Aslan's Sacrifice: A Question

[Corin101]

One of the clearest parallels to Christianity in the Chronicles is in the LWW, where Aslan gives his life in the place of Edmund. People often point out that this is referring to the sacrifice of Jesus in our world. Though I don't debate this point (after all, Aslan is the Christ in that world), if Lewis was trying to draw a parallel been the Cross and the Stone Table, a major part seems to be missing.

In LWW, Aslan dies for Edmund only. Yet we all agree that Christ died for the sin of the entire world, not just one person in particular. How than can we call this an analogy between Christ and Aslan? When you think about it, Aslan died for a repentant traitor; Christ died for a very unrepentant world who wanted Him removed.

Do you people have any ideas on how to explain this? Perhaps I'm reading in too much between the lines, but I must admit that it has puzzled me for some time. What's your thoughts?

[Louloudi the Centaur]

Edmund was not the only human or Narnian to sin, or have wrongdoings.

Digory rang the bell in Charn and caused an evil to enter the new world of Narnia. Tumnus kidnapped a child and was going to turn her in to the White Witch. Eustace was a very rude child, and even turned into a dragon.

So obviously, these characters and many more all sinned in one form or another. They would have to pay the price. Digory had to get a magic apple to Aslan to repair the damage he had done.

But when Aslan sacrificed Himself, He sacrificed Himself for all, including those in the past, like Digory, who had done their wrongs. Aslan repaired the damage of the past events, including the Creation, Tumnus' kidnapping of Lucy, and Edmund's treason against Him.

Every character in Narnia except for Aslan has done things wrong, past, present, and future. But when Aslan died, their sinfulness was forgiven. He forgave Eustace out of grace and undraggoned him. Jill was forgiven when she stopped memorizing the signs. Eustace for example, we can assume, was unrepentant. He only thought of himself and though he could do it all. Aslan still died for Eustace though. He still forgave Eustace.

Do you get what I'm trying to say? This is the best answer I have at the moment... *waits to see what others have to say*

[parableproductions]

The Stone Table breaking indicates that type of sacrifice would only be required one time. (similar to the Tapastry to the Holy of Holies tearing from top to bottom at the time of Jesus death showed that the requirement necessary to remove the barrier that prevents us from being reconciled with God had been met)

I think the breaking of the Stone Table supports Louloudi's point.

But, say Aslan did just die for Edmund alone - that's a very good illustration of God's love for us. We are all sinners, but if any one of us (I'll use me for the example, just to keep my pronouns straight), if I had been the ONLY sinner, God still would have sent Jesus to take the penalty for me. For my part, I am required to accept that gift - it doesn't do me much good if I don't accept it and the One who gave it to me.

Lewis didn't intend the Chronicles of Narnia to have an exact parallel to everything in the Scriptures, but he did write stories that have Biblical themes and some pretty deep spiritual lessons. Jesus taught in parables all the time and He has given that talent to some, and I think Lewis was one of them - a great writer of parables.

[daughter of the King]

First off, don't think of it as a direct parallel. That's almost as misleading as thinking of the Chronicles as allegories. The events and characters in the Chronicles are often very similar to events and people in the Bible but there are no exact parallels.

Second, Aslan saves all of Narnia through saving Edmund. Look at what the White Witch and Aslan both say about the Stone Table:

...every traitor belongs to me as my lawful prey ... unless I have blood as the Law says all Narnia will be overturned and perish in fire and water.

...when a willing victim who had committed no treachery was killed in a traitor's stead, the Table would crack and Death itself would start working backward.

The Deep Magic was the Law placed upon the world of Narnia by the Emperor-Over-the-Sea at the Dawn of Time (which was also when the White Witch was brought to Narnia). That law demanded that traitors be killed for their crimes. If the traitor was not killed, then Narnia would be overturned because the law had not been upheld. However, the Deeper Magic allowed the traitor to live if a perfect victim took his/her place. The Stone Table cracked because the victim was perfect; the treachery was atoned for by someone else and Death was turned backwards. This is how Aslan's sacrifice is sort of similar to Christ's sacrifice. We are all sinners, or (if you really want to draw a parallel) traitors. By sinning we turn away from God. The Law demands that we die eternally for our sins. The Gospel is like the Deeper Magic (or the Deeper Magic is sort of like the Gospel, however you want to say it) because Christ, the perfect victim died for us. And by and through His grace death has no hold over us and we live eternally.

Did that make sense? I have an ear infection and the antibiotics have clouded my brain a little.

[Melda Laure]

No, you have it exactly right. The "analogy" only resonates, it does not rhyme.

Aslan died on the stone table to ransom Edmund and to redeem all Narnia from the White Witch for the prophesy of the Four Thrones could not be fulfilled without him.

Aslan's sacrifice reminds us (as christians) of Jesus on the Cross. But that's about it- the two are not the same thing at all. Jesus died ONCE on the cross to save Adam's Race from Adam's Fall.

