Christians & His Dark Materials

[Inklet]

There have been many posts devoted to the question: "Can Christians enjoy Harry Potter?" I say yes, but flying below the radar is a series of books by Philip Pullman called "His Dark Materials."

Pullman identifies himself as the anti-C.S. Lewis. I would not have a problem with his books (which are wonderfully well written) if they were only written to encourage independent thinking for children raised in atheist households. I think they are much more dangerous than that.

I would appreciate a reply from anyone who has read and enjoyed these books because I may be missing something.



***SPOILER***



Isn't the hero of the third book the same person who tortured and murdered children in the first book? Scientists should be respected, but I can't understand the ethics of this trilogy. Does Pullman revere Dr. Mengele?

Leave out Pullman's description of God as an insane fraud. Leave out his characterization of the Catholic Church as a cabal of homicidal maniacs. Neither of these disturb me as much as the fact that a series that is marketed to children is completely amoral. I was under the impression that atheists could be decent people, but maybe I was wrong. I hope not.

I have read recommendations for this series from a senior member of this site (I can't remember who) in threads asking for book recommendations. I would like to hear a response to my difficulties.

[rosymole]

I have read His Darl AMterials, and thought they were excellenet, but sadly I am no theoplogian, so I can't allow myslef to get inot a deep discusiion about the rights and wrongs of these books. It is true that they do paint the world of organised religion in a very bad light, but I would urge you to remember that they are only a book, a story!

Pullman is expressing his opinion of religion in this book, which he is entitled to do, just as Lewis was enititled to express his views through the CoN.
If you didn't enjopy the ideas behind the books then that's understandable, but there is nothing sinister about them, I don't think, they hold a positive message I think, that people can change for the good throught their love for others.

As for your idea about Mengele, I don't think that could viewed as revernce, what was being done to the children in the book was abhorent, and that came across in the writing, but I think it also showed a little of the 'Milgramesque' world in which we live, which could easily be transfered into Pullman's world.

[waterhogboy]

I have only read the Amber Spyglass. I think its a really good book and am planning at some point to read the first two.

I agree that I dont like the way religion is portrayed in the books though. I would disagree with Rosy to some extent. CS Lewis and the such put forward their views of why their religion is right - Pullman on the other hand is saying why he thinks someone else's religion is wrong. I think there is a big difference cos the latter can be very offensive in a way the former cannot.

However, I stay in the camp that says no problem with the books - just didnt like that aspect of them...

[Green Knight]

Apparently, they are being made into movies also. I had no problem with his tone on religion. I think he was using an allegory to all of the people who have twisted religion to their own means and ends. Sophia, who was supposed to be the Moringstar, was a person who tries to enlighten the people who have been conned, and "she" got villified for it.

[Inklet]

Rosymole, thanks for your reply.

A few points:

You said that "His Dark Materials" is "only a book, a story!' If you feel it's inappropriate to comment about the ethics behind a work of fiction, I would suggest you seek another forum. By your argument every question such as "What do you think happened to Susan?" should be answered: "She's a fictional character. Why would you care about a figment of an author's imagination?"

Of course it's a story. So is "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe." We can still talk about the ethics underlying that story, right?

You also say: "Pullman is expressing his opinion of religion in this book, which he is entitled to do..."

I don't remember calling for a big ol' book burning. Of course any author is entitled to say anything he or she wants. I am criticizing Pullman's work; please don't imply that I want to censor him.

You said "[He] paint[s] the world of organized religion in a very bad light." Please read my post again. I made it clear that I didn't mind Pullman characterizing my church as a "cabal of homicidal maniacs." I meant what I said! That's not my concern. If Pullman were only attacking organized religion I would be fine with that. My concern is that Pullman doesn't seem to know the difference between good and evil.

I wish you would answer this question: In the world of "His Dark Materials," is there such a thing as right and wrong? Can you give me an example from the books of a hero? A villain? They all blend together so much...

[rosymole]

Inklet, of course I'm all for discussion and very much against censorship, and are we not discussing now? it's what it's all about!! and the reason I have great affection for this forum is because we are not censored in our views. :)

I am, as we all do on forums such as this stating an opinion, and I would never say that elements of books, stories no less (!) should not be discussed, but taken in the context of what are, being stories..I also understand that readers will look heavily into things they read to guide their lives and in some ways that can be a great thing- LWW as prime eg! - but a little caution must always be taken..

