<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Shack</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gracebeliever.com/2010/01/the-shack/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gracebeliever.com/2010/01/the-shack/</link>
	<description>Where &#34;We the People&#34; honor &#34;In God We Trust&#34;</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Jan 2012 10:55:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: johnjkirkwood</title>
		<link>http://gracebeliever.com/2010/01/the-shack/comment-page-1/#comment-1968</link>
		<dc:creator>johnjkirkwood</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Aug 2011 01:59:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gracebeliever.com/?p=902#comment-1968</guid>
		<description>Sorry Pearl, I&#039;ve been through this with other Lewis-haters and it always comes down to a bitter agenda.  I&#039;m convinced both Lewis and Tolkien were not only saved but had an advanced understanding in many Theological areas. Obviously, they had blind spots and weaknesses, so do the people who pretend to see other men&#039;s hearts, beyond judging their words.  I have read about everything both of these  men have wrote and you do Lewis a dis-service by cherry-picking his quotes. The idea that you take his view on death from when he was a baby Christian and don&#039;t mention the conclusion that he arrived at in A Grief Observed betrays the fact that you really have no scholarship to back up your assault or you know better and you&#039;re driven by an agenda. I wouldn&#039;t doubt either, as arrogance loves the company of ignorance and your trifling expresses both.
Do you believe that any Anglican or Catholic is saved? Many of Lewis&#039; detractors did not. The fact that you completely missed the point of the article to strain at a gnat suggests that you have an axe to grind.  You have an agenda ... it&#039;s small and sad and I pity you and others like you.  The arrogance of crying Grace, Grace where there is no Grace. It seems that you don&#039;t take the advice of your own email address. I hope that Christian virtue will eventually catch up with your judgmental spirit and that you will repent of your vituperation and be given to forbearance. Until that time, regard the beam in your own eye, dear. It&#039;s blurring your vision.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry Pearl, I&#8217;ve been through this with other Lewis-haters and it always comes down to a bitter agenda.  I&#8217;m convinced both Lewis and Tolkien were not only saved but had an advanced understanding in many Theological areas. Obviously, they had blind spots and weaknesses, so do the people who pretend to see other men&#8217;s hearts, beyond judging their words.  I have read about everything both of these  men have wrote and you do Lewis a dis-service by cherry-picking his quotes. The idea that you take his view on death from when he was a baby Christian and don&#8217;t mention the conclusion that he arrived at in A Grief Observed betrays the fact that you really have no scholarship to back up your assault or you know better and you&#8217;re driven by an agenda. I wouldn&#8217;t doubt either, as arrogance loves the company of ignorance and your trifling expresses both.<br />
Do you believe that any Anglican or Catholic is saved? Many of Lewis&#8217; detractors did not. The fact that you completely missed the point of the article to strain at a gnat suggests that you have an axe to grind.  You have an agenda &#8230; it&#8217;s small and sad and I pity you and others like you.  The arrogance of crying Grace, Grace where there is no Grace. It seems that you don&#8217;t take the advice of your own email address. I hope that Christian virtue will eventually catch up with your judgmental spirit and that you will repent of your vituperation and be given to forbearance. Until that time, regard the beam in your own eye, dear. It&#8217;s blurring your vision.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pearl</title>
		<link>http://gracebeliever.com/2010/01/the-shack/comment-page-1/#comment-1967</link>
		<dc:creator>Pearl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Aug 2011 01:22:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gracebeliever.com/?p=902#comment-1967</guid>
		<description>Ouch.

Well, at least you published my original comment, and therefore, I gather that you are mature enough to allow others to do their own research and make up their own minds accordingly.

In no way am I trying to be misleading (that amounts to deceit in my book).  I have read (and even understood!) many of his books, beginning with the Narnia chronicles as a child, following up with his classics &quot;Mere Christianity&quot;, &quot;The Screwtape Letters&quot; and &quot;Surprised by Joy&quot;.  Admittedly, I was a babe in Christ when I read them, so I did not recognize any errors, but came across many critiques of his writings in recent years.  I think they&#039;re pretty straight forward and were he alive today, I think he&#039;d have a lot of clarifying to do.  But then, why bother with us little simpletons?  The Christian life is obviously over our lowly heads (yeah, right).

And even though this is your blog and I have no intention of sticking around to harrass you, I have to say that I did not misunderstand you, but rather, you have misunderstood me:

I said:

&quot;However, I am deeply troubled by your stating that Lewis and Tolkien’s writings are &lt;b&gt;scriptural&lt;/b&gt;.&quot;

Merriam-Webster&#039;s online dictionary defines &lt;i&gt;scriptural&lt;/i&gt; as:

&lt;blockquote&gt;: of, relating to, contained in, or according to a sacred writing; especially: biblical&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Quite different from what you accuse me of.

Regardless, Sir, I didn&#039;t mean to offend you and, obviously, I have.  Honestly, I&#039;m sorry for that, and realize I should have better managed my inflammatory expression and used more grace.  Please forgive me for giving way to my temper.

