home
RSS
The C.S. Lewis you never knew
C.S. Lewis has become a virtual Christian saint, but his life wasn't as tidy as his public image.
December 1st, 2013
06:00 AM ET

The C.S. Lewis you never knew

By John Blake, CNN

(CNN) - He looked like a “red-faced pork butcher in shabby tweeds,” lived secretly with a woman for years and was so turned on by S&M that he once asked people at a party whether he could spank them.

We’re talking, of course, about C.S. Lewis, the Christian icon and author of classics such as “Mere Christianity” and “The Chronicles of Narnia.”

It’s tempting to remember Lewis only as the self-assured defender of Christianity who never met an argument he couldn't demolish. His death 50 years ago, on November 22, 1963, was overshadowed by the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. He has since become a patron saint of American evangelicals.

But the actual man whom friends called “Jack” had a “horrible” personal life, thought he had failed as a defender of Christianity and spent so much time in pubs that his publishers initially struggled selling him to a religious audience, scholars say.

“American publishers worried about offending their more puritanical readers because it seemed impossible to get a dust jacket picture of Jack without a pint or a cigarette,” says Michael Tomko, a literature professor at Villanova University in Pennsylvania.

There are three other parts of Lewis’ life that clash with his image as well:

1. His religious books made him poor

No modern Christian author sells like Lewis. The cumulative sales of his Christian books for adults - not including the Christian allegory and children's fantasy "The Chronicles of Narnia" - now approach 10 million copies, according to HarperOne publishers. “Mere Christianity” sold more than 150,000 copies over the past year alone. Perhaps the only publishing parallel to Lewis' works would be “The Lord of the Rings” trilogy, a mythology written by Lewis’ close friend and fellow Christian J.R.R. Tolkien.

But Lewis never got rich from his Christian classics, says Michael Maudlin, executive editor at HarperOne.

“His books left him poor,” Maudlin said. “He had all of this money coming in, but he didn’t take those royalties.”

Lewis vowed to donate all the money he made from his books on Christianity, Maudlin says. He got big tax bills for his Christian books but struggled to pay them because he had given the money away.

Lewis refused to renounce his vow even though his money worries persisted throughout his life, Maudlin says.

“He is a man whose number one anxiety in life was poverty,” Maudlin said. “Because his dad overspent, money was always a worry. He didn’t fix things in his home because he and his brother worried about poverty.”

Lewis’ financial worries stalked him until the end, says Alister McGrath, author of the acclaimed new book “C.S. Lewis: A Life.”

Lewis’ health began to fail near the end of his life, so he wanted to hire a private secretary to help tend to his affairs. His income, though, was so spotty that he told his potential secretary that he didn’t know whether he could pay him, McGrath writes.

Lewis was more worried about losing his teaching salary from the University of Cambridge than his book royalties, says McGrath, a professor at King's College London.

“Lewis was convinced that his books would cease to be popular and thus generate little in the way of income,” McGrath said.

2. He felt like a failure as a Christian communicator

"Brilliant" is one of the most common words used to describe Lewis. He seemed to have read everything, and he could easily write in several genres: children’s fantasy, science fiction, Christian apologetics and autobiography.

“He had an almost photographic memory,” Maudlin said. “He could recite the passage and page of a line from a book on medieval poetry.”

Lewis was not so adept in the ordinary world. He never learned to drive or type because he was too clumsy. And he was a shabby dresser who lived in a house that was falling apart.

He even began to doubt his ability to defend Christianity.

Lewis' breakthrough came as a Christian apologist, one who publicly defends and explains Christianity by invoking logic. He delivered a series of talks on Christianity for BBC radio during World War II that made him famous (you can hear some of those talks on YouTube). His fame crossed the Atlantic in 1947 when he made the cover of Time magazine.

But just as his fame peaked in the 1940s, Lewis began to doubt his persuasive powers, McGrath says.

Debating Christianity in public became “draining” for Lewis, McGrath says. At a 1945 lecture on Christian apologetics, according to McGrath, Lewis said, “Nothing is more dangerous to one’s own faith than the work of an apologist. No doctrine of that faith seems to me so spectral, so unreal as one that I have just successfully defended in a public debate.”

