Harry Potter/Lord of the Rings/Narnia - dangerous to children?

[Sezzie87]

This is a fascinating debate, I could argue this for years non-stop. Some people argue firstly that Harry Potter is wrong because it's full of witch-craft and blurs the line between good and evil. However people that say it's wrong purely because of it's content (i.e witchcraft etc) have also commented that Narnia and The Lord Of The Rings, fantasy as they may be, are in the same boat and are also wrong.

Do you think there should be lines drawn for Christians regarding what we shoud and shouldn't fill our heads with, or do you think it depends on how much we actually take it seriously? Is there a difference between Harry Potter and the other 2 mentioned? Are they all purely fantasy or should they be taken more seriously on a deeper level (although I'm aware of the christian symbolism in narnia - I believe that's important) I'm actually torn between all the different ideas... What do you all reckon? :)

And just to add a bit of excitement there's a lil poll to go with this too hehe :)

[Queen Swanwhite]

I think (in my opinion) that HP is evil and small children should not read the books due to, maybe, scary things, I don't know. :D

[Sezzie87]

Yep i agree with you there.... the thing I'm stuck with si that if we argue that, then should we not argue the same for LOTR and Narnia? It has witches and wizards and evil in it... what's the difference? apart from the fact they've both bin written by christians and there's a clear line between good and evil, there's still the content issue :rolleyes:

[Lillee]

I think (in my opinion) that HP is evil and small children should not read the books due to, maybe, scary things, I don't know. :D
Have you read any of the Harry Potter books in the series yet? if you haven't then you wouldnt have known that there where any scary things in them. BUT if you have, you would know that Harry Potter himself is not evil. The books were written for small children. They are good fiction books. J.K Rowling does an extrodinary job of telling of another land that is make believe. like most stories there is usually a good guy and a bad guy. and yes bad guys are scary. for instance:
Does the white witch scare you in the Narnia books? is she evil? and should we not let small children read those books?

[Sezzie87]

Mmm yeah I'm sure they're brilliant books... but the thing is, I do know that the author had to reasearch deep into the occult to write them...

not criticising anyone at all - just saying that my opinion is that at a born-again Christian I shouldn't be reading something which clearly has roots in things which are against what I believe in - no I haven't read the books, but for that very reason.

But I'm sure they're good stories, I wouldn't argue with that at all

[EveningStar]

I think we can go too far down the road with what should be censored from young people.

CASE ONE: On "The Simpsons" they had the children of Christian extremist Ned Flanders saying they wouldn't watch reruns of "Mister Ed" because they had a talking horse and that was blasphemy. SOUND FAMILIAR??

CASE TWO: There was a strange man in our neighborhood that every year would post a sign of a demon dressed in a red suit. "SATAN CLAUS!" it said. He was certain that believing in Jolly old Saint Nick was equivalent to taking Christ out of Christmas. Forget for the moment that Saint Nicholas was canonized by the Pope for his real life generosity, or that the Santa Claus we tell children about spends his whole life giving away things on the night of Christ's birth.

CASE THREE: Bambigate. Yes, they raked Disney over the coals for allowing Bambi's mother to die. He held firm. Thank God.

We should make sure that children get the full benefits of love and guidance, but we cannot wish all of popular culture away by artificially inventing a world for our kids where such things do not exist. Look at all the experimental "utopia" communities where they would reinvent the human race. "Amana" and "New Harmony." Where are they today? Why haven't they solved the world's problems? Because you can't reinvent the human race. Only Christ could do that and he did it 2000 years ago. The choice of what to do with your life in light of Christ's sacrifice is...by God's own choosing...up to our free will. He did not rigidly enforce his message through censorship.

If parents want to mitigate the "damage" of Harry Potter, they should read the books, take an active interest in them, and kindly, gently explain that there really isn't a school at Hogwarts and that some people are not born with the gift of performing spells while others are not. Just as we might remind kids that George Washington really did not cut down the cherry tree and then admit to his father, "I did it...I cannot tell a lie."

Reality checks, folks, not brainwashing. Kids should have absolute faith that we are in touch with the subjects we preach about, for once they feel we are harping on things we do not fully understand ourselves, our soapboxing becomes irrelevant and we sideline ourselves as active influences in their lives.

