Van Til vs. C.S. Lewis

[Puritan Sailor]

Does anyone know if Van Til and C.S. Lewis ever interacted with each other, either through corespondence or in print? Just curious to see how these apologists interacted since they were contemporaries.

 

[discipulo]

Van Til had such defined lines, such rigour and precision
that he didn't agree with most Schaeffer's apologetics,

I can't just imagine him having much agreement with C S Lewis imagetic metaphors. Lewis is a story teller, that he does very good, ands there’s good food for thought in there, but he is too much a poor blurred theologian to meet Van Til's standards of dialogue

 

[awretchsavedbygrace]

Van Til had such defined lines, such rigour and precision
that he didn't agree with most Schaeffer's apologetics,

I can't just imagine him having much agreement with C S Lewis imagetic metaphors. Lewis is a story teller, that he does very good, ands there’s good food for thought in there, but he is too much a poor blurred theologian to meet Van Til's standards of dialogue

Couldnt have said it better myself.

 

[Guido's Brother]

My books are still in boxes (I recently moved), but if memory serves VanTil wrote to Lewis, but Lewis did not respond. I think this is in Muether's biography. And yes, VanTil does deal with Lewis somewhere, but again the books are in boxes so I can't give chapter and verse. I'd suggest looking at the index in Bahnsen's VanTil Reader.

 

[Bookmeister]

Patrick,
Van Til addresses Lewis in chapter 4 of his "Defense of the Faith." He also has an unpublished manuscript on the "Theology of C. S. Lewis" I happen to have a copy of this and since it is unpublished I think I could send it to you.

 

[discipulo]

My books are still in boxes (I recently moved), but if memory serves VanTil wrote to Lewis, but Lewis did not respond. I think this is in Muether's biography. And yes, VanTil does deal with Lewis somewhere, but again the books are in boxes so I can't give chapter and verse. I'd suggest looking at the index in Bahnsen's VanTil Reader.

I stand corrected, I read Muether's biography and saddly I didn't remember the episode page 138 when Van Til mentions he read Lewis' Surprised by Joy and he says it is vitiated by a wretch arminianism.

But page 238, is more in line with what I imagined would be Van Til's response to Lewis, where VT simply rejects Lewis' Mere Christianity approach as falling short of the "Whole Counsel of God" as are pages 80-83 of the Defense of Faith, where VT basically says Lewis "confuses things in metaphysical and ethical terms".

 

[py3ak]

I'm reasonably confident that Lewis wasn't aware of Van Til, and wouldn't have been much impressed if he had been.

 

[Hamalas]

Would anyone be willing to post some extended quotes for those of us who don't own the books?

 

[discipulo]

I'm reasonably confident that Lewis wasn't aware of Van Til, and wouldn't have been much impressed if he had been.

Ruben, it seems I was not fair with Lewis, but I'm actually very fond of his books, between me and my wife, we have pretty much all his works, but as you know, Lewis was often theologically incorrect.

Martyn Lloyd Jones didn’t even consider Lewis an evangelical (from Knowing the Times – what is an evangelical?) - meaning he didn’t consider Lewis fully orthodox or biblical.

In a sense this is an unfair comparison between two very different Christians that worked for the Kingdom in very different ways.

So maybe you are just telling us in a polite and wise way that we shouldn’t even dare to compare Van Til and C S Lewis, for the risk of being unjust and ungrateful…

-----Added 9/22/2009 at 07:03:54 EST-----

Would anyone be willing to post some extended quotes for those of us who don't own the books?

It's a bit long to type all that Van Til wrote on Lewis, this on the books that I have, after from the Defense of the Faith, pages 80-83

Van Til, Introduction to Systematic Theology, page 39, because of Lewis on Miracles putting God in the position of being subject to the Universal Natural Laws He created, VT calls this "arminian type of discussion", page 84, about 2 other books of Lewis, VT states that Lewis has an arminian approach of placing believers and unbelievers side by side in recognizing a general moral law and sharing the same "cardinal virtues". Page 375 VT criticizes Lewis for reducing the personal God to an apriori principle to be complemented by an a posteriori principle (my note: Schaeffer also does this in his metaphors of Revelation)

interestingly there's no mention of Lewis on Christian Apologetics

John Frame also has a several notes about Lewis on his analysis of VT's thought, a lot of pages to summarize though

 

[py3ak]

No, César, I'm just saying that being somewhat familiar with Lewis, and with the sorts of books he enjoyed and was impressed by, I don't think that he would have enjoyed Van Til's writing or been much moved by his arguments.

 

[Puritan Sailor]

Thanks for the references guys. I'd forgotten about that one in Defense of the Faith. I'll have to reread that one. Alan, you have a PM.