HarperCollins to Release C. S. Lewis Bible

The C S Lewis BibleTo go along with the other tie-in books being released in October for The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, HarperCollins will be publishing a C. S. Lewis Bible.

Thought-provoking meditations from beloved author C. S. Lewis’s own spiritual writings are paired with corresponding Bible passages in The C. S. Lewis Bible. This NRSV Bible provides readings comprised of over 600 selections from Lewis’s celebrated spiritual classics, a collection that includes Mere Christianity, The Screwtape Letters, The Great Divorce, The Problem of Pain, Miracles, A Grief Observed, The Four Loves, and The Weight of Glory, as well as letters, poetry, and Lewis’s lesser-known works. Each reading, paired alongside relevant passages in the Bible, offers C. S. Lewis as a companion to a reader’s daily meditation of scripture.

Sample pages from the C. S. Lewis Bible can be viewed here and more information on this Bible can be found on HarperCollins’ website here. You can also pre-order the Bible here.
Thanks to johobbit for the heads-up!

UPDATE: In digging around for more information on the C. S. Lewis Bible, I ran across another book being released on Oct 12 called ‘A Year with Aslan: Daily Reflections from The Chronicles of Narnia’.

In the tradition of A YEAR WITH C. S. LEWIS, get your daily dose of Narnia inspiration in this first of its kind collection of 365 readings from the beloved children’s series. A Year with Aslan will select the most thought-provoking and poignant passages from all seven books in the series, and provide reflective questions that get the heart of what matters most.

Website is here. Preordering is available here.

87 Responses

  1. narnian1 says:

    I like! I will be buying it for sure =)

    • WilliamMoseleyandSkandarcrush! says:

      Hey you guys! Ok, so i know this is way off topic, but if you go to Narniafans.com, they show a picture of Ramadu! The actor is Leonard Nimoy… or something like that! I know i'm posting it on the comment thing, but I'm not a spy for Narniaweb and I don't know how to send it in. So if anyone is still reading this(i know this is kind of late, but it's the newest news) go to Narniafans.com and click on the third link or something!

      And on this Bible thing, I'm not too happy about. I mean, we're not supposed to add to the Bible. I know that it's not made to add to the Bible, but it's still not right(at least, I think it's not right to call it a Bible if part of it is not the Bible, it's a story on CS LEWIS'S life.

      • 220chrisTian says:

        @William: it's an April Fools joke! lol

      • WilliamMoseleyandSkandarcrush! says:

        ooohhhhh snap! 🙂 I can't believe I fell for it.

      • Jill Pole says:

        Kinda agree with yer there, Narnian. But I guess the other writings are cool, though. But why call it a Bible? Isin't that sort of . . . I don't know. You said it right.

      • Jill Pole says:

        Hahahah! Read the comments. Didn't check, though.

      • Bill Dandreano says:

        I don't agree. I love to study the Bible and I love to read what other people who love to study the Bible have written about it. Normally, I have to go to a different book, to find out what my favorite writers have written about passages of scripture that I am looking at. With this Bible, however, we can have a commentary, by a man whom God has worked through for a lifetime, to aid us in reading God's word. This is not an addition to the Bible itself, but a study tool, that will help all who read it gain a different perspective into the word itself.

        We are the body of Christ. Each part of the body serves a purpose and all parts are needed. To read another mans take on the bible is not to think it to be a part of the Bible, but an insight into what God has shown that man. To me, that is the Church working well. If a person would read C.S. Lewis passages next to scripture and assume that they are additions to the word, exposes more issues in that person than it does in the publishing company who created this Bible. We can glean from C.S. Lewis, but not take away from the Word of God. Let's enjoy the fruit of the body of Christ. We are not adding to the Bible, but being good stewards of the Word God has given by reaping the fruit of another's gift.


      • Darktiger09 says:

        I don't like the whole 'C.S.Lewis Bible' thing either IF, (the IF is a big thing there) they/he is ADDING to the actual Word of God. If they are just putting in some quotes and side-notes, that's perfectly fine in my opinion. Every person has their own walk with The Lord,and so long as they believe that Jesus Christ came to save our sins and that his blood and sacrifice is the One and Only way to Heaven, then it is up to the individual to determine the direction of their walk with God. Obviously, if they are into things that directly contradict the Scriptures, we obviously have a problem there, and it is then up to fellow believers to GENTLY AND KINDLY point out what they are erring in; but if they are using good solid Christian literature that will enhance and build up their walk with The Lord, then by all means, leave them alone and let them do so!