Imagine for a moment trying to tell a ghost story around the campfire. About the man with a golden hook for a hand. If every time we brought up yet another gruesome detail one of the parents spouted out, "Tell my Jimmy there really WASN'T a ghost with a golden hook. That's unbiblical!" Do you think it would shake the mood? OH BOY YEAH. Do you think the other kids would be shocked to know you "lied" to them? Well gee....NUH UH! NOT!

[Sezzie87]

Do you think the other kids would be shocked to know you "lied" to them? Well gee....NUH UH! NOT!

The thing is though, the issue isn't what they believe to be true... it's what they're getting caught up in at the same time as innocently reading these books... and I think that once everyone sarts reading them to purely 'engage with them' and understand what they're talking about more, there's a danger that those people could get caught up too.

I'm not sayig that everyone who reads them is brainwashed, not at all. I just think that as a Christian myself, I can't serve two masters, so why would I even support something which advertises witchcraft by reading it, when I know that it doesn't glorify God in the slightest, in fgact it does the opposite. I think it's just a matter of where our priorities lie...

[EveningStar]

I understand your concerns, and yet I beg to differ on two points:

First, I don't think Harry Potter "advertises" witchcraft. First off it points out witches as being an actual different SPECIES from humans. That's not my take on it, it's what the books themselves say. So a child is never going to think they could "become" a witch any more than they might "become" a rabbit from reading Peter Cottontail. That, I believe, is one of the most commonly overlooked points by non-readers of the series.

Second, the witchcraft of Harry Potter acknowledges and celebrates Christian symbols such as Christmas. In this sense it is not real witchcraft in the books, but rather people with powers similar in ways to Superman or Captain America. There is no real qualitative difference between x-ray vision and the ability to see through walls using one of the "spells" in Harry Potter. They are both "super powers" in that sense. And nowhere in the entire series of books are spells referred to as some sort of prayer or a religious belief. They are treated like skills to be mastered, not doctrines to be incorporated into any sort of relationship with the universe, sacred or profane.

That makes Harry Potter somewhat of a special case because witchcraft has been clearly taken out of its original religious context. To that degree, it cannot proselytize for Wicca or any other pagan religion.

Just my thoughts. I am a fan of the books, but also a deeply conservative Christian. I don't see this as a Doctor Jeckyll and Mr. Hyde split. It's fun once in a while to read fantasy. That's all.

[Sezzie87]

Do you not think it blurs the line between good and evil though? The way I see it is that the wizardry that Harry Potter uses himself is being used to fight another type of evil... basically just saying that the type Harry Potter uses is good and the other is not... when clearly both are wrong... just my opinion though

[EveningStar]

Let's please set down an understanding between us. There is no "force" of evil, only evil use of force. Satan was in the presence of God and he used the strength God gave him and the mind God gave him to eventually work against the Almighty. That is like your father giving you allowance money and you using it to do drugs. You take his own money to work against his will for your life and in doing so you invite destruction. Satan would be altogether flattered if you gave him credit for his power, but he is only misusing Daddy's credit card and he will have to pay the bill at the end of the month, TRUST ME ON THAT...the wages of SIN are DEATH. The belief in a separate power of evil is unchristian and comes from zoroastrian dualism or gnostic dualism. Look in John 1. In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God and the word was God. And the word became flesh and dwelt among men. All things were made through him and without him was nothing made. And that includes the so-called "forces of evil." There is no negative energy in the universe, only hatred and malice.

[Sezzie87]

Yes but we still have a choice to go God's way and not Satan's way... there's 2 very different paths we could take...

Satan is a separate entity, and he doesn't glorify God, so he's a separate force... regardless of where the evil originated from

I agree that God created everything, but the lack of God or lack of obedience to God made way for evil... which is very definitely a force

why else would the Bible talk about the battle between God and the devil so much...? Why would God be fighting against something which came 'from Him'?

[EveningStar]

For the same reason David fought against Absalom. And Absalom did not possess an opposing force, just an army of misguided people.

[Sezzie87]

But why were they misguided in the first place?

[CSLewisFan]

Have you read any of the Harry Potter books in the series yet? if you haven't then you wouldnt have known that there where any scary things in them. BUT if you have, you would know that Harry Potter himself is not evil. The books were written for small children. They are good fiction books. J.K Rowling does an extrodinary job of telling of another land that is make believe. like most stories there is usually a good guy and a bad guy. and yes bad guys are scary. for instance:
Does the white witch scare you in the Narnia books? is she evil? and should we not let small children read those books?

