XPost: rec.arts.books.tolkien, alt.books.cs-lewis, rec.arts.books.childrens   
   XPost: rec.arts.sf.written   
   From: news@pointerstop.ca   
      
   Mike Schilling wrote:   
      
   >   
   > "Derek Broughton"  wrote in message   
   > news:g7gfa3-g5e.ln1@news.pointerstop.ca...   
   >>> Yes, Aslan is literally Christ.   
   >>   
   >> Sorry, but he definitely isn't.   
   >   
   > Are you looking for an argument? :-)   
   >   
      
   Well, duh! :-)   
   >>   
   >>>> That would be a form of blasphemy.   
   >>>   
   >>> Why?  If Christ can incarnate as a human here, why not as a lion in   
   >>> Narnia?   
   >>   
   >> Well, ask a cross-section of Christian theologians whether, if there is   
   >> intelligent life elsewhere in the universe, if it's possible that they   
   >> can   
   >> have been "saved".  If so, ask if Christ could have appeared to them.   
   >   
   > Why ask them?  The question is how Lewis would (for the purpose of these   
   > stories) answer that question.   
      
   No, that's not the question.  I have no doubt that Lewis (and Tolkien)   
   dislike the concept of allegory, and perhaps they do understand it   
   differently than I do.  All I have to go on is current common usage and   
   dictionary definitions.  The point is that _I_ cannot accept Aslan _as_   
   Christ, and there is plenty of considered theological opinion to back that   
   up.  It's not the only valid stance, but just because Lewis refused to call   
   LWW allegory, doesn't mean I have to accept it.   
      
   I'm considerably more open to Tolkien's denials of allegory in his work.   
   --   
   derek   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)