        Some may find problem with using any other literature than the Bible, but as before said, it is up the the believer and their walk with The Lord that will determine what they should do concerning those matters, and it is not our place to criticize them and tell them what they are doing is wrong. That is not our place, and in reality we are doing more harm than good!

    • Hehe…I hate april fools day jokes unless im doing it. 🙂

    • Bill Dandreano says:

      Here is my question for everyone…?

      This is being called the C.S. Lewis Bible!!!

      What if it were called, The Bible with C.S. LEwis commentary.

      Would we feel different about it?

      • No, I still think it would be fun to read!

      • Darktiger09 says:

        I think that would be fine, so long as they are not adding to the actual Bible.

      • Darktiger09: I totaly agree with you! That I would NOT read!

      • I agree with you all, it shouldn't be added to the Bible as a substitute, its just a study tool. I don't like the name, it's a little like using the Lord's name in vain for me, I think it should be different like "The Bible with additions and commentary by C S Lewis", not the "C S Lewis Bible." We'll just have to wait and see what it's really like.

      • Darktiger09 says:

        yeah, if they started doing that then i think they would have a lot of angry Christians to deal with!

      • Bill Dandreano says:

        This is NOT adding to the Word. It's commentary. That's all. It's no different than a Matthew Henry commentary. It's not bad, it's not a sin. It's a Bible, with commentary by C.S. Lewis. If this is "adding to the Word," than we should never study anything but the Bible itself. No works written about it, no opinions, not even our own. Chill out every one….it's a commentary. Enjoy it.


      • You guys are absolutly right. I actualy have the Henry Morris commetnary bible but his views on baptizim are absolutly wrong.

      • Bill Dandreano says:

        Pippin…this is what I'm talking about. You're saying that his views on baptisim are wrong. That is your opinion. If you can state your opinion based on what we read in the bible, then why is it wrong for C.S. Lewis to do the same. We have a Bible here that is simply C.S. Lewis not in place of, but next to the scriptures with his opinion. this is great in my opinion. Maybe they are wrong about baptisim. That's fine. We are the body of Christ moving towards got through study and relationship. Praise God.

  2. theprincessspy says:

    Awwww, I wish it were KJV!! That's my favorite version. but this is brilliant!

  3. Talking Rat says:

    Huh… interesting. 🙂 Does anyone else find this slightly weird? I mean, putting the commentary of a single author right inside a Bible? I guess I think it's great if people use it as a commentary, but I'm just afraid this could tempt some people who (like myself) love C.S. Lewis' writing and ideas to put his words on too high a footing…

    But it's still pretty cool. 🙂

    • true-narnian_queen says:

      well you can look at it that way, but having his words in the bible might help you to understand it more. so i think its the coolest thing ever!!!

      • Talking Rat says:

        I agree– I just think I might prefer having it in a separate book (see below if you'd like for why). 🙂

      • Aravis and Hwin says:

        I think that it's a little weird that they're putting C.S. Lewis's words in with the rest of the Bible, but I think that a seperate comentary would be a great idea.

    • Starlily says:

      I agree, Talking Rat. C. S. Lewis has some good insight, but I don't think we should pay more attention to his writings than the Bible, which is the inspired word of God. He was only human, after all.

      By the way, Talking Rat, I like your name. 🙂 I have a pet rat, and sometimes I wish he could talk.

      Then again, maybe not. 😉

    • Rilianluvr4evr says:

      Well I find it odd that they would call it "The C.S. Lewis Bible." It sounds almost as bad as "The Gospel according to C.S. Lewis." I think its Ok to put reflections by C.S. Lewis as a commentary BUT they should call it something like,"Holy Bible with commentary by C.s Lewis" We have study bibles with notes, don't we?

      • Rilianluvr4evr says:

        Wait a sec…Could this be an April fool?

      • Talking Rat says:

        I doubt it– this was posted yesterday (so they would be cheating if it was! 😉 ) and the links are valid.

      • Bother Eustace says:

        Yeah, that would make more sense. I myself have a Bible with commentary by Henry Morris, but it's not called the "Henry Morris Bible" or anything like that… it just has little footnotes and brief introductions to the books.