Actually, the books weren't written for small children.
They are marketed towards children.

-Austin

[she-elfwarrior19]

I voted Harry Potter for as follows reasons:

~I hate it
~I think its witchcraft and to me witchcraft is evil.

[Lillee]

I voted Harry Potter for as follows reasons:

~I hate it
~I think its witchcraft and to me witchcraft is evil.
what a shame to be so narrow minded. oh well too each is own.

[Lillee]

Actually, the books weren't written for small children.
They are marketed towards children.

-Austin
yes, you are correct. but my point still stands.

[Queen Lucy the Valiant]

Young children i dont think would be reading the HP books because they are so long, but would want to see the movies because of the wasy the are advertised on TV and in mags etc. and the influence of older siblings would encourage them, but in my opinion the HP movies arent as bad as the books in themselves, the movies arent as gorey as JK Rowling describes in the book.
Narnia is a different cause because in a way it is in christain terms like Asland being Jesus and Edmund as Judas, and the White Wistch as, in someways, the devil tempting Edmund with Turish Delights......
Lord of the Rings is the same, but parents would probably not allow little children to see LOTR is the cinema because of its content, but they may allow the kids to watch it on dvd at home, because its a very different atmosphere ie. you can skip through parts you dont think are suitbale and can turn it off if you dont want to see it without wasting a whole lot of money on the cinema prices.

Hannah :)

[inkspot]

It's my belief all are fantasy stories and can be enjoyed as such. In the HP Fantasy world, there are people, as Chakal says, a separate specied of people, who are gifted with magic. There are people like them in the other fantasy stories: Gandalf and Saruman (one good and one evil), for instance. Because they practice magic in a fantasy world doesn't make the books evil.

Some people say HP is more evil because children are learning to practice magic whereas Gandalf (and, apparently Saruman) were created (like angels) with the magical power, so magic is okay for them but not for humans. But then we have Lucy in VDT reading spells (and being heartily thanked for it by the Duffers) and Dr. Cornelius in PC doing some small magic -- neither of them was created like an angel, a magical being. They are humans (or half-humans) who learned to do magic, same as HP ...

It's all a fantasy. And as long as parents monitor what their kids read and discuss it with them, there is no danger.

And if you say the dividing line is that Narnia has Christian symbolism and HP does not, you are mistaken. You can find Christian symbolism in HP. Harry's mother laid down her life for her child, just as Christ said, greater love has no one than this. Harry was scarred by his encounter with evil as a baby: a lightning bolt scar on his forehead. Jesus said he saw Satan fall like lightning. In early church symbols, the stag was a symbol of Christ (after St. Eustace encountered a stag with the crucified Savior in its horns). In HP, the patronus which protects Harry from the dementors is a stag. There's more ...

[Midnight Rider]

Harry Potter is evil because the magic in it is bad and is said to be OK. Chronicles of Narnia, the books at least, are good because the GOOD magic is said to be GOOD, and the BAD magic is said to be BAD. I don't know about Lord of the Rings beacase I've never read it.

[Midnight Rider]

Auctully, I haven't read HP, but I know what it's basicly about. I have read Narnia, and therefore I know what it's about. I have no idea what LOTR is about exept mabe somebody who has control of magical rings?

[inkspot]

Harry Potter is evil because the magic in it is bad and is said to be OK. Chronicles of Narnia, the books at least, are good because the GOOD magic is said to be GOOD, and the BAD magic is said to be BAD. I don't know about Lord of the Rings beacase I've never read it.
What do you mean, in HP the magic is bad and said to be OK? In HP, the magic is neutral or good, and some bad wizards use it for bad purposes. The same could be said for the magic in LOTR, used for good by Gandalf and bad by Saruman. Even in LWW, the magic is divided by Deep Magic and Deeper Magic, both are assumed to be good, one is assumed to be excellent or superior. I am not getting your point here ...

[Midnight Rider]

It's SO funny but VERY irritating that my friend Ashley isn't allowed to read The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe because it has monsters! She's NOT a baby!
And another friend Kaila isn't allowed to read it because there's a witch...

[Midnight Rider]

What do you mean, in HP the magic is bad and said to be OK? In HP, the magic is neutral or good, and some bad wizards use it for bad purposes. The same could be said for the magic in LOTR, used for good by Gandalf and bad by Saruman. Even in LWW, the magic is divided by Deep Magic and Deeper Magic, both are assumed to be good, one is assumed to be excellent or superior. I am not getting your point here ...
OK, OK, so I admit I might not know what I'm talking about... that's just what I heard.