Lewis then lost a highly publicized debate to Elizabeth Anscombe, a young Catholic philosopher who pointed out inconsistencies in his reasoning. They clashed over passages in his book “Miracles,” which he later revised. Lewis’ confidence was shaken further when he realized that his argumentative powers had little effect on some of his closest friends and relatives, who remained hostile to Christianity, McGrath says.

Lewis thought that he had “failed as an apologist towards those who were closest to him,” McGrath writes. “How could Lewis maintain a profile as a public apologist with any integrity in the light of such private failures?”

When the BBC asked Lewis to participate in a discussion on the evidence of religious faith, he declined: “Like the old fangless snake in 'The Jungle Book,' I’ve largely lost my dialectical power.”

Some contend that even Lewis’ faith failed him.

He lost love not long after finding it late in his life: Joy Davidman was an American writer who befriended Lewis by letter and eventually became his wife. She died of cancer at 45 with Lewis at her bedside. Their love affair was depicted in the 1993 film “Shadowlands.”

Lewis had written about God and suffering in a book entitled “The Problem of Pain.” But when he wrote about losing his wife in “A Grief Observed,” he was a different man, says Ivan Strenski, a religious studies professor at the University of California, Riverside.

“The cocky self-confidence is totally destroyed,” Strenski said. “The confident, modern interpreter of Christianity is gone. He’s really a shattered Christian.”

3. He had a "horrible" personal life

When the University of St. Andrews in Scotland awarded Lewis an honorary degree in 1945, Lewis gloomily joked that he preferred getting a “case of Scotch whiskey.”

Lewis needed some escape at the time. His personal life was a wreck. The man who seemed like the embodiment of self-control and virtue in his books had a personal life complicated by dysfunction and deceit.

Lewis’ personal struggles began early. His beloved mother, Flora, died when he was 9; he never really got along with his father, Albert; and he was sent away to a miserable boarding school where a schoolmaster was literally declared insane.

“It was horrible," Maudlin said of Lewis’ personal life.

Then Lewis experienced another horror – trench warfare in World War I - but he rarely talked about the experience.  Nor did he talk much about the promise he made during the war to his fellow soldier and friend Paddy Moore.

Lewis assured Moore that he would take care of his mother if Paddy didn’t survive the war. Moore was killed, and Lewis fulfilled his vow after returning home. Lewis moved in with Paddy’s mother, Janie Moore, and helped raise her daughter, Maureen.

Lewis’ relationship with Janie Moore is still mystery. Some scholars say they became lovers; others say she was more like his mother. Lewis, though, hid the relationship from his father and his colleagues at Oxford University.

“There was an attraction between the two of them from the very beginning,” said Warren Rochelle, an English professor at the University of Mary Washington in Virginia.

“When he first met her, she was 45, almost the exact age when Lewis’ mother died, and it’s clear from correspondence that they found each other attractive and engaging,” Rochelle said.

Lewis had another complicated relationship at home with his brother Warren, or “Warnie," an alcoholic who moved in with Lewis and Janie Moore. Warnie couldn’t stand her.

As Janie Moore grew older, she lapsed into dementia. The demands of caring for an alcoholic brother and a disabled woman proved so difficult for Lewis that he was hospitalized for exhaustion at one point. Yet Lewis took care of Janie Moore and her daughter even as she presumably stopped being his lover, scholars say.

“She gave him stability, a family and a mother figure,” Rochelle said. “She gave him a lover for a while, but no one can prove it.”

Lewis’ sexual proclivities also clash with the images of the reserved Englishman who touted the virtues of abstinence before marriage in “Mere Christianity.”

Lewis displayed an interest in sadomasochism during his youth. He read the writings of the Marquis de Sade; once became drunk at a party and begged people to allow him to whip them; and signed three letters to friend Arthur Greeves with the closing “lover of the whip,” according to McGrath’s biography.

Lewis befriended Greeves during childhood, and the two remained close throughout his life. Greeves was gay, but that didn’t seem to bother Lewis.

“Lewis was aware of Greeves’ homosexuality and made it clear that this would not be a problem within their friendship,” McGrath said. “He also made it clear that he didn’t share Greeves’ orientation.”

Despite Lewis' personal hardships, those who've studied him say his kindness was as impressive as his intellect.

Lewis didn’t try to hide from a public that sought his counsel after he became famous. He made no attempt to conceal his phone number. He rose at daybreak to answer letters from people seeking spiritual advice.

