Between Interpretation and Imagination: C. S. Lewis and the Bible

by Leslie Baynes

A New Testament scholar illuminates C. S. Lewis's writings on the Bible

In this highly original study, New Testament scholar Leslie Baynes illuminates C. S. Lewis's writing on the Bible. She reveals never-before-published notes, written by Lewis in books that he owned, that offer unique insight into his thinking on Scripture, and she identifies the figures who shaped his approach to biblical Charles Gore, James Moffatt, Sister Penelope Lawson, George MacDonald, Austin Farrer, and more.

While sympathetic to Lewis's work, Baynes uncovers problems, too. These hinge upon his understanding of the Gospel of John—as evidenced by essays like "Modern Theology and Biblical Criticism" and the "Liar, Lunatic, Lord" argument. The controversies Lewis takes up in these arguments encompass fundamental questions in Christian thought, and his responses to them have formed the minds of his readers for generations. At the same time, Baynes highlights the subtle beauty of his use of Scripture in the Chronicles of Narnia, arguing that Lewis's most glorious writing emerges when he eschews academic biblical scholarship and relies instead on his greatest strength—his literary imagination. Between Interpretation and C. S. Lewisand the Bible is a vital addition to any Lewis fan's library, offering rich insights into how this influential author wrestled with Scripture.

360 pages, Kindle Edition

Published November 4, 2025

Reviews

[Jeremy]

Critical reviews at TGC and WORLD.

From what I can tell on Bluesky and Twitter, Baynes has a severe case of TDS, and in 2023 she may have used she/her pronouns in official bio information. Baynes values higher criticism, doesn't hold to biblical inerrancy, and prefers redaction criticism to harmonization (of the Gospels). She thinks that the Gospel of John differs from the Synoptics in many details (although she doesn't want to call them errors), and she suggests that the Gospels don't reliably represent Jesus. She claims to be a Lewis fan, but she presents herself as having the courage to call out Lewis for being quasi-antisemitic and racist (Orientalism), while praising him for displaying feminism. Some of the ironies of the criticisms include the fact that she calls Lewis rude for criticizing others’ reading ability, then criticizes Lewis’s reading ability; and she criticizes Lewis for describing Jews as being “typically” a certain way (self-righteous), then describes Christians as being “typically” a certain way (ignorant on the Jewish law). Other unfortunate moments are her Freudian interpretation, the use of the term “enslaved persons” (think of “unhoused persons”), and her criticism of Elizabeth Anscombe for sticking up for the Bible. At many points throughout the book, I thought that no one would want their work to be read like Baynes reads Lewis. These details color my view of Baynes's work. Call it a personal heresy if you want, but Baynes seems to be okay with it (see pp. 3–4).

Baynes appears to be a typical biblical scholar in some unfortunate ways, and because Lewis dismisses higher criticism and modern biblical scholars, I sense a lot of defensiveness from Baynes. The level of scholarship is impressive at many points, although I doubt that many readers will follow her arguments in chs. 7–8, and in general I think the book is too academic to be enjoyed by the average Lewis fan.

As is often the case, the subtitle is more helpful than the main title. This book is a work of reception history—Lewis's use of Scripture in his fiction and nonfiction (2). Part 1 explores Lewis's dependence on biblical scholars such as Charles Gore and James Moffatt. Part 2 critiques Lewis's understanding of the Gospel of John and shows how he interacted with the higher criticism of Bultmann and others. Part 3 argues that Lewis's Chronicles highlight Lewis's best engagement with Scripture—when he's not engaging modern biblical scholarship. See pp. 2–3 for the three main arguments plus an overview of the parts.

Introduction
2: This is a book about reception history (Lewis and the Bible)
2-3: the book’s 3 arguments, plus an overview of the parts
3-4: disagreement with Lewis on “the personal heresy” (context matters)
4–5: Baynes likes Lewis but is willing to criticize him.

Part 1 [biography]

Ch. 1 [1898–1932]
14n29: Lewis's mistake about the year of his conversion to theism (1930, not 1929)
14: Scripture multiplies around Aslan
19: Orthodox connections

Ch. 2 [1930s]
22-27: infallibility issues
30–31: Christ’s mistakes about history/science
34: overlap bt Gore and Lewis

Ch. 3 [1932–1949]
41-42 (and 48-49): important passage on Lewis’s misquotations (see chs. 7-8)

Ch. 4 [1950–1963]
45 (and 2-3): his best work on Scripture is in Narnia
50: Kilby sent Lewis the Wheaton statement on biblical inerrancy
55-65: Lewis’s quasi-antisemitism
- 56: Jews as typically self-righteous
- 59: characterized by hatred (Joy)
62: Baynes flirts with Freudian interpretation
63: Joy influenced Lewis for the worse (re: Jews)
66: Baynes: “typically Christian ignorance”!
69-73: dismissive of Anscombe for sticking up for the Bible
75: will address inerrancy more in ch. 5

Part 2 [case studies]

Ch. 5 [fundamentalism]
79: Lewis was not an evangelical (although he did like Billy Graham).
82-84: 2 reasons Lewis didn’t believe in inerrancy
88–90: evangelicals on Lewis on the Bible
- Christensen (1979)
- Jeffrey (2000)
- Wheeler (2006)
- Vanhoozer (2010)
- Ryken (2014)
- Williams (2016)
90: Baynes thinks the 1978 Chicago Statement on Inerrancy wouldn't have changed Lewis's mind.