[glamel]

for me, all of the three books are great, i love it.
that's just me, i don't care if others don't like harry potter, i like the books. and im excited to read the last book of HP!!:D

[Malacandra]

CASE TWO: There was a strange man in our neighborhood that every year would post a sign of a demon dressed in a red suit. "SATAN CLAUS!" it said. He was certain that believing in Jolly old Saint Nick was equivalent to taking Christ out of Christmas. Forget for the moment that Saint Nicholas was canonized by the Pope for his real life generosity, or that the Santa Claus we tell children about spends his whole life giving away things on the night of Christ's birth.


This reminds me of the dyslexic occultist who sold his soul to Santa. :D

[EveningStar]

Or the dyslexic agnostic insomniac that laid awake nights wondering if there is a Dog...

[inkspot]

OK, OK, so I admit I might not know what I'm talking about... that's just what I heard.
No I am sure you know what you are talking about, I am not sure I understand what you are talking about.

I heard the same thing from Christians before I ever read HP, which is that HP magic is wrong because it being practiced by humans and taught to children ... but when you read the books, you see the people who can do magic are different than regular humans, and nowhere is Satan worship encouraged or anything like this. They're just fantasy stories.

[EveningStar]

Why don't we use the Jesus Scale. Which is that you judge a tree by the fruit it bears. Narnia awakened a great deal of interest in Christianity. Harry Potter did not. They can't be equated, at least not on the Jesus Scale.

For a good tree bringeth forth good fruit, but shall ye gain figs from thistles?

[inkspot]

Give the whole series a chance ... I think HP book 7 may make a dramatic Christian point which will bring all the books into focus! (This is my dream, really.)

But also consider ... LWW is required reading in many schools in Great Britain, but many, many youngsters who read it in school never get the Christian symbolism today, because they are not being reared in Christian homes. They do not know the story of Christ, and so cannot see it in LWW.

So, can we really say CON generates interest in Jesus among children who have not already been exposed to the story of Jesus? I don't think so ...

LOTR's symbolism is even more deeply hidden than CON's, and many of its readers and fans do not even realize how it points to Christ.

And finally ... CS Lewis adored fantasy literature because, he said, it breathed an otherworldly joy on him -- like a breeze from another world! Its very other-worldliness made him seek for the source of the breezes, outside our own material world.

So in a sense, any fantasy work which inspires us to look beyond this physical reality for our hope, for something more, can point us to Christ.

[Midnight Rider]

Oh OK then.

[she-elfwarrior19]

what a shame to be so narrow minded. oh well too each is own.
Im not being narrow minded,i can say what i want your probably saying im narrowminded b/c of what i said about HP right?I understand but honestly thats how i look at it, and maybe the Christain way i was raised doesnt allow witchcraft and the stuff that HP does.

[ntertanedangel]

hey, I'm new :) Just thought I'd point these out to you
Magic from before the dawn of time (http://www.hp-lexicon.org/magic/old-magic.html#Ancient)
Harry Potter's magic (http://www.hp-lexicon.org/essays/essay-harry-potters-magic.html)
Magical ability (http://www.hp-lexicon.org/essays/essay-magical-ability.html)
They're essays on Harry Potter that I think shed some light on the situation. I'll make no secret that I'm a Christian and have no moral qualms whatsoever about reading Harry Potter. But that's me :)

[Lady Larien]

ok guys let me just point this out if somebody hasn't already Lord of the Rings is a Christianmovie and book depending on how you look at it same as Narnia after all Tolkien and Lewis were best friends but Harry Potter is the farthest but that doesn't mean that us Christians have to hate it actually my Mum bought Goblet of Fire the other day and it was awesome not near as good as LOTR or Narnia but Harry Potter movies are third on my fave list 1. Narnia 2. Lord of the Rings 3. Harry Potter. 3 might be Eragon soon though when that movie is released (CAN'T WAIT!!!!!) well that is just what i think oh and you can by books at your local Family Christian Store about finding Christianity in LOTR and Narnia so go read up on it before you start saying bad things

[Danny]

I chose the "other" option, and have been instructed to explain why:

Firstly, for those who claim that Harry Potter is evil are clearly either dilusionists or conservative religious fanatics. Just my opinion.