He even made personal visits.  A priest once wrote Lewis that he didn’t know whether he believed in a loving God anymore. Lewis met the man and spent an afternoon talking to him about his problem, wrote A.N. Wilson, author of, “C.S. Lewis: A Biography.”

“The priest, who had expected the author of 'The Problem of Pain' to look pale and ethereal, was astonished by the red-faced pork butcher in shabby tweeds whom he actually encountered,” Wilson wrote.

Lewis is still surprising people 50 years later. His ability to reach people long after his death is astonishing, some say.

“It’s odd that someone has been so popular for so long,” Maudlin said. “Lewis’ books are still in front of the bookstore. We grew up with him, so we lose touch with how unusual that is.”

The Christian icon whose image we see in bookstores may first seem distant. He spoke and dressed like a prim Englishman from another time. But his life was messy, contradictory and tarnished by thwarted dreams.

Perhaps Lewis still speaks to us because we when we look closer at his life, he’s really not that unusual.

We see ourselves.

- CNN Writer

Filed under: Books • Christianity • United Kingdom

soundoff (1,513 Responses)
  1. Lawrence of Arabia

    Paul was a murderer.
    Matthew was a tax-gatherer.
    Peter was a low-life fisherman.
    Moses was a murderer.
    David was a murderer and a liar.
    Elijah was a coward.
    Thomas had very little faith.

    Funny how God only uses broken people – because that's all that any of us are.... Broken. That's why there's grace and repentance.

    December 2, 2013 at 8:31 am |
    • JJ

      I guess that explains why the majority of people incarcerated in our prison system are Christians.

      December 2, 2013 at 8:41 am |
      • Lawrence of Arabia

        I would not agree with that.
        Remember, not everyone who calls themself a Christian is actually one.
        I can sit in a garage and blow smoke, but that doesn't make me a car. Likewise, I can pray in a church but that doesn't make me a Christian.

        December 2, 2013 at 8:45 am |
        • igaftr

          And I'm certain we can find christians who will say you are not a christian either. Pretty funny.

          December 2, 2013 at 8:56 am |
        • Lawrence of Arabia

          "And I'm certain we can find christians who will say you are not a christian either."
          -----
          I'm sure you can, but how do you determine whether a man is or isn't a follower of Christ? By using the only canon of truth – the Bible. Look to the Bible to see if what I believe is true or not.

          December 2, 2013 at 9:00 am |
        • G to the T

          "Canon of Truth" – In my estimation it takes more faith to believe the bible than it does to believe in the concept of "god'. Forgeries, later insertions, miss-attributions and copier's errors somehow all come together (regardless of language and/or version of bible used) and are still able to transmit the perfect will of god. Now that would be a miracle.

          December 2, 2013 at 9:23 am |
        • cedar rapids

          'I'm sure you can, but how do you determine whether a man is or isn't a follower of Christ? By using the only canon of truth – the Bible. Look to the Bible to see if what I believe is true or not.'

          And those christians you claim are not christians would tell you exactly the same thing.

          December 2, 2013 at 9:38 am |
      • cross eyed mary

        That's a lie

        December 2, 2013 at 8:46 am |
        • Lawrence of Arabia

          How so?

          December 2, 2013 at 8:54 am |
        • Lawrence of Arabia

          Disregard my reply Mary, it was intended elsewhere...

          December 2, 2013 at 8:55 am |
    • Jesse

      Amen brother, a true understanding of the gospel

      December 2, 2013 at 9:09 am |
    • cedar rapids

      'Matthew was a tax-gatherer.
      Peter was a low-life fisherman.'

      you call those broken because of their professions?

      December 2, 2013 at 9:40 am |
  2. Stacy

    I pop in from time to time to see if CNN still pursues their "agenda"–smearing the image of Christianity. Join the other dismal failures of the last 2000 years who only succeed in providing scraps to the truly intolerant. Although we Christians are often inept in our attempts to emulate the life of Christ, be slow to judge us according to His perfect standards. While I enjoy a honest and open-minded debate on the matter of our purpose–or lack, thereof, CNN's brand of journalism relating to Christianity seems to attract those who bash and belittle.

    December 2, 2013 at 8:25 am |
    • midwest rail

      Contemporary evangelical Christians lead the world in turning people off from Christianity. No agenda needed from any news organization.

