What is time, and why are we subject to its ofttimes harsh burdens? After his conversion from atheism, C.S. Lewis discovered some comforting truths about time, and the limits of time’s constraints.
Each year the four seasons seem to pass more rapidly. Before we know it, our parents have gown old, and we may well have children of our own. In retrospect, it all happens in the proverbial flash.
Ultimately, there will come a day when our lives reach their own “winter,” and even our most precious memories may drift away from us in time’s relentless breeze.
The C.S. Lewis Institute has an interesting article titled “The Point at which Time Touches Eternity.” They quote some wisdom from The Screwtape Letters, and end with a query which can help us live happier lives.
As you think about your own life, do you sometimes think too much about the Past or the Future, and not chiefly attend to the Present and Eternity?
Lewis answers that very question in his essay “Historicism.” He acknowledges that too often we become slaves to the regrets of our past and the dread of challenges awaiting us in the future. He reminds Christians that “God will supply every need of yours according to his riches in glory in Christ Jesus” (Philippians 4).* Therefore, Lewis encourages us to throw off the bondage of past and future, since “where, except in the present, can the Eternal be met?”
Janie Cheaney recently wrote “Eternity in Our Hearts” for World Magazine. Inspired by Saint Augustine and C.S. Lewis, it is subtitled “What if time astonishes us because we are meant to one day live outside of it.”
More of Lewis’ Thoughts about Time
In Mere Christianity, Lewis describes our universal human experience. “Our life comes to us moment by moment. One moment disappears before the next comes along: and there is room for very little in each. That is what Time is like.” He then describes just how limited our perspective is.
And of course you and I tend to take it for granted that this Time series – this arrangement of past, present, and future – is not simply the way life comes to us but the way all things really exist. We tend to assume that the whole universe and God himself are always moving on from past to future just as we do. But many learned men do not agree with that. Almost certainly God is not in Time. His life does not consist of moments following one another . . .
If you picture Time as a straight line along which we have to travel, then you must picture God as the whole page on which the line is drawn. We come to the parts of the line one by one: we have to leave A behind before we get to B, and cannot reach C until we leave B behind. God, from above or outside or all around, contains the whole line, and sees it all.
In Miracles, C.S. Lewis describes God’s transcendence over time as our Creator’s “eternal Now.”
It is probable that Nature is not really in Time and almost certain that God is not. Time is probably (like perspective) the mode of our perception. There is therefore in reality no question of God’s at one point in time (the moment of creation) adapting the material history of this universe in advance to free acts which you or I are to perform at a later point in Time.
To Him all the physical events and all the human acts are present in an eternal Now. The liberation of finite wills and the creation of the whole material history of the universe (related to the acts of those wills in all the necessary complexity) is to Him a single operation. In this sense God did not create the universe long ago but creates it at this minute – at every minute.
That is pretty deep. The sort of stuff that philosophers love to ponder and debate. Even before his conversion to Christianity, while still clinging to his formal atheism, Lewis contemplated time’s role in existence. In 1918 he wrote to his close friend Arthur Greeves about these matters.
You see the conviction is gaining ground on me that after all Spirit does exist; and that we come in contact with the spiritual element by means of these “thrills.” I fancy that there is Something right outside time & place, which did not create matter, as the Christians say, but is matter’s great enemy: and that Beauty is the call of the spirit in that something to the spirit in us. You see how frankly I admit that my views have changed.
Sheldon Vanauken (1914-1996) was an American author who preserved in A Severe Mercy several of C.S. Lewis’ letters of consolation following the death of Sheldon’s wife. In some ways, the Vanauken story foreshadowed Lewis’ own marriage and widowhood. Pointing toward the Resurrection, Lewis wrote the following.
You say the materialist universe is “ugly.” I wonder how you discovered that! If you are really a product of a materialistic universe, how is it you don’t feel at home there? Do fish complain of the sea for being wet? Or if they did, would that fact itself not strongly suggest that they had not always been, or would not always be, purely aquatic creatures?
Notice how we are perpetually surprised at Time. (“How time flies! Fancy John being grown-up & married! I can hardly believe it!”) In heaven’s name, why? Unless, indeed, there is something in us which is not temporal.
C.S. Lewis writes much more about time, but we will conclude here with two passages that use the metaphor of author to describe God’s nature. The first comes from an essay entitled “The Seeing Eye.”
My point is that, if God does exist, He is related to the universe more as an author is related to a play than as one object in the universe is related to another. If God created the universe, He created space-time, which is to the universe as the metre is to a poem or the key is to music.
To look for Him as one item within the framework which He Himself invented is nonsensical. If God – such a God as any adult religion believes in – exists, mere movement in space will never bring you any nearer to Him or any farther from Him than you are at this very moment.
You can neither reach Him nor avoid Him by travelling to Alpha Centauri or even to other galaxies. A fish is no more, and no less, in the sea after it has swum a thousand miles than it was when it set out.
This final quotation appears in Mere Christianity. It is most certainly true, and my hope is that all who read this post will come to celebrate this joy. Both now, and for eternity.