Secondly, we must keep in mind that these are stories set within fantastic realms, and so inevitably the words "sorcery" and "witchcraft" are going to show up somewhere in the text.
Also, I think that Harry Potter, despite the "witchcraft" and "sorcery" carries a very Christian message.
Afterall, we are told by Albus Dumbledore that it was the love of Harry's mother that saved him from Voldemort, not sorcery... J.K Rowling's own "Deep magic" perhaps?

And lastly, I pity anyone that denies their children the right to read these books. These books are great morality tales, teaching us to stand strong in the face of adversity, to fight for our values and beliefs and above all to love eachother and to strive to do what is best for the greater good.

If only people could see past the "witchcraft", then they would see the true worth of such books...

[inkspot]

ok guys let me just point this out if somebody hasn't already Lord of the Rings is a Christianmovie and book depending on how you look at it same as Narnia after all Tolkien and Lewis were best friends but Harry Potter is the farthest but that doesn't mean that us Christians have to hate it
I agree Christians don't have to hate HP, but I am curious why you say HP is the farthest from Christian lliterature? There are many ways to see Christian symbols in HP. I listed a few somewhere ... but Danny listed a good one above: Dumbledore makes clear Harry is alive because his mother sacrificed herself for him, the strongest possible magic. Doesn't thi sound like Christ's "Greater love has no man than this, that he lay down his life for his friends?" Then there is the business of the patronus which protects Harry, in the shape of a stag. The stag is a symbol for Christ in ancient church history (St. Eustace converted when he saw the crucified Savior in the horns of a stag). Also, remember all the rejoicing of angels when Christ was born? Perhaps this compares with the rejoicing of wizards when baby Harry defeated Voldemort at the beginning of the series? Ordinary humans didn't understand the significance, but witches were hugging them on the street -- just as ordinary shepherds didn't understand the significance of Christ's birth, but angels sang to them anyway!

There is more ...

[EveningStar]

In Kansas now Harry Potter books are sold with a sticker inside the cover. "The Theory of Magical Powers is not scientific fact and readers are urged to carefully consider the evidence both for and against their existance." :rolleyes:

[Danny]

Some very good observations there, Inkspot. I think that if you look for it, spiritual symbolism can be found in most forms of literature.
Tolkien said that he disliked allegory, and that he did not consiously try to convey any inner meaning in his books, though subconsiously there are many parallels to the Bible in his work.
I believe that such symbolism is imbedded deep in our subconsious, and goes back to the origins of storytelling, both oral and written, and forms Man's philosophy and understanding of life.

[inkspot]

In Kansas now Harry Potter books are sold with a sticker inside the cover. "The Theory of Magical Powers is not scientific fact and readers are urged to carefully consider the evidence both for and against their existance." :rolleyes:
Get out! They had better start putting such warnings on Grims Fairy Tales, too.

[onlymystory]

In response to the earlier comment that LOTR is a Christian movie, I guarantee everyone involved in that movie would disagree with you. Even more important, Tolkien himself would disagree. Tolkien hated the idea that people would compare LOTR to the story of Christianity and he worked very hard to keep them separate. It was another reason he didn't care for the Chronicles of Narnia. As many have said before me, the key to reading any book is discernment. Maybe I should write a book on finding God in Harry Potter. They do it for every other series. Maybe then people would realize that if you want to find God somewhere, you will, He's always there. And if you don't want to see Him, its easy enough to ignore Him. I can turn any book in the world practically into a support of Christianity and God, whether it was written that way or not.

[EveningStar]

Problem is, every bit of literature has religious symbolism. You are creating a bit of the universe as if you were a demigod and the way natural law and human nature unfolds in the story is a commentary on how you view natural law and human nature. So not necessarily the facts but the way they are presented, are unavoidable bits of religious--or irreligious--symbolism.

Robin Hood presumes it is right to rob the rich as long as you give to the poor. LWW presumes that betraying your family and friends violates a law greater than Municipal Code 132 Section B Paragraph 4. Peter Pan exalts the innocence of children. Watership Down promotes brains over braun and endorses the idea that there are powers at work above and beyond natural law. I could keep on going but not all of you have a broadband connection... :rolleyes:

[inkspot]

good point Chakal! And it does hand in glove with what I mentioned about why CSL loved fantasy: it seemed to speak of a world beyond this one, and all good fantasy literature makes you wish for that world.