    • Reepicheep775 says:

      I agree with you, Talking Rat. This isn't diabolical, but it is a little dangerous.

    • Mac-bond says:

      I totally agree with you, that was a well thought out observation. I think this is pretty cool, but I share in your consern.

    • Jill Pole says:

      Yeah, ditto . . .

  4. Lucy Helen Ycul says:

    I'd like to have ‘A Year with Aslan: Daily Reflections from The Chronicles of Narnia’ for my birthday.

  5. Rilian says:

    Talking Rat, I understand your concern, but I don't think we should be afraid of putting a commentator's writings inside the Bible, no more than we should of putting a map of historical pieces (which could be flawed) inside the Bible.

    I will probably not be buying one. CS Lewis had many great talents: apologetics, literature, history, philosophy, even poetry. But he was not a formal theologian. Many people go to Lewis for thoughts on theology. He had good thoughts on mere Christianity, but I would not advise anyone to go Lewis to sort out their theology any more than I would tell someone to go read John Piper for thoughts on history. Could he talk about it? Sure, but that's not necessarily his specialty. There are better sources.

    This Bible will only reinforce this tendency.

    • Talking Rat says:

      Although a commentary is probably going to influence people's views a lot more than a map. 🙂 I don't think it's sacrilegious or anything, 😉 and I'm all for commentary. But a regular commentary is in a separate book, so you're more likely to look at more than one and maybe even be more critical in your reading, whereas if it's right there, it seems like it would be easy to go only by what Lewis says about the passage… does that make sense? Not that someone's going to say, "This is inside my Bible, so it must be infallible too;" I think most people are smarter than that 😉 but subconsciously I think it could lead some people to be less critical– you know, "I'm studying The-Bible-and-C.S.-Lewis," instead of "I'm studying the Bible and seeing what C.S. says about it." And again, I don't think it's horrible, I'm just not sure yet if it's the best idea.

    • Lady Gwenay says:

      I agree with Rilian and Talking Rat that we have to be careful with reading commentaries as the final truth of Scripture interpretation. But could we not have the same concerns about any Bible with study notes as we have with the CS Lewis Bible? I mean, all study notes are just a one group's opinion of the interpretation of Scripture. And though I know Lewis was not officially a trained theologian, even among scholars who have studied the Bible extensively there are many disagreements about Scripture interpretation and application. I'll be adding this Bible to my Lewis book collection – and reading it along with books and commentaries from other authors.

      • Talking Rat says:

        I'd thought about that with study notes, but like you said, study notes are from a group, which is a little different than one person.

  6. true-narnian_queen says:

    i am totally getting this bible! and a year with aslan!!!

  7. pselpevensie says:

    i am SO buying that!!!!!

  8. Liberty Hoffman says:

    awesome!!!!! I think it would be worth buying…..I might get it! 😀

  9. narnia fan 7 says:

    Huh? whit?

  10. InklingsNut8472 says:

    This is a day-one buy for me. I can understand the caution some are expressing, but I think there's little likelihood of this Bible harming someone's faith. Technically, you're trusting other people anytime you read any version of the Bible, especially one with notes and articles.

    Emphasizing a particular person's thoughts on the Bible is hardly new. For a little perspective, check out this list:

    1. Joel Osteen's "Hope for Today" Bible
    2. Joyce Meyer Study Bible
    3. John Macarthur Study Bible
    4. Max Lucado's "Inspirational Study Bible"

    And on and on. Personally, I don't think Bibles that feature a single author's commentary are particularly disturbing. What I do find disturbing are Bibles that zero in on a single issue like environmentalism. Case in point: "The Green Bible," a Bible that colors all the verses that talk about the Earth in green. If that isn't weird, I don't know what is…
    As far as I'm concerned, if all these other authors deserve their own Study Bible, then surely C.S. Lewis deserves one! I'll take his thoughts on the Bible over Joel Osteen's any day (no offense to fans of Joel Osteen).

  11. awesome! I'm totally getting this!

  12. Skilletdude says:

    Uh, no thank you. If I want to read C.S. Lewis, I'll pick up one of his books…not a Bible.

  13. Aslan's my homeboy says:

    Totally getting it!