God is not hurried along in the Time-stream of this universe any more than an author is hurried along in the imaginary time of his own novel. He has infinite attention to spare for each one of us.
He does not have to deal with us in the mass. You are as much alone with Him as if you were the only being He had ever created. When Christ died, He died for you individually just as much as if you had been the only man in the world.
* This gracious, eternal gift is available to all people.
Mere Inkling Press 
I love CS.
I consider C.S. Lewis one of my greatest mentors… even though I wasn’t introduced to his works until I was attending college, a decade after his passing.
What a rich feast for thought you’ve spread out before us, Rob! I especially loved these quotes: “As you think about your own life, do you sometimes think too much about the Past or the Future, and not chiefly attend to the Present and Eternity?” and “To Him all the physical events and all the human acts are present in an eternal Now.”
The present in eternity and eternity in the present: we are immortals already, are we not?
Glad you enjoyed this small serving of Lewis’ wisdom. As for living into eternity, I can’t believe how blessed we are to receive the gift of eternal life as disciples of Jesus.
Amen. How good is the LORD!
I enjoyed reading this. Thanks for sharing with us.
This sentence in particular, “Time is probably (like perspective) the mode of our perception” jumped out to me. It’s so simply put, and makes sense. Yet a perspective outside of time is so hard to wrap my head around. The analogy of how an author is never rushed within his own novel is excellent – helped me imagine such a state. C.S. Lewis was brilliant!
I also find it fascinating beauty seems to be a pathway toward spirt (and even God) for many people. Reminds me of the quote “Beauty will save the world”, from Dostoevsky’s novel “The Idiot.”
True Beauty finds its ultimate manifestation in God.
It strikes me that we aren’t far from the truth if we paraphrase 1 John 4 (God is Love) and suggest God is Beauty.
It goes without saying, of course, that neither of these phrases can be reversed.
God is beauty does sound right to me too.
Jesus would have chosen to die to save one of us. Oh, what special, love, and it’s always worth it to live with eternity in mind.
Many Christians believe our Lord did, indeed, die for the sins of all. The question is whether or not we accept this gift.
The alternative view is the limited atonement (or particular redemption) which posits that he only died for the redeemed/elect.
I believe the first view, which is affirmed by my own Lutheran heritage, is correct. It seems to me that limiting the universality of Christ’s sacrifice is to limit Jesus’ redemptive mission. Of course, this is definitely not to suggest that everyone will be saved — the Scriptures are abundantly clear that’s not the case.
There are, of course, equally devout Christians on both side of this debate, and (as with every human discourse), semantics plays a major role.
Agreed. I prefer the ‘Christus Victor’ view of “redemption,” preferred by Luther and Aulen.
For what it’s worth, wink…
Thanks for your comment, Erroll. This is one of the most sensitive theological issues for Christians in the United States. The Reformed traditions have been dominant in radio Bible teaching, etc. for so long and — God bless them — for much of the evangelistic energies here… that many people think Calvinism is the rule for all true Christians.
Addressing controversial subjects can alienate readers, but I believe it’s healthier for members of the same family (the same Body!) to discuss these things and comprehend that we don’t view everything an identical way. It’s healthy to understand that our unity comes not from doctrine, but from Jesus himself.
That said, we see the value of the ecumenical creeds, that comprise the core of what Lewis called Mere Christianity.
I’m not relating, of course, anything that you do not already know. However, not all readers of Mere Inkling are mature and theologically-educated believers. I don’t want to alienate anyone, or be divisive, but I do want to proclaim the truth as I know it.
That said, I think I’ll avoid writing about the “rapture.” That’s a minefield that really gets people fired up.
Point taken, Rob! Sincere apologies to you and your readers. Unity in Jesus is paramount. Jn. 17.
Like you I believe Jesus died for all. His love then leaves us free to choose Him and His blood and eternal life in place of our eternal death.
Amen.
Erroll, no need at all for an apology. I appreciate your encouragement. There are so many wonderful theological questions best suited to intimate conversations over a nice cup of coffee or tea. I wish we all had that opportunity to discuss these things in that sort of setting!
All have the opportunity to be saved even those who don’t understand what it is about. They will be judged according to what they know and how they lived with it. God gifts everyone a measure of faith. He also gifts us free will. From this you can see I am in agreement with you.
Yes, our Lord is loving and merciful.
Amen!
So heartening along life’s way… Thanks Rob. So grateful for Lewis’s books over the years. Sanity.
“Sanity.”
What an apt summary of Lewis’ work!
Erroll and Rob, I enjoyed reading your dialogue above nearly as much as the post it’s attached to.
Thank you for the encouragement, Mitch.
I enjoyed reading this wonderful post 💜
Thanks a lot for sharing it
Beautiful.
Rob,
I love the thoughts here. Yes, we cannot reach him for as of now we are characters in a story called His Story. When the story is done, though, the characters exist in real life much different than this one. In Christ, Gary
Gary Avants Forbear Productions * *garyavants66@gmail.com garyavants66@gmail.com
“Much different…” and infinitely better!