      December 2, 2013 at 8:27 am |
    • cross eyed mary

      Perfect set up. No athie can possibly hit that out of the park

      December 2, 2013 at 8:43 am |
    • cedar rapids

      'I pop in from time to time to see if CNN still pursues their "agenda"–smearing the image of Christianity.'

      so are you bearing false witness with this claim because you are biased toward ignoring the pro-religious articles on the belief blog, or have you genuinely missed those?

      December 2, 2013 at 9:44 am |
  3. richunix

    He was a very human with all it hope and frailty. He struggle with friends and himself, as we all do. However I’m not surprised by the revelation CCN in his past, we all have demons/skeleton in our closest and they seem to come out when we past. As for Christianity, I came to see the Bible as a very human book, I came to see Christianity as a very human religion, it did not descend from high. It was created, down here on earth, among the followers of Jesus.

    Stephen F Roberts: “I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.”

    December 2, 2013 at 8:18 am |
  4. Anna

    .
    [youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeedE8vH1FQ&w=640&h=360]

    December 2, 2013 at 7:45 am |
  5. Jack Parker

    How very CNN.

    December 2, 2013 at 7:24 am |
  6. Mack Hall, HSG

    There is nothing new here. Why are you wallowing in it?

    December 2, 2013 at 7:23 am |
  7. somervillechangeling

    The "dirt" on Lewis in the article is from McGrath's recent biography, which is very positive and pro-Lewis. What anti-Christians in the comments section miss, and what most Christians see is that there are no larger than life saints. There are larger than life intellects (and Lewis was one based on "The Allegory of Love" and "The Discarded Image" alone). Reading Lewis brought me to respect Christianity though I didn't become a Christian until decades after I first appreciated his writing.

    It's true that his greater doubts in regards to his ability as an apologist came from a philosophical debate with a Catholic; and his (temporary) doubts about his views on pain and God's goodness came from personal tragedy; from losing the one love he found late in life to cancer. That just makes him human.

    His earlier sinfulness and love of S&M showed that he was a sinner exposed to the worst of the British public school system. At his worst he was an adulterer with a separated older woman, but he was also faithful to his promises to her and her daughter. He had a gay friend he did not condemn and he loved pagan mythology and poetry. Yet, Christ had a part for him to play in Christian history. It is the role of biographers to help us understand the parts that those with speaking roles play in the play that is life. We, the extras who think we are just commenting from the cheap seats won't know the parts we play until our role is concluded.

    Lewis' mild S&M fantasies are less worse than Dawkin's toleration of being fondled by a predator when he was in public school. At least Lewis only wanted consenting adults but Dawkins had to make his experience sound almost normal in his defense that it was a different time. No time is different, God is eternal and so is morality. The only thing that is different are the images we apply to both the age we live in and the ages that came before that we reject.

    December 2, 2013 at 7:22 am |
    • cross eyed mary

      Lol. Rotflmao! Love u dodo

      December 2, 2013 at 8:39 am |
  8. Why?

    John Blake
    Tearing down a dead man is really courageous and appropriate. He has no defenders! Oh I get it, it's about truth and honesty. Or you just enjoy the sins of other humans and how we all fail our Lord which makes them public fodder. Publish the skeletons in your own closet before you reveal those of others, John Blake! You are below disgusting

    December 2, 2013 at 6:44 am |
    • That's just crazy talk

      Naomi Klein has made a career of doing the same to the late Milton Friedman.

      December 2, 2013 at 8:29 am |
    • cedar rapids

      You have a problem with pointing out the little know facts of someones life?
      Would you prefer a whitewashed false image, such as the style that seems to surround the founding fathers these days?
      A person's life is a person's life, the whole thing.

      December 2, 2013 at 9:47 am |
  9. amadea

    C.S. Lewis is an almost perfect model of what a true Christian looks like. Despite his super intellectual prowess, he is a broken man, convicted by the Holy Spirit of Christ's salvation for a lost world. The fact that even Lewis wrestled with doubt, sometimes, is a sign of humility in the man. The Christian life is often messy as Jesus' was. I, like Lewis, tell people, "If God can forgive me, deliver me from my sins, He can forgive anyone." Hallelujah! What a Saviour!

    December 2, 2013 at 6:40 am |
    • sybaris

      True Christian..............you really need to read about thre True Scotsman

      December 2, 2013 at 7:51 am |
      • HZD

        So do you. Just because someone uses the phrase "a true ____" doesn't mean that they are drawing on that particular fallacy.