  14. 220chrisTian says:

    I agree with all of you that this is not a good thing. Lewis wasn't a formal theologian, as Rilian and Lady G pointed out. Besides, I don't want to read Lewis's thoughts on the Bible. I already know what they are and I consider Lewis practically a heretic for them.

    I own the Max Lucado Bible and, for me, it's a distraction. It's ADDING TO the Scriptures!

    Bibles with study notes, like Scofield's and others, aren't the same thing–not really. They're trying to help you understand the Bible. They're giving background information: word studies and definitions, types and symbols, etc. Check out this site [Scofield Reference Notes on 1917 KJV] to see what I mean: http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/scofield-reference-notes/

  15. narnian resident says:

    i think this is really interesting. one of my favorite things i love to look for when i read Lewis books is things that relate to passages in the bible. when i read chronicles of narnia, i adored the parts i found that refered to things of the bible, especially aslan stuff, so ithnk its cool that they can bring things together that he wrote that are very spiritually inspirational. and plus, just because they're calling it "bible" doesnt mean anything against the Bible. bible stands for "Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth", and im not saying that we NEED things written by lewis before we leave earth, but i bet there are things he has for us that can enhance our walk with God and help our spiritual growth. after i had read narnia and screwtape letters i actually felt closer and stronger in my spiritual walk, not to mention gain knowledge of things that everyone should know about. so simply calling it bible just means a book of spiritual, or even just common normal, instructions that are handy and helpful. my mom has a big fat wedding magazine from Simple, and it has every detail you should know about planning a wedding, and she calls it her "wedding bible" 🙂
    so there is nothing wrong with the name

    • HighQueenofNarnia says:

      It's sad that people use the word "Bible" so flippantly as to mean any book that should be trusted without fail. There is only one Book like that. The Bible is the infallible, unchangeable Word of God. The Bible is NOT "simply spiritual, or even just common, normal instructions that are handy and helpful." It comes directly from God. It isn't written by people who can make mistakes. It was written by men who heard the words of God. And the Bible is set apart from all other books because it was dictated by God. No other book- written by Max Lucado or C.S. Lewis- can compare. Which, as I said earlier, is why it's sad that people call anything that may be helpful a "Bible".
      With apologies to C.S. Lewis and other commentators, the Bible is easy enough to understand without all the added words. The Bible was not written for people who had the time and experience to decipher something. It was written for people with barely any (if any) education. So we don't need theologians to decipher the Word.
      One more thing- human people, however smart or close to God they are, are prone to mistakes. C.S. Lewis is no exception. Who knows what misinterpretation may be in the pages! In some of the "best Bibles around" there are mistakes, mistranslations, and heresies. I'm not saying that this particular Bible has such things, but it's best to just stick with what we're given.

      • 220chrisTian says:

        Amen, HighQueen! Well said! *claps*

        I hate seeing "wedding bible" and "cooking bible," etc. You don't WANT to know some of Lewis's thoughts on the Bible. They're not pretty. 🙁 Lewis on Genesis? Yikes!

      • Talking Rat says:

        I'd agree about the Bible being clear enough for all people, but I'd add that, since we are also humans who make mistakes 😉 it is helpful (though not necessary) to have commentaries.

      • narnian resident says:

        ok your right about that, highqueenofnarnia. i was just saying i dont think we have to freak out too much that they're calling it "Bible", but yes you are right it is from God. instructions from God, thats what they are, and i can never get enough of it 😀

  16. Hannah says:

    This is really neat!

  17. HighQueenofNarnia says:

    I was just reading some of the sample pages. (Warning: This may be what Lewis believed, but I don't think that he was trying to impress his beliefs upon everyone else.) He says that "the most lawless and inordinate loves are less contrary to God's will than a self-invited and self-protected lovelessness." So, basically, according to Mr. Lewis, loving others in the wrong way is better in God's eyes than not loving at all or just loving yourself. Now, whether or not I agree with this statement, the Bible commentaries present Lewis' words as fact. It may sound like an opinion, which it is, but the impression that I got from reading this was that it was true. And people may think, "Well, you know, Mr. Lewis was a great Christian and man of God. I'm just a simple (insert occupation here). So if Mr. Lewis says that it's true, it must be true." Does anyone have any idea how harmful this can be to readers? Mr. Lewis is a mere man. He was respected by most, but he's still a man. Honestly, I would rather just let the Bible speak for itself.
    Seeing the commentary take up half a page of the Bible where the Word could have been was rather sickening.
    I agree that it is helpful to have commentaries, Talking Rat. But, of course, it isn't necessary. And you honestly MUST evaluate the commentaries for what they say, not who wrote them. Don't get caught up in the mindset of "So-and-so was a great Christian. I should accept whatever he says as truth. And it is in a Bible, after all." That, I think, is the danger of commentaries. A great author combined with the fact that the words are in a Bible can overwhelm a person. Every word in the text of the actual Bible is absolutely true. I will vouch for that. But any added features- I suggest that one reads carefully. Those were not written by God.