Your query about the good/evil within the book is a very good point and I think highlights a great deal within the text itself because perhaps there are no definitive black and white areas, as in life it's all varying shade of grey..people's change as do their motives etc and as such no one can be plonked directly into good or evil all the time, evebn the nastiest beast in the world may have been a nice child?! Now I'm going to bow to the ultimate cop out..I haven't read the books for several months so sadly immediate examples of things do not spring to mind, but if as/when i get around to re0-reading them I will return armed to the teeth with quotes, and half baked opinions galore!! :D

Rosy xx

[Green Knight]

Lyra's parents, because they live on the idea of "The end justifies the means."
Mrs. Coulter her actions working for that Church sanctioned project, and Lord Asreal for the way he uses his daughter as a pawn in his schemes.

[legolas]

i have never read that... (if it's a book your talking about, if not. i lost as usual)

[flora]

I don`t think that any knowledge of alternative religious concepts should bring any evil.

Although I`m not fully christian, I usually believe in God and enjoy both con and hdm,

I think that the distinction between good and evil is very clear in the books. Evil characters: Lord Asriel, Mrs. Coulter, oblation board, lord Boreal and a few others which I don`t remember (as I read the book a year ago).
Positive characters: Lyra, Will, dr Malone, Yorek, baloon flyer, the gypsies, Serafina Pekkala, etc.

Of course the positive characters are not sweetly saintly good as in simple fairy tales but through their mistakes are very real.

Lyra and Will are supposed to build a new republic of heaven in their worlds, if that isn`t positive, then what is ?

Also the concept of the thinking matter - I think it is wonderful. If people could not think, discuss as we do here on these forums, analyze and oppose to ideas, the world would be a far more interesting place ! Even if the price is to be banished from paradise !

[inkspot]

Welcome, Flora. I didn't see you post before. Check out the other threads and give us your insights on CON, LOTR, and all the other crazy stuff going on around here.

[flora]

Thanks for a warm welcome !

It is my first post here, though I visited the forums before. I hope to pop in now and then, and perhaps have my say in some of the threads. From what can be gathered from the members logins only, people here are well acquinted with other fantasy novels apart from CON. I look forward to knowing you all better and exchange views on various things. Greet U all !

[inkspot]

Most of us are Tolkien fans, and a bunch seem to be fans of other fantasy books, movies, TV. We'll look forward to hearing from you again.

[inked]

Leave us room to allow Mr. Pullman to speak of his intentions in his writings.

"When you look at what C.S. Lewis is saying, his message is so anti-life, so cruel, so unjust," he said. "The view that the Narnia books have for the material world is one of almost undisguised contempt. At one point, the old professor says, "It's all in Plato' - meaning that the physical world we see around us is the crude, shabby, imperfect, second-rate copy of something much better."
"I wanted to emphasize the simple physical truth of things, the absolute primacy of the material life, rather than the spiritual or afterlife," he said.
(NEW YORK TIMES, November 6, 2000, article author Lyall)

I personally think his understanding of CSL and Plato is a bit deficient - as perhaps those who see the sheer joy of the material world Lewis expresses in Narnia also think. It is not that this world is "crude, shabby, imperfect, second-rate" in itself. It is that in comparison with the reality which is to come, it seems so. And this attitude is nowhere better displayed than in the ending of TLB. The glorious demise of the Narnia we have known and loved is beautifully portrayed and absorbed into the GREATER and FULLER reality of the true Narnia, that is, Narnia becomes ever more itself. To have settled for the old Narnia when Aslan offers the real Narnia is to settle for less than all of Narnia (rather like the dwarves, whose attitude Mr. Pull man seems to share!). Of course, Mr. Pullman is declaring himself a solid materialist in philosophical outlook. Here and now is all there is, so you'd better enjoy it! is his declaration.

