They Believed What? Martin Luther King Jr, CS Lewis, Mother Teresa, Jonathan Edwards, GK Chesterton

Let's talk about C .S. Lewis, Martin Luther King Jr., Jonathan Edwards, Mother Teresa, and G .K.

Chesterton. We'll take a look at the controversy concerning each one of them, and then we'll share our conclusions about whether we think they had true saving faith or not.

1. C .S. Lewis Lewis was a British writer and a lay theologian.

He wrote many popular books, including The Chronicles of Narnia and Mere Christianity.

Lewis had a gift for writing and for communicating ideas effectively. His unique writing style is one reason why he continues to be so popular today.

This Lewis quote about Jesus being liar, lunatic, or lord is especially well -known today.

He writes, 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 the man who says he's a poached egg, or else he would be the devil of hell.

You must make your choice. Either this man was and is the son of God, or else a madman, or something worse.

You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him, and kill him as a demon, or you can fall at his feet and call him

Lord and God. But let us not come to any patronizing nonsense about his being a great human teacher.

He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to. Now it seems to me obvious that he was neither a lunatic nor a fiend.

And consequently, however strange or terrifying or unlikely it may seem, I have to accept the view that he was and is

God. This great quote and countless others are why C .S. Lewis is beloved today by so many

Christians. Lewis' view of scripture is extremely concerning.

In Reflections on the Psalms, Lewis writes, All holy scripture is in some sense, though not all parts of it in the same sense, the word of God.

Lewis elevates certain parts of scripture above other parts. Regarding the Psalms, Lewis writes,

There is also in many of the Psalms a still more fatal confusion, that between the desire for justice and the desire for revenge.

This Psalm 23 .5 may not be so diabolical as the passages

I have quoted above, but the pettiness and vulgarity of it are hard to endure.

One way of dealing with these terrible or, dare we say, contemptible

Psalms is simply to leave them alone. In Letters of C .S.

Lewis, Lewis writes, It is Christ himself, not the Bible who is the true word of God.

The Bible, read in the right spirit and with the guidance of good teachers, will bring us to him.

But it is extremely dangerous to create this false dichotomy between Christ and the Bible, because today it is only through the

Bible that we can know anything about Christ at all. In We Remember C .S.

Lewis' Essays and Memoirs, James Houston writes that Lewis had no cultural connections with evangelicals.

He had no friends among them. His friends were all Anglo -Catholic or Catholic. This probably explains why

C .S. Lewis wanted to present a Christianity that would encompass both Protestants and Catholics.

In Near Christianity, he writes that his primary aim was to defend a belief that has been common to nearly all

Christians at all times. You will not learn from me whether you want to become an

Anglican, a Methodist, a Presbyterian, or a Roman Catholic. Lewis apparently believed that Protestants and Catholics have enough in common to both fall under the category of Christianity.

Lewis' view concerning whether salvation is by faith or by words is, at best, confused, and at worst, heretical.

In Near Christianity, Lewis writes, But it does seem to me like asking which blade in a pair of scissors is most necessary.

A serious moral effort is the only thing that will bring you to the point where you throw up the sponge.

Faith in Christ is the only thing to save you from despair at that point. And out of that faith in Him, good actions must inevitably come.

But Scripture is clear that what leads the Christian home, or what saves a person, is faith alone in Christ alone.

Good works will always accompany true saving faith, but it's important to be clear that faith alone is the grounds of our salvation.

What's our conclusion about C .S. Lewis? Do we think he was saved? We certainly hope so.

But we don't think we can say for certain. Lewis had a tremendous gift for writing. At the same time, his actual theology was pretty bad.

We wouldn't recommend learning from his theological writings, and if you choose to read them, you should exercise extreme caution.

King was a minister and an activist who became the most visible spokesman and leader in the

American Civil Rights Movement. King's role in the

Civil Rights Movement was undoubtedly heroic and admirable. At the same time,

King's theology was extremely problematic. In a paper titled, In another paper titled,

King writes this. as a retrogressive spiritual aid.

Amid change all around, he is willing to preserve certain ancient ideas, even though they are contrary to science.

What's our conclusion about Martin Luther King, Jr.? Was he a genuine Christian?

If King really believed these things that he wrote, and we have no reason to think he changed his views later in his life, then it seems clear that King was not a genuine

Christian. He held many heretical positions concerning essential doctrines of the

Christian faith. King may have been an admirable civil rights leader, but he certainly did not hold to the orthodox foundational doctrines of the

Christian faith. Edwards was a preacher and theologian.

He is considered one of America's most important and original theologians. Regarding what

Edwards thought, there isn't really anything wrong. Edwards' theology was extremely biblical and solid.

The controversy regarding Edwards is that he owned slaves. The relationship between Edwards and slavery is a pretty complicated one.

Here are two quotes from a paper titled, Jonathan Edwards and the Anti -Slavery Movement, that highlight the tension in Edwards' views regarding slavery.

The author writes, Not only did Edwards own slaves, but he also defended the institution of slavery.

In 1997, Minkima discovered a draft of a letter by Edwards on the issue of slavery.

This draft shows that Edwards accepted the societal status of persons born into slavery.