        December 2, 2013 at 8:48 am |
    • HotAirAce

      Despite his super intellectual prowess he failed to conclusively prove his or any god exists.

      December 2, 2013 at 7:53 am |
      • FrmrMrne

        What is with you militant atheists? The object of faith isn't to "prove" anything. Faith is, by its very definition, belief in something unprovable or unproven. People of faith don't require proof. You do. But no one is trying to prove anything to you. You either believe or you don't. So,.... don't, I guess. Up to you. But to come on Belief Blog to argue about the lack of "proof" inherent in faith seems a little,.... silly.

        December 2, 2013 at 8:44 am |
        • HotAirAce

          Lewis, not some atheist, attempted to prove that his god exists. He failed, even according to other believers. For many years, and for some even now, it was his claim to fame. I merely pointed out he failed to do what he set out to do.

          December 2, 2013 at 8:49 am |
    • JJ

      So, it sounds like Ted Haggard can also be viewed as the model True Christian®.

      December 2, 2013 at 7:54 am |
      • HotAirAce

        Or any or all of the thousands of pedophile priests and their protectors.

        December 2, 2013 at 7:58 am |
    • Kay

      What on earth does "convicted by the Holy Spirit of Christ’s salvation for a lost world" mean???

      December 2, 2013 at 1:31 pm |
  10. bacbik

    C.S. Lewis:
    boooooooooooooooooooooooooooring!

    December 2, 2013 at 6:31 am |
  11. cross eyed mary

    Sam stone is a typical pagan boob. C. S. Lewis was just the opposite. Everyone hates Sam. Everyone loved Clyde Stapleton.

    December 2, 2013 at 4:26 am |
    • Half-human

      Getting your lines crossed again...

      December 2, 2013 at 4:43 am |
  12. Cuitlamiztli X. Carter

    Mehercle, the Narnians have come out in full force. Would that you were Christians, like Uncle Jack. Nothing in this article struck me as character assassination. It was an attempt to contextualize, not to discredit.

    Lewis was a Christian apologist who preached "Mere Christianity" yet in that book had nothing of length to say about the Spirit, the Church, or the Word (I would suspect those would be considered essentials of Mere Christendom, but Jack focused on buttressing theism with incomplete dilemmas). He preached a nigh-universalism (his comments on righteous Buddhists in "MC", his Tash-worshiper in "The Last Battle") and his allegorical view of Hell downplayed the wrath of God over broken commandments, playing up human rebellion against God's love. He was a liberal, and a complicated man. This article only serves to remind us of that.

    December 2, 2013 at 3:21 am |
    • Trent

      Um-no, he wasn't a liberal. And the fact that he describes hell allegorically doesn't make it less real. Allegory is a conduit for the Unseen Real to go past our heads to our hearts. If you think that hell, heaven, the Spirit, the Word, and the Church (Believers, who are the central figures in his works) are "downplayed" because they are often described in symbol, you shouldn't even be commenting about Lewis. Christ used symbols and parables to describe the kingdom of Heaven so that we could "feel" what it is like, so that an internal dimension of faith would be triggered that cannot simply be explained by the intellect, therefore allowing us to remain untouched and intact. Symbol "invades" our ordered world, and therein lies Lewis' genius. If you take his allegory literally, and define him accordingly (because his figure was a "tash worshiper" he must be ok with worshipers of other gods) you have missed Lewis' message, and yes, it is diminished into oblivion.

      December 2, 2013 at 3:42 am |
    • cross eyed mary

      R u seriously suggesting point being agreed so? Apparently your god didn't live either. U would seriously think someone would have mentioned him.

      Dodo, u r an idiot

      December 2, 2013 at 4:29 am |
      • Half-human

        ...and you do your name proud cross eyed mary!

        December 2, 2013 at 4:36 am |
    • Half-human

      Profound academic analysis Dr Cuitlamiztli X. Carter. To me this was a well-balanced article, OK? John Blake of CNN definitely has a chip on both shoulders

      December 2, 2013 at 4:33 am |
  13. Trent

    "Not really that unusual"? The writer of this article is an idiot. It's like saying Mozart was "not that unusual" because he had financial problems and died painfully from rheumatic fever and kidney failure. I'm sorry, but genius in any field is a dimension into which the writer of this piece has never ventured or personally encountered in any way; but he can stand at the gates and scoff at those who do enter. We are richer; you are poorer John Blake of CNN.