It therefore follows that morality is materialistic in origin. That is, it is self-determined and has no origin outside the individual. "Pullman has made clear in a lovely essay called "The Republic of Heaven" that he is passionately against any religion that puts its vision of the spirit and the afterlife above human life and the natural world, where our moral and spiritual tests as well as our pleasures are found.... And what does he mean by "the Republic of Heaven"? 'No kings, no bishops, no priests,' says one of the rebels. 'The kingdom of Heaven has been known by that name since the Authority first set himself above the rest of the angels. And we want no part of it. This world is different. We intend to be free citizens of the Republic of Heaven." (Jefferson, NEW YORK TIMES, January 20, 2002)

Beautifully disguised, Pullman through his rebels demonstrates the ultimate illogic of his position. The rebels oppose the Authority on the grounds of His being above the rest of the angels, but justify their position on the same ground: self-assertion. What, indeed in Pullman's thought, is the difference between the Authority and the rebel? None. To establish a just cause for opposition to the Authority, Pullman must posit a standard of moral judgment against which the Authority and the citizens of his Republic of Heaven can be measured, and by which each is judged. But he cannot allow that for then there is existent, determinant, REAL morality. His resolution is, of course, that if each citizen is the self-made authority he wishes to be, there is no ground for thinking the Authority to be "right". "Right" is decided by me, for me, and no standard exists by which to judge various concepts of "right".

In fact, this whole scenario is replete with prior suggestions along this line:
"You shall be as God...if you (disobey and ) eat this forbidden fruit" or more precisely, Pullman really believes what Milton's Satan asserts, "Better to reign in Hell than to serve in Heaven". To assert the self as the arbiter of truth, to put God in the dock, to deny all realities save the immediate sense experience, this is to become ultimately limited. For a symbolic representation of this as answered by Mr. Lewis, see THE GREAT DIVORCE. I rather gather Mr. Pullman has not read that.

My 2 cents!

[inkspot]

To assert the self as the arbiter of truth, to put God in the dock, to deny all realities save the immediate sense experience, this is to become ultimately limited.
So, since this the POV Pullman writes from and presents in His Dark Materials, would you say that Christians should not read it, and not expose their children to it?

It sounds evil, and I am curious if there is a book or school of thought that you would steer your kids away from as vigorously as GoldenRod steers people away from Harry Potter ...

[waterhogboy]

I dont think humans have any right to 'put God in the dock'.

[inked]

So, since this the POV Pullman writes from and presents in His Dark Materials, would you say that Christians should not read it, and not expose their children to it?

It sounds evil, and I am curious if there is a book or school of thought that you would steer your kids away from as vigorously as GoldenRod steers people away from Harry Potter ...


I would say that a parent concerned over values whether Christian or not should read these books to determine their suitability for their children. And certainly would want to discuss the books if they were read by children so as to guide the minds into the right directions, rather than to let them fester in mere materialism.

John Granger addresses this in THE HIDDEN KEY TO HARRY POTTER but only briefly. I am not aware of any book per se about Pullman or his work. But I do find it interesting that I am not aware of such. I think people should pay more attention to this matter rather than magic. But materialistic philosophy and the deconstruction of morality just don't have the crowd appeal of magic or "magick" or whatever mispelling titillates the pleasure center, I guess. :(

[inkspot]

I think people should pay more attention to this matter rather than magic. But materialistic philosophy and the deconstruction of morality just don't have the crowd appeal of magic
I think maybe it is that some Christians fear anything to do with magic will open up the soul to direct interaction with demons, whereas something like materialism will merely tend to erode a person's Christian values if it is dwelt on. Or maybe they think once you open yourself to demons, the demons are free to pursue you, whereas materialism/atheism are things that you must pursue yourself if you really want to believe in them. I don't know, but that could be a couple reasons why HP gets some Christians going. But you are right, this materialism philosophy or pragmatism is very bad for the soul, as witnessed in post-Christian Europe now, where there is no God and thus no moral standard, as you say, everyone decides good and evil for himself.

[inked]

Well, Inkspot, those poor, benighted souls living in such fear of magic and its possible association with demons have certainly left the field wide open for materialism and its rejection of the spiritual. That is to say, they are trying to close the barn door after the cows have escaped because the results in Europe are not one whit less the work of demons than the most *appealingly spectacular* demonic possession manufactured by Hollywood. (Remember what Screwtape said about the materialist magician?) :(

[inkspot]

the results in Europe are not one whit less the work of demons than the most *appealingly spectacular* demonic possession manufactured by Hollywood.
Totally in agreement with you there.