Ch. 6 [Bultmann]
Baynes thinks Bultmann is misunderstood on some points.
96n3: Bultmann didn't coin "demythologize"
108: "enslaved person" [enslaved to academic political correctness?]

Ch. 7 [biblical scholars and "Modern Theology and Biblical Criticism" (MTBC)]
114: Lewis mentions PL in MTBC
114–21: Lewis misreads Lock
121–26: failed dilemma (124–25: energeia and circumstantiae)
- 126: "rude" irony (see pp. 162–63)
126–32: Lewis misreads Auerbach
162–63: summary (Lock, Bultmann, Tyrrell)—Lewis didn't read carefully and would have agreed with much more
162: Lewis quotation about criticizing others
163: Helen Gardner comment about Lewis's misunderstanding of what he read
163: Baynes wants people to understand John's Gospel better [but she seems to think it contains errors].

Ch. 8 [trilemma]
165: trilemma versions
166: alleged logical problems
170: Baynes questions that the Gospels reliably represent Jesus.
175n44: Lewis misquotes Pope (see n46 for more mistakes)
176: Baynes prefers redaction criticism to harmonization of the Gospels.
195: lots of pages dedicated to showing that Jesus didn't claim to be God in the Synopitcs
208: summary [some readers might be skeptical of her defense: not trying to challenge/reject council decisions about Jesus, not trying to say that the Synoptics don't present Jesus as God]

Part 3 [Narnia]
Ch. 9 [allegory]
215: quotations, allusions, echoes, allegories
215: 7 Scriptural "embedded" quotations (VDT x 1, MN x 2, LB x 4)
220: correct order of the Chronicles

Ch. 10 [MN]
225: 1st quote (Gen. 1:31)
225–26: chart of connections to Genesis 1–2
226: weeping as a positive sign
228: 2nd quote (Matt. 25:21)

Ch. 11 [LWW]
233–35: fishhook; rood; Harrowing of Hell
238: Lewis a feminist?

Ch. 12 [HHB]
242: racism/Orientalism
243: Exodus foundation

Ch. 13 [PC]
250: PC has the fewest biblical references.

Ch. 14 [VDT]
254: unspoken biblical motif: "I am the light of the world" (John 8:12)
258: stars as sentient beings (Philo)
262–63: chart of connections to the Gospel of John (and Revelation)

Ch. 15 [SC]
264: silent biblical motif: "the truth will set you free" (John 8:32)
265: Calvinism as a meaningless debate
268–69: veneration of an icon

Ch. 16 [LB]
271: apocalypse/Revelation
271–72: ape as medieval devil
272: deceitful appearances
278: [I'm not convinced that Tirian/Jewel act more ethically than Moses.]
278: significance of numbers
278–81: problem of Susan; need for 7?
281: sloppy apostle reference
282: emeth in AoM
284: purgatory
284–86: 8th day
286: Nativity in LWW and LB (see n41)
288: theosis
288: "He can do no more" :(
290–91: 5th quote
290–92: virtuous pagans
292n55 (and 291): Hart/Baynes (Lewis too?)—Paul views all to be saved (although not a universalist)
294: Plato's learning from Moses
296n73: Gaiman's "Problem"
296: 6th quote?
296: 7th quote
297–98: west as penultimate to the east

Ch. 17 [Past Watchful Dragons]
301: Milton's Comus (see n6)
303: conclusions
305: hints about why Lewis hid Scripture references

A few typos: 61, 233, 271

[Anne · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read most of this book in awe. The author writes like a native translator from the esoteric land of scholars, putting what might be otherwise inscrutable information into language that not only makes the content understandable, it makes it readable. Simplified, but not dumbed down. A difference that strikes me as similar to that between a monk who feels himself to be muddled and a monk who is ‘muddle headed’ (pp 155). Like the reviewer who called it part detective story, I found it a page turner. The density of information (produced from what must have been a staggering amount of research) is the only thing that kept me from trying to read it straight through in one long sitting. Different than a detective story though, is the way that although there are hundreds of leads to be followed, we are never led toward a red herring or taken on a goose chase. The case, for Baynes, is already solved, and we are taken right into the heart of it, shown the clues that became the hard facts. This was all so well done, I read a lot of this book with more interest in the facile, persuasive arguing of the author than in the actual faults she was presenting, though I’ve had my share of problems over the years with Lewis’s theological reasoning in a few of his works. Problems I more sensed, with the niggle of uneasy doubt, than knew until they were brought up for probing by Baynes in sections like “I Am No Higher Critic and “Liar, Lunatic, or Lord.” But what ultimately emerged for me from this book, born from the mind and the generosity of hard work of a writer who is obviously gifted in both, is a Lewis she would like to see gently dethroned, defrocked in a sense, sent down, by a preponderance of evidence she offers without flinching, to join the ranks of faithful Christians throughout history who have erred, either by arrogance or ignorance or both, in their interpretation of the Bible. In other words, a human Lewis. Extraordinary in his gifts. Ordinary in his flaws. This for me, is an elevated Lewis. More than myth, more than symbol, Baynes’s Lewis is the real mere Christian.

[William Collen · Rating 4 out of 5]

Done reading. Blurb forthcoming in WORLD magazine's book of the year issue.