    • 220chrisTian says:

      @High Queen: I agree. As you and Talking Rat noted, commentaries are helpful. I like and use study notes. At the same time, they're written by fallible people. We should never trust them as much as or more than the Word. Example: I own a Scofield Bible. I find it REALLY helpful. But sometimes I disagree with what he says [i.e. his commentary] and explain why in the margins. Every commentator is fallible. You have to compare them with the Word and see if what they're saying agrees with it.

      "the most lawless and inordinate loves are less contrary to God’s will than a self-invited and self-protected lovelessness." — WRONG! Wrong love [ = sin] is no less contrary to God's will than lovelessness. God is explicit on all the wrong types of love He condemns and the punishment for them. Chapters in Leviticus and Proverbs, David's sin with Bathsheba, ETC: they're all sin, all lawless, all contrary to God's will. Whatever doesn't conform to God's word and will is contrary to it. Lawless and inordinate loves are no exception!

      • HighQueenofNarnia says:

        I totally agree! I was just trying to prove my point about how commentaries aren't the Bible, so I didn't voice my opinion. But one type of sin is just as wrong as another. Artificial love is just as wrong as hate.

  18. Wow, that looks really cool! I'd love to buy that! 🙂

  19. I think that this is clearly different from other so-called "Study Bibles". I would get it, because I have read his other works and can recognize what "part of the road" of the man's spiritual journey he was on. Others might not be able to recognize that. I can keep it in the proper context.

    For those that haven't read his other works already, Lewis will seem to say stuff that he ultimately did not believe. The thing about the man is that he readily admitted that he did not have all of the answers, but was still looking and searching. If you don't remember this, you can take something out of context, and be harmed more than helped.

    So, we are taking his words out of the *lifelong* context of his over all thought, and so much more worse, leading others astray.

    Even herein so far, I can see where Lewis is not correctly interpreted. His comments on Creation, for instance, are not in a belief in evolution. At first, he considered it a possibility, but eventually, he viewed it as a myth that might have been heroic, but was much less logical and more difficult to believe than the true Christian myth.

    About his words for love, if you take that and other quotes out of context of the overall BOOK, if not of his over all ENTIRE APOLOGETICS works, you will get thoroughly mixed up. Without a background in having read everything he wrote, you will not be able to isolate where they are from, and thus be harmed.

    So, I think everyone is right, but before you criticize his beliefs, understand that he was on a lifelong quest to learn and understand the Lord, and that his works are searches in logic that build upon each other, often needing the entire book just to understand one single point within it. He would often make this clear at the start of his works.

    Despite my agreement with the possible negativity of this work for those who haven't studied him extensively, I will say that there is one area where this work would be far superior to other so-called "study Bibles", and that is that it will not have the contamination of the anti-Christian and demonic "social Gospel" bilge that so many others have. And yes, I do believe that the "social Gospel" ruins any message of Christ. Even my Ryrie Study Bible is contaminated with it to some extent.

    God bless all.

    • HighQueenofNarnia says:

      But I have not studied C.S. Lewis extensively. However, if C.S. Lewis's comments can only be understood by those who know him well, then I'm sorry- they're not worth reading. I have neither the time nor inclination to do a background check on C.S. Lewis. I do not want to have to read his other works in order to understand his comments on the Bible. That is not practical at all. And that's just great for you, MereChristian, but what about the average Joe who will read this Bible and perhaps misinterpret his comments? This is fine, apparently, for someone who knows it all about C.S. Lewis, but if I don't, and I will misinterpret his comments, why get the Bible if I'm going to be misinformed?