[Checkmate]

I am a Christian and I do enjoy Harry Potter...

[Johan 72109]

I didn't actually finish the trilogy... I got half way through the final book and then stopped - not because of the anti-God ideals within, but because it was just plain lousy. :D As all know, I don't like books where the good guys walk all over the bad guys, and this was just one of those books... Hundreds of crack swiss snipers against a few ill-trained african militia, who've been caught in the open, and who wins... :mad:
Hehehe...

On a more serious note... I always take books that don't view God the way he is as sheer fantasy. God is so blatently NOT the way he's portrayed in the trilogy that I just don't bother with it. I just think 'Hmm, man trying to kill a god... cool plot twist... Could end up interesting... Oh, he's whooping the god's backside hands down. How boring.'

One thing that I do think that these violently atheistic types haven't realised is, what would happen if they did manage to 'kill God' and stop the world believing in him, as is happening quite spectacularly in Europe. If we're all overgrown amoeba, then, as Neitzsche said quite rightly, the strong can make the rules. It's survival of the fittest. Why protect the weak or the infirm? They're useless. Kill them off. Why not delete all records of God as well, just to stop some people foolishly trying to subscribe to religion? Hell, delete ALL past records, and then when people ask who invented the aeroplane, we can just say 'we did it'. Someone protests, why not just kill him. Because there's no need for morals you know. We're all just overgrown amoeba, after all. Maybe we should all have five or six spouses, just to ensure our genes get passed along as much as possible. Yeah, makes sense. Survival of the fittest, after all.

What's even more disturbing is that the vast majority, if not all these things happened in Communism and Naziism, societies where God was, essentially, dead. More disturbing still, is the fact that God's being deleted from the public concious rather efficiently by people in Europe, not purposefully admittedly, but it's still happening. :(

[inkspot]

Some people who have a bad opinion of God, or believe that faith in God is an impediment to mankind's progress, would say that morality is possible outside of God. They think that humans can justly decide on what is moral or immoral and set the standard they decide upon for everyone.

But as you can see in Europe, that ideal is frustrated because no one is really concerned with what is moral or immoral -- those standards don't enter into the thinking anymore, but have been replaced with a standard of materialism: am I happy? Am I well fed? Do I have a job? Good then, I don't need to bother with what is happening to anyone else in the rest of the world, things are fine for me just as they are.

I was trying to explain my work once to a French couple in the Cayman islands, that I help Christian ministries raise money for charitable works. I ventured, "Perhaps you one time gave a gift to a Catholic mission to feed the poor, and they continued to write you letters after that and tell you about further opportunities to help?" The couple shook their heads: apparently charitable giving was more or less a foreign concept to them. Why? Because they had plenty, so what should it matter what happened to poor people? This is what happens when faith in God declines -- selfishness and materialism take up the slack.

(Not to diss the French -- it was noted after the 2004 elections in the USA that the states most heavily represented by "values voters," religious people, were also the states that do most of the charitable giving in the USA. Those states represented by people who were less religious/less motivated to vote for values issues were the ones where charitable giving was lowest. Faith in Christ engenders charity and compassion -- a lack of faith or even belief engenders selfishness.)

[Johan 72109]

Very true... People just don't understand their responsibility to others usually if they don't serve a higher power (though of course there're notable exceptions.)

[inkspot]

Very true... People just don't understand their responsibility to others usually if they don't serve a higher power (though of course there're notable exceptions.)
Yes, absolutely, there are agnostic/atheist people who do have empathy and operate in a moral/charitable fashion and kudos to them for it!

But in general, I think, the Christian faith impresses upon people their responsibility for those around them.

"As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith." Galatians 6:10

[Sam]

I agree, because if you take away faith, you take away the motivation for the moral life. I think a lot of Atheists, who want society to be rid of God (as does Phillip Pullman) don't want to look their own values in the face. I have lots of friends who are atheists but who refuse to question things like theirmorality, or a social conscience. If you take away God, then there is no rule that such things should exist. I can't imagine anything more depressing than a world where there is no real order, or meaning. it would be chaos.

