of ‘quote mining’, just read what he said.

To not seem like I’m cherry picking, here is another occasion when Jesus used the Old Testament to talk about himself:

Joh 3:14-15 NLT  And as Moses lifted up the bronze snake on a pole in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up,  (15)  so that everyone who believes in Him will have eternal life.

I hope I’m not guilty of your assessment of, “what you don’t like you use anything to wiggle out of the plain meaning.” And I hope that you won’t use something to wiggle out of the plain meaning.

I hope that you will come back and acknowledge that the Old Testament does have some references to Jesus and that one does not have to do “a lot of imaginative quote mining of it trying to make it seem as if there was”

Words Don't Always Mean What They Say - Face Value

In a recent post, I asked if there was any way you could understand Jesus’s teachings as right and not ‘wrong’, any way at all.

Your response was:

If you can't read him at face value then you are putting your words in his mouth. Then it is the words of Ray

If someone really wants to find a way to explain away an obvious mistake - then you can certainly twist the meaning of their words to make it say whatever you want …

I posted the KEY definitions as an effort to show how words don’t always mean exactly what they say.

I submit the following verses as a case in point:

Gen 3:1-7 NLT  The serpent was the shrewdest of all the wild animals the LORD God had made. One day he asked the woman, "Did God really say you must not eat the fruit from any of the trees in the garden?" 

(2)  "Of course we may eat fruit from the trees in the garden," the woman replied.  (3)  "It's only the fruit from the tree in the middle of the garden that we are not allowed to eat. God said, 'You must not eat it or even touch it; if you do, you will die.'" 

(4)  "You won't die!" the serpent replied to the woman.  (5)  "God knows that your eyes will be opened as soon as you eat it, and you will be like God, knowing both good and evil." 

(6)  The woman was convinced. She saw that the tree was beautiful and its fruit looked delicious, and she wanted the wisdom it would give her. So she took some of the fruit and ate it. Then she gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it, too. 

(7)  At that moment their eyes were opened, and they suddenly felt shame at their nakedness. So they sewed fig leaves together to cover themselves.

Looking at those verses on the surface, face value, God said they would die. Satan said they would not die. They ate and didn’t die. Therefore, on face value, God was wrong and Satan was correct. Therefore, if we are looking for truth, we should follow Satan.

I submit to you that no Christian writer will understand for a moment that we should follow Satan rather than God. No one takes these words at face value – rather they keep them in context and realize that Adam and Eve really did die that day.

And, just for the record, I’m always looking for ways to understand that Jesus is right, if I don’t understand him (yet) I don’t excuse myself from responsibility by saying Jesus is wrong. Never!

Golden Gate Bridge

The Golden Gate bridge is a good illustration of our Christian life is constructed and used. I've included some pictures of the Golden Gate bridge to illustrate a point.

These are different perspectives on the same object. Everyone recognizes them as pictures of the Golden Gate bridge. No one would say one of the pictures is 'wrong' or 'false'

You commented some time back that you were disappointed that all of the Bible commentators didn't agree, or that they didn't say the same thing the same way. I think Bible commentators are Golden Gate photographers, each one emphasises a different view of the subject at a point in time.

To some, the bridge is something to drive on. To some, the bridge is something to paint and repair. To some, it's an object to photograph. And to some, it's all of these things on the same day, but for others, it takes on a different meaning depending on where they are in their life cycle.

Everyone agrees there is the Golden Gate bridge, but not everyone agrees that there is just one way to 'see' it.

The same is true of Jesus being the Son of God. At any point in time, we may see him differently from a different angle and stress different qualities bassed on where we are in our Christian life cycle, but we still recognize him as the Son of God.

No illustration is perfect, and they all can be pressed beyond their usefullness, I hopes this helps make a point and gives us freedom of expression about our faith in Jesus as Son of God and Saviour.

Everyone agrees that there is a Golden Gate bridge, they agree on where it is, and it's demensions. It is a suspension bridge that links the northern tip of the San Francisco Peninsula to Marin County Caliorina and that it was finished in 1937. The American Society of Civil Engineers have declared it one of the wonders of the modern world.

Beyond the basic facts the bridge can be looked at and described many different ways. None of the differences are 'wrong', they just emphasis different facets of the same bridge. To some it's a road.

To some it's a thing of bueaty.

To others it may be bueatiful, but it also is a thing to be maintained, it's a work place,

This bridge is like our Christian faith - we have unity in the basics and in everything else there is liberty.