He did not see slavery as a sin, even though he opposed the slave trade. Later in the paper, the author writes,

Fourth, Edwards opposed the slave trade. Regarding the purchase of slaves, Edwards followed the

Puritan tradition in Massachusetts law. Edwards limited purchasable slaves to war captives, debtors, and children of slaves.

Other than these sources for new slaves, he strongly opposed the slave trade.

He asked, Whether or no other nations have any power or business to disenfranchise all the nations of Africa?

Even though Edwards did not oppose slavery because he could not find any alternatives for already existing

African slaves for the slavery plantations, he believed no country had the right to take

Africans from their country. Here, it is notable that Edwards himself seems to have changed his attitude towards the slave trade.

For example, when Edwards purchased his first slave in 1731, he went to Newport, since Newport was the place to buy slaves through the

African slave trade. Minkima assumes that at that time, Edwards probably had no qualms about the

African slave trade. However, when Edwards wrote the letter draft in 1741 referring to the slave trade, he was against it.

What made Edwards change his mind? This is only a matter of speculation, but his change was quite probably the result of the

Great Awakening. What's our conclusion about Jonathan Edwards?

Regarding his theology, we have absolutely no reason to doubt the genuineness of Edwards' faith.

And in fact, Edwards' teachings are some of the best and most solid Christian teachings in history.

Regarding the issue of slavery, we believe that the African slave trade was certainly unbiblical and sinful.

The fact that Edwards defended the institution of slavery and owned slaves is extremely troubling.

At the same time, I think we need to consider both the different historical contexts in which

Edwards lived, as well as what Edwards had written against the slave trade. Would we still recommend

Edwards' teachings and theology? Yes. Do we support Edwards owning slaves and defending the institution of slavery?

No. Do we think Edwards owning slaves and defending the institution of slavery necessarily means he wasn't a genuine

Christian? No. We're inclined to believe that Edwards certainly had blind spots concerning the issue of slavery, but that he was still a faithful, genuine

Christian. The whole of Edwards' writings and theology leads us to hold this position.

Mother Teresa was a Roman Catholic nun and missionary known for her service to the poor and needy.

While Mother Teresa's service to others is definitely admirable, here are some serious concerns.

First, Mother Teresa was a professing Roman Catholic, and the official teaching of the

Roman Catholic Church is antithetical to the gospel. The difference, though, is the capacity to cooperate with the energy of grace, so as to grow in justification.

Second, when asked if she sought to convert the people she worked with, she answered, Yes, I convert.

I convert you to be a better Hindu, or a better Muslim, or a better Protestant, or better Catholic, or better Parsi, or better Sikh, or a better Buddhist.

And after you've found God, it is for you to do what God wants you to do. From this, it seems that Mother Teresa didn't even believe in salvation through faith in Christ alone.

And third, Mother Teresa experienced a lot of doubt, even in her own faith.

In a letter to a confidant, she wrote, Where is my faith? Even deep down, there is nothing but emptiness and darkness.

If there be God, please forgive me. What's our conclusion about Mother Teresa?

We certainly admire Mother Teresa's acts of charity and service, but it seems pretty clear that she did not believe in the gospel that saves.

Like with Martin Luther King Jr., it is certainly possible to do many admirable things in service to others, while, at the same time, not having true saving faith in the biblical gospel of Jesus Christ.

Number 5. G .K. Chesterton Chesterton was an English writer, philosopher, lay theologian, and literary and art critic.

He wrote many popular books, such as Orthodoxy and The Everlasting Man.

As interesting and compelling as some of Chesterton's writings might be, Chesterton was a

Roman Catholic, which would lead us to believe that he probably held to doctrines that were irreconcilable with the biblical gospel that saves.

So that's the happy inconsistency of our friends who are in Rome.

But they have to understand, as I'll be talking about this afternoon, that Rome has categorically, consistently, and clearly denied the gospel.

Number 6. James White James White had a discussion with Doug Wilson, and they talked about Chesterton.

And, interestingly, Wilson argued that he believed Chesterton was saved because of the level of spiritual insight in Chesterton's writings.

To read Chesterton, I frequently can't go three pages without running into astounding spiritual insight.

The lights are on. In other words, it's not just earthly wisdom.

It's not just rotate your tires or change your oil every 3 ,000 miles. It's spiritual wisdom that smells like Jesus.

As you can see, James White disagreed with Wilson, pointing out that a

Catholic who is devoted to Catholicism will inevitably believe doctrines that are irreconcilable with the biblical gospel.

In other words, the point is that we're not talking about a five -year -old as far as their knowledge of dogma.

He knows what he believes. That's the issue. And I agree with you that we are not saved by works.

We are not saved by doctrinal perfectionism. But we are saved by the gospel.

And that, to me, is the real key issue. I would like to be hopeful that in some fashion, what we read in Chesterton in regards to his dedication to Roman Catholic theology did not actually reflect where he really was.

But the real question that was raised by the video that you did was, can the

Roman Catholic gospel save? Not, can works save? We agree with James White over Doug Wilson regarding Chesterton.

We have no reason to doubt Chesterton's belief in the Roman Catholic version of the gospel, which is not the true biblical gospel at all.

Can we benefit from Chesterton's writings? Yes. Did Chesterton believe in the gospel that saves?