OMS, I have to disagree with your position that Tolkien did not want anyone to find Christianity in LOTR. He in fact stated that at first LOTR's very Catholic overtones showed up on their own, and that later he enhanced them. What he did not like was overt and obvious symbolism/allegory such as you see in Narnia. He didn't like CON for this reason: too obvious! But Tolkien's Catholicism is so skillfuly woven into LOTR, you will not see it if you are not looking for it -- and it is si profound, once you do see it, you cannot ignore it!

[Danny]

But Tolkien's Catholicism is so skillfuly woven into LOTR, you will not see it if you are not looking for it -- and it is si profound, once you do see it, you cannot ignore it!

Too true. Have you looked at the appendices and noticed the dates.
The Fellowship departed from Rivendell on the 25th of December (Christmas and the Pagan festival of "Sol Invictus", "The Indomitable Sun"), and the Ring destroyed on 25th of March! (The destruction of original sin!)

[onlymystory]

I stand corrected Inkspot. I was aware that Tolkien had similarities and such to christianity. I was more trying to point out to narniaqueen that saying HP is evil because it is not obviously Christian when LOTR is was wrong. I just know that Tolkien hated the really obvious tie ins to Christianity that were rampant in the Narnia chronicles. I was more trying to remind others that Tolkien wasn't trying to be overtly Christian either and I do know he would have been angry if accused of such. However, obviously I was a little confusing. I do love finding the symbolism in LOTR but I think it causes it to fall closer to HP than CON because you do have to search to find it.

[inkspot]

I very much agree. And btw, I am pretty sure someone has written a book similar to "Finding God in Harry Potter." The title escapes me right now, but I am sure I have heard of it. In a way, Tolkien would have been more a fan of HP with its less obvious symbolism than CON with its blatant symbolism, you are right.

[Knight Aaron of Narnia]

I like HP and I am a Born-again Christian.
I agree that Witches and Wizards in HP
are not human.
And if your not going to read HP because of Witchcraft
then you shouldnt read LOTR.
Wizards in LOTR were born with Magic.

[inkspot]

Good point, KingAslan. Sometimes critics of HP say the magic in HP is bad because it is about children "learning to do magic" or "being taught magic," which it would be wrong to teach children in the real world to try to do spells and magic. But if they would read HP, they would see certain children are born as magical beings, and naturally they have to learn to use their magical skills -- just as in LOTR, the wizards and elves are born (or created) as magical beings. No difference.

[Saruman]

Big difference. :)

Tolkien wrote concerning his creation of the Istari ("those who know"), who were called by Men (etc.) "wizards." They were emissaries sent from the Lords of the West to contend the will of Sauron. They were not, however, magical beings in the least. No more "magical" were they than was Jesus of Nazareth, who cast demons out of people and healed those who were sick. These Istari, these "wizards," were angelic beings, of a lesser degree than were the Valar (who were often mistakenly called "the gods").

The same applies to the natural abilities of the Elves. Inkspot, you will of course remember that I quoted Galadriel concerning the Mirror of Galadriel in FOTR, and how she addresses Sam:

"And you?" she said, turning to Sam. "For this is what your folk would call magic, I believe; though I do not understand clearly what they mean; and they seem to use the same word of the deceits of the Enemy. But this, if you will, is the magic of Galadriel. Did you not say that you wished to see Elf-magic?"

(Bk. 2, pg. 364)

You came to this conclusion concerning her statement:

The example of Galadriel's pointing out her magic is different from Sauron's is one thing, but there is no denying Gandalf and Saruman have the same kind of magic, and one is good and one is bad

Notice carefully, Galadriel never called her abilities "magic." She said to Sam, "But this, if you will, is the Magic of Galadriel." She never implied that it was "magic" in the first place, but only called it thus because that was what Sam believed it to be.

And in your statement concerning Gandalf being good, Saruman being bad, there was never any difference between the two. Saruman was a good being at first, but, perhaps much like Lucifer, pride and hate conquered him, and he fell away from his high calling, and therefore used what knowledge and skills he possessed for evil purposes.

In this I see a very great difference between the "wizards" of LOTR and the wizards of HP.

I should also like to mention, though, that it is not against "magic" that I have my reasons for disliking HP. Obviously we see "magic" in Narnia, and we do see some "magic" in LOTR. My arguments against HP have always been about the uses of "magic." What's the reason behind a "Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry" anyway? I love fantasy, but not to a degree where it goes into something that, in my opinion, is very touchy.