    December 2, 2013 at 2:27 am |
  14. John

    "Lewis displayed an interest in sadomasochism during his youth..." Lewis didn't convert to Christianity until he was 34.

    December 2, 2013 at 2:25 am |
    • sybaris

      Exactly

      I don't have enough self-loathing to be a Christian

      December 2, 2013 at 7:48 am |
  15. Half-human

    WHAT? Lewis was a smoker! That's it. I'm burning all his books

    December 2, 2013 at 2:25 am |
  16. Ethan R.

    I keep waiting for the dirty secrets, but the worst you can say is that he smoked, drank, lived with his wife, gave away his money, had an insane teacher, a mother who died when he was young, and didn't care about how he dressed? Disgusting article, attempting to discredit a true genius because he was human and lived a human life. Oh wait, it's not Lewis; it's the fact that he defended Christianity, and Christianity and Lewis unabashedly assert that people need a Savior because people are fallible and sinful. What an unacceptable and offensive idea! So discredit him because he was fallible, and was honest about his sorrow and his doubt. That is what makes him great, you idiot.

    December 2, 2013 at 2:16 am |
    • K.J.

      Agreed. This article is garbage. C.S. Lewis looks even better and more respectable to me now. John Blake looks less respectable.

      December 2, 2013 at 2:33 am |
      • cross eyed mary

        Point being

        December 2, 2013 at 7:56 am |
    • sam stone

      what is "sinful" is allowing someone else to take the punishment you feel you deserve

      yet, christians not only flock to it, they brag about it

      December 2, 2013 at 6:09 am |
      • sybaris

        actually they're duped by it.

        According to the tale a spirit came to earth, rented some human flesh for a while, rid itself of it then went back to where it came from.

        Not much of a sacrifice there.

        December 2, 2013 at 7:47 am |
        • FrmrMrne

          So, why are you worried enough about it to come on Belief Blog to argue about it? If something isn't real it seems that wasting time seeking out its adherents and arguing with them is a little juvenile and silly.

          December 2, 2013 at 8:48 am |
      • cross eyed mary

        It is wonderful. U should try it

        December 2, 2013 at 7:55 am |
      • 99dakota4by4

        Christians didn't "allow" Christ to suffer our punishment – God offerered it as a free gift so that He/we could have a right relationship without the tarnishments of sin to get in the way. Those who accept this will be disciplined in this life for to correct our wrongs but will put us back in fellowship – those who deny will not have fellowship now and will find punishment coming...

        December 2, 2013 at 12:59 pm |
        • sam stone

          if it were truly a free gift, there would be no retaliation from refusing it

          December 2, 2013 at 8:17 pm |
        • Ecal

          You respond makes no logical sense. If you are sick and I decide to give you free medicine, yet you decide not to take it, you will remain sick. The same could be said with our sinfulness, which its medicine is Christ! By you not taking it is not God's punishment, it is simply your foolishness.

          December 2, 2013 at 8:39 pm |
        • Ecal

          Sam Stone,

          the above respond was toward your comment...

          December 2, 2013 at 8:44 pm |
  17. Mark McDonnel

    Wow. You really found the serious dirt on Lewis. I don't see how his reputation will ever recover. Truly monumental and devastating in its sweep and scope.

    December 2, 2013 at 2:02 am |
  18. Half-human

    Really well balanced article. Would you please do one on the Pope, then one on Richard Dawkins, and lastly an Autobiography please. Thanks.

    December 2, 2013 at 1:58 am |
  19. Just remember...

    We're just commanded to share, it's the Holy Spirit's responsibility to win the ignorant over... so don't lose sleep over the lost in here.

    December 2, 2013 at 1:14 am |
    • igaftr

      So people who do not believe as you are ignorant and lost? Because your magic book said so?
      That would tend to indicate your beliefs are rather inaccurate.

      December 2, 2013 at 11:33 am |
      • 99dakota4by4

        'Ignorant' shouldn't be seen here as negative – just a matter of 'un'knowing. When your eyes are opened and you come to believe then you have come to 'know' the Spirit and are no longer ignorant of God's salvation – and power. As far as 'lost' goes, one is lost until he/she has found their way home – God's home via His son Jesus

        December 2, 2013 at 2:55 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.