Sincerely,

Pearl</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ouch.</p>
<p>Well, at least you published my original comment, and therefore, I gather that you are mature enough to allow others to do their own research and make up their own minds accordingly.</p>
<p>In no way am I trying to be misleading (that amounts to deceit in my book).  I have read (and even understood!) many of his books, beginning with the Narnia chronicles as a child, following up with his classics &#8220;Mere Christianity&#8221;, &#8220;The Screwtape Letters&#8221; and &#8220;Surprised by Joy&#8221;.  Admittedly, I was a babe in Christ when I read them, so I did not recognize any errors, but came across many critiques of his writings in recent years.  I think they&#8217;re pretty straight forward and were he alive today, I think he&#8217;d have a lot of clarifying to do.  But then, why bother with us little simpletons?  The Christian life is obviously over our lowly heads (yeah, right).</p>
<p>And even though this is your blog and I have no intention of sticking around to harrass you, I have to say that I did not misunderstand you, but rather, you have misunderstood me:</p>
<p>I said:</p>
<p>&#8220;However, I am deeply troubled by your stating that Lewis and Tolkien’s writings are <b>scriptural</b>.&#8221;</p>
<p>Merriam-Webster&#8217;s online dictionary defines <i>scriptural</i> as:</p>
<blockquote><p>: of, relating to, contained in, or according to a sacred writing; especially: biblical</p></blockquote>
<p>Quite different from what you accuse me of.</p>
<p>Regardless, Sir, I didn&#8217;t mean to offend you and, obviously, I have.  Honestly, I&#8217;m sorry for that, and realize I should have better managed my inflammatory expression and used more grace.  Please forgive me for giving way to my temper.</p>
<p>Sincerely,</p>
<p>Pearl</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: johnjkirkwood</title>
		<link>http://gracebeliever.com/2010/01/the-shack/comment-page-1/#comment-1961</link>
		<dc:creator>johnjkirkwood</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Aug 2011 19:39:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gracebeliever.com/?p=902#comment-1961</guid>
		<description>Sorry Pearl; I&#039;m very aware of Lewis&#039; detractors and much of what they  wrote. I reject your analysis and find your &#039;evidence&#039; contradictory and misleading, but I want to correct you on an error about my writing .... I never called their writings Scripture.  I said that their writings were Scripturally accurate (speaking of their fiction and your critique goes outside of that); if you can&#039;t even get my intent right in a low-brow article, I wouldn&#039;t expect you to understand Lewis of Tolkien.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry Pearl; I&#8217;m very aware of Lewis&#8217; detractors and much of what they  wrote. I reject your analysis and find your &#8216;evidence&#8217; contradictory and misleading, but I want to correct you on an error about my writing &#8230;. I never called their writings Scripture.  I said that their writings were Scripturally accurate (speaking of their fiction and your critique goes outside of that); if you can&#8217;t even get my intent right in a low-brow article, I wouldn&#8217;t expect you to understand Lewis of Tolkien.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pearl</title>
		<link>http://gracebeliever.com/2010/01/the-shack/comment-page-1/#comment-1959</link>
		<dc:creator>Pearl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Aug 2011 19:15:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gracebeliever.com/?p=902#comment-1959</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;&quot;Far from the depth and Scriptural accuracy of Bunyan, Lewis or Tolkien...&quot;&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Indeed, you do have a gift for writing and adequately identifying the heresies found in the delapidated shack.

However, I am deeply troubled by your stating that Lewis and Tolkien&#039;s writings are scriptural.  Far too many preachers extol the virtues of these two brilliant men, albeit unsaved men, from their pulpits. They do so out of ignorance and owe it to their congregations to learn otherwise.  Tolkien was a devout Catholic.  Lewis identifies sympathizes with Catholicism as well, identifying himself as &quot;very Catholic&quot;.

Lewis on Salvation:

&lt;blockquote&gt;&quot;There are three things that spread the Christ life to us: baptism, belief, and that mysterious action which different Christians call by different names—Holy Communion, the Mass, the Lord’s Supper.&quot;&lt;/blockquote&gt; Mere Christianity

Lewis on Purgatory, speaking in make-believe words of Jesus Christ:

&lt;blockquote&gt;&quot;Whatever suffering it may cost you in your earthly life, whatever inconceivable purification it may cost you after death, whatever it costs Me, I will never rest, nor let you rest, until you are literally perfect. . .&quot;&lt;/blockquote&gt; Mere Christianity, Chapter 9

One reviewer of both Lewis and Tolkien writes:

&lt;blockquote&gt;&quot;It is truly baffling that any real Christian should think that Lewis was a Christian. It seems that most have only heard the advertising rhetoric, but few have taken the time to read the works that expose his personal views or biographical works chronicling his habits. Lewis did not consider all of the Bible the inerrant Word of God (Reflections on the Psalms). He did not believe that faith in Jesus Christ was all that was necessary for salvation (Screwtape Letters). He believed that one could lose one’s faith in a moment through commission of a mortal sin (Screwtape Letters). He believed in Limbo as a place (neither heaven nor hell) of temporary punishment (Screwtape Letters). He believed that church sacraments are part of salvation (Mere Christianity, Screwtape Letters). He believed that pagans may belong to Christ without knowing it (Mere Christianity). He had a participating interest in the occult (The Inklings Handbook). And, regardless of his reputation and his &quot;great swelling words,&quot; his outlook on death was not that of a Christian. This from C. S. Lewis, A Biography: &quot;Like many (most?) religious people, Lewis was profoundly afraid of death. His dread of it, when in the midst of life, had been almost pathological and obsessive. Physical extinction was a perpetual nightmare to him and, whatever his theological convictions and hopes, he was unable, before his wife’s death, to reconcile himself to the transition which death must inevitably entail.&quot;&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Source: Keepers of the Faith website, &quot;C.S. Lewis: Who He Was &amp; What He Wrote&quot; 

Yes, Lewis was a master of logical argument, but he and Tolkien must be realized as false representatives of the pure Christian faith.  As dabblers in theosophy and lovers of the occult, they are mere stepping stones to the more obvious forms of blasphemy such as &quot;The Shack&quot;, Harry Potter books and even the &quot;Twilight&quot; vampire series which are all gobbled up by undiscerning Christians and pagans alike.

There is plenty of documentation confirming this at a site called &quot;Crossroads&quot; by Berit Kjos, as well as many other sources.  Christians must wake up and educate themselves on their many heros and &quot;scholars&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>&#8220;Far from the depth and Scriptural accuracy of Bunyan, Lewis or Tolkien&#8230;&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>Indeed, you do have a gift for writing and adequately identifying the heresies found in the delapidated shack.</p>
<p>However, I am deeply troubled by your stating that Lewis and Tolkien&#8217;s writings are scriptural.  Far too many preachers extol the virtues of these two brilliant men, albeit unsaved men, from their pulpits. They do so out of ignorance and owe it to their congregations to learn otherwise.  Tolkien was a devout Catholic.  Lewis identifies sympathizes with Catholicism as well, identifying himself as &#8220;very Catholic&#8221;.</p>
<p>Lewis on Salvation:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;There are three things that spread the Christ life to us: baptism, belief, and that mysterious action which different Christians call by different names—Holy Communion, the Mass, the Lord’s Supper.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p> Mere Christianity</p>
<p>Lewis on Purgatory, speaking in make-believe words of Jesus Christ:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;Whatever suffering it may cost you in your earthly life, whatever inconceivable purification it may cost you after death, whatever it costs Me, I will never rest, nor let you rest, until you are literally perfect. . .&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p> Mere Christianity, Chapter 9</p>
<p>One reviewer of both Lewis and Tolkien writes:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;It is truly baffling that any real Christian should think that Lewis was a Christian. It seems that most have only heard the advertising rhetoric, but few have taken the time to read the works that expose his personal views or biographical works chronicling his habits. Lewis did not consider all of the Bible the inerrant Word of God (Reflections on the Psalms). He did not believe that faith in Jesus Christ was all that was necessary for salvation (Screwtape Letters). He believed that one could lose one’s faith in a moment through commission of a mortal sin (Screwtape Letters). He believed in Limbo as a place (neither heaven nor hell) of temporary punishment (Screwtape Letters). He believed that church sacraments are part of salvation (Mere Christianity, Screwtape Letters). He believed that pagans may belong to Christ without knowing it (Mere Christianity). He had a participating interest in the occult (The Inklings Handbook). And, regardless of his reputation and his &#8220;great swelling words,&#8221; his outlook on death was not that of a Christian. This from C. S. Lewis, A Biography: &#8220;Like many (most?) religious people, Lewis was profoundly afraid of death. His dread of it, when in the midst of life, had been almost pathological and obsessive. Physical extinction was a perpetual nightmare to him and, whatever his theological convictions and hopes, he was unable, before his wife’s death, to reconcile himself to the transition which death must inevitably entail.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>Source: Keepers of the Faith website, &#8220;C.S. Lewis: Who He Was &amp; What He Wrote&#8221; </p>
<p>Yes, Lewis was a master of logical argument, but he and Tolkien must be realized as false representatives of the pure Christian faith.  As dabblers in theosophy and lovers of the occult, they are mere stepping stones to the more obvious forms of blasphemy such as &#8220;The Shack&#8221;, Harry Potter books and even the &#8220;Twilight&#8221; vampire series which are all gobbled up by undiscerning Christians and pagans alike.</p>
<p>There is plenty of documentation confirming this at a site called &#8220;Crossroads&#8221; by Berit Kjos, as well as many other sources.  Christians must wake up and educate themselves on their many heros and &#8220;scholars&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