[DifferentFree]

I think there really isn't anything wrong with fantasy, but I will say that there is NO SUCH THING as Good and Bad Witches/Wizards/Warlocks. I don't hold that against LOTR because I know about the author and since he was a Christian, I think it was more of an allegory. But Harry Potter, I don't like at all. I don't know too much about Rowling, but I'm pretty sure she isn't a Christian. Though I agree she is a fantastic writer, I find her books getting darker and darker and probably wouldn't let my kids read them, or I won't when I have kids atleast.

[inkspot]

I think there really isn't anything wrong with fantasy, but I will say that there is NO SUCH THING as Good and Bad Witches/Wizards/Warlocks. I don't hold that against LOTR because I know about the author and since he was a Christian, I think it was more of an allegory. But Harry Potter, I don't like at all. I don't know too much about Rowling, but I'm pretty sure she isn't a Christian. Though I agree she is a fantastic writer, I find her books getting darker and darker and probably wouldn't let my kids read them, or I won't when I have kids atleast.
This is an interesting viewpoint: "I know Tolkien was a Christian, so I will allow his wizards were good, but I don't believe Rowling is a Christian, so I think her wizards are bad." Now, did you know Tolkien was a committed Catholic, and JKR is a member of the Church of Scotland, more or less an Anglican like CS Lewis? Knowing this, do you now think her wizards might be as allowable as Tolkien's?

Tolkien wrote concerning his creation of the Istari ("those who know"), who were called by Men (etc.) "wizards." They were emissaries sent from the Lords of the West to contend the will of Sauron. They were not, however, magical beings in the least. No more "magical" were they than was Jesus of Nazareth, who cast demons out of people and healed those who were sick. These Istari, these "wizards," were angelic beings, of a lesser degree than were the Valar (who were often mistakenly called "the gods").

The same applies to the natural abilities of the Elves.
In the basic text of the three books of LOTR, which is all most fans will read, there is no "religious" explanation given of the wizards and elves, but it is obvious they possess innately what we would call magic. In HP, it is obvious some people also innately posses magic: they are a different species than muggles, humans who cannot do magic, as the elves and wizards are a difference species in LOTR. These magical people are usually sent to a magic school -- if they continue living with oridnary humans, as young Voldemort did for some years, they can still do magic but it is hap-hazard and dangerous, so the school teaches them how to use their magic.

A few of these type go bad, as Saruman went bad, and most go right, as Gandalf went right. I still am not seeing the difference here between HP and LOTR magic, or "the use of magic." The good guys use it for good, and the bad guys use it for bad, in both stories.

Even in CON, Lucy uses a magic spell once for good, when she lifts the invisibility curse from the Duffers, and once for evil, when she eavesdrops on her friend. Yet no one suggests CON is dangerous. Any "magical" story could be dangerous if you suggested to a child that he could do magic himself. HP no more so than the others, in my estimation.

[waterhogboy]

We had a really interesting discussion on this very subject at our church youth group on sunday. We also included His Dark Materials. The woman leading the discussino thought that CoN and LotR are not dangerous, but HP and HDM are. However, she admitted herself that she reads HP and HDM.

[inkspot]

We had a really interesting discussion on this very subject at our church youth group on sunday. We also included His Dark Materials. The woman leading the discussino thought that CoN and LotR are not dangerous, but HP and HDM are. However, she admitted herself that she reads HP and HDM.
I haven't read HDM, but I understand it is an atheist manifesto. Did the Bible study leader somehow link HP and HDM as evil because they reject God? Because I don't see that in HP ...

[waterhogboy]

No - they weren't linked in that way. She simply decided that whereas CoN and LotR couldnt be considered dangerous, HP and HDM could.

[inkspot]

On what basis? I can see HDM because it makes out that religion is evil, correct? But I am curious about HP ...

[Twilight]

I don't think any of them are dangerous to children. However, the LotR movies shouldn't be watched by kids and I would say that they should watch HP's 'Goblet of Fire' with a parent for the end part.

They are all fantasies and should be taken that way. Harry Potter isn't bad; the magic is silly, kid-like magic most of the time, which is totally different from actual dark magic such as Wicca and whatnot.

I can say this because I used to be totally against Harry Potter. I would suggest reading the books first before making assumptions.