Without getting into the minutiae of Deep Magic, Lewis cannot have two actual crucifixions for The Fall. That would be too obvious a heresy. The thing is nicely muddled for those who do not think too deeply. It was somewhat cleared up when we learn later (in MN) that the Marring of Narnaia and the curse of the white witch is due to Digory and Uncle Andrew.

I suppose the interesting question is if it is NOT a direct parallel, then what is it? I wonder if you realize that this is likely the reason that humans are tasked with so many of the pivotal events in Narnia: it's one of the corollaries of the prime directive - you break it, you (or your race) fix it. Funny thing about Deep Magic; the evil oriented are so greedy to acquire this power that they forget (or likely never learn) that there is always a Deeper Magic which cannot be abused.

I doubt Lewis had that in mind when he wrote, it's just a happy accident.

[Corin101]

Wow, good thoughts people.

I think we can all agree that Aslan died just for Edmund. From reading the book, it seems clear that Aslan's sacrifice was only for his redemption. This is where I disagree with Louloudi the Centaur. She says: "But when Aslan sacrificed Himself, He sacrificed Himself for all, including those in the past, like Digory, who had done their wrongs. Aslan repaired the damage of the past events..." I honestly can't see this in LWW, and I doubt Lewis had that in mind when he wrote it.

However, parableproductions seems to have a good point. It may be of interest to note that Lewis, in his novel Perelandra, said something to the effect that if there was only one traitor (sinner) in the world, Christ still would have died in his place. I think it is likely this thought stayed in the back of Lewis's mind until, several years later, he was able to compose the thought into this story.

But perhaps I have been reading too much into the story. After all, the primary reason the Chronicles were penned was because Lewis loved a good story. The analogies and symbolism must take second rank to this.

[Hermitess of Narnia]

In The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, Edmund tells Eustace that Aslan had saved him [Edmund] and saved all Narnia. That could mean that Aslan saved Narnia by saving Edmund or that Aslan took the place of all the traitors in Narnia. Mr. Tumnus had also agreed to work for the White Witch and betrayed his Country. Of course, he was turned to stone, so maybe that counts for the White Witch's "right to a kill."

[twinimage]

Like others have said, The Chronicles of Narnia isn't supposed to be an exact parallel or allegory to the Bible or our world. I feel that Aslan died for Edmund only. If you look at it more from Edmund's perspective, it makes Aslan's sacrifice more personal, rather than having Aslan die for everyone. It can get a little confusing when one thinks about it.

Some of the posts here provide some good insight on the Deep(er) Magic and the law about traitors, which is a close parallel to the law of God and how Jesus' sacrifice fulfilled or satisfied the law. His sacrifice was to die in our place for all our sins. The penalty for any sin is death/blood shed. Jesus' took our place and provided the blood shed for us. Aslan does a similar thing for Edmund. Edmund didn't have to do a thing to earn it either. Same with us. We receive forgiveness because of God's grace, which comes from His sacrifice for us.

I think I almost like the story better with Aslan dying only for Edmund. It gives it a more personal touch. If Aslan died for all of Narnia, it may have lessened the effect or impact of what he was doing. While Aslan didn't die for all of Narnia, the concept of how Jesus fulfilled the law by taking our place and shedding His blood, which the law demanded, is intact in the story of Aslan's sacrifice. I think that's much more important.

Sorry for any run-on sentences. I'm bad about that.

[EveningStar]

Aslan's sacrifice to appease the Deep Magic was not done to redeem a "fallen world" for two reasons:

1. Edmund, as a human born on Earth, was already forgiven from Christ's sacrifice on the Cross 1910 years or so earlier. So the sacrifice was not to redeem a "fallen mankind" which was already done once, permanently.

2. Narnia was inhabited by NUMEROUS talking species. If Mr. Beaver and Mr. Badger shot craps on a Sunday with the mortgage money it wouldn't mean that the foxes would be in mortal danger of a highly unpleasant afterlife. All mankind are sons of Adam and daughters of Eve, but not everyone is a son of Trufflehunter.

But yes, I do agree that the character of the sacrifice made a permanent change to the status quo since the table itself cracked. A table that itself can be compared as closely with the stone tablets of Moses as with the Cross of Christ.

[MountainFireflower]

My thought is that C.S. Lewis used this to show the specific goal of Jesus' sacrifice: to redeem individual human hearts. A lot of times I don't realize the power of Jesus' sacrifice because it's easy to just think of Jesus dying for the whole world, end of story. And he did die for the world, but there's more: he died for each one of us. Each person on this earth. I think it's almost more powerful the way Lewis chose to write it, because Aslan died for just one person. Edmund. He saw Edmund as valuable enough to give up his entire life for. And in the same way, Jesus saw me as valuable, as treasured enough to die for. His love was so intense that he died for me, as an individual heart with my own share of mistakes and weaknesses. He saw through my sin and saw who I really am, what I am worth. He did the same for you, for all of us. And that is... incredible.

“He died not for men, but for each man. If each man had been the only man made, He would have done no less.” ― C.S. Lewis

[Varnafinde]

"How than can we call this an analogy between Christ and Aslan?"

We needn't call it an analogy if by that we mean that it should fit in every detail, like an allegory. It is a parallell in many ways, but not in the details. It is a reminder of Christ, but the situation is not the same in Narnia as in our world, so the solution isn't the same either.

Somehow what Aslan does, has effect for all of Narnia, although he only dies for one person (and not even a native Narnian). It is the beginning of the downfall of the Witch, which he completes the next day, after his resurrection. It is significant enough for the Stone Table to break, presumably indicating that its time is past, it should never be used again. And he has already - just by coming, even before his sacrifice - brought spring and summer to all of Narnia.

[Dinode]

Aslan died on the stone table to ransom Edmund and to redeem all Narnia from the White Witch for the prophesy of the Four Thrones could not be fulfilled without him.

Exactly, regardless of whether or not the others needed saving, if Aslan hadn't died for Edmund either he would have been killed, so the prophecy couldn't be fulfilled and Narnia would remain enslaved, or he wouldn't be killed and Narnia would perish.

There's actually a quote from Last Battle (emphasis mine):

He meant to go on and ask how the terrible god Tash who fed on the blood of his people could possibly be the same as the good Lion by whose blood all Narnia was saved.

So apparently his sacrifice helped Narnia in some way or another, even if only as I mentioned above.

[Narnian_Badger]

"I did not say to myself, ‘Let us represent Jesus as He really is in our world by a Lion in Narnia’; I said, ‘Let us suppose that there were a land like Narnia and that the Son of God, as he became a Man in our world, became a Lion there, and then imagine what would happen.'" --C.S. Lewis

I've always considered it pretty cut and dry that Aslan's sacrifice was for Edmund specifically. It seems that with Narnia, since the parallels are so evident, we take the story and try to fit it to its Biblical origins. Sort of our own personal exegesis (or even eisegesis). If we didn't compare the Narnian story to Christ's resurrection, would we ever get the idea that Aslan's specific sacrificial act was meant to absolve every betrayal ever? No, I sincerely doubt it.

In regards to "the good Lion by whose blood all Narnia was saved" (LB), through Aslan's sacrifice, he did two things. One, ensured that Narnia did not "perish in fire and water" (LWW), which would have happened if someone (no preference as to whom, that we are aware of) had not been killed on the Table. Two, because he sacrificed himself in such a way, Edmund didn't have to die and thus was able to sit with his siblings on the four thrones, and (sort of a 2b), the way Aslan returned in the final battle saved Narnia. True, he probably could have done that last part either way, but this happened to be what he chose.

Also, while the sacrifice was for Edmund (thus, “He died not for men, but for each man. If each man had been the only man made, He would have done no less,” as referenced by Mountie), I think that the main point, what really "saved all of Narnia", was not his death, but His Resurrection. That is where the true parallel lies. Anyone can die for his friends--only One can come back to life after doing so.

[Narnian_Archer]

The way I see it, Aslan is not dying for the sins of the world in Narnia - the fact is, he already did that in our world. That's why he is who he is, and that's why he references himself to Lucy later in the VDT. Aslan has ALREADY DIED for the sins of the world in our world - he is dying in Narnia to save Edmund and to show himself to the other children so that they will seek him out in our world by his other name. (That's originally why he allowed them into Narnia - not just to save Narnia, but to meet Him there and seek Him in our world and know Him as Christ). I think that's what Lewis meant by this scene here, and why he didn't make it a complete replica of the Crucifixion - it's a similar situation that is like him dying for the sins of the world so that the children (and, ultimately, the people reading the books) will understand and see the parallels with Christ and seek Him out in our world.

[Dinode]

If we didn't compare the Narnian story to Christ's resurrection, would we ever get the idea that Aslan's specific sacrificial act was meant to absolve every betrayal ever? No, I sincerely doubt it.

Very good point. I agree with you, while saving Edmund did save all of Narnia, it wasn't for the salvation of all of Narnia.

That's originally why he allowed them into Narnia - not just to save Narnia, but to meet Him there and seek Him in our world and know Him as Christ

Another good point. Aslan does often accomplish multiple goals with the same act, like when he scratched Aravis in The Horse and his Boy, the chase got them to the hermit and by extension to King Lune in time, but the main point was to show Aravis what she had done to her servant.

[Varnafinde]

In regards to "the good Lion by whose blood all Narnia was saved" (LB), through Aslan's sacrifice, he did two things. [...] Two, because he sacrificed himself in such a way, Edmund didn't have to die and thus was able to sit with his siblings on the four thrones, and (sort of a 2b), the way Aslan returned in the final battle saved Narnia. True, he probably could have done that last part either way, but this happened to be what he chose.

I agree. Aslan saved Narnia by defeating the White Witch, through those two (or two and a half) things he did.

I think that the main point, what really "saved all of Narnia", was not his death, but His Resurrection. That is where the true parallel lies. Anyone can die for his friends--only One can come back to life after doing so.

Very good point. The Resurrection is the real victory. His death wouldn't be much use - here or in Narnia - if it had not been followed by his Resurrection. Paul in Corinthians 15 says so, too.