[inkspot]

I agree. If you take God out of the equation, then what is the basis for laws at all, who says "Thou shalt not kill"? If it's just a human being telling me that, why should his judgment on that issue be any better than mine? And if there is no God, therefore no eternal soul, what difference does it make if I do kill, it would be the same as killing an animal ... I think all morality unravels if there is not a standard of goodness that comes from outside a human being.

And like you, Sam, I would be sad to think my whole life had no meaning outside whatever I achieve here in the brief span of years I have, and that when the last memory of me is gone from the last thought of the last person who remembers me, than I am gone forever ... What would the point be?

[Johan 72109]

It's scary really. The thought that, when you die, you're just going to experience an eternity of nothing, absolute nothing. It means that anything you do, even your proudest achievements, are completely pointless, because give them a few decades or centuries or millienia, and they will not exist. :(

How people cannot believe in God when we have a terror of this... Eternity has been set in the hearts of men, the bible says, and it's absolutely true. We have a fear of dying, a fear of not making a difference, a fear of being unimportant. Why would we have this if it wasn't created in us? It's certainly nothing to do with the idea of evolution.

[inkspot]

Good point ... if we are the sum total of our evolution up to this point, there is no chemical or physical reason for us to have such yearnings, so where did they come from?

[Sam]

I just keep reading your posts and thinking 'I agree! I agree!' it's so nice to hear people saying things that make so much sense to you, when there's so many people out there who seem blind to it. So, thanks. :)

[inkspot]

I like your new Avi, Sam. Love Peanuts!

Thanks for the encouragement, that's one thing I like about this site, a lot of people believe the same things -- and even those who don't are willing to listen and not be snotty (of course, then I have to listen and not be snotty to them, which is a struggle! JK, I am rarely snotty to anyone).

But it does my heart good to hear from young folks who have these same thoughts and beliefs. Seems like on TV and at the mall you see a lot of younger people without much in the way of deep thoughts, sincere convictions or respect for themselves and others. But I know good kids are out there (my husband's daughters come to mind) and I hear from them here, too. It's refreshing. :)

[waterhogboy]

And I have to say Inky - its a great encouragement for us young ones out here to know there's adults like you who respect our opinions and treat us like adults. :)

[inkspot]

And I have to say Inky - its a great encouragement for us young ones out here to know there's adults like you who respect our opinions and treat us like adults. :)
Aw, thanks, WHB! You lot have a great perspective and fresh ideas, so your opinions deserve respect.

[Sam]

I feel the same way as WHB- no wonder I'm fast becoming a narniafans addict. I think it's time for a group hug :D

Back to Phillip Pullman- I was thinking about the books, and the thread 'would another C.S. Lewis please step forward' and thought it was a real shame that a writer with such energy and imagination should be writing something so dark, even nihilistic (I'm sure he'd disagree, but there you go). Maybe we should have a prayer for Phillip Pullman that he can have a complete change of heart and put his talents into a new kind of writing.

[inkspot]

Great idea! I will pray for him.

[Telitha]

There's one other factor I feel needs mention in regard to a Christian reading books like these.

Yes, they are fiction. Yes, they are just the ramblings of an atheist who's 'entitled to an opinion'.

However, that doesn't change the fact that this is so clearly the outlet of somebody who hates the Lord and all He stands for to pour out his hate and pride. A Christian should be well aware (I don't know what they're smoking if they aren't) that this world is filled with hostility and that we are commissioned to go out and be among these people (not like them though), but... actually putting the effort into reading a book like this, why? Why would somebody who knows God's grace and loves Him more than all the world deliberately shove their face in the firing line of a needless attack on their beloved saviour?

I did try reading it at one point, didn't get too far (though I did skip into the depths to see what he was getting at) as I found it about as enjoyable as being punched in the face, or seeing your mother/sibling/spouse being punched in the face by some outsider.

[inkspot]

I found it about as enjoyable as being punched in the face, or seeing your mother/sibling/spouse being punched in the face by some outsider.
That's Johan's favorite kind of book, I don't know why.