      Well, if he's still searching, that's all very well and good, as long as it's absolutely clear that this is just the observations of a man who is still seeking. Many people DO NOT KNOW this (if it's even true- no offense, but I am giving you a huge benefit of the doubt here). They think that this is the result of much prayer and testing. I realize that people go through periods of belief or unbelief. These comments, if they are in the wrong context, should not really be published, if it is not what Lewis believes.

      That Lewis even considered evolution as an alternative to a created world shows that he cannot be trusted. (Of course, God-instigated evolution is debatable [a belief which I think is false, but that's my opinion]) Is that what you mean?

      Just because something is more logical does not mean that it is true. Our God is a supernatural God. He does things outside the laws of science. Is not a man rising from the dead "difficult to believe"? Yet it is true. Is not water turning into wine impossible? Yet it happened. God is more powerful than laws, because he created them. Even if evolution was more logical than Creation, I would still believe Creation, as it is the account in the Bible.

      Oh, please. If I have to read the entire book to understand and not misinterpret ONE QUOTE, then I would rather not read the quote. Again, if I need fifty-plus pages of background to fully understand a single sentence, then why bother? It's just not practical.

      Lewis's words on love are just plain wrong. He's saying that the wrong kind of love is better than hate. Really, now. Both are sin.

      Of course one should keep that in mind! Isn't that what every Christian does? And the building block strategy is not entirely bad. But if people take it out of context and just place one or two sentences in the Bible, then I think that this study Bible idea is just wrong. As Skilletdude put it, "Uh, no thanks. If I want to read C.S. Lewis, I'll pick up one of his books. Not a Bible."

      Well, actually, it might. Saying that one type of sin is not sin but another type of the same sin is sin is rather heretical. Sin is sin. Period. But I think that C.S. Lewis was not intentionally anti-Christian. However, the commentary shouldn't be all one author. (Well, technically, there is only one Author.) There is danger of his words being either contradictory to the Christian faith (as he wasn't a theologian) or misinterpreted. I am giving you a large benefit of the doubt, but it seems to me that the mark of a good writer is one who can make a quote understood either standing alone or in an argument. At any rate, it is better for the reader to see two different views on a verse (if they want a study Bible) rather than one. This way they can decide or even come up with their own views.

      Anyway, in summary, I do not want to-nor should I- have to understand his numerous other books in order to understand his commentary on the Bible. And, all in all, it seems to me that if, according to MereChristian, I'm going to misinterpret most if not all of Lewis's comments because I'm simply not well versed in everything he wrote, this whole C.S. Lewis Study Bible thing is a bad idea.

      • Talking Rat says:

        I don't think you have to read everything Lewis wrote to understand anything he wrote– like you said, HighQueen, that would be highly impractical. Although I'm sure it helps you understand.

        But I think, Mere Christian, that you have a point about context– there are a lot of places where Lewis freely admits that he wasn't sure about something, and that this or that was just his speculation. When it's all chopped up, it can be hard to get what he's saying.

        And I don't think it's quite fair to say you shouldn't have to read quite a bit of context to fully understand a sentence– like your sentence, High Queen "Just because something is more logical does not mean that it is true." What you meant I think is that just because something doesn't seem to make sense *by human, natural standards* doesn't mean it's true– but I know that from context in the rest of the paragraph. If I had just read that sentence by itself, I might have thought you meant that truth isn't logical from any standpoint, including a logic that accepts the supernatural. Do you see what I'm saying.

        About evolution– in the problem of pain, he talks about how it might have been (a great example of speculation where he states very clearly that he's only speculating) and talks about how at some point along the evolution of man, God gave him a soul– so he was definitely not excluding God.

        So basically, I don't think his writings are unfathomable until you've studied everything he every wrote, but I also don't like the idea of just pulling things out of context from here and there and sticking them side by side with the Bible.

      • Talking Rat says:

        Sorry: "…just because something doesn’t seem to make sense *by human, natural standards* doesn’t mean it’s NOT true…"

      • Bill Dandreano says:

        I am going to have to agree with TalkingRat on this one. On the one hand your saying that one should not have to read all of the C.S. Lewis books to understand where he is coming from and what his points of view are. On the other hand your saying that because you didn’t understand one of his books, you won’t understand the rest. If Clive Staples Lewis were alive right now, and he heard you say that, he would utter his famous line of , “Your argument implodes on itself.” You ‘re saying that I should not have to have context to understand everything, but at the same time your saying that based on the context one book, you can’t understand anything. Context is important to you. Your issue is not context as it stands, but how much context does one need to have. You’re using a little context, to make a large assumption about the study Bible.

        Also, commentary is commentary. The Scripture needs to be our context. We’re discussing context in terms of a mans books, when the mans books should be in the context of scripture. I think it is a great idea to take a timeless writer like Lewis, and put him next to the scriptures, so we can see how his writing holds up under the powerful light of Gods truth. This is a wonderful idea and as I have said above, it’s the body of Christ working well with itself.


      • Beruna says:

        While I'm doubting you really gave MereChristian's words enough thought, HighQueen,(because he/she really does have a point) I do agree we shouldn't have to read everything to understand one quote.

  20. Sean M says:

    As to Lewis' position on theology, he called himself a 'lay theologan.' He never claimed to be the last word on anything Biblical. However, his insight has been invaluable to my personal walk with Christ. His theology is highly practical, though far from perfect. The nice thing about having his commentary side-by-side with the Bible's text is that you can check his comments against the Word of God.

    As to the C.S. Lewis Bible itself, I'm getting it.

  21. COOL!! That would be so cool to read! 🙂

  22. I stated, Ma'am, that there is a necessity in understanding the context of a person's words, in order to understand what that person means. The fact that a brand-new Christian who saw warfare would struggle with the truth somewhat should not be surprising. Trust me, it's quite realistic. Warfare is not like Hollywood makes it out to be with an inspiring soundtrack playing in the background, and the result never in doubt. I have doubted myself, at times, so I can have sympathy for what Lewis went through.

    If you think this makes him, or by extension myself and other, bad Christians, then so be it. I would merely ask that you think, probe, and try to discern, instead of speaking to these issues and those who struggle with such contempt and sarcasm. As a Christian, how can you expect to win souls with such sarcasam and contempt?

    As for the argument that it might not help others, well, that is for them to decide between themselves, their families, and, most importantly of all, God. It is not for us to decide. If a company chooses to release a product, then we can condemn it, but it really isn't our place to try to act like a product shouldn't even exist. I, for one, feel that input stops there, at input, and should not get into controlling, or forcing others actions. If I, or anyone want to get it, it is my business, and not anyone else's, except for God's.

    Above all, shouldn't we rejoice that a man embraced more and more of the truth in the last few years of his life, instead of ripping him to shreds for not doing so sooner. The Scriptures say that the angels watch us to learn from us, but I wonder if watching our attitudes doesn't cause them to learn how grateful they are not to be us.

    Thank you all for your opinions, and I would just ask some of you to try to understand instead of coming down on those of us who struggle with a wave of righteous indignation. You have absolutely no clue what any of us go through.

    God bless all.

    • Bill Dandreano says:

      Once again the Bible tells us to learn from one another. It tells us to study to show our selves approved. If all we do is read the Bible, without any help at all from other people who read it, we are in essence saying that we are capeable of understanding on our own. Some of us more spiritual people may say that they read the Word with the Holy Spirit. I say that the Holy Spirit was poured out on a people of God and not on one isolated individual. the context for the Holy Spirit is the body of Christ. If we read the Bible apart from others at all, we are neglecting the Body of Christ, thus neglecting the indwelling of the holy Spirit all together.

      Maybe if they came out with a seperate book called, "The C.S. Lewis commentary, people would not be so upset. Mere Christian, I love your words and agree with you. I feel blessed to have C.S. Lewis as a gift given by God to the church. He is human, but he also has been used by God. He flaws matched with his usefulness should give all of us sinners some hope that God uses the foolish things of this world to confound…..the wise.


  23. Eavis says:

    While I don't agree with their phrasing eg, "C.S. Lewis Bible" I don't think this is a bad thing. He's got immensely insightful thoughts on lots and lots of things.

    Much of the time his more harsh critics take his writings out of context. Much depends on context. Lots of us, every day, say things that would be heretical if they were taken out of context. Lewis is no different.

    People that are struggling with this, just think of it as a commentary and it might be easier.

    Go with God,

  24. InklingsNut8472 says:

    I believe, along with most of the rest of you, that the Bible is God's Word. But I think some of us disagree on what that means. One person said in an earlier post that the Bible is "the infallible, unchanging Word of God," and then turned right around and said that some of the "best Bibles around" were full of mistakes, mistranslations, and heresies. That doesn't sound like "infallible" and "unchangeable" to me.

    Such arguments raise an interesting question. How do we know which Bibles qualify as God's "unchanging Word" and which don't? In the spirit of Lewis’s ending to Mere Christianity, I see three main possibilities:

    1. All modern translations and editions of the Bible can be trusted.

    2. Only some modern translations and editions of the Bible can be trusted.

    3. No modern translation or edition of the Bible can be trusted.

    In the first case, there would be no point to this debate, because there would be nothing to worry about. The average Joe who picks up the C.S. Lewis Bible (or any other) could open it without fear of being assaulted by heresy.

    Obviously, the second and third cases present us with a problem. How do we decide which Bibles are trustworthy? Unless I’m an expert in Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic, I’m forced to trust the opinion of a scholar to tell me whether a particular translation/edition is trustworthy. But wait! How can I do that if human beings are infallible and only the Bible itself should ever be trusted? Oops. That leaves me with the option of reading a version of the Bible that might be faulty or resorting to the original manuscripts. Assuming that I’m an average Joe (like most of the early apostles), that isn’t really much of a choice.

    It shouldn’t take long to realize that we’re forced to trust in God and those who represent Him (or claim to, anyway) in order to get a version of the Bible we understand. If God can produce the original, flawless manuscripts that we all believe are His Word, why couldn’t He ensure that all (or at least most) of our modern translations bring us the message He wants us to hear?

    As far as the Lewis Bible goes, live and let live, please, and stop tearing your hair out. It isn’t the end of the world if someone untrained in the Scriptures happens to buy this. If God can speak through an ass (Numbers 21), surely he can speak through Lewis.

    Something tells me the ass wasn’t a formal theologian, either. But it still spoke the truth.

  25. tim says:

    I think I might puke

  26. Talking Rat says:

    Just want to clarify again, since the conversation has gone on so long: I'm not freaking out about this, I just think it's something to consider. 🙂 I don't think it's absolutely and terribly dangerous, I just think it's maybe on the edge of being dangerous, where for some people it could be helpful and for others it might be a bit of a stumbling block.

  27. Bill Dandreano says:

    Pippin…this is what I’m talking about. You’re saying that his views on baptizim are wrong. That is your opinion. If you can state your opinion based on what we read in the bible, then why is it wrong for C.S. Lewis to do the same. We have a Bible here that is simply C.S. Lewis not in place of, but next to the scriptures with his opinion. this is great in my opinion. Maybe they are wrong about baptizim. That’s fine. We are the body of Christ moving towards God through study and relationship. Praise God

  1. April 16, 2010

    […] HARPERCOLLINS TO RELEASE C. S. LEWIS BIBLE Coming in October. Thought-provoking meditations from beloved author C. S. Lewis’s own spiritual writings are paired with corresponding Bible passages in The C. S. Lewis Bible. This NRSV Bible provides readings comprised of over 600 selections from Lewis’s celebrated spiritual classics, a collection that includes Mere Christianity, The Screwtape Letters, The Great Divorce, The Problem of Pain, Miracles, A Grief Observed, The Four Loves, and The Weight of Glory, as well as letters, poetry, and Lewis’s lesser-known works. Each reading, paired alongside relevant passages in the Bible, offers C. S. Lewis as a companion to a reader’s daily meditation of Scripture…. Read this in full at http://www.narniaweb.com/2010/03/harpercollins-to-release-c-s-lewis-bible/ […]

  2. April 17, 2010

    […] HARPERCOLLINS TO RELEASE C. S. LEWIS BIBLE Coming in October. Thought-provoking meditations from beloved author C. S. Lewis’s own spiritual writings are paired with corresponding Bible passages in The C. S. Lewis Bible. This NRSV Bible provides readings comprised of over 600 selections from Lewis’s celebrated spiritual classics, a collection that includes Mere Christianity, The Screwtape Letters, The Great Divorce, The Problem of Pain, Miracles, A Grief Observed, The Four Loves, and The Weight of Glory, as well as letters, poetry, and Lewis’s lesser-known works. Each reading, paired alongside relevant passages in the Bible, offers C. S. Lewis as a companion to a reader’s daily meditation of Scripture…. Read this in full at http://www.narniaweb.com/2010/03/harpercollins-to-release-c-s-lewis-bible/ […]