Harry Potter and the Bible/Who agrees with me? [Archive] - Page 2 - The Dancing Lawn

Goldenrod22

08-19-2005, 03:42 PM

Anyway....

Green Knight, I wanted to answer your question. My belief about 'folk magic' (as you call it) is pretty straightforward. I think that if you believe, as I do, that God created the Earth in seven days (as well as the entire story of Creation from past to present), then any 'magic' is under question.
Because if you believe that God created everything (I do not think God is, in Himself, 'magic', He is the 'I AM'), then nothing could be 'magical' except what God created. And as angels are a creation (there is no magical mystery about them, to God, anyway), we are a creation, and everything that we don't even understand is just a creation of God's. Even Satan used to be a creation. Heaven is a creation!

My brain was befuddled when this thought popped in. But can you understand?

Nothing is unknown to God. The element in magic (and magick) is that you are harnessing something that would otherwise be unknown by the 'ordinary' person (sounds like 'Muggles' to me).

WOW!

Here is another little thing that is sad about 'folk magic' to me (Really, though, I am not sure exactly what you mean when you say 'folk magic')
In the Ukraine there is a story told to the children in some of the orphanages. It is the fictional story of Baba Yaga (I am not sure if this is how this is spelled), a terrible monster-type creature who they are told about at a very young age. This monster is said to roam the land at night, eating children who dare to try and run away.
This story is repeated so often, and at such a young age, that the children oftentimes believe that Baba Yaga is real. They have frequent nightmares about her, and even after being adopted from the orphanages are often fearful of leaving their beds at night.
And do you know why the adults at the orphanages continue telling Baba Yaga's story?
To scare children into not thinking of running away. They use the story of Baba Yaga to psychologically bind those children to the orphanage.

inkspot

08-19-2005, 03:49 PM

JK Rowling's ex-husband says that she us making 7 books because she believes 7 is a "Magical, Mystical number" In other words, lucky pretty much. and the church does NOT uphold that.
The church doesn't uphold "lucky numbers," but as Inked pointed out, numbers do have spiritual significance and seven has always been regarded as the number of perfection. God uses it throughout the Bible, starting with the seven days of creation and ending with all the sevens in Revelation: seven churches, seven lamp-stands, seven seals, etc. CS Lewis halted CON after seven, and we don't suspect him of counting on lucky numbers. I don't know what JKR believes, but if she believes seven is a significant number because she is a Christian and finds it significant in the Bible, she is correct.

Welcome back, GR. I will think about your post and respond later.

inkspot

08-19-2005, 04:01 PM

GR, I agree with what you say about practicing magic as human beings, whether it is folk magic or witchcraft or Wicca, whatever: it is an abomination.

But I am not sure that the HP books are encouraging anyone to practice magic. I believe a Christian family could make a good case for finding Christian values, spiritual values, in the books, as Inked has pointed out on many occasions.

I know our kids started reading HP as soon as the first book came out (and our girls were young then, 10 and 12 or something), and I know that they never for a moment thought magic -- in the sense of casting spells -- was real. They knew the books were fantasy, and I am not sure what kind of kids would think it was real and turn to demonology because of it ... HP books never reference a power behind magic -- except for Harry's special protection from evil imparted to him because his mother loved him enough to die for him, which is a Christian concept.

inked

08-19-2005, 05:21 PM

Good list of 7's Inkspot!

WHB is probably correct that the basic reason is the number of years in the accepted British schooling process.

I think GR's list could be used with equal applicability against TCON and Middle Earth.

Whoever noted that witch was related to "poisoner" is on the right track. The term sorcery in Scripture is related primarily to drug usage and what we refer to as pharmaceuticals. Check out any lexicon and the Hebrew and Greek words. I guess that leaves us Tylenol users and such in a pretty nasty place, doesn't it? :p

inked

08-20-2005, 12:36 PM

Hey, Inkspot, I just read in the Bible, in Genesis chapter 30, verse 14 that Jacob's oldest son Reuben found some mandrakes in the fields while gathering grain. He took them to his mother LEAH. Then RACHEL who had no children biologically asked for some (for she and Jacob had been arguing earlier in the chapter about Rachel's lack of children). Leah refused until they cut a deal as to whom Jacob would cohabit with that evening. Rachel got her mandrake roots clearly intending to use them to promote her own fertility (sort of helping God out with the process, since He didn't seem to have it down just right in her case). Doesn't seem to have worked quite as Rachel imagined however, for Leah had three more children, 2 sons and 1 daughter in succession while Rachel remained barren.

Does this positive reference to mandrake root mean I should offer it to my infertility patients? Does the fact that Rachel seems to approve of mandrake roots use in some sympathetic magic mean that the Bible endorses magic? Are all references to magic in any book indicative of the need to abhor that book? Should I leave off my Bible reading? Isn't the Bible encouraging me to practice magic by this story?

And then there's that bit with Saul trying to raise Samuel for advice with the witch of Endor - rather surprisingly successful to both the witch and Saul as well as Samuel's obvious displeasure. Does that mean I am supposed to consult a witch and or medium to get advice from dead prophets too? Isn't the presence of the story more proof that I shouldn't read my Bible. After all this appearance of the words MUST mean that what is told is absolutely true and capable of only one understanding, doesn't it?

Golly! What's a reader to do?

inkspot

08-20-2005, 03:12 PM

LOL -- you're killing me! :p
Now I gotta go look up all the verses on magic ... there must be a loop-hole... :D

Green Knight

08-20-2005, 05:32 PM

When I mentioned "folk magic" is was speaking of the systems of belief that were/are prevalent in the certain areas of rural Pennsylvania, the Ozarks, and the South Carolina Lowcountry, to name a few. Its a form of herbcraft mixed with Christian faith that was a carry over of folk traditions from Europe.

Ouija boards don't call spirits, but they do allow the subconscience access to the real world. Basically, you allow all the nasty stuff that you keep locked away an outlet.

legolas

08-20-2005, 05:34 PM

thats interesting...

inkspot

08-21-2005, 04:20 PM

Ouija boards don't call spirits, but they do allow the subconscience access to the real world. Basically, you allow all the nasty stuff that you keep locked away an outlet.
This is your belief, but if you believe in the spirit world at all (as most Christians do) there is no way to rule out using the board invites demons to speak through it -- that is the point of it.

Green Knight

08-21-2005, 07:14 PM

Green Knight

08-21-2005, 07:18 PM

That was me.

They also translated one of the Commandments wrong.

Istead of "Thou shalt not kill" it should be "Thou shalt not murder".

inkspot

08-22-2005, 10:03 AM

I think GR's list could be used with equal applicability against TCON and Middle Earth.
I think this might be the case ... we know that Lewis and Tolkien were Christians, so we will allow their use of magic in their tales? I am not sure I am getting the distinction. And there are lots of fairy tales with magic and witches, but we don't say that it is anti-Christian to read them. I am having to think hard about this issue.

Whoever noted that witch was related to "poisoner" is on the right track. The term sorcery in Scripture is related primarily to drug usage and what we refer to as pharmaceuticals. Check out any lexicon and the Hebrew and Greek words.
Is this true? But in that Bible story you mentioned of Saul trying to bring back the spirit of Samuel, that woman isn't using drugs -- she's a medium, and it was obviously a bad thing for Saul to have tried to do...but then in L'engle's "A Wrinkle in Time," which is very Christian in tone, there is a "Happy Medium" who helps the heroes by letting them see what's happening in other parts of the universe in her crystal ball. And we know that the L'engle books are good, moral stories ... this goes back to the other issue of whether every fictional use orf magic is bad.

inkspot

08-22-2005, 10:08 AM

It could be that they are telling the story to keep them tied to the ophanage, but she is also part of their culture.
Yeah, there are lots of fairy tales like this that are generally accepted, as bed-time stories for children.

Do you think, GR, that fairy tales like Little Red Riding Hood and Snow White are bad, or I should say, anti-Christian?

benjamin_narnialover

08-25-2005, 02:06 PM

hi i've just found this thread, and i want to get my two cents in.

i started reading harry potter shortly after the first book came out, and i've never thought that it was a dangerously unchristian thing to read. teh books morals are fairly good. they portray good vs. evil, and while there is a little bit too much rule-breaking and lieing, the overall message is about love and giving people second chances (forgiveness). someone a while ago, posted some articles about hp. those articles seemed to make a point about how much of what harry does is revenge motivated. i really don't see this at all. the only time that harry is really acting for revenge is in teh 3rd book, and he's shown to be wrong (about sirius).
i believe the magic, which seems to be the main problem some christians have with the books, to be harmless to read about. as i think someone already mentioned the magic is nothing like the magic practiced in real life. For another, no kid i've ever talked to has ever thoguht that any of the magic portrayed in the books is real. i think it's an insulting to children to think that they'd really believe hp magic is real. and if they were very young, and did believe it, they'd soon realise they were wrong (in the same way that kids stop believing in santa claus or the tooth fairy). and no harm would be done to them.

Checkmate

08-25-2005, 02:36 PM

"People are stupid..."
-Zeddicus Zul Zorander
I understand what it is that you're talking about and comprehend your problem. This is, indeed, a grieveous issue...

inkspot

08-25-2005, 06:04 PM

"People are stupid..."
-Zeddicus Zul Zorander
I understand what it is that you're talking about and comprehend your problem. This is, indeed, a grieveous issue...
Huh?:confused:

I believe the magic, which seems to be the main problem some christians have with the books, to be harmless to read about. as i think someone already mentioned the magic is nothing like the magic practiced in real life. For another, no kid i've ever talked to has ever thoguht that any of the magic portrayed in the books is real. i think it's an insulting to children to think that they'd really believe hp magic is real.
I agree with this, Benjamin.

Checkmate

08-25-2005, 06:06 PM

It's a Sword of Truth thing...

inkspot

08-25-2005, 06:11 PM

It's a Sword of Truth thing...
Oh, sorry! Didn't recognize it. :o

Goldenrod22

08-27-2005, 12:47 PM

Hi! :)

I think what "Benji" is saying just hops back on the same merry-go-round of beliefs.
I have stated in almost every single one of my previous posts an antithesis to all of the points Benji has. And for that matter, the same exact points that Inked keeps resurfacing with.
I am going CRAZY. It appears as if nothing that I say has any impact, because a few posts later the SAME question appears again (for the hundredth time). Here is an example:
Inkspot: You know, there is really no link to real magic in the books.
Me: Actually, I'll show you exactly in the books where the students of Hogwarts allude to real magic(k). I can even show you where in the books Harry and friends use their magickal 'talents' for evil purposes.

Inked: Hey, Goldenrod. Look at this obscure Biblical reference I found stating that God promotes the use of witchcraft! Because it is in the Bible, it must mean that it is good.
Me: The Bible is composed not just of the things God approved of, but also of the evil that God punished. When he told the story of Saul and the witch of Endor, he was not promoting it by placing it in the Bible. He was showing that it was an evil thing that Saul had done. If you had read more, Inked, you would have found that in 1 Chron. the writer alludes to the evil Saul commited when consorting with the witch.

Popular Belief: There are no verses condemning the practice of witchcraft or sorcery.
Me: Look at the looong list I created in a previous post. It is unbelievable how Christians can so easily 'forget' these verses. The real challenge is not finding verses in which God hates witchcraft, but finding ANY that support it. You'd almost have to go throught the Bible with a penknife and cut out all the parts that HP lovers would find offensive. And end up with a very holey bible.

Benji: HP makes nobody be a witch and my friends are all not witches who read it and so that means nothing is bad in it and there is no magic in it that is bad magic.
Me: Well, I can't speak for you and your friends, but I would just have you look at the impact on our culture. At every library or bookstore you can easily see 'teen and child witchcraft' promoted. Just last week, I was at the library and saw a reserved book on the book cart titled 'You are SO cursed', with a pouty teen witch on the cover. The library also features an entire series of books about two teen witches called 'T*Witch' (published by Scholastic, the same publishers of HP).
Companies have jumped on the bandwagon with making witchcraft fun for kids, too. Just go to the Scholastic website for kids. They promote having kids submit spells they write themselves. Did I mention that the kids are real witches?

Goldenrod22

08-27-2005, 12:58 PM

Hi! :)

Inked, what is wrong with you? You seem so determined to undermine anything that is connected to refuting HP. What do you lose if you stop for a minute to consider my point of view?
If I stop trying to help other people to look at the books from a Christian standpoint, then I am not doing what is right. If you stop and just consider my points, then you are none the worse off. You may even see where I point out specific verses in the Bible that could ACTUALLY be true!
Why do you hate my speaking out against something that I am trying to see from a Biblical perspective, that I believe has a dangerously real impact on our culture today?
Is it just that you want to believe so strongly that Harry is all right, that you will ignore anything in the Bible otherwise?
Or any of the points I've made?
Or anything in the Richard Abanes' books?
Or even (have you been to this site?) the article on Visionforum.com?

P.S. I do not equate the magic in LOTR and Narnia as equal to the magick in HP. I have posted, many times, an antithesis to this point (look at my previous posts, which use comparisons).

Johan 72109

08-27-2005, 01:13 PM

What GR22 lacks is movement beyond concrete thinking to symbolic thinking. It is a serious defect to the appreciation of literature.

GR22 if you want a true allegory by CS Lewis, go read THE PILGRIM'S REGRESS. It is an allegory in the true sense of that world, by a master of the genre second to Bunyan, in my humble opinion. TCON is not an allegory. It is a "supposal" and symbolic outworking of the concept in NON-allegorical terms per the author himself.

:confused:

The Pilgrim's Progress ISN'T by C.S Lewis though... it's by Bunyan... He wrote it while in prison... Hence why he's so acclaimed as a writor of Christian allegory...

Johan 72109

08-27-2005, 01:45 PM

P.S. I do not equate the magic in LOTR and Narnia as equal to the magick in HP. I have posted, many times, an antithesis to this point (look at my previous posts, which use comparisons).

Sorry Goldenrod, this is me being horribly stupid, but could you repeatyour arguments for the sake of those of us too lazy to trawl back through the thread please? :o
I'm especially confused concerning Lord of the Rings... I can't see a distinction between the magic of Gandalf and the magic utilised by the heroes of Harry Potter. The other point about Lord of The Rings is that Middle Earth has Gods - not based upon our own God either, but much closer to the gods of Norse mythology from which Tolkein derived his ideas... On the other hand, one could simply view these 'gods' as like angels - only with the power of creation, and more driven by human urges and desires. I dunno...
As ever however, these are just my thoughts and opinions, chucked out in a random order... I don't claim to possess masses of theological arguments and a whole library of books upon the subject... just my ikkle old walnut of a brain :)

Only tenuously related to the subject, but never mind, my apologies... What are your views upon Role Playing? While some RPGs avoid the use of magic, many include it as a tool of either good or evil. As well as this, some RPGs have Gods that manifest themselves to the heroes to help or hinder. Heroes in RPGs can be thieves, or assassins, or other unwholesome things. I'd be interested to hear your views upon this subject, not to debate, just as a point of interest. :)

inkspot

08-27-2005, 02:46 PM

The Pilgrim's Progress ISN'T by C.S Lewis though... it's by Bunyan... He wrote it while in prison... Hence why he's so acclaimed as a writor of Christian allegory...
Inked mentioned The Pilgrim's REgress, not Progress -- The Pilgrim's Regress is an allegory CS Lewis wrote in the style of Bunyan's great work.

I can't speak for GoldenRod, but I have read many of the articles she has mentioned, and I think one of the distinctions that people draw between magic in HP and magic in LOTR/CON is:

The only magical people in LOTR and CON are wise old wizards like Gandalf or in CON the hermit who used to be a star, so they are actually angel archetypes, not humans -- and angels of course have power that it is not immoral for them to use, but if we humans tried to use their power, that would be wrong.

They also say that LOTR and CON take place in wholly fictitious lands, so they could not possibly influence children to try magic at home -- it's clear in MN that Uncle Andrew is erring to try to produce magic on earth, whereas it can be lawfully practiced in Narnia, see? But HP and friends live on earth and suffer no ill effects from the mere practice of magic (whereas Frodo is nearly consumed by the ring.)

Also in CON and LOTR, the magic people are already magic when the story begins, it is an innate talent, and they are not the main characters of the story, whereas the heroes of HP are learning magic, and they are the stars of the show. Some people think JRRT and CSL deliberately cast their magicians in the sidelights and as ancient wizarding sterotypes for that reason: to show people that magic cannot and should not be pursued on earth.

So while it's clear that the magic of LOTR is different from the magic of HP for these and other reasons, the debate is whether any book that puts magic in the center stage and allows it to play out on this earth is evil -- or whether JKR is just approaching good, moral themes, from a different direction than JRRT and CSL.

Johan 72109

08-27-2005, 04:14 PM

Inked mentioned The Pilgrim's REgress, not Progress -- The Pilgrim's Regress is an allegory CS Lewis wrote in the style of Bunyan's great work.

Whoops... My bad... :o That'll teach me to misread sentences... Hehe... *slaps forehead* My apologies Inked... like I said, brain the size of a walnut... :D

And thank you for telling me Goldenrod's points... It's much clearer now :)

But I personally still take the middle way with HP... It's not satanic, but you couldn't call it 'christian literature' either... it's just a good yarn in my opinion.

inkspot

08-27-2005, 09:19 PM

I am tending this way, but Inked thinks book seven will prove that JKR had a Christian theme in mind all along ... I think that's what he thinks ...

Green Knight

08-27-2005, 10:41 PM

Some of us on this board live in the US, where we have freedom of religion. That doesn't mean that you have the freedom to chose the Christian sect of your own choice, it means that if you want to worship BoBo the Purple Moose, you can. Have any of you ever read a book about Wicca, a Neo-Pagan movement, or a New Age text? Wicca has been recognized by the US Army and the US government.

I believe in Christ, but I also believe in Raven, Coyote, and Ganesha. A person on another board put it something this way, God had to talk to the other peoples of the world in a way that they could understand. The Creator had more then one face, and that is something that many people of many faiths have forgotten.

Green Knight

08-27-2005, 10:45 PM

The whole thing is non-Christian. If there are any Christian Themes in Harry Potter, then they are the ones that have found their way into popular culture.

Johan 72109

08-28-2005, 08:27 AM

I guess that depends on your beliefs though... I think that the various world religions have extreme differences that make them impossible to have come from one God. I mean, the defining difference between Christianity and all other religions is grace, the idea that God can die for man, not man for God. I don't see how God could reveal himself to other people without also revealing this all-consuming fact.
But this is just my beliefs... I'd be interested to hear your opinions. :)

inkspot

08-28-2005, 02:31 PM

Companies have jumped on the bandwagon with making witchcraft fun for kids, too. Just go to the Scholastic website for kids. They promote having kids submit spells they write themselves. Did I mention that the kids are real witches?

If witchcraft is hugely popular right now, I don't think we can say HP is responsible any more than LOTR or CON are responsible. I'm not all that conversant with pop culture, but I have seen things like Buffy and Angel, at least seen their commercials, so I know there is an interest. But I don't think there's any way to prove HP caused the interest, is all I am saying. Maybe the popularity of witchcraft made HP popular, but does that mean HP promotes devil worship? I am reading the things you post, GR, and I am not seeing the connection clearly made. I was ready to go along with it before I read the HP books, but now I think they are good adventure stories and could be used by a Christian family to examine some important Christian themes with their kids. If HP could somehow redeem the terrible effects of the popularity of witchcraft, I think that would be a good thing. By all means we should eschew anything that presents itself as a spell book and a way to harness Satan's power or any pagan power, as those things are sinful, but I don't see HP doing that, and I have read all of them ...

I did not realize, GR, that you had cited specific examples of "real magic" in the HP books, would you mind to list them again? All the magic I can remember from the books seems to be fantasy type stuff.

it means that if you want to worship BoBo the Purple Moose, you can. Have any of you ever read a book about Wicca, a Neo-Pagan movement, or a New Age text? Wicca has been recognized by the US Army and the US government.
Of course we understand that you can choose any religion or anti-religion you want here in the USA, and no one is debating that. Those of us discussing the morality of the HP books in the Threads like "Christians and Harry Potter" have been coming at it from a Christian standpoint because we are Christians, but we certainly aren't saying no one can choose any religion except Christianity. GR is saying that the Bible forbids sorcery, but she is not saying that sorcery is illegal, you see?

I don't happen to agree with you that any other faith except faith in Christ can present the saving grace necessary for eternal life with God, although you of course are free to believe as you will. The Bible clearly states that no one comes to God except through Christ, and as I base my beliefs on the Bible, that is what I believe, too. Many other humans have gone as far as human wisdom can take them, and they leave us with great ideas for righteous living and justice, but only Christ can bridge the gap between man and God, is my understanding of the Scriptures.

If anyone chooses to believe on Jesus and on something else such as Wicca or Bobo the Purple Moose, I think they have left the path of Christianity, because from a Christian standpoint, Jesus is the only one who can be called Lord, anything else is idolatry.

inked

08-28-2005, 04:26 PM

The popularity of witchcraft might be due to any of a number of factors. It is certainly simplistic in the extreme to suggest it is due to HP. Of course, when looking for a scapegoat, ... any port in a storm. Shouldn't we say it is due to Shaklespeare particularly Hamlet? You know (if you have had English Lit) "Double, double, toil and trouble/Cauldron boil and cauldron bubble..." or further back "Hansel and Gretel" or the Arthurian Cycle with Merlin et alia?

Opponents of HP have conveniently narrowed their focus due to JKR's unabashed and unexpected success. Gives them a convenient if erroneous target. *shrugs* They'd have to read all that other stuff if they were serious about tracing literary and cultural influences in regards to however they choose to spell magic. But that implies work and thought and effort. Much easier to operate from a lack of knowledge, as it keeps it so much simpler.

Having read numerous critiques of HP, including Mr. Abanes' (who ought, in my humble opinion, to have his communications degree revoked for the inability to comprehend communications!), I can say that they all fall far short of an intelligent grasp of the role of magic in the English literary tradition within which CS Lewis, JRR Tolkein, Charles Williams and JK Rowling write. The only critic adequate to this task in a broad forum is John Granger, author of LOOKING FOR GOD IN HARRY POTTER and THE HIDDEN KEY TO HARRY POTTER (now out of print since the release of LFGIHP). Since he is a classics major, he actually has put in the time and hours and has the resources to address these issues. I highly suggest that you read LOOKING FOR GOD IN HP if you would like to see the errors of the naysayers turned out for all to see. Or you can check out the essays at www.hogwartsprofessor.com for an introduction.

inked

08-28-2005, 04:57 PM

Green Knight,

I totally disagree with you! And, if you like, you can look up my arguments all over this board, since it would undoubtedly bore many others for me to reiterate them again! Or you can check out the Christian Themes in HP thread over at www.entmoot.com where I have been maintaining this position for quite some time. I post as inked over there as well.

Inkspot,

The people who make the arguments about TCON and LOTR clearly have not read them to make the arguments that none are magical except angelic substitutes! I will not do their research for them (which lack, indeed, is their chief fault - intellectual sloth<accedia>) but I will note that:
1) Lucy does magic in PC with a spellbook, the laws of which magic even Aslan says He obeys!; and,
2) The elvish races have "magical powers" according to the hobbits and men in LOTR (in fact, a natural ability which is paralleled in HP exactly).

So much for an alleged difference that has not a whit of distinction upon actual inspection. And anyone who cannot realize that HP is fictional, well, they need to write a book about magic(K) thinking persisting into allegedly adult years.... :p !

Goldenrod,

What I would lose besides the time I have taken to read the rot written by Mr. Abanes and his ilk of "critics" is my intelllectual integrity. I have considered the "arguments" proposed by these persons and I do not find them convincing or even based on any reality other than their manufactured ones. The same intellectual and spiritual honesty that allows me to enjoy Hamlet or TCON or LOTR or even the Lord Peter Wimsey novels by Dorothy L. Sayers - that is to say, the willing suspension of disbelief - is operative in the HP books. And, regardless of the distinctions without difference that Abanes and others try to make (op cit Inkspot), I cannot commit the mental hari kari necessary to hold such an erroneous view. I will not say that black is white nor the reverse to suit persons who obviously can string letters together and make words and words to make sentences and still COMPLETELY MISS meaning!

So, GR22, you will have to accept the fact that "arguments" you have made have been thoroughly considered by me and rejected. They are false arguments based on erroneous understandings of literature, reality, and scripture. Hopefully you won't take it as a personal attack for me to so baldly state the truth: I have considered the arguments and found them wanting truth, integrity, and substance.

On the other hand, why do you persist in your failure to consider my arguments?

inkspot

08-28-2005, 06:44 PM

1) Lucy does magic in PC with a spellbook, the laws of which magic even Aslan says He obeys!; and,
2) The elvish races have "magical powers" according to the hobbits and men in LOTR (in fact, a natural ability which is paralleled in HP exactly).
Yeah, I tend to agree with you, but I was listing those arguments I could remember for Johan. however, I did read that they don't count that magic Lucy does as the same as HP because when she does the one spell she isn't supposed to, there is a bad result for her (they don't really say about the one spell she is supposed to do and succeeds, I guess they can allow one spell) and they say it's okay for the elves to be magic because they're not human, it's just the morality of humans doing magic they disagree with.

I am thinking like you, that it's a fantasy, and you know you're going into a make-believe world when you open the book. But I have been uncomfortable with the witchcraft imagery and thinking a lot about whether that could be bad in and of itself. By comparison, I remembered a sci-fi story I read years ago where the denizens of a particular planet would drop off their embryonic children (who were hatched looking like lung fish) in a swamp, and the ones that survived til they got legs and could crawl out were welcomed into homes and society, while the others, well, they were fodder for evolution. Now, in our world it would be a terrible sin to leave a baby in a swamp to die, but I didn't think that the story would have influenced anyone to do so. I mean, it was a sci-fi story. So I don't think it's inherently wrong to create a fantasy world that employs modes of being that are impossible and/or forbidden in this world -- especially if the themes of the story are positive and life-affirming.

That's one reason I have such high hopes for HP book seven to clearly present a Christian theme.

holyboy

08-28-2005, 11:14 PM

Just out of curiosity, have you read the books yet Goldenrod?

Also, some of the same questions may come up, because they are big questions that are needed to be answered before we can move on. Until these are answered sufficiantly for all parties (which some won't, but that doesn't matter) we will go back to these questions again.

Just reinforce what you have to say, and read other's responses.

benjamin_narnialover

08-28-2005, 11:15 PM

this is just a side point, but i thought of a couple other examples of magic in CoN when reading the last couple posts.
Dr. Cornelius describes himself as a minor magician. he puts on a spell on caspian's guards to make them sleep, and he talks of having to do lots of spells to get susan's horn. as the part dwarf (cornelius) is not an angel-like figure, i think this shows that CoN (in this respect at least) are not very unlike HP.

borntofly

08-28-2005, 11:22 PM

but you see he was still half-dwarf. Not a full human.

inkspot

08-28-2005, 11:42 PM

But dwarves aren't naturally magic like elves, so I think he qualifies -- it's an exception to the rule that in CON and LOTR only people who are "naturally" magic can lawfully practice magic ... good thought, Benji.

inkspot

08-28-2005, 11:45 PM

Also, some of the same questions may come up, because they are big questions that are needed to be answered before we can move on. Until these are answered sufficiantly for all parties (which some won't, but that doesn't matter) we will go back to these questions again.
LOL -- before some of the religious debate threads got locked up, we were asking each other to refute the same arguments about half a dozen times -- but each time we would come at it in a slightly different way or with slightly different Scriptures. I enjoyed the mental exercise of it ...

Johan 72109

08-29-2005, 08:36 AM

I hadn't joined when the religious threads were still going, unfortunately :( Hehe, I like a nice debate in the evening... *geeky grin* (As long as people aren't trying to kill each other over things that in the grand scheme of eternity ain't THAT important. E.g Harry Potter, for all those maybe getting the teensiest bit het up about it, on both sides of the argument?) :o

Johan 72109

08-29-2005, 08:54 AM

inkspot

08-29-2005, 10:15 AM

I think that saying 'it's all right for them, they're not human', or, 'it's okay for them, they're only half human', sounds a little like nitpicking... Essentially, magic in HP, CoN, LotR and all the others are the same.
I probably didn't explain it exactly right cuz I don't fully understand it, but the point I think they are trying to make is that CON and LOTR don't encourage human children to try to do magic spells, because none of the human role models get anything but grief from magic spells: it's only rightly done by non-humans and angel archetypes -- not by the main character human children, whom we would expect real human children to identify with and emulate. There are those two spells Lucy does, one bad and one good, but she doesn't make a practice of learning magic as HP and friends do. Like I say, I am not sure this is exactly what the theory is, but it's something like that.

inkspot

08-29-2005, 10:18 AM

I like a nice debate in the evening... *geeky grin* (As long as people aren't trying to kill each other over things that in the grand scheme of eternity ain't THAT important.
Totally agree. We were debating Scripture vs. Tradition and Predestination vs. Free Will, which are fascinating topics to me, so I loved getting everyone's point of view and trying to explain my own. But some folks did get a little worked up about it, and sort of took to insulting each other instead of trying rationally to respond to the arguments, so it was probably best the threads were locked up.

Johan 72109

08-29-2005, 12:14 PM

Ah, I got ya... Still doesn't feel like much of a difference, but never mind... :o

Goldenrod22

09-01-2005, 01:12 PM

Hi everybody! :)
So many smart thinkers around this time! I hope I can keep up. First, I'd have to agree with Inkspot. He has been a real help clarifying my position on some of these issues.
Lets look at where I see the difference between magick in HP and magic in LOTR and LWW:
Chronicles of Narnia----Conflict involves two opposing forces (i.e. kinds of magic) of entirely different origins. The one source of magic (Aslan's deep magic) is 'good' because it comes from, is controlled by and operates through the One who has legitimate authority over all things (i.e. the Emperor Beyond the Sea). The other source of magic is 'evil' because it springs from an illegitimate authority that has usurped control over Narnia (i.e. the White Witch). Good characters (i.e. Peter, Susan, Lucy) do not overcome witchcraft by learning more witchcraft. Instead, they respond to evil by becoming servants of the good character, Aslan, who ultimately vanquishes the White Witch.
Rowling's good characters, however, seek to overcome evil by using the same dualistic magical power employed by Lord Voldermort and his Death Eaters.
In fact, every wizard has been trained by the same kind of institution that instructed Voldemort and his followers!
As one newspaper columnist observed, "Lewisian magic seems a bit pale and remote compared with Rowling's; it is far easier to imagine a Harry Potter fan thinking: 'Wow, that sounds like fun! If only I could find a way to...'"

Lord of the Rings----(note: I'm sorry if I put you down, Johan, for trying to find out my opinions on this subject. It would be great if you looked back over my previous posts so I could explain easier, though :) )
Conflict involves two opposing forces that pit the elves, dwarves, men, and hobbits against the Dark forces of Sauron. The elves DO NOT ENHANCE their natural powers by practicing more magic. They, like Harry, are allegedly (though many practicing witches would love to claim that they are 'born' with their 'gifts') born with their magical powers. But unlike Harry, they do not enhance or 'boost' their magic by learning higher levels of it. The same goes for Gandalf.

Goldenrod22

09-01-2005, 01:22 PM

Goldenrod22

09-01-2005, 01:40 PM

Goldenrod22

09-01-2005, 01:40 PM

More LATER!!!!

Johan 72109

09-01-2005, 03:01 PM

Hi! :)

First, I am getting a lot of questions from different sides. So I'll try to answer as many as possible without leaving anybody out.

First First ;), to answer Inkspot:

'Azkaban' has several real magick references---
Fortune-telling/mediumship (Trelawney accurately predicts, using a crystal ball, future events. A.k.a. Hermione's dropping of a class, and the escape of Peter Pettigrew. She is also possesed by a spirit and declares a prophecy.)

Herbology/potions (Harry and friends make several trips to the greenhouses in order to cultivate plants that will be used to make potions. Professor Snape explains how they will be used "...I can teach you how to bottle fame, brew glory, even stopper death.")

Palmistry/Tea leaves/Fire omens (Trelawney teaches students to read palms, observe floating tea leaves, and read fire omens.)

Arithmancy (Studied by Hermione in Book 3, it is a precursor to Numerology)
Numerology (Also studied by Hermione. Can be traced in its real life origins to the astrologer/magician Cornelius Agrippa)

Ancient Runes (Hermione studies this)

Bear in mind that the palmistry/tea leaves/fire omens are clearly scorned in HP as being a fake, so that's not exactly actual magic in the books... But you're right about the rest of the divination stuff (from what I remember of the books).
Also, on the ancient runes thing... What's so bad about it? I mean, the Nordic people used runes, and while they worshipped different Gods, they weren't satanic. The celts used runes, and while they were into worshipping nature and using 'nature magic' it's still not satanic. Unless you're talking about different kinds of ancient runes in history? I honestly don't know here, I'm looking forward to hearing your thoughts :)

Johan 72109

09-01-2005, 03:22 PM

So many smart thinkers around this time! I hope I can keep up. First, I'd have to agree with Inkspot. He has been a real help clarifying my position on some of these issues.
Lets look at where I see the difference between magick in HP and magic in LOTR and LWW:
Chronicles of Narnia----Conflict involves two opposing forces (i.e. kinds of magic) of entirely different origins. The one source of magic (Aslan's deep magic) is 'good' because it comes from, is controlled by and operates through the One who has legitimate authority over all things (i.e. the Emperor Beyond the Sea). The other source of magic is 'evil' because it springs from an illegitimate authority that has usurped control over Narnia (i.e. the White Witch). Good characters (i.e. Peter, Susan, Lucy) do not overcome witchcraft by learning more witchcraft. Instead, they respond to evil by becoming servants of the good character, Aslan, who ultimately vanquishes the White Witch.
Rowling's good characters, however, seek to overcome evil by using the same dualistic magical power employed by Lord Voldermort and his Death Eaters.
In fact, every wizard has been trained by the same kind of institution that instructed Voldemort and his followers!
As one newspaper columnist observed, "Lewisian magic seems a bit pale and remote compared with Rowling's; it is far easier to imagine a Harry Potter fan thinking: 'Wow, that sounds like fun! If only I could find a way to...'"

Lord of the Rings----(note: I'm sorry if I put you down, Johan, for trying to find out my opinions on this subject. It would be great if you looked back over my previous posts so I could explain easier, though :) )
Conflict involves two opposing forces that pit the elves, dwarves, men, and hobbits against the Dark forces of Sauron. The elves DO NOT ENHANCE their natural powers by practicing more magic. They, like Harry, are allegedly (though many practicing witches would love to claim that they are 'born' with their 'gifts') born with their magical powers. But unlike Harry, they do not enhance or 'boost' their magic by learning higher levels of it. The same goes for Gandalf.

Erm... Inkspot's a 'she'... Hehe... Man, this forum should really start putting people's gender next to their name... I make the mistake all the time of gender-confusion :o
No, you didn't put me down at all, don't worry about it... I deserved it though, yes, I really should have looked back over the posts... :( My bad, I'll do it now.
Thanks for clarifying though, I've got what you mean now. :)
I'm still interested in your views on the gods in LotR though... I dunno, you may have been about to answer the question on the other thread, I've forgotten which HP thread I posted it in... If so, my apologies.
Thanks very much.

inkspot

09-01-2005, 06:01 PM

Erm... Inkspot's a 'she'...
It's confusing cuz
Inked= a he who tends to be acerbic
Inkspot = a she who tends to be agreeable

Thank you, GR, for your further explanation of the differences between magic in CON/LOTR and HP. I am re-reading the HP series now with some of the points you make in mind, to see if I can work up a good animosity to them.

Aslan the Wise one

09-01-2005, 06:06 PM

I can't say moch about this topic becose i hae not read the HP books,But i know many peolpe who have and i get my info from them, and as i have sid before i'm not a big fan of HP just becose the hole magic thing wich is some of you know i'm doing a studly on it, but any way i do think it is a good pice of Lit....

inkspot

09-01-2005, 06:10 PM

Yeah, I knew numerology and divination were real occult things, but we haven't really seen the kids practicing them, or trying to divine anything (except as Johan notes, they sort of joke about divination, but none of it is ever right). The palmistry, tea leaves and all are treated as pretty much fake, so I doubt they encourage kids in any of that.

Still, I think that in a work of fantasy, a Christian writer could use these things without encouraging witchcraft, like the Happy Medium in L'Engle's Wrinkle in Time, she uses a crystal ball to show the heroes things that are happening on their home planet. I don't think it's a sin, in a fantasy story, to have a character make a prophecy ... because it's a fantasy story. Might as well say tales about the Oracle at Delphi encourage witchcraft, you know? And in CON the centaurs study astrology (as did, presumably, the wise men from afar who saw the star of the Christchild and came to worship Him).

As I say, I am re-reading the books with the things you have mentioned in mind, but I am not 100% sure that it's wrong to write about these things in fantasy.

inked

09-01-2005, 07:58 PM

Well, Inkspot, if you care to read Genesis, Exodus, and Leviticus straight through, you will note plenty of biblical allusions to those practices being used by prominent characters and in the construction of the texts. I mention a few:
numerology: all the 7's from creation to blessings to tabernacle to the completion of the promise of God by Jacob taking 70 to Egypt!

divination: Joseph's cup "stolen" by Benjamin stated to be used for this!

dice/lots: the drawing of the Urim and Thummin was to reveal the Lord's will (e.g., interesting that Joshua uses it after Moses' death for this purpose)!

speaking under influence of spirit: all the elders before the tent of meeting and two in camp when God placed some of the spirit on Moses upon them to the end that they should help in the governance of hte people!

animal usages: the aberrant caff business opposed to the bronze serpent ordered by the Lord to save the Israelites from the serpents, not to mention Balaam's ass!

herbology: it would be difficult to top a non-consumed, burning, talking bush - even for JKR! - and then there's Aaron's rod alone of the tested sprouting almond buds, flowers, leaves, and fruit overnight to affirm the Aaronic priesthood!

spellwork: back to Balaam, this time, he's the *ass* as all his curses turn to blessings, even with the ritual sacrifices offered time, and time, and time again! (To his credit, Balaam had warned the contracting king that might happen since he had to say what God told him to say.) Then there is the whole business in the Tabernacle with discernment of a husband's suspicions of unfaithfulness and the trial by drinking a potion made up of elements from the Tabernacle and a curse written and then rubbed off into the potion!

Need I go on? Are you laughing yet? There remains much more and we haven't gotten to Numbers or Dueteronomy. And I haven't even touched on Pharoah's magicians who duplicated many of Moses' / Aaron's signs and wonders (though not all, of course!). Of course, beside politicians, talking asses are a not-so-impressive event anymore; though there are some spectacular ones in print (not politicians, I mean!).

Of course, if it's in the biblical literature, it must be deemed a valid literary technique, don't you think? Just as in the Bible, so in JKR's HP-verse, it all depends on your choices!

inked

09-01-2005, 08:16 PM

It's confusing cuz
Inked= a he who tends to be acerbic
Inkspot = a she who tends to be agreeable

Thank you, GR, for your further explanation of the differences between magic in CON/LOTR and HP. I am re-reading the HP series now with some of the points you make in mind, to see if I can work up a good animosity to them.

Inkspot,

I will gladly take acerbic if you mean it as acidic (as in unripened fruit being more acidic than ripe as regards to taste) and even if you mean it as astringent (since an astringent is used to tighten skin, dry out the overly wet, and improve healing >think witch hazel, if you dare!<)! I won't even object if you use it in the sense of sour, as in vinegar, when used as a preservative >think dill pickles!<. I would say that these uses demonstrate a positive use of gifts given by God to recall people from erroneous ideas and statements which they perceive as acerbic. I trust I am never sour merely for the sake of being sour! or destructive as a strong acid such as hydrocloric or sulfuric. Remember vinegar poured over jellyfish stings neutralizes them though it may not be pleasant to be stung or antidoted or smell like vinegar!

Maybe you really meant acerolatous (healthfully full of Vitamin C like the acerola plant whose fruit are like cherries and mildly sour?)?

On the other hand, if you meant it (in the nicest possible sense, of course) as "doesn't suffer fools gladly," I must confess you are probably very accurate in your assessment! :eek: Though I do try to patient and kind in reproof and correction at least 7 times - the 7 x 70 is pretty tough, I admit! :eek:

At any rate, THANKS! (I think!)

edit: I disagree with GR22's alleged differences in magic between the HP and TCON and LOTR. I think you will too on review. It is a distinction without a difference cobbled together to exempt CSL and Tolkien from being in the same literary tradition as JKR (which also should exclude Shakespeare, Chaucer, and Spencer >The Faerie Queen<). Sorry, but it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, waddles like a duck, it's a duck (though we maybe could argue about which species of duck!)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Johan 72109

09-02-2005, 07:47 AM

Erm... While I still think that there's nothing wrong with the magic in HP, I would say that the magic in the Bible is different. First of all, some of the 'spells' come from God. Which is very different, obviously, as it's God, and it's miracles interpreted by other people as magic. The stuff that isn't from God, I get the impression God doesn't approve of. For example, Joseph's cup that he practiced divination with - I'm not entirely sure that God would have approved of it. Now, God isn't going to smite Joseph because of it, mainly because there is no specific Holy Book for Joseph to look at to see that it's wrong. In comparison to the people of Jesus' time, Joseph is ignorant of religious things, God doesn't seem to particularly care though (which I'd like to point out at this moment. It's got nothing to do with the debate, but it's incredibly encouraging that God doesn't care if we're ignorant, or get things wrong, he loves us despite our weaknesses :) ) We can see many examples in the Bible of where God's people do things wrong, and God ignores it and doesn't mention it - just look at Jacob, who was completely worldly and lied through his teeth all the time to avoid trouble, and yet God loves him. The greatest of the Kings of Israel did what everyone else did and went to war in the correct season, often against nations that weren't directly evil. And just like everyone else in their day, the winners weren't particularly nice to the losers. The tribe of Benjamin was replenished after civil war by going off and raiding other countries for women. While God never condones these activities, nor does he judge his people for them, because he knows he is working with a sinful nation.

*rereads what he's put* Okay, a lot of that had nothing to do with the debate. :o Sorry about that.
But my point was that the magic in the Bible isn't like the magic in HP. Either it's a miracle, or it's not condoned by God.
However, I still think that there's nothing wrong with the magic in HP.

Aslan the Wise one

09-02-2005, 08:46 AM

I well have to disagree with you Johan 72109 on this, The magic in HP is very deffet then then magic in Lotr and even in CON, The magic in all thee books are very deffet, I wish i had more time to say more but i need to go back to work...............

inkspot

09-02-2005, 09:31 AM

Johan 72109

09-02-2005, 10:05 AM

inkspot

09-02-2005, 10:17 AM

What is the meaning of Rowling's books ... to provide a rollicking good time. Lewis' books have a very different goal; the British scholar hopes that his readers come away with a good time, and much more as well.
Okay, remember that Tolkien disliked Narnia because the symbolism was too blatant. He would have preferred the readers have to work at it, as in LOTR. Perhaps with HP, you just have to work at it? I think Inked has made some interesting points about ways in which the HP books demonstrate Christian values and themes, if you take the time to really think about them and work them out. If indeed JKR is a believer who will ultimately illuminate the gospel story with this body of work, then I don't think we can fault her because we have to work to find it. People like Tolkien don't want to be preached to in their literature, and maybe JKR doesn't, either? I don't know, because I haven't seen the end of the series yet, but I think there is a very good chance Harry himself could end up laying down his life for his friends in order to rid the world of great evil -- which would be a very Christian ending to the books. So, I don't think it is fair to say: the point of the HP books is a rollicking good time, while the point of Narnia was religious instruction. There's no fault in a book being a rollicking good time, and I don't think you can fault it for using the things that interest kids today to get them involved in it.

I would say that these uses demonstrate a positive use of gifts given by God to recall people from erroneous ideas and statements which they perceive as acerbic. I trust I am never sour merely for the sake of being sour! or destructive as a strong acid such as hydrocloric or sulfuric. Remember vinegar poured over jellyfish stings neutralizes them though it may not be pleasant to be stung or antidoted or smell like vinegar!
This is what I meant, you know, caustic, sardonic, succinct. Just as a way of telling the two Inks apart ...

inkspot

09-02-2005, 10:19 AM

Sorry, what does deffet mean... :o
I think it's different, abbreviated.
Or else it's Jango Fett's cousin ... De Fett

inked

09-02-2005, 10:44 AM

Granted there are differences in the magic of HP and CON, as GR has pointed out. The point was, I think, that an author can write about magic and not be encouraging witchcraft. If the fact that Joseph used a cup for divination were to encourage witchcraft (as God did not smite him for it), then perhaps it should have been left out of the Bible. If that crazy story of Saul consulting a medium to speak with dead Samuel were to encourage witchcraft, perhaps it should have been left out of the Bible. If that business about getting with child a mandrake root were to encourage witchcraft, maybe it should have been left out of the Bible ... but God left them in the Bible, so can we infer that maybe just reading about magic doesn't encourage witchcraft?

This is what I am saying. There are instances of the bad magic that we as Christians today condemn in the Bible itself -- which we know is the true Word of God -- so surely in a fantasy story it can't be a sin to write about such things?

This I am not familiar with. Where is it in the Bible?

Inkspot, Numbers 5:11-31. Then check out the potion made for cleansing in Numbers 19 - the lustral washings for purification!

The point is well taken that one can read about these things (in fact God commanded that these things be read about when you get right down to it, since He commanded the reading of hte Law to the peoples!). I am trying to make the same point.

Am I astringent or acerbic enough to make the point, though? That is the question.
WRITING ABOUT MAGIC IS NOT A SIN, DOES NOT INDUCE ONE TO SIN, DOES NOT ENTICE ONE TO SIN! IT IS A LITERARY TECHNIQUE UTILIZED IN THE BIBLE, CS LEWIS, JRR TOLKIEN, CHARLES WILLIAMS, MADELEINE L'ENGLE, and JK ROWLING.
Artificial distinctions drawn to differentiate the literary technique are obviously that - artificial and distinctions without difference. Magic as a technology has good uses and evil uses in the literary world and in this non-fictional one. One's choices are what matters. Each of the authors mentioned has said that in various modes, including God. Why miss the message by focusing on the words that are included in all the literary genre?

Johan 72109

09-02-2005, 11:12 AM

Well, unless you're intent upon reading Satanic texts written by practicing Satanists and trying to use them... Sorry... just playing Devil's Advocate there... ;)

Johan 72109

09-02-2005, 11:25 AM

I still can't think that HP can be considered christian, because there's blasphemy in the books. If she truly is a christian, then I can't see her writing a book containing blasphemy. It just doesn't work for me.
But you're right, nowt wrong with a ripping good yarn - in fact, a good yarn is preferable to any amount of allegory or christian morals in my opinion. One case in my opinion is a book called Shadowmancer, written by a minister who dislikes HP to be a christian fantasy book. It's got some great christian morals, but as a piece of writing it sucks. You don't feel involved in the characters at all, the action feels fake, and he manages to make the idea of God, Angels and Demons actually cheesy... Which is what they are definately not. :mad:
Of course, I'd rather have a book of christian morals and allegory that is ALSO a ripping yarn than just a ripping yarn. but CoN is one of the few series i've read that delivers this.

Johan 72109

09-02-2005, 11:31 AM

What is the meaning of Rowling's books?

The grand purpose of the books, as journalist Alan Cochrum noted in his 'Forth-Worth Star Telegram' article:
to "provide a rollicking good time."
Consequently, her books are filled with crude jokes, crass remarks, gratuitous violence, gore, juvenile antics and just about every other ploy used in today's action-packed PG-13 films and video games.

Cochrum notes:
"Lewis' books have a very different goal; the British scholar hopes that his readers come away with a good time, and much more as well. His question is: 'What would the story of the Bible (Creation, Incarnation, Death-and-Resurrection, Redemption, Revelation) look like in another world?' The answer, in a word, is Aslan--the leonine Christ figure of Narnia."

Beautifully said. :)

Gratuitous violence and gore? Erm... I know I've said this before, but HP is very tame in comparison to other (actually very good) books. If you think the violence and gore in HP's gratuitous, I recomend you never touch a novel or movie on the horrible subject of war. Or indeed any of your average fantasy/sci-fi yarns. And i know this only shows how immature I am, but... juvenile antics ARE quite entertaining... :o

But what you said about Narnia is all too true. Amen to that. :)

inked

09-02-2005, 11:35 AM

#2
inked
Elf Lord

Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: sikeston, MO, usa, earth, sol
Posts: 1,351

I advise folks to read the Narnian Chronicles in the published order the first time. Then re-read them in the chronological order. Then as your fancy takes you. Since I have been doing this for >3 decades, I have lots of thoughts in regard to the works.

First, they are rollicking good stories.
Second, they are rollicking good stories!
Thirdly, they ARE rollicking GOOD stories!

There is of course a lot to mined from them in many areas of interest. Since I have read many other of CSL's works, including some scholarly ones, it is amazing to me the actual breadth and scope of the series.

The BBC produced adaptations that are available on DVD and video and which are quite good for those who like movie versions. And there was an animated version in the 70's which is still available for LWW.

I must confess, that though I enjoyed PJ's LOTR movie series immensely, I have reservations regarding the upcoming productions in process now. The potential for CGI and special FX is awesome these days and I wouldn't want it to overtake the fact that these ARE ROLLICKING GOOD STORIES!

How's that, N?
__________________
Inked
"Aslan is not a tame lion." CSL/LWW
"The new school [acts] as if it required...courage to say a blasphemy. There is only one thing that requires real courage to say, and that is a truism." GK Chesterton
"And there is always the danger of allowing people to suppose that our modern times are so wholly unlike any other times that the fundamental facts about man's nature have wholly changed with changing circumstances." Dorothy L. Sayers, 1 Sept. 1941
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++

See http://entmoot.com/showthread.php?t=11514 for more! :)

Inkspot,
What do you know, GR22 and I agree for once! I may be a minor agreement! No, wait! It is a DISagreemen! I think Narnia a rollicking good tale without the Christian symbolism which, by the way, even Pauline Baynes, the illustrator of the original editions MISSED by her own statement on her first reading!

Of course, it's better with the symbolism and MAGIC that pervades Narnia from entrance to exit. LIKE the Harry Potterverse! :D

inkspot

09-02-2005, 12:14 PM

#2
inked
Elf Lord
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: sikeston, MO, usa, earth, sol
Posts: 1,351

Why is all this in the text of your post, and why does it differ slightly from what your profile says? I'm freaking out ...

Johan, what blasphemy? I am re-reading the books, and I haven't noticed any blasphemy. And I usually would be sensitive to that I think.

I read ShadowMancer and tried to read the sequel, but like you, I found the writing and maybe the plot boring and maybe atrocious. I felt bad because I wanted to like them! I didn't know the author was an opponent of HP. He certainly didn't come out with a very good alternative.

inkspot

09-02-2005, 12:22 PM

Well, unless you're intent upon reading Satanic texts written by practicing Satanists and trying to use them... Sorry... just playing Devil's Advocate there... ;)
LOL! All right then, we'll make the first exception to Inked' Rule:
Writing about magic is a sin if you are intent on trying to use Satan's power and/or induce others to use Satan's power. Other wise,
WRITING ABOUT MAGIC IS NOT A SIN, DOES NOT INDUCE ONE TO SIN, DOES NOT ENTICE ONE TO SIN! IT IS A LITERARY TECHNIQUE UTILIZED IN THE BIBLE, CS LEWIS, JRR TOLKIEN, CHARLES WILLIAMS, MADELEINE L'ENGLE, and JK ROWLING.
And Johan, you had better be careful with the "devil's advocate" business, I think you might be encouraging witch craft. :p

Johan 72109

09-02-2005, 01:36 PM

Johan 72109

09-02-2005, 01:39 PM

Argh... you're right!!!! PURGE THE WITCH!!!!!!!! :mad: *waves pitchfork and flaming brand*

Where's Matthew Hopkins when you need him... :p

inkspot

09-02-2005, 04:30 PM

Nah, there's just one or two times in the most recent book where Ron and harry use God out of context... which annoyed me a bit, because it hadn't occured in any of the others :( (if memory serves, which it doesn't always).
I will watch for it -- I am in the middle of Book 4 now (in preparation for the movie, can't wait!) but haven't noticed that ...

inked

09-04-2005, 12:03 AM

unleavened

09-04-2005, 12:29 AM

I've only seen the HP movies *ducks bricks*. What annoyed me about them was that the kids are really disobedient and mean to eachother and the adults are portrayed as (it seemed to me, but I could be alone on this one) incapable of protecting and controling kids - or maybe just all around incapable. I'm picky about these kinds of things though. I don't think I'd want to have my kids read/watch and admire books/movies where these themes persist. What you read/watch greatly affects your world view and therefore your actions. I wouldn't want a kid to think their behaviour is ok, or that adults really are stupid and incapable (though they wouldn't say it that way).

DISCLAIMER! Like I said I didn't read the books, and I don't mean to offend anyone who does like HP. That was just my take on the movies. The books may be completely different. Plus, I did think that many of the basic plot elements were very good and that testifies for the author's abilities despite any disagreements I may have with her portrayal of life.

Johan 72109

09-04-2005, 11:15 AM

J,

You need to be specific. I have read HBP twice and I do not recall to what you refer. Of course, we may have different concepts of proper usage of the words designating God. Taking His name in vain is not the same as using the word God in a declarative or imperative or questioning sense. God....
God! God? Oh my God! etc. are not taking the Lord's name in vain. Though one can weary of the repetition when it is overused by people who really ought to have a larger repertoire of vocabulary words. :rolleyes:

You don't think 'oh my God' is offensive? I personally find it incredibly offensive. I'm sorry I can't be more specific however... I myself read my brother's copy of the book, which is at his house... :o Which means I can't offer quotes I'm afraid, but me and my family all noticed the characters taking God's name in vain once or twice in the book. Personally, I think that using God's name as an alternative for a swearword ('God!' instead of whatever swearword you want) is vastly worse than using the swearword in and of itself. I'd be interested in hearing why you would disagree however... I may very well be wrong. :)

inkspot

09-04-2005, 03:46 PM

I agree with Johan on swearing. Or taking the Lord's name in vain. And I am watching for that now in the HP books, I don't remember it from my first reading of them. But I will say, I don't make a practice of swearing, but I have done in moments of weakness, and I would still hope a "Christian" book could be made of the story of my life, despite my weakness.

Now, as for the kids being disobedient and the adults being incapable in the movies ... a lot of kids' stories feature bungling adults, it's sort of part of the kid-movie deal: I'm surrounded by bunglers and will have to save myself! Handsel and Gretel maybe started it all, or Snow White ... I don't think it teaches kids that they can't trust you as a parent, but it's part of the fun of the stories. If books and movies were all about upstanding parents and guardians and teachers, and good children who always obeyed them, they would be ... boring. It's the Huck Finns of the literary world who make it interesting.

I think maybe Christians are too hard on HP because they think he is evil, so they say, "Set aside the magic, there's all that disobedience!" But even Jacob in the Bible was a trickster. If there weren't these elements of conflict, the literature would be dull.

holyboy

09-04-2005, 04:35 PM

Now, as for the kids being disobedient and the adults being incapable in the movies ... a lot of kids' stories feature bungling adults, it's sort of part of the kid-movie deal: I'm surrounded by bunglers and will have to save myself! Handsel and Gretel maybe started it all, or Snow White ... I don't think it teaches kids that they can't trust you as a parent, but it's part of the fun of the stories. If books and movies were all about upstanding parents and guardians and teachers, and good children who always obeyed them, they would be ... boring. It's the Huck Finns of the literary world who make it interesting.

Another reason kids like children books is what I call the "freedom factor" Often, a child's opinion is discarded as nothing. The kids feel inferior to their parents (which they should, because if they felt equal, there would be no dicipline) and they feel like they want something more. they want more freedom to go where they want to, to speak what they want to, and to be in charge.

Children read books like Harry Potter and CoN because it is the children that are the heros, not the adults, and the children are the ones in charge of the plot and the events. Look at the Chronicles of Narnia. The heros of the story are always children. In Harry Potter, the children (Harry & friends) are the saviors of Hogwarts and the world. Children like reading about it because they secretly want it to have the power to save the world, to solve the crime, and unfortunatly, they are kids, and we can't let them have this power because they do not understand it. But that doesn't stop them for wanting it.

unleavened

09-04-2005, 05:00 PM

True, but the chidren in CoN only succeed in submission to and with guidence from Aslan. For me, that makes all the difference. And perhaps I'm a bit radical on this, but Huck Finn drove me crazy for the same reason, and in the Bible we are not supposed to admire Jacob's trickery. God spent a very long time in conditioning Jacob until he was no longer a deciever and renamed him Israel.

HP is not the only book that does this. I think atleast some upstanding adult or athority figure should be present, as an example for kids in the books. I know, I'm picky, but it's not just about HP. I'm like that with all books I read.

Johan 72109

09-05-2005, 04:24 AM

I agree with Johan on swearing. Or taking the Lord's name in vain. And I am watching for that now in the HP books, I don't remember it from my first reading of them. But I will say, I don't make a practice of swearing, but I have done in moments of weakness, and I would still hope a "Christian" book could be made of the story of my life, despite my weakness.

Actually... I don't in fact disagree with swearing, just blasphemy... I think that's partly what British schooling does for you though :o
I would agree with you, a few swearwords does not make a book non-christian by any means.
On the other hand, if you're writing a work of complete fiction, there's no need to insert blasphemy, there's plenty of alternatives. Swearing in books is fine... While this may be rather immature of me :o , it CAN actually be humerous, if used well. It can convey dramatic emotion, or the mindset and attitudes of a certain character. It's also, to be frank, more realistic than euphemisms. But blasphemy doesn't add anything. It can be easily replaced by a euphemism, or if that would not create the right feel, a swearword.

Just in case anyone's thinking I'm now on the 'burn HP' end of the reading spectrum, I'm really not, I'm still in the middle. I just disagree that HP is what you should recomend to your friends as christian literature... It's darn GOOD literature, but not christian.

unleavened

09-05-2005, 02:59 PM

I just realized I should put in another disclaimer. I'm not against reading HP or books with similar themes, I was just saying what annoyed me about some books/movies. Please don't think that I don't want you to read anything like it, b/c that's not true. There are many good things to extract from books besides things that I've mentioned above. Just be on your gaurd so you aren't taken in by the author's subtle, often deceptive references to their word view. This is true of all literature and all of life however, and that doesn't mean we should live in steel boxes and shut life out.

inkspot

09-05-2005, 04:55 PM

God spent a very long time in conditioning Jacob until he was no longer a deciever and renamed him Israel. HP is not the only book that does this. I think atleast some upstanding adult or athority figure should be present, as an example for kids in the books.
In HP, Dumbledore is consistently right and good, and an authority figure. I can only think of once that Harry didn't do what Dumbledore told him to, and the result was disastrous. So, in that way you could say HP is analagous to Jacob in the Bible, because he is learning to obey the one true authority figure in his life.

unleavened

09-05-2005, 05:17 PM

Good point I hadn't thought of Dumbledore. This eases my thoughts, though it doesn't make the rest of the disobeience acceptible to me. Again, do remember, this is b/c I'm picky, and it doesn't mean I condemn the books or movies. Opinons are like belly buttons...

inked

09-05-2005, 10:58 PM

Actually... I don't in fact disagree with swearing, just blasphemy... I think that's partly what British schooling does for you though :o
I would agree with you, a few swearwords does not make a book non-christian by any means.
On the other hand, if you're writing a work of complete fiction, there's no need to insert blasphemy, there's plenty of alternatives. Swearing in books is fine... While this may be rather immature of me :o , it CAN actually be humerous, if used well. It can convey dramatic emotion, or the mindset and attitudes of a certain character. It's also, to be frank, more realistic than euphemisms. But blasphemy doesn't add anything. It can be easily replaced by a euphemism, or if that would not create the right feel, a swearword.

Just in case anyone's thinking I'm now on the 'burn HP' end of the reading spectrum, I'm really not, I'm still in the middle. I just disagree that HP is what you should recomend to your friends as christian literature... It's darn GOOD literature, but not christian.

Au contraire, Monsieur!

see www.hogwartsprofessor.com and read all my comments on why HP is Christian literature.

By the by, OMG is not blasphemy. If you check out the Decalogue in Exodus or Dueteronomy, especially in a good translation with footnotes, you will find that what is involved in taking the Lord's name in vain is falsely making an oath in the name of YHWH. Jewish piety took the view that the power associated with Name (also known as the Tetragrammaton or four letters, since Hebrew is written without vowels) was so awesome that to avoid offending in any fashion, it was not pronounced! In fact, the actual pronunciation of YHWH is uncertain!!! It is most probably YaH-WaY (written as Yahweh in THE JERUSALEM BIBLE and others). The Yah component is incorporated into names (eg, Hilkiah, where the Yah is the three letter ending) or praise shouts (eg, Hallelu - Yah, our hallelujah). The Jews piously substituted Adonai (Lord) and still do when reading in synagogue. The KJV word Jehovah is a combination of the Hebrew consonantal letters with the vowels of Adonai in a German script that used J/Y and V/W, thus JHWH + Adonai = JeHoVaH.

Therefore to take the name of the Lord in vain was to falsely swear an oath as to the truth or falsity of something, to say an oath without intent of fulfillment or to deceive, or, conversely, to intend to do something that was proscribed bythe ritual law (such as some guy's completion of child sacrifice in a literal obedience to a vow that should have been changed when his daughter met him after a battle). People who run around saying " Oh my YHWH!" would be guilty of impiety since that is God's personal revealed name, but impiety is not blasphemy.

Distinguish between impiety and blasphemy. (No, not me, you.) OMG is certainly overused and tiresome and trite. But that does not make God any of those things. And, for all we know, the person using the phrase may be refering to some tribal or household god. So I guess that would be OMg! :rolleyes:

And, for some folks, those words ("O my God!" or "My Lord!" or "Lord, have mercy!" et cetera) may actually be arrow prayers and not at all impious and certainly not blasphemous.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++

If you get a chance, the study of the names of God as used in the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Bible, the Jewish Torah) is a real education in the underlying polytheism of the Patriarchs out of which YHWH revealed Himself in varying modes as He drew unto Himself His chosen persons and made Promises to them. I highly recommend this way of getting to know Him as He has made Himself known. One of His best Names, the one Jesus used, is Abba (Father)!

I recommend a good reference Bible to address those issues. I personally favor the JERUSALEM BIBLE for reading and concise footnotes to aid understanding. The HARPER COLLINS STUDY BIBLE is another. One I have had from parents since 1972 is the SCHOFIELD REFERENCE BIBLE which is excellent in this area of names and their meanings in relation to God. And there are individual books galore.

I personally recommend Mr. Lewis' wife's SMOKE ON THE MOUNTAIN (Joy Davidman <Gresham> Lewis). She was a convert from Judaism to atheism to communism to Christianity. The middle two sort of went together in the 1930's. It was through Mr. Lewis' writings that she came to Christian faith. (They began a correspondence and one thing led to another so that they eventually married. Really a rather amazing and unlikely story - not at all the conventional love story. He was a life long bachelor and she an American divorcee with two sons. Doug Gresham of producing fame in the LWW is one of the sons.)

Another source for your consideration of "blasphemy" should be the discussion of the nature of sacred/profane and blasphemy/sacrilege to be found in HELL, the first section of Dante's DIVINE COMEDY as translated and footnoted by Dorothy L. Sayers. She has a very interesting discussion in the notes and/or introduction to the Canto dealing with some denizen of hell "giving the fig" to God. A very rude gesture in Italy as I am given to understand!

Hey this is rambling about, so I'll quit!

Hallelujah! ;)

Johan 72109

09-06-2005, 07:24 AM

Wow, that's really interesting... :) Okay, point taken there Inked. I still ain't going to use the phrase, mainly because nowadays it's BECOME offensive in christian circles... And I don't fancy a religious debate every time I use three words! :D I can't exactly see it as prayer arrows though. When people say 'oh my God', most of them even believe in God, and the remainder aren't not thinking about God at all at the time, they're thinking about something dramatically different, (at least in Britain). I dunno... here people just use God's name as a substitute for swearing, which I really don't approve of at all, and I'm sure you'd agree with me there... However, I see your point... It's ain't blasphemy. :p Thanks very much for the enlightenment!

Hehe... you're seeing a unique thing here... Me admitting I'm wrong. :D

But I still don't think I agree with the idea of HP being christian literature... I just can't see it myself.

inkspot

09-06-2005, 03:09 PM

I still think it's not nice to use God's name in vain. (OMG, etc.) I hate hearing youngsters (or anyone really) say that as an exclamation of surprise or disgust. How rude, especially when people say, "Jesus Christ!" when they're made or revolted by something. I think that's awful. But I haven't noticed HP and friends doing it.

Inked, you ought to go over the Introduction Thread for these days starting around page 117 http://www.narniafans.com/forum/showthread.php?t=134&page=117&pp=10 for an interesting discussion of whether you could be a Duffer ...

I apparently have a chance, but you, no. :p

Goldenrod22

09-09-2005, 04:08 PM

Hi everybody! :)
Know why I like to start each post off with a 'hi' and a smiley? To make everything seem not so gloom-and-doom, when I start talking of HP.
Anyway, I just thought I'd point out that I wholeheartedly disagree with any form of taking God's name in vain.
I was always taught that any curseword, whether it is just calling out a 'mild' expletive when you stub your toe, or saying a full blown curse when you're an adult, is not right.
Why?
1. It diminishes your example of Christianity to others. When you use the same 'Oh my --d's' over and over, you are doing exactly what every other non-Christian (or, sadly, Christian) will do. Many times I have heard the above exclamation at anger, surprise, happiness, or pain.
It is acceptable now, because the God to whom you refer is made into nothing more than a passing swear.
I don't care if there are those who want to say that the reason for saying what they do is popular, because as Christians, we are not to strive for what is popular.
It disgusts me how quickly we have gone from a nation that would, on bended knees, seek the unimaginable face of the Lord (and never see it in its full glory, just as Moses could not as God shielded him as he passed) to a nation that throws around His most Holy name as if it were nothing more than a cheap, disposable paper napkin.
(teenage girl passes by with a casual 'Oh my --d! You would not believe what I just saw!')
2. I take the Bible literally. If it says 'Do not take the name of the Lord in vain', I listen.
3. Why is there a need for ANY cursing? As ol' Goldenrod always says, "If you want to express yourself, go take up painting."

Goldenrod22

09-09-2005, 04:17 PM

Goldenrod22

09-09-2005, 04:41 PM

Hi! :)
Disagree. Here's why.
1. Hey there, Inked! About the point you made...'It does not entice one to evil by reading about magic'. Pwa haa haaaaaa! Sorry. That makes about as much sense as saying that God is a woman.
Ha ha ha. Sniff.
That would explain the ENTIRE cult of witchcraft, that of Wiccanism, and even that of real sorcery. Every one of these people participating in what they do has a book of MAGIC, written by people who believe magic is a way to empower oneself.
That would explain the delightful little websites devoted towards real kids practicing (from homemade spells and real magick books) magic.
I have to say, of all the points you have yet made, that one struck me as the most ludicrous.

Forgive me for saying this (oh,wait. Don't! :) ), but LOL! ROTFLWTIME! (rolling on the floor laughing with tears in my eyes)

Sorry. I am being immature.
Oh well.
2. The magick in HP is not the magic in Narnia or LOTR. Maybe if I keep repeating myself...
3. (sigh calmingly). I believe that 'magic' in the Bible is either from God (don't see any God or 'Force' similiar to God in HP), from Satan (and is punishable, like the advice Saul chose to get from the Witch of Endor), or a miracle of God that is not what you would call magic (the healing of the blind man, for instance)
4. Right out in the open, for all the world to see, are the verses in Deut. which I highlighted previously. Ignore those, and you are ignoring one of the easist to comprehend verses about what we are supposed to do about witchcraft.

Johan 72109

09-09-2005, 05:06 PM

holyboy

09-09-2005, 05:12 PM

Pwa haa haaaaaa! Sorry. That makes about as much sense as saying that God is a woman.
Ha ha ha. Sniff.
That would explain the ENTIRE cult of witchcraft, that of Wiccanism, and even that of real sorcery. Every one of these people participating in what they do has a book of MAGIC, written by people who believe magic is a way to empower oneself.
That would explain the delightful little websites devoted towards real kids practicing (from homemade spells and real magick books) magic.
I have to say, of all the points you have yet made, that one struck me as the most ludicrous.

Forgive me for saying this (oh,wait. Don't! :) ), but LOL! ROTFLWTIME! (rolling on the floor laughing with tears in my eyes)

Please do not insult someone's opinion. It diminishes your argument when you say another person's idea is dumb. If you truly want to debate on the forums, then debate. Don't insult another member.

This is the kind of thing that got the Christian threads locked.

2. The magick in HP is not the magic in Narnia or LOTR. Maybe if I keep repeating myself...

Would you consider someone looking for a magic wardrobe a bad thing? He is hoping that through magic he can enter another world. Many members of the forum did that as children, wishing to go to Narnia. Is that a bad thing?

Its just like children doing magic in HP. They may "think" its true, but after a while, they realize they won't go to Hogwarts. Children grow up, and they will look back and say "Wow, I dumb to think that!" They will grow out of it. I say let kids be kids. Don't try to shield them. By shielding them, they will wonder about it even more. Let them read the books. Let them go through a "I hope I get a letter from Hogwarts" faze, and then they will grow out of it.

Johan 72109

09-09-2005, 05:30 PM

Other stuff:
1. I'm so sorry, Inkspot! I thought you were a man all along. I think this is because I thought you mentioned a post (when you were talking to Inked) about being fathers, and how you let your kids read certain parts of the books. Or something like that. Sorry!
2. Johan, what gods in LOTR did you mean? Any examples, 'cuz I can't remember.
3. Inked, I think by 'acerbic' Inkspot was trying to gently explain how you can (sometimes, not always) be really acidic, snippy, and kind of cruel when you write replies to people about beliefs, HP, etc. It could just be beacuse you are trying to debate, though.
4. Also, when I quoted the statement of 'rollicking good time' in HP, I did not pose this all-encompassing question: If you would like to compare HP to Narnia, does Narnia have any of the aforementioned PG-13 type humor, gore, and generally disgusting elements (bubotubers, screaming mandrake babies, blood-flavored lollipops)? Does it include the elements of animal torture (Weasley brothers put a firecracker in the mouth of a salamander)? How about explicit references to drunkeness, murder, torture, inappropriate hand gestures, four-letter words, lying, stealing, and don't even start with all of the magick references (I could practically read them off in my sleep by now)?

Hey Goldenrod :) Yes, i notice the smileys... glad you're being as relaxed as everyone else :)

Well, the Gods aren't particularly mentioned in LOTR itself, but in the Silmarillion, complied from the dead Tolkein's notes on his world, it mentions the Valar, the Gods who created elves, dwarves, and men... And, I'll add, acted just like the Gods of mythology... i.e, all too human.

Erm... what's wrong with generally disgusting elements... they're humerous, as simple as that. Do you think that mud is a PG-13? because that's all they're like... just a bit of (humerous) mud. And I believe the 'animal torture' isn't really that... bear in mind that salamanders, mythologically, live in the hearts of volcanoes, a firecracker won't hurt them.

Narnia has references to drunkeness, murder, lying, stealing... sure it doesn't have ALL the ones you mentioned, but they're there.

Basically, I think that some of your points are valid, but others aren't based on the views of people who have read the books, just on hearsay I'm afraid...

Is your point on the PG-13 thing, as an aside, saying that we shouldn't read or watch anything not 'PG-13'? Because if it is, I'd have to disagree I'm afraid, for reasons I've already said...

I look forward to hearing your replies! :)

inkspot

09-09-2005, 06:26 PM

Yeah, I like the screaming mandrake babies, they're funny -- and the potato garden gnomes, too. They're ... magical. Tee-hee.

The salamander in question was already a creature of fire, so it's implied the firecracker didn't hurt it, and the other animals in HP are pretty lovingly treated, some of them are people.

The other stuff -- bubotubers, for example -- are just thematic elements that happen to be bad, the buboes give you boils and whatnot, but not everything in a story can be sweet or else there's no conflict.

And like Johan said, drunkenness, murder and torture are all mentioned in CON, just the mention of them doesn't make a book sinful. (It's funny that Hagrid and Puddleglum are the ones who come to mind in the case of drinking, and they are both sort of in a supportive role, kind of looking after the kids but needing looking after, too, and both such well defined and likeable characters.)

On that stuff alone, I can't say HP is more sinful that CON or LOTR.

I just finished re-reading #4, and I still think it's possible Inked could be right, and the books could wind up with a symbolically Christian theme. Wouldn't that be something?

inkspot

09-09-2005, 06:43 PM

'It does not entice one to evil by reading about magic'. Pwa haa haaaaaa! Sorry. That makes about as much sense as saying that God is a woman.
Ha ha ha. Sniff.
That would explain the ENTIRE cult of witchcraft, that of Wiccanism, and even that of real sorcery. Every one of these people participating in what they do has a book of MAGIC, written by people who believe magic is a way to empower oneself.
You are ignoring the exception to the rule, which is that "Writing about magic is a sin if you are intent on trying to use Satan's power and/or induce others to use Satan's power" which I think could be modified, "if you believe in magic and are using a spellbook to do magic yourself, then that would be a sin ..."

But HP isn't a spell book and doesn't steer anyone toward Wicca, it's a fantasy story with magic. See, so your little bout of the giggles above was unwarranted: the people you mention are trying themselves to do magic, and their spell book is giving them instructions, but kids just read HP and CON for fun, not as instructions for doing magic. You certainly will allow that HP and CON are not instructional books in witchcraft or magic, won't you? I mean, Queen Lucy does spells -- from a book -- but that doesn't make Voyage of the Dawn Treader an instructional book in magic or witchcraft.

You can say, "Yes, but Lucy's book was from God," but that doesn't work because there is no "God," clearly spelled out in Narnia, although one is alluded to in Aslan, so can you demand that HP clearly spell out a God and devil in the Potterverse?

It seems to me we are saying because we know JRRT and CSL were Christians, then we can know their magic was good, but because JKR has chosen to use medieval imagery that involves witchcraft (which can be found in classic literature, ie Shakespeare), then her magic is bad. But I don't think that's fair to her.

That makes about as much sense as saying that God is a woman.
Why do you find this so funny? God is the whole -- man, woman, both, neither, and much, much more, right?

waterhogboy

09-10-2005, 06:55 AM

Erm... Wicca isn't Satanic... Yes, they believe in magic... but this is more the kind of magic druids used 3000 years ago, mixed in with new-age beliefs. Sure, you may not believe that Wicca is the right religion... at all. But it's no more Satanic than Islam, or Sikhism, or any other religion, in my opinion.

Thought I'd pop my head back into the warzone for a minute to just disagree wholeheartedly with Johan's comment. Wicca IS satanic - just as the druids religion was back then. Its completely different to Islam Sikhism and other religions because they dont have magic in their religion. Magic comes from the devil and any religion, whether they mean to be or not, are devil worshipping if they harness his power.....

Johan 72109

09-10-2005, 07:36 AM

I'm forced to concede to the point there WHB, you're right :o ... I'll rephrase my earlier statement. I don't think they're conciously looking for Satan's power when they do magic, but they find it. I don't think we're going to find Wiccans forming suicide cults and going around trying to destroy systems of government, like some groups of direct satanists might do, but you're right. Actually practicing magic is ALWAYS satanic. My bad there... :o

inked

09-10-2005, 11:29 PM

Oh, now, WHB,
What do you mean by "harness the devil's power"? I'll wager you that many persons in religion, even Christians, or especially Christians who blame him for everything they don't like, harness his power. But I rather doubt that's what you had in mind. How about all the politico's who say he inhabits the other party (-ies)? Aren't they harnessing his power, too? And we won't have to go far to speak of Islamic terrorists who harness his power to recruit and send suicide missions to various countries!

So, it's not really so simple to avoid being the devil's thrall. If someone happens to be using outward signs that one likes to think always mean the devil's at work, what would those signs be? (Maybe we should ask holyboy666 since he seems to have borrowed one of them and nobody's on his case! :p )

On the other hand, if someone says he's all religious and right and perfect in every way (sort of like Mary Poppins), and wears a pectoral cross, and then doesn't do as Jesus said, is he the devil's thrall or not?

And then there's the really difficult bit about the devil quoting scripture. Are all scripture quoters thereby relieved of any cohabitation with the devil?

My point is, as I am sure you grasped, that the devil - to give him his due - has managed pretty well to infiltrate every nook and cranny of life and thought. It'd be great if we could say there were absolutely definitive signs that we could never miss that always meant that. But even people engaged in Wicca et alia who are searching for truth may come to see the light, mayn't they? And people who are self-righteous can be whited-sepulchres, beautiful on the outside and full inside of dead men's bones!

The only ones I know to be in the devil's power are those who deny Jesus is the Christ. That one's pretty clear! (Have you read THAT HIDEOUS STRENGTH?)

inked

09-10-2005, 11:36 PM

Yeah, Dudette!!!!! :D

Sam

09-11-2005, 05:01 PM

I was thinking about the HP good or bad debate (and I have to confess here and now that I am a great big nerdy Harry Potter fan- sorry Goldenrod) and it seems to me that although there may be aspects/episodes of the books that you may find objectionable are still a lot less worrying than a million other things that kids are exposed to- mainly on television.
Anyway, I know I'm waffling, and I don't want to preach because I am complete rubbish most of the time, but I saw a film the other day that really disturbed me, and afterwards I really regretted going to see it. Then, I thought of Phillipians 4;8

"whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is gracious, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things."

The verse is immensely practical- we should put into our minds, the things we want to come out of them. So I applied this thought to Harry Potter, and here're my conclusions:

I would say that Harry Potter is a much better thing to be putting into children's minds than the majority of cinema/magazines etc. Even if you object to the magic, or some of the language, or the romantic entanglements of the protagonists- it seems to me they are far milder than most popular culture. Plus, I think the overall message of the series is really about loving sacrifice and making good choices and refusing to abuse your own gifts. Reading itself (by its nature of being a rather time-consuming, concentrated activity) encourages the reader to judge and question what they are reading, so it is possible to reject or accept what you read in a more informed way than what you watch, or even hear. And finally, I think it likely that children who have become readers through Harry Potter will then look for other things to read, including The Chronicles of Narnia, and it may lead them in all kinds of beneficial directions.

By the way, I don't mean to imply that people who don't read Harry Potter for moral reasons will be watching or reading all these other terrible things (on the contrary, I'm sure they are not.) I'm just trying to point out a positive side to the world-wide success of the books.

Sorry for rambling on at you all. :)

Johan 72109

09-12-2005, 10:50 AM

I'd agree there... I'd be inclined to think that almost ANYTHING that gets kids reading (and an interesting, easy-to-read series like HP is perfect for this) is fantastic. Reading has to be one of the best gifts God has given us... People who say books do nothing that TV doesn't do better are talking rubbish. The most intelligent and interesting people I know read books.
So, surely something that induces people to read (and not the dark and nasty either, though I would say dark and nasty is fine as long as you're careful who reads 'em) has to be helpful. :)

Gibby

09-12-2005, 11:17 AM

...The most intelligent and interesting people I know read books...
:)

I read books. What happened to me then?

inkspot

09-12-2005, 11:18 AM

I am tending to agree with Sam and Johan.

I don't of course think anything that gets kids reading is good for them, certainly there's plenty of rubbish that might be interesting and yet not good for a child (or an adult) but reading is so much, much better than watching TV or playing video games, and I don't think HP is bad to read. As Sam mentioned, the themes so far have been good ones: loyalty, friendship, self-control and learning to take responsibility ... and to my mind, the magic is just fantasy, an avenue for presenting the themes in an entertaining, novel way.

Re-reading Order of the Phoenix now, and I will say that I don't think books 4-6 are good for young kids. Goblet of Fire is very scary and dark at the end, of Order of the Phoenix is very oppressive with the hideous unjustice under which Harry labors. I would not recommend them for young children or any teenager who tends to depression ... They are more for people like Johan who want to see the heroes ground into the dust and eventually defeated.

Sam

09-12-2005, 04:41 PM

Thanks Inkspot, I think you're probably right. and Gibby- great picture!

Goldenrod22

09-16-2005, 03:48 PM

Johan 72109

09-16-2005, 04:10 PM

Where did I say that i believed in moral relativism, indeed, where did anyone say that? I'm confused here... :confused: Just because I say that the ancient druidic religions and Wicca aren't necassarily the sort of groups that promote suicide cults and self-annihilation does not, repeat NOT, mean I am saying they were good - they weren't about worshipping God, and directed people away from him. I just don't think that we should react to wiccans in the same way we would a satanist. I do not, repeat NOT, advocate saying 'all religions are equal, none are better than each other'... The only way to heaven is through Christ.
What I DO advocate is still respecting other beliefs, if they're not going to result in immediate hurt and suffering that is. If I meet someone who's a muslim, or a buddhist, or even, yes, a wiccan, I'm not going to scream in their face how they're wrong, however much I think they are. How much of a witness do you think that is going to be, especially in the environment that exists today (at least in Europe)? I'll explain my beliefs... I'll tell them that God loves them. If they're feeling lousy, I'll make sure I'm there. I'll tell them about God's ultimate sacrifice. But I won't sit and say 'huh, well, I guess all religions can be right... It doesn't really matter what you believe.' Nor will I try and tell them that their religion is evil as sin. They've been decieved, and decieved well. How will insulting everything they've built their lives upon help change them, unless you have the advantage of knowing and loving them well enough to be able to judge them in love and get away with it?
The same goes for other ancient beliefs and traditions... The Chinese WERE philosophical. The Greeks WERE great thinkers. The Romans, yes, the Romans, were a model civilisation for their time... any civilisation that is less barbaric than CHRISTIAN civilisations well over a thousand, yes, a thousand years later, is really quite civilised. If you don't believe me there and think I'm wrong, then I can account more examples of blood sports, acts of genocide, gross negligence, and barbaric treatment of people in medieval or even seventeenth century christendom than ever occurred in the pagan Roman Empire.
None of this means that I think those old religions and beliefs were equally as valid as christianity, by any means. But I refuse to simply think that anything that isn't christian is despicable and morally abhorrent. Yes, it's wrong. It guides people away from the truth. A true christian could have more virtue than it anyday. But it doesn't make people into monsters.
I probably haven't phrased this very well... Basically, I don't think we should be worried about wiccans or ancient religions anymore than we'd be worried about 'normal' religions. This doesn't mean I agree with them however, or even think that people can believe what they believe, fine, or even that there are many ways to heaven. There's just the one. Never, ever, have I even insinuated any differently. Please don't suggest that I, or anyone else here, has had the wool pulled over their eyes by modern political correctness. I know for myself that I'm just not that kind of person... I'm about as cynical to media and politics as you can get. I'm sure everyone else in here is discerning enough not to believe all the propoganda that's pumped into them. When some 'christian' spouts rubbish on TV, I'm sure we're all grieving as much as you.

Sorry about that rant... That was me being not very nice, I know... :o Sorry about that.

Anyway, back to ordinary debating. :)

On the subject of the ancient religions being into human sacrifice and worshipping runes etc... Well, first of all... They didn't worship runes, they wrote them. That was the only way to write. There's nothing mystical about runes, it's just letters. And worshipping nature and the phases of the moon... What's the difference between that and worshipping any other idol? It's wrong, yes. But it isn't going to spread nihilism and despair whatever it touches.
Human sacrifice, yes, some of the cults will have probably practiced this, some, but not all of them by any means. Most of the sacrifices that were made were of fruit and gold and meat. The other thing to bear in mind that the 'magick' practiced by the druidic cults probably didn't work, making corruption unlikely... Just because one part of a group practices bad things, doesn't mean that all the group is pure sin and should be ostracised like a leper.

Anyway, apologies again for the rant, just wanted to make things clear in case I'd been misrepresented, (probably me not being clear enough in earlier posts there... my bad... :o )
Hehe, I guess you've caught me at a bad time as well really, i'm a bit tired an' all... I hope I haven't upset anyone by my comments.

Goldenrod22

09-16-2005, 04:13 PM

Hi! :)
This is pretty neat! The exact points, almost to the very words you use, are mentioned in 'Harry Potter and the Bible' by Richard Abanes.
1. "Kids should be allowed to read anything, as long as they are reading."
Reply: Oh no, they should'nt! Would you follow this same principle for a different example, such as: "Little babies should be allowed to play with anything, as long as they are learning to play."
Does this mean you give the baby tacks to play with? Tiny Barbie doll shoes? Small, round rubber balls? Popped balloon pieces?
No! They will probably put them in their mouth (as babies do) and choke on them. You could fudge on this and say how they might be able (if they put it in their mouth) to swallow it harmlessly. It could make it down their little throats without harm. Is this not crazy? You don't even fool around with an idea like this!
2. "As long as kids are reading 'good' stuff in a book, they'll ignore the 'bad' stuff."
Reply: Can you be so sure of that? If HP really teaches 'good' things like self-sacrifice, etc. does that mean you should ignore all of the 'bad' things it promotes? By example, kids will learn not only (by your definition) how to sacrifice themselves for others, but also how to lie and get away with it. And how fun it is to do magic, growing in this 'art' with friends. And how to treat those baddies that spoil your fun (don't you think Harry and Ron are SO sweet to Hermione when she threatens to tell the teachers of their plans to break the rules?)
3. Here's a fun one: "The salamander was a volcanic beast, so it didnt hurt it when they put a firecracker inside him."
What was the intention of the Weasleys? Was it to torture the animal, or treat it with kindness?
What example do they give to other kids who want to 'pull the legs off a daddy-long-legs'?
Just that it is a fun thing to try and bully something smaller and weaker then you.
And why not? Where does the moral standard begin in any of the books?

P.S. Read any of R.L Stines' novels for children, starting with the 'Fear Street' series. Then you will begin to understand the mindless brutality that is so apparent in today's novels that 'get kids to read'.
PG-13? Naw, let's have the next generation read some R-rated stuff in the cradle.

inkspot

09-16-2005, 04:15 PM

I don't even know what we're talking about anymore.

I'll go along to the next HP thread and see if it's any clearer in there.

What I am wondering, GR, is whether the centaurs practicing astrology in CON is evil? Cuz the centaurs in HP do the same thing ... but maybe that question was in the other thread.

So if anybody reading signs in the stars is evil, and if reading about it tempts us to sin, then you would have to say reading CON would tempt you to sin just as HP does. Wouldn't you? With Roonwit and all ...

Johan 72109

09-16-2005, 04:29 PM

Sorry about that Inkspot, that was my fault... :o

Johan 72109

09-16-2005, 04:40 PM

R.L Stine? :confused: Really, this guy ISN'T that bad at all... Sure, some of his books scared the heck out of me when I was eight or nine, but only in the way that makes it fun, in the way that makes people ride on rollercoasters. Most of his books didn't scare me at all, they were just great books (for a young child).

And sorry... I didn't think when I was advocating 'if kids read anything, it's good...' you're right, that's wrong. Of course, if something's grossly nastier than they can handle, then they shouldn't read it. if it's going to give them nightmares, if they're too impressionable and won't get the book's message, of course they shouldn't read it. My bad there. :o But most kids I know read HP and are fairly discerning... They realise it's a story. They realise that lying is wrong, that practicing magick is wrong. This is because they've been brought up well, by good parents. Of course, if a child is young, I wouldn't give them HP to read. But I'd give them very few books to read anyway. I wouldn't give a young boy 'A child called It', even though it's an incredibly powerful and encouraging book, as well as a dire warning.

Basically, I think that you need to look at a child's age. If a child can handle it, if a child is discerning and knows morals, then let them read darker books, because often, (with notable exceptions) these are going to help them grow as people alot more.

Also... you've probably completely forgotten about this question... you're getting snowed under from all angles by us guys... :o But, what do you say to the Gods and mythology in the LotR world, very similar in form to Norse Gods?

Anyway, as ever, I look forward to reading your thoughts! :)

inked

09-16-2005, 11:35 PM

GR22 and Johan,

Check out this site: http://restingplace.typepad.com/sword_of_gryffindor/

If you go to the August 24 posting at the bottom of the page and check out the comments, you'll both find Mr. Abanes comments intriguing.

Of course, being cynical, I'd say he likes HP because he has now published 3 books on the series that people buy so he makes money. I do note however that he does not own up to having horns, donkey ears, hoofs, or a tail after all that reading and writing about HP! :p

Aslan the Wise one

09-17-2005, 12:51 AM

LOL, Very Nice inked.

unleavened

09-17-2005, 04:16 PM

This is my outlook on reading. I'm just wondering if this sounds about right to everyone here. You can pretty much read what you like as long as you've conditoioned your mind to be analytical about the author's views. Although there are some books out there that are so poisoning (sp?) to the mind, that you shouldn't even read them b/c you may never get those things out of your mind (not speaking of HP, in case anyone was wondering) that's b/c of this verse.
"whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is gracious, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things."
Although what is poison to one person's mind may not be to another's. Example: I can't watch real life crime shows, but my sister can.

Do remember that kids are especially vulnerable in this area however. Their minds are not as analytical yet, so they must be more careful what they take in, or at least their parents should discuss it with them (this helps develop analytical minds). So the issue of weather or not a book should be read at all and weather or not a book should be read by kids is a completely different issue.
Again, I'll say I can't comment much more on HP itself, b/c I haven't read the books. So, this isn't about HP, just reading in general.

waterhogboy

09-17-2005, 06:01 PM

Is there an argument to say that our kids ought to be 'immunised' in a matter of speaking?!?

I will explain myself. It's all well and good following GR's train of thought and wrapping our kids in cotton wool for their own safety, but what happens when they go out into the world on their own. Without experiencing some of the 'terrors' out there how vulnerable to attack are they going to be???

For example, lets hypothesise, I've never allowed my kids to read about magic in books, I dont have a TV or computer so they cant find out about this stuff, then they go out and find out from a friend about wicca. Alternatively, my kids have read HP, but I've explained to them the danger of occult/magic. They can watch TV, so although some of the stuff is unsuitable they can learn about the dangers and consequences of some of the bad things they will encounter in life.

So these two kids go and find out from a friend about wicca. Which is gonna be the one who is more likely to find out about it!??! Its like I said, through immunisation, you inject a small, harmless amount of the virus, and it protects the child for life. Is it wrong to think the same can be done in this sense!?

Aslan the Wise one

09-17-2005, 06:05 PM

Very True waterhogboy...

unleavened

09-17-2005, 06:29 PM

This is true. I don't deny that, but it doesn't mean you shouldn't be careful as to what they take in. Don't give them the immunizations until they're ready for them. Just like real immunizations, if they are given to a kid too early the kid could die from them. A big part of these immunizations is not just the watching of TV or the reading of the books, but also disscussiong. I don't think we disagree too drasticly, WHB.
In my previous post and this one, when I say "kids" I don't mean all the way through age 18 or anything. I mean 10-12 and under. There IS (in my opinion) a certain amount of sheltering that should go on, but I don't mean that they shouldn't read anything or watch anything. Even adults need to shelter their own minds. God commands it in Philipians.

waterhogboy

09-18-2005, 11:03 AM

Unleavened - I completely agree. I wouldnt let young kids read HP, and thats not even from a Christian perspective, I know non-Christian parents who wouldnt let their kids read them till about 9-10. I think by that stage kids are old enough to realise that books are just fantasy. Before than fantasy and reality can have the edges blurred...

unleavened

09-18-2005, 04:07 PM

Yup, that pretty much covers it.
Wow, someone agrees with me and understands what the heck I'm talking about. This is a rare phenomenon in my life.

inkspot

09-19-2005, 11:06 AM

No, it wasn't your fault, Johan. I just have a short attention span, and I couldn't figure out what was actually being discussed. If I read it more thoroughly, I can figure it out.

I'm like you, certainly not militant about telling other people that their religion is wrong. But I think maybe there is a place for everybody -- prophets and apostles. Prophets all the time went around, not predicting the future, but boldly telling people that if they didn't change their ways, doom lay ahead. Apostles, on the other hand, it seems to me, went around preaching the good news, but focusing on "There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ" (Romans 8:1). They wanted believers to love one another and show Christ's love to the world. Perhaps both avenues can still work today, depending on your calling in Christ.

I know it makes us moderates cringe to see or hear a prophet-type condemning someone else, it's insensitive and politically incorrect ... but as I discover more about Jesus, I am seeing that in His time period, He was militant, and His words were sometimes insensitive -- or at least, revolutionary. So, as I say, maybe there is a place for both styles of communicating the Gospel.

Now I am the one who is off topic. Sorry!

Green Knight

09-20-2005, 11:36 PM

Prayers are a form of magic.

The thing about the Druids sacrificing humans was a tall tale told by the Romans.

The thing to also remember is that Christianity is a syncretic religion. Modern Christianity did no spring for wholly created from the sermons of Yeshua ben Yosef. It was created and built upon for a few centuries, and it still isn't static. Most of our holidays come from pagan sources. Some of the roots of Chrisitanity come from Judaism, but Zoroastrianism, the Cult of Sol Invictus, and other sources lead to the creation of Christianity. Christianity is a solar religion, as most churches are oriented to the west, where the Sun rises.

inkspot

09-21-2005, 09:30 AM

Christianity is a solar religion, as most churches are oriented to the west, where the Sun rises.
I am not sure where you are getting this information -- do you have documentation that most churches face west, and if so, that the reason they do so is because Christianity is a solar religion (as in sun worship?)

Here is an interesting link that deal with your other ideas on Christianity being syncretic:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_and_world_religions#Possible_relation ship_with_Zoroastrianism_through_Judaism

It looks to me as if the only connection to Zoroastrianism might be through Judaism, but there is no way to say for sure whether the Zoroastrians were copying the Hebrews or the other way around, or that there was no connection at all.

Granted Christmas and Easter are celebrated at the same time as pagan holidays, but the thing is: Jesus didn't command the celebration of any of holiday -- the only ritual He advised was the Lord's Supper, Eucharist. The holidays were human inventions, and celebrated at the same time as pagan celebrations so they would go un-noticed in the midst of persecution of the church in Roman times.

So to say Christianity is a syncretic religion is misleading. Its rituals, holidays and outer "forms" deveoped over time, but they were birthed from Christ's teachings on the foundation of His Judaism, not drawn from existing false religions.

Aslan the Wise one

09-21-2005, 09:33 AM

Go! inkspot.

inkspot

09-21-2005, 09:53 AM

'd like to point out that God is not a neutral character when it comes to being God. Jesus, God incarnate, did not come to Earth in the body of a woman. God is referred to as 'Our Father' in heaven, 'Abbah Father' in Hebrew, and in the male form of speaking is referred to with 'His'.
My point was that God is neither man nor woman, He is God. As for masculinity, I believe we may find that it is one of the attributes of His personality, but we will not think of Him in terms of man or woman, but something so much beyond that! In which case, it would be equally amusing to refer to Him as a man as it would be to call Him a woman.

(You mentioned that one of Inked's ideas was as amusing as saying God was a woman, but except for the brief time Christ was on this earth, it is equally silly to say that God is a man.)

Sorry for the diversion -- carry on with Christians and Harry Potter. :o

Green Knight

09-22-2005, 12:50 AM

The cross was a instrument of torture, but it is also a sun symbol. It was also a symbol of balance. Early Christians also used the pentagram as a holy symbol.

inkspot

09-22-2005, 10:27 AM

Of course the cross was a symbol of torture, that is why we revere it: Christ took the punishment for us.

Again, I am not seeing how any of this makes Christianity a "solar" religion or syncretic (except in weird syncretic aberrations like "santeria" which is not what we would call Christianity).

And again, where is the documentation for what you are saying?

But this isn't even the right forum for it -- this is the Harry Potter & Christianity Thread.

jalapeno45

09-23-2005, 03:55 PM

My point was that God is neither man nor woman, He is God. As for masculinity, I believe we may find that it is one of the attributes of His personality, but we will not think of Him in terms of man or woman, but something so much beyond that! In which case, it would be equally amusing to refer to Him as a man as it would be to call Him a woman.

(You mentioned that one of Inked's ideas was as amusing as saying God was a woman, but except for the brief time Christ was on this earth, it is equally silly to say that God is a man.)

Sorry for the diversion -- carry on with Christians and Harry Potter. :o

I happen to disagree. It says in the Bible man was made in the image of God. This was made to imply a sence of gender. (But I do agree it would be 'balderdash' to say that God is a woman!)

Goldenrod22

09-23-2005, 04:09 PM

Good point, 'Pepperboy'.
I don't think that God is a woman, just as it is a very important point that the man God sent to Earth for our Saviour was not.
Recently on the Harry Potter front, I was reading about a very interesting idea that has come out against one of the themes in the book.
Has anyone noticed the frequent idea that J.K. Rowling has been promoting as concerns the 'obese' characters in her stories?
Think about it for a moment. The Dursleys, continually described as ugly and overweight, are evil characters. The Dursley boy is given a pig's tail for punishment (for his father's sin) and you can note the obvious reason why (pig).
Harry's aunt is obese, and frequently referred to as ugly and fat.
She (in the movie) is blown up into the shape of a giant balloon (hint, hint).
Hagrid, a large man, is presented (though a 'good' character) as being a drunk who disobeys school rules.
In any light, the obese characters are ugly, mean, stupid, and cruel.
Harry, being thin, of course is under no such ridicule. And we wonder why our kids are being teased for their weight at school!
For they are treated as idiotic inferiors.

waterhogboy

09-24-2005, 08:39 AM

Cornelius Fudge is fat and not evil, Molly Weasley is overweight and one of the nicest people in the whole series. Again Professor Slughorn - obese but not nasty (a bit pompous but everyone has their faults). Thingy giantess lady from France school person thing is also very large - but not nasty at all. Professor Sprout I believe is also quite stout.

On the other hand some of the evilest - Draco and Lucius Malfoy, Voldemort, Aunt Petunia, Severus Snape amongst others are all described as being very skinny.

I think you may be picking up on something from lack of information - what you said is very true, but as can be seen above the opposite is also true.

Sam

09-24-2005, 04:29 PM

I agree with WHB- I don't think the books are encouraging people to tease kids for their weight. After all, the kids who are the nastiest are Malfoy and co. - not at all set up as role models. However, I do feel that with Dudley, the whole weight thing gets a bit gratuitous. Just because I think it is a fairly lazy way of characterising someone (since we get long descriptions of his size in every book, I think. )

waterhogboy

09-24-2005, 04:44 PM

But also remember that Dudley's, Crabbe's and Goyle's wieght actually starts turning into muscle in the later books so its not really commented on at all later on.

Sam

09-24-2005, 04:54 PM

ah, that's true. My apologies for unresearched criticism!

inkspot

09-27-2005, 05:40 PM

Also HP's Aunt Vera is razor thin, so the evil people come in all shapes and sizes, just like the good ones.

Mostly the descriptions are accurate of real people you might meet, some good, some bad -- like Ludo Bagman who was once a star athlete and is now running to seed a little, so his uniform doesn't quite fit. That's something you would see in real life.

You have to leave the author some means to make the bad, ludicrous characters seem bad and ludicrous -- JKR always comments on Snape's greasy hair (why does she pick on him?!), but we can't say it teaches kids to make fun of greasy hair ...

inkspot

09-29-2005, 06:22 PM

Okay, I just re-read all 6 HP books, and I was especially looking for evil so I could go along with the Christians that don't like the books and don't want anyone to read them .... but I really didn't find it. I think if the kid is the right age for the books and the parents explain that practicing witchcraft in our world is bad, but that HP is a fantasy world, they are just good stories. I could be totally wrong and book seven could descend into some kind of recruitment campaign for satanism in which case I will eat these words ... but I am more inclined to think that if the last book does make a dramatic, symbolic statement beyond just being a hum-dinger series end, it might actually be a Christian statement. I hope so!

Goldenrod22

09-30-2005, 12:10 PM

Hi! :)
Inky, I just think that you are not looking at the books from the perspective of what is directly in them that is 'bad' (this could fall under anything from crass jokes, lying, magick, innuendo, etc.).
What I mean is that if you were to open the books, looking specifically for all of the bad things that you could justify (like...'Harry HAD to lie. And it was a white lie anyway. And he was in danger, so it did'nt count that time.') and then feeling fine when you could hand the book over to a younger person with no guilty feelings!
My conscience gives me a big twist in the gut when I see the mild expression on parent's faces, who could'nt care less what their kids are exposed to.
They are practically yawning at the things their kids are reading and watching on T.V., saying with a sigh that it is 'To get them used to the world'.
This, in my opinion, is an excuse.
How far do you let things go when exposing a child to witchcraft, sexual immorality (for younger viewers-I'm sorry, but I needed to be specific), and violent murder?
Would you honestly plop a child down with a book on the dark arts (written by someone who is interested personally in the message) and say:
"Now, I want us to study this together with discretion. What moral values does the character have? Does he show a Christian heart? What can we learn from this?"
Listen, that is ridiculous.
If you want to teach the kid how to pull moral virtues from a book, show him the examples of fallen and redeemed characters in the Bible.
Show him examples in classic literature of characters that followed a clearly un-Godly path, and then turned from their ways.

But don't go about trying to say that since Harry is occasionallly punished for a very few of his behaviours, that he is a changed teen. If he were ever truly repentant of his wrong doing, then it would be evident.
No matter how you want to say it, the behaviours that are presented in the books are to TEACH kids that lying is okay, stealing is okay, etc.
They are not made to present reality.
Disagree.

inkspot

09-30-2005, 06:27 PM

So in your estimation, GR, is it wrong to allow children to read any story in which a sin goes unpunished? The the OT, Jacob was pretty much the hero of his story (certainly God loved him better than Esau), but he was a trickster and a con man, and he never really repented of it -- God seemed to bless him for it. And that's in the Bible, which you can't object to children reading ...

It seems to me Christians want to protest the magic in HP, then when people say there's magic in LOTR and CON, they want to drop that and instead protest Harry's failings as a human being ... he lies or he cheats. But people do that, and you can't protect children from ever learning there are people in the world who lie and cheat, and even "good" people may be guilty of it (all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God).

If you are going to restrict your kids to reading books about boys and girls who, if they do happen to sin, are commensurately punished for it, then you aren't going to give them a wide range of reading options, and you aren't going to give them a true picture of the world, because very often no one is punished for their sins. In fact, the great gift God gives us is that we aren't punished for our sins commensurately or at all -- He took the punishment for us and let us off free!

And this is beside the fact that often HP is regretful of his actions, and he is called to exert his moral muscle. Whenever he has failed Dumbledore or disobeyed him, he winds up plenty regretful. And **book six spoilers** by the end of HBP, he has decided to go it alone to face the Dark Lord because he wants to protect his friends. He is maturing into a person who embraces self-sacrifice for the love of others. "Greater love hath no man than this, that he lay down his life for his friends," Jesus said. Could that be where Harry is bound? It increasingly looks like it.

The question of whether I would put a book of black magic incantations in the hands of a child and instruct him to read it and not take any harm from it is not applicable here, because HP isn't a book of spells. It's just a story about a fantasy world where magic is real and not forbidden.

Of course I do not agree that it's okay to plop kids in front of the TV and let them learn all there is to know from the mass media, or to allow children to read books and magazines that destroy innocence and contribute to immorality. Parents need to know what their kids are reading and viewing, and that's why I mentioned in my last post that if the books are age-appropriate and the parents have made it clear that these are fantasy books and practicing satanism in the real world is bad, that the books are really not evil. This is still my thought. :)

And I hope JKR loves Jesus, and that books seven will end with a triumphantly symbolic way to save Harry and yet portray Christ's love. Woulnd't that be swell?

unleavened

09-30-2005, 08:57 PM

I promised myself I wouldn't get any deeper into the HP debates, since I haven't read the books, but I have a few things to say ouside of the books.
A. To inky: there is definately an age where kids can handle analysing a book and determining what's wrong and what's right. Just be careful. There are some things I wish I hadn't watched on TV when I was younger. I knew it wasn't real, but I sub-consciously applied it to life. My mom tried not letting me watch some of the stuff I was watching and my behaviour improved. It was a long time ago, so I don't have spacific examples. Sorry.
B. Also to inky: The Jacob story is an extrememly complicated lesson on the refining process a person (more on the adult side) goes through to become a Godly individual. His deceptiveness (is that a word?) is looked down on and eventually removed. I studied this story in detail. I don't know that you're looking at it in the right light. I could be completely off base though.
C. To Goldenrod: Classical liturature can be just as poisonous as any other liturature. Don't let the deciet and sin get away with hiding behind the word "classical."

I mean no insult to anyone.

Checkmate

09-30-2005, 09:23 PM

I didn't know that she was a Christian... I was told that she practiced witchcraft, but I guess that you could practice witchcraft even if you are Christain, though it would **** your soul. This subject has become cliche...

inkspot

10-05-2005, 06:40 PM

Gondor Knight of Narnia

10-05-2005, 07:10 PM

as to harry potter relating to the bible...NO!well...if it does it's leastways not like Lotr and CoN relate to the bible...harry pooter gives me the creeps...full of witch-craft and...YECH! i can't say as i liked the commercial where the owls dropped hairy potter books into the hands and houses of children....it led me to think "get the stinger missiles!"

Elsmere

10-06-2005, 11:44 AM

I aggree with you about the fact that people get a bit hysterical about it. coz I read HP and really enjoy them. It is like other books it is ok if you see and read it as a story and don't dwell on the fact that they are witches and wizards and doing magic, and you don't make it real, and just because they are "good" witches and wizards in the bookdoesn't mean that magic is "good". I personnally just see it as a story just like any other book.

inkspot

10-06-2005, 05:59 PM

as to harry potter relating to the bible...NO!
You must read way back through this thread and the other HP threads for our friend Inked's eloquent defense of HP as literature in the same (Christian) vein as LOTR and CON. He draws some very interesting parallels between Scripture and what is happening in the HP books. I personally think **possible spoilers** that there is a good chance that in book 7 HP will lay down his life for his friends, in a lovely homage to Christ's sacrifice. I am really hoping that whatever the ending of the series, it will be one that supports and upholds the message of the gospel ... I think that would be swell.

but even if it doesn't, I have found the books to be great stories and enjoyed them immensely. Don't think I got any witchcraft on me, either.

Saruman

10-07-2005, 03:11 AM

JKR, we have heard, is a member of the Church of England or (if there is such a thing) the CHurch of Scotland? I forget. I do not know if she personally practices witchcraft, if she did, I would then doubt that her church membership had any real spiritual roots.

For a couple of years now I have had the privilege of watching The House of Lords debates live on Parliamentlive.tv, ever since it first broadcasted on-line in September '03 (if I am not mistaken...it's, uh, been a while!). But I notice that the "Lords Spiritual," - those bishops of the Anglican church - who sit on the side of the current Government, but are not affiliated with any side - have opinions to share. Even though they are not "affiliates," they are strongly opinionated, and demonstrate (in my estimation as a born-again Christian, saved by the grace of God in and through the Lord Jesus Christ) a lack, in terms of being men of "the Faith."

I hope I haven't lost you, but what I am driving at is - if you go to a church that talks about Christ, it doesn't mean a thing if indeed you have other desires and passions in mind, because they are your impetus/god in life. I am aware of people - among friends - who attend church with such great devotion, and yet there is Something lacking in their lives and the fruit of the Spirit is not evident in them.

The author of Harry Potter is (if I have rightly heard - correct me if I'm wrong) a practicing pagan. Glory be if she attends church: her heart is not in the things of the Lord, but in the things of this world. And Harry Potter, in my estimation, is not literature I would add to my private collection. And it would bug me greatly if I dared to read something that I know for a fact dabbles in spiritual darkness and witchcraft.

My intent in writing this is not to offend my brethren who perhaps enjoy reading Harry Potter, but it's my wish to state my opinion concerning this literature, and how I believe it is the furthest thing from being Christian-like in its contrivance. (Reason with me - would our Lord be reading Harry Potter and be a regular fan of Rowling?)

inkspot

10-07-2005, 10:54 AM

How do you know JKR is a practicing pagan and what the state of her heart is? Has she said this in an interview, or are you personally acquainted with her?

To my knowledge she has not publicly made any statement about her faith -- and actually said that if she did, it would make the direction the books are heading too obvious. (Which to me implied that if she were a Christian and spoke up about it, that would make the Christian direction her books are heading too obvious ... but maybe I am just hoping that was it and really she is a pagan and commenting on that would make the pagan direction her books are going too obvious?)

As for whether Jesus would read the books: if he liked a ringing good story, he would. The books don't link their magic to the devil or any dark power. The magic is a talent some people have and develop, some use it for good and a few use it for evil ... it could really be a metaphor on the ways any of us use a gift we have been given -- if we use our gift with numbers to ply an honest trade or embezzle from our company, if we use our gift with physical fitness to serve others as a first responder or to terrorize others as an enforcer ... The magic in HP books doesn't seem to me to be satanic, just a fantasy world metaphor for any talent that can be used either for good or evil. That's the choice HP has to make, and the one we all have to make with our gifts.

I don't think Christ would be opposed to such imagery and symbolism. But again, if JKR is really a satanist and the books are going to end in a pagan debauchery, then I will be proved wrong and have egg on my face. It could happen.

Of course, Curumo, I totally agree with you that someone can religiously attend church and yet know nothing of a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. My tendency is to give the church-goer credit for knowing Jesus rather than to look for evidence of Christ in them and, if I judge it lacking, decide that they don't know Jesus. I like to give people the benefit of the doubt that way, since their walk with Christ may be one that doesn't sit up and present itself to me for inspection ... I hope that anyone who saw me in or out of church would know I am a follower of Christ just by looking -- but realistically I know there are times when my words and actions don't present that case very strongly. I hope other believers give me the benefit of the doubt at that time! :eek:

Elsmere

10-07-2005, 12:18 PM

jalapeno45

10-07-2005, 02:56 PM

Do we actually have any evidence that JKR is a pagan? If we don’t then we shouldn’t judge other people by their “outer appearance” e.g. JKR writing her books, because that is God’s job when Jesus comes again. I can’t wait for that moment, but again I can because of some of my friends not being a Christian I would hate to see them not go to Heaven.

You're right about not judging people. But is it right to keep letting people do what they do? Isn't it our job as good christians to point people in the right direction? I think that the "don't judge people" excuse is just another way of saying "let them do whatever they want just as long as they aren't hurting anybody".

Goldenrod22

10-07-2005, 03:15 PM

Hi! :)
Hey ya, everybody. Inky, I think that your points are coming from a good place, that you are not wholeheartedly giving over to believing that Harry is an allegory for Christ (scary thought), etc.
But I have noticed that in one persistant point you make, you do not fully understand the real magickal properties that Harry's world shares with the real world of magick. Here is what I mean:
-Did you know that when you said that the magick in the books are 'a talent given to a few, who use it for their choice of good or evil...the magick itself is neutral', that you are directly echoing the beliefs of practicing witches?
The belief stems from the thinking that if you were 'born' a witch, then you must learn to control the powers you have-for good or evil; magic itself is neutral.
I am of the belief that all magick is from a dark source, and therefore, corrupted.
God's miracles are not 'magick' but are divine help from Him.
If you want to get technical, then, you could ask where the other 'magick' is from... ;)

Aslan the Wise one

10-07-2005, 03:20 PM

I agrre HP does have christian themes and other views, But i'm not quite sure about the hole magic thing in HP....

inkspot

10-07-2005, 04:40 PM

-Did you know that when you said that the magick in the books are 'a talent given to a few, who use it for their choice of good or evil...the magick itself is neutral', that you are directly echoing the beliefs of practicing witches?
The belief stems from the thinking that if you were 'born' a witch, then you must learn to control the powers you have-for good or evil; magic itself is neutral.

I did not know this. I do not, actually, know anything about real people who practice witchcraft as I believe in the real world, that is evil.
I am of the belief that all magick is from a dark source, and therefore, corrupted.
God's miracles are not 'magick' but are divine help from Him.
If you want to get technical, then, you could ask where the other 'magick' is from... ;)
So where does that leave CON and LOTR if all magic is corrupted? you cannot deny that Lucy says spells from a spell book in VDT, and that Gandalf and the other wizards have magical powers that other people do not ... I am still trying to get the difference between the magic in these Christian-themed books and HP. Just because we know the authors were believers, it was okay for them to write about magic? I know you have explained this a bunch, GR, but I still am not getting it. And I'm not usually what you would call a slow learner ...

Isn't it our job as good christians to point people in the right direction? I think that the "don't judge people" excuse is just another way of saying "let them do whatever they want just as long as they aren't hurting anybody".
I think in the Bible, different people were called to present the Gospel in different ways: prophets preached a turn or burn message intended to make people "scared straight." But apostles like the beloved John preached a message of love that embraced everyone. If God is leading you to judge others as your way of showing them their need for a Savior, just be sure you do so in a spirit of love and compassion for their eternal souls, and not in a spirit of condemnation and anger at them for being sinful -- after all, we are all sinful! If you are going to judge them harshly for their faults, then you had best be prepared for a harsh judgment of your own faults.

I do not think we can judge, based on the knowledge we have, whether JKR is a believer, and I don't think it is very nice to say she is not if we have no evidence that she is not, such as a public statement from herself. I have never seen that, although I did read that she is a member of a Christian congregation in England. That doesn't necessarily signify that she has a relationship with Christ, but I don't think it's very Christian to declare that she is a pagan if there is nothing supporting that theory and she is a member of a Christian church ... Like I said, the benefit of the doubt is what I hope other believers give me if they see me acting or speaking in a non-Christian way, in a moment of weakness ...

Turtle

10-08-2005, 02:29 AM

Hello! :)
I agree with Waterhogboy. The celtic and druid religions (from what I know) are based on the worship of runes, astrological signs (phases of the moon), and other forms of worship. Did you know that some of these ancient groups preformed human sacrifice?

I personally knew that some of these groups practiced human sacrifice. The druids were not one of these however. Additionally while there was a focus on the astrologically signs the celts did not have runes. In fact I can't think of a culture that worshipped runes. The norse who had runes worshiped multiple gods, As did the Celts and the druids. BTW the druids are the scholarly class of the Celtic people. That's over simplifying but that’s the basic concept. As for human sacrifice those who practice these religons today do not engage in these acts any more than we Christans engage in torturing anyone we suspect of having different beliefs.

I think as Christians we need to be very careful when speaking of the 'goodness' of ancient civilizations and (especially) religions.
We can not be tempted into believing the lie of moral relativism when it comes to seeing the beliefs of these cultures. What I mean is that we begin to say,
"The ancient Chinese seemed so philosophical. The Greeks seemed so artistic. That must mean that their beliefs are as valid as Christianity."
Many Christians see themselves as tolerant by saying to (for example) a Wiccan or Jadist,
"You may have your belief. And it may be right, to you. My belief may be right to me. But you may not think so. So neither of our religions, when seen by the opposite one, is wrong or right."
I disagree wholeheartedly with this!
It pains me to hear Christians mouthing these doctrines, when it is simply not the truth.

I agree with you wholeheartedly on this subject, but I think that as Christians we need to also be careful in our speech not to alienate people and push them away from God.

I know this may seem like a complicated idea to those of you who have only known one way: acceptance of all religions as valid.
But Jesus has said something forever that should be imprinted in our hearts and minds:
"I am the way, the truth, and the life. Whoever comes through me shall never perish, but have eternal life."
This means that Buddha is not a saviour. No matter who follows him.
This means that you are not your saviour. No matter if you say so.
This means that no goddess, no wood or stone idol, or object is your saviour.
No matter who worships these things.

Again I agree with you but so would a Buddhist. Buddhists do not believe Buddha to be a savior but someone who taught a positive way of living. Sort of the Buddhist equivalent of Mother Theresa. Except there is no named deity in Buddhism. Again I'm oversimplifying here but I think you get the idea.

I would like to say that I am not in any way targeting you but your post covered the all points that others had made and that I wanted to address. The reason that I am so sensitive about this subject is that I left the church for several years before returning to Christianity. The need of some, not all and certainly not most, to tell me that I was going to hell pushed me even further from the church. The person who said I understand and respect your beliefs but do not agree with them is the one who eventually lead me back to the church. So I respect of other people and their beliefs is essential to witnessing for the Lord.

As for Wiccans and other Pagans worshiping the devil, I'm not entirely certain about that. I believe that it is not the right path but only God knows for certain if they are worshipping the devil.

Lastly, the implication that Harry Potter leads people to the occult is inaccurate. The occult is made up of many different religons and as far as I can tell Harry Potter endorses none of them. Many people don't seem to understand that Wicca is a religon. And many who claim to convert because of the Harry Potter novels are simply looking to break away from the Christian society and Wicca which is the easiest to understand of all the Pagan religons is the most appealing. What I'm trying to say here is yes people will turn away from the church and yes that is terrible but when they do there is a deeper problem than Harry Potter.

Sorry about the rant. I will step down from my soapbox now.

crjr9833

10-08-2005, 03:40 PM

You guys are going a little bit off topic....

I believe the sacrifice of Albus Dumbledore (who dies to protect HP) to be an obvious parallel to Christ. After that, besides HP being a classic good vs. evil book, I wouldn't go looking for a whole lot of Christian elements. The author's intention is not to write a Christian work, but merely an entertaining story. However, without realizing it herself (I think) Christian themes just end up in her books because they are natural things. If there isn't anything even a little godly in any book, this is a theory, I don't think the book would even be interesting to anyone. Because Christian things are the natural law. And without these natural elements humans (being created by God) cannot even relate.

Ricky

10-08-2005, 07:09 PM

Not to take away from the links between Albus and Christ, but as somebody explained to me, the mentor always has to die in these sorts of books so that the trainee person can fulfill their destiny i.e. Obi Wan Kenobi in Star Wars, Luke Skywalker and Gandalf in LOTR, Frodo.

But I do agree with you crjr.

Sam

10-08-2005, 09:29 PM

Yes, me too. Your point about Christian things being the natural law, I think is very pertinent. And of course, if you are a Christian, you can see it more quickly than most (i mean, in non-Christian literature etc.). It's also quite like some of what Lewis talks about in 'Mere Christianity' when he writes that a lot of the way humans behave is an unwitting argument for the existence of a God, and Saviour.

inkspot

10-10-2005, 04:11 PM

You all have made some very good points, very thoughtful.

Turtle, welcome to the discussion. I think your points are very well taken. I have seen well-meaning believers drive seekers away from the cross by telling them how wrong their own beliefs are, or attacking them for not behaving the way a believer would -- as if anyone else is tasked with following Christ except His followers. You have touched on an issue that I think is very important. When we condemn a non-believer for their beliefs or behavior, we sort of slam a door in their face if they have been trying to get a glimpse of Christ through us.

I am glad you have returned to the Savior and that you have such sensitivity.

Is your avi Johnny Cash? That is too funny. :D

Aslan the Wise one

10-10-2005, 04:15 PM

Very true inkspot, I nyself have seen it many times, and my friends dad was a bodygard for Johnny Cash's son a long time ago....

Peter

10-10-2005, 05:53 PM

I've read C.S. Lewis' AtouBioGraphy (sp?) and It's very intrsting. It talks about Chirsts and Chathlics.

inkspot

10-11-2005, 10:03 AM

my friends dad was a bodygard for Johnny Cash's son a long time ago....
Hoo-ha -- you should post this over in that other thread where we talk about our celebrity encounters. I forget what it is called, something like "You'll never guess what" :D

Aslan Footsoldier

10-19-2005, 03:42 PM

just a note, many here seem to have some sort of Christian background, or have themselves made Christ their savior and Lord (thus becoming a Christian). it is largely to those whom this post is directed; although all others are free to listen and pipe-in with comments! :D

i think we may be missing the point in all of this. both tolkien and lewis said that their works were NOT allegory. tolkien was wanting to writing a mythology for the english people (since their's was presumably lost due to war). lewis was not intending to write an allegory either. instead, he was writing a 'what if.' what if the Son of God was incarnated in a place called narnia? what would he look like? how would he act? through this, lewis can teach truths of the Christian faith, but i think we do him and the chronicles a disservice if we see everything as an allegory (like bunyan's pilgrim's progress - which is a fine book!). take the narnia books, first, as what they were intended for - wonderful stories of fantasy and adventure. then see some intended truths of Christianity in them. For example, how can you (as a Christian) read the beavers' description of aslan in lww and not feel the truth of that description as it relates to Christ himself! nevertheless it works perfectly fine exclusively for aslan as well - lewis was brilliant in this. he present Chrisitian theology apart from the Christian religion as it were. he takes what can become cold doctrinal beliefs and presents them in such a way that they warm our hearts (as they should).

also, do not assume that because something was or was not written by a Christian author or was or was not meant to be Christian allegory, it is necessarily good or bad. speaking as a Christian, we need to be able to read and view fiction as fiction. even then, we can still evaluate it on whether or not it is bad or good as art, as well as bad or good in as being edifying to the soul. ask questions like, 'how are good and evil depcited?', 'who is the hero and why?', 'what do the settings and (in a visitual medium) the lighting do to our understanding of good and evil?' this will allow us to evaluate something based on it's merits and not some artificial Christian grid.

as for the potter books (that is the point of this thread isnt' it? ;) ) i hope Rowling is a Christian (for her sake!). but what bearing does that have on her books? i have read and enjoyed the harry potter books as fiction fully believing she was not a Christian. i watch people lie, cheat, steal, hate, curse, etc. everyday in the real world, it doesn't mean i condone it or engage in it myself. likewise, some Christians may rightly have a real beef with actual witchcraft. but reading about it and embracing it quite another thing. furthermore, in the real world, magic is always sinful because it is contrary to God and his ways (not to mention, he explicitly forbids it!). but in a fictional world, magic may be amoral - wielded for good or evil, much like a sword (as in middle earth or narnia). in that fictional world then what is sinful, or evil is how the magic is used. we, as Christians, have to be able to read fiction this way, if we are to enjoy anything of it! furthermore, while many books may have elements that resemble to Christian themes, it does not make them Christian; nor does it make them good and acceptable literature. i like the potter books as fiction. but regardless of rowling's beliefs, she has not come anywhere near accomplishing what lewis did so beautifully in the chronicles - use fiction to excite the heart with Christian theology.

* whew! i'm out of breath! * :p

inkspot

10-19-2005, 04:17 PM

Welcome Footsoldier! I didn't see you post before. your points are very valid. Our brother Inked would have something to say to you about whether the Potter books are Christian fiction, but I will let him say that to you next time he checks in -- or if you page back through this thread or the other Potter threads, you will see his thoughts.

waterhogboy

10-19-2005, 04:45 PM

To be honest, regarding HP, I think Footsoldiers hit the nail right on the head as to where I stand on the HP books - and explained it better than I ever could. Cheers mate! :)

Aslan Footsoldier

10-19-2005, 04:45 PM

Welcome Footsoldier! I didn't see you post before. your points are very valid. Our brother Inked would have something to say to you about whether the Potter books are Christian fiction

thanks. i'll have to check out what he says about the potter books.

inkspot

10-19-2005, 08:22 PM

There's this thread, then one about
Christians & harry Potter and one about
Will the next CS Lewis please step forward or something like that -- it veered off into Potter-land for a while, too, and in each of them Inked fought the good fight for the idea that JKR is writing Christian fiction. They're all in the "Narnia and Christianity" forum, I think, this forum.

Happy hunting! Sorry I can't be more help.

Aslan Footsoldier

10-19-2005, 11:28 PM

thanks again, inkspot. i will definitely see what he says, although, i will be a pretty tough sell. i tackled this subject in a class for a discipleship series ("Living Out a Christian Worldview") for our church last summer. i read several anti- and pro-harry potter books/articles. one of my favs was in a collection by alan jacobs. i found most who were against him were inconsistent (esp. about lotr) or just didn't like any fantasy fiction, and those who were very much for him, stretched things a bit too far. but, i do try to keep an open mind! :)

Aslan Footsoldier

10-19-2005, 11:29 PM

To be honest, regarding HP, I think Footsoldiers hit the nail right on the head as to where I stand on the HP books - and explained it better than I ever could. Cheers mate!

thanks for the compliment, mate! ;)

jalapeno45

10-21-2005, 02:57 PM

I did not know this. I do not, actually, know anything about real people who practice witchcraft as I believe in the real world, that is evil.

So where does that leave CON and LOTR if all magic is corrupted? you cannot deny that Lucy says spells from a spell book in VDT, and that Gandalf and the other wizards have magical powers that other people do not ... I am still trying to get the difference between the magic in these Christian-themed books and HP. Just because we know the authors were believers, it was okay for them to write about magic? I know you have explained this a bunch, GR, but I still am not getting it. And I'm not usually what you would call a slow learner ...

I have somthing slightly different to say here. I think you are getting cofused. There is a big difference between magic and magick.

I think in the Bible, different people were called to present the Gospel in different ways: prophets preached a turn or burn message intended to make people "scared straight." But apostles like the beloved John preached a message of love that embraced everyone. If God is leading you to judge others as your way of showing them their need for a Savior, just be sure you do so in a spirit of love and compassion for their eternal souls, and not in a spirit of condemnation and anger at them for being