[Johan 72109]

*coughs* Well, while I DO enjoy books where the heroes get ground into the dust, I'm not the sort of person who stays up late at night reading books of nihilistic philosophy slating God, just for kicks... :D Though, having said that, I DID once try to read a book of Neitszche, just to see why everyone was so upset by him... By page 7, I understood why completely. :(

In answer to Telitha, yes, I take your point over reading His Dark Materials, which is essentially an atheistic rant. However, I found the atheistic ideals in it so laughably ridiculous and whiny, that I couldn't really see it as anything other than a fantasy series, (a rather tacky fantasy series to boot.) I thought of the premise ('A man trying to kill a god, interesting!') as nothing to do with our own God or ideals - thought of it as a parallell universe, if you like. In the end I stopped, but not because of the pathetic anti-God ranting, that fell down somewhat because a) A supposedly atheistic book actually CONTAINED a god, rather stupidly
and b) Indeed, if God WAS a rather inept and evil angel, yes this book would be a statement of a sort, but in actuality God is nothing like this. Don't believe in him, fine, but don't make him something he's not.
No, I didn't stop because of this. I just stopped because the books were pants.

Basically, I read atheistic stories because they're so ridiculous, I can only think of them as that; stories. I don't perceive them as a 'threat' as it were, because atheism does NOT make for a good read, unless you're a VERY dedicated atheist who likes a whole lot of cliches and good-guys winning against evil. However, I can also understand the wish not to read them... It's hardly pleasant having someone trample all over your entire belief system and the most important being in your world.

And Sam, that's a fantastic idea... Imagine what would happen if Philip Pullman puplically announced that he'd become a christian! That'd be amazing! :D So I'll pray for him there... It must be kind of nasty to be that bitter about a religion as well :(

[Inklet]

Thanks, Inked, for expressing my points better than I ever could.

Rosymole, I re-read my response to you, and I came over so snarky! I'm sorry.


I think I get so upset about Pullman's books because they are explicitly marketed to children. These are not children's books, anymore than The Lord of the Rings is a children's book. Can children read, understand, and enjoy them both? Of course. Will you find a "kid-friendly" version of The Lord of the Rings in the children's section of your local bookstore? No. It's not marketed to them. "His Dark Materials" is, and this bothers me.

I manage a chain bookstore. If someone wants to buy Pullman's books, fine. If someone asks me what I think about them, I'll be honest. I think that's fair. Incidentally, many parents are so thrilled that their children enjoy reading that they couldn't care less about what they read. My family is all solid Roman Catholic, and when my nephew had finished "His Dark Materials" my sister donated the books to her church! I didn't read the books until a few years later, and I'll never tell her what a mistake she made, but I did talk to my nephew about them and he read them as straight fantasy--no philosophy absorbed, thank God!

Most likely, if a child has a solid moral upbringing, these books can do no harm. Now--how can we make sure that all children have a solid moral upbringing?


I agree with the last several posts about praying for Pullman. You never know! There is a recent precedent:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=315976 [Link doesn't work anymore. It was a story about a famous atheist who came to the conclusion that life didn't happen by chance.]

Found a new link. Here it is. (http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2005/004/29.80.html)

[inkspot]

Thanks for that link, Inklet, it was very interesting. I hope that old guy in the article hasn't died in the meantime -- I am going to pray for him, too, to realize that Jesus is the answer. I think it's great that God could open his mind at that age!

[Valin Kenobi]

I very much enjoyed the HDM trilogy, but when it comes to his worldview and C.S.L. I think he is full of it. (He is entitled to his opinion of course.) With HDM I try to separate the message from the (really excellent) writing and story.

In answer to Telitha, yes, I take your point over reading His Dark Materials, which is essentially an atheistic rant. However, I found the atheistic ideals in it so laughably ridiculous and whiny, that I couldn't really see it as anything other than a fantasy series, (a rather tacky fantasy series to boot.) I thought of the premise ('A man trying to kill a god, interesting!') as nothing to do with our own God or ideals - thought of it as a parallell universe, if you like. In the end I stopped, but not because of the pathetic anti-God ranting, that fell down somewhat because a) A supposedly atheistic book actually CONTAINED a god, rather stupidly
and b) Indeed, if God WAS a rather inept and evil angel, yes this book would be a statement of a sort, but in actuality God is nothing like this. Don't believe in him, fine, but don't make him something he's not.

Exactly. The atheistic stuff in the first two books was more subdued (thus easier to ignore but perhaps more "insidious" if you look at it that way) but in the last book that element was so over the top that just got silly.

[Inklet]

A good post on Pullman is at the Stromata blog.

The link is here. (http://stromata.typepad.com/stromata_blog/2005/11/the_antinarnian.html)

Read it, then poke around. Its a great blog.

[Inklet]

I've just been re-reading all the posts in this thread and one just now jumped out at me.

Somebody said that it would be a good thing to establish a Kingdom of Heaven on Earth.

Every totalitarian dictatorship is established as a "Kingdom of Heaven". Hitler, Lenin, Mao, and Castro all were founding a kingdom of heaven.

Name me a "Kingdom of Heaven on Earth" that produced a great work of art--even a great individual (who was not working against the "kingdom") and I'll eat my hat.

[Inklet]

I forgot this (http://www.kirkcenter.org/bookman/44-1-bernthal.html) article.

Cleaning out my files.

[ChildOfAslan7]

I've just been re-reading all the posts in this thread and one just now jumped out at me.

Somebody said that it would be a good thing to establish a Kingdom of Heaven on Earth.

Every totalitarian dictatorship is established as a "Kingdom of Heaven". Hitler, Lenin, Mao, and Castro all were founding a kingdom of heaven.

Name me a "Kingdom of Heaven on Earth" that produced a great work of art--even a great individual (who was not working against the "kingdom") and I'll eat my hat.

Inklet, I totally agree with you. A Kindom of Heaven on earth would only be shaped by human means. If you compare the descriptions of Heaven from the Bible and the "heavens" Hitler, Lenin, Mao and Castro created, you can see that there could be no true happiness for all people for a kingdom of Heaven on earth.

[PrinceOfTheWest]

That's part of the challenge and beauty of being a disciple of Christ. We work for a great good that we know full well will never happen until our King comes again, but even knowing that, we work and make real progress. Example: William Wilberforce knew that a truly just society would never completely arrive on earth in this age, but nonetheless worked to further justice by getting slavery outlawed in the British Empire. That was true justice, and a movement of that earthly kingdom closer to a heavenly one, done by a man who knew it could never be completed.

So to compare Christians (and righteous Jews) who seek to further the Kingdom of Heaven on earth with the idolatrous regimes of communism and socialism is to compare apples and oranges. They were idolaters who discarded the truth and tried to raise a "tower to heaven" of their own - thus condemning themselves to failure. We who follow Christ seek to broaden His reign, which when done in His way will bring (more) peace and justice to all. We know it can never be completed until He returns, but it can and should be worked for. The primary thing to remember is that for all of us, the first and foremost place we are to establish Christ's reign is in our own hearts - and that's a lifelong project.

[Darth_Digger]

I am not allowed to read the Dark Materials because they are meant to be very anti-religious and against God!


DD

[inkspot]

The primary thing to remember is that for all of us, the first and foremost place we are to establish Christ's reign is in our own hearts - and that's a lifelong project.
So true! Well said, PoTW.

[Inklet]

I'm hearing rumblings that "His Dark Materials" will soon be a movie. Any info?

[rosymole]

I'm hearing rumblings that "His Dark Materials" will soon be a movie. Any info?

I've heard this too..it's already been a stage play I think, but when they do a the film I've heard they're (whomever they may be) are only doing 2..and having to combine 'The Subtle Knife' with the other two..I hope they don't though, IMHO, i could happily sit through hours and hours, to lose too much of the detail and ideas behind the writing would be a great shame.

[inkspot]

Rosy, you had better go over to the "Look what I found" thread and defend Pullman and HDM. He's getting kicked around.

[rosymole]

I'm frightened to go over there..they'll just shout me down..it's very tricky to defend someone elses opinions..I might just let them rage for a while..and then go back in and stir it all up again!
*goes off to find body armour and portable water cannon*

[inkspot]

LOL! It's okay -- Namaste took up his defense, and she did a nice job. The masses did the polite thing and just ignored her ...