I mainly enjoyed it because I thought it was one of the really good theological discussions that we have had at book club. Do not get me wrong I think our book club has been extremely good and I have enjoyed reading all the books we have read so far. That being said, I really just enjoyed the discussion of the book. And with that, I will just give my take on the book, because to try and recast the entire discussion would be very hard to do, and I would not want to misrepresent what anyone had said. So what follows is my personal take on the book.
For those of you who have not read the book, I will try to summarize what the book is largely about. For those of you more familiar with the book than I am, please forgive me if this is a crass overview, as it has been a month and several books ago since I read it.
Basically it is a book of conversations between different people after they have passed away on Earth. The book begins with a man in a small town boarding a bus. The bus then takes him on a journey through Heaven and Hell where he meets a host of supernatural people. Before I give my take on the book, let me say that this is written as an allegory and Lewis right off the bat says that this was not intended to be the "end all, be all" of what the afterlife (heaven and hell) would look like. However, I do believe his theology of Hell comes out in this book.
Before I get to that however, there was a strong theme in the book:
Lewis is concerned with how a loving God could send people to hell. In other words, if God is love (as the Bible claims Him to be) then how could God send someone to a place that is torturous? Further, how could He sentence them there for all eternity. This is a valid question that I have asked myself. In the book, Lewis basically points out that God does not send people to hell. Rather God has given the invitation in Christ Jesus for all to accept him and spend their eternal lives with the Father. People end up in hell, separated from the Father (according to Lewis) because they CHOOSE not to accept Jesus.
So it is not God who determines who goes to hell and who goes to heaven, rather it is the responding to the invitation that the Father has already given in Christ Jesus. Now I know that my Calvinist friends would disagree with this point. However, I completely agree with Lewis here. To say that God sends (predestines) people to hell so that others might see His glory is (in my humble opinion) a very masochistic view of God. If God is love then there is no way that He created anyone to go to hell. John 3:16 says that Jesus died for ALL, meaning the invitation has been extended and people are able to freely reject or accept God's offer of salvation. It should be said that Lewis is not advocating a works based salvation here (and neither am I). Rather he is simply saying that human beings have the freedom to accept of reject the Father. It should also be said here, that the offer of salvation is initiated by the Father through the Holy Spirit and that there is a freedom to accept of reject the offer from the Holy Spirit. Otherwise how could love even exist? If a response is coerced one way or the other, how can love truly be expressed. In the determinist view of things, I was going to be a Christian from the beginning of time, and if that is true, then how is it a loving response to surrender my life to Christ if the Father knew he was going to make it happen a long time ago? Without choice there is no such thing as love.
So I liked Lewis' take on why people go to hell and are separated from the Father (I believe for eternity). It is a choice to refuse or accept the offer of Jesus. If it is true love, then a choice has to exist. God does not send people to hell. Hell is a result for those who reject the offer of salvation through Jesus.
So that seems to be the issue that Lewis is mainly dealing with in this book. And there are several other things that come out of this book that are really good and that I really liked. Lewis seems to be really big on the sanctification process and you truly desiring to be changed by God in order for that to happen. In other words, for the God to really get rid of something in your life that is hindering you from being all that you were created to be in him, then there is going to have to be effort on your part as well (or at least the desire for something to be changed). I think this is biblical: "work out your salvation with fear and trembling." So overall I really enjoyed reading this book. That being said, his theology on hell really bothered me and made it troubling for me to read.
As I said before, Lewis is trying to reconcile the concept of a God,who is love, sending people to hell. I do appreciate his take on the fact that our choice on this earth, namely rejecting the offer of salvation is what sends us to hell (not God predetermining who is going and who is not). However, I believe Lewis goes to far in his theology. (And the following is not explicit in this book, but I believe it to be implicit. This next part is from reading other things by him). Lewis believes that a God who is love would not keep people in hell for eternity. This would not be love. Rather, Lewis believes that people are offered a second chance at Christ after they pass away. Again, he cites choices as the reason people remain in hell. He sees those who remain in hell as people who are making the conscious choice to stay there. The illustration is a door locked from the inside. Meaning that to get out all one needs to do is to turn the key from the inside and walk out.
Lewis gets his thinking from George MacDonald (ironically a character in his book). MacDonald offered the possibility that there could be opportunities for those who reject Christ, or for those who have never had the opportunity to accept him in their lifetime. In fairness there are passages that seem to indicate that MacDonald might have some validity to his claims. In 1 Peter for example Peter seems to indicate in a couple of passages that Jesus actually preached to those who were already dead and imprisoned in the afterlife (1 Peter 3:19; 4:6) In Ephesians 4:9-10 it seems to indicate that Jesus descended into the lower parts of the earth to fill all things. MacDonald would argue that these verses seem to indicate that Jesus' work to save the lost extends beyond our concept of time and space.
So for Lewis (whose thoughts come from MacDonald) a loving God cannot send people to hell (we do that by rejecting the offer of salvation) and a loving God could not possibly keep people in hell for eternity (we remain by refusing to give up our desires and rights we believe we are entitled to) for to keep them in hell would not be loving either. I completely disagree with the latter portion of his thinking.
As I said, I appreciate Lewis trying to explain to people that God is not this heartless deity that simply doles out punishment on people and sends some to hell in order that he might be glorified more. But I cannot go so far as to say that Jesus offers another chance of salvation after death. It is a very nice thought, but does not seem to be very biblica,l save for a few obscure passages that MacDonald uses. I also appreciate the fact that Lewis and MacDonald are taking the problematic issue of those who did not have a chance to accept Christ into account in their theology of the afterlife. However, I believe the whole of biblical witness goes against them in this regard.
While I cannot begin to explain what happens to those who never had the opportunity to accept Christ. Or what happens to those who suffer from mental retardation and will never fully grasp the concept of Christ's atoning sacrifice, and therefore never come to a "saving knowledge" of Jesus. Or what happens to infants who passed away at birth (though I have no biblical support on this one, I am convinced that infants who pass away are not condemned to hell). In these instances I believe that we must trust in God's infinite wisdom and justice and judgment (something MacDonald would for sure not like). I don't believe it is our right or responsibility to start assigning these people to heaven or hell, rather we are to leave that in the hands of the one true judge.
Those circumstances aside, I believe that those who are confronted with the choice of accepting or rejecting Christ only get that opportunity in this lifetime. I am not saying it only happens once and if rejection happens then that is it for that person. I am saying that biblical witness seems to say that there is this life, we either reject or accept, but when we die there is judgment (see book of Hebrews).
All of this to say that I enjoyed Lewis' take on why people go to hell, but I believed he went to far in his view on people getting a second chance after they die to accept Christ. This is the one time I hope I am wrong! For it seems to be a nice idea, a nice thought, and an ideal way for things to work. Yet I am not convinced it is the biblical picture we get of judgment after death.
I would strongly recommend reading this book. It is filled with awesome characters and good dialogue. If anything else it will make you think about different issues. It will for sure make you think about choices that we make in this lifetime that go beyond simply accepting or rejecting Christ. I think the back of the book says it best, "This is the starting point for a profound meditation on good and evil."
Overall it was a good read, an entertaining read, just my knowing of his theological stance on things made it hard for me to get past what was implicit in this book. A lot of people will tell me that this book was about the power of choices. And to an extent I agree with them, but the whole book seems to put forth, at least implicitly, his view on a second chance of accepting Christ after death.
That's my two cents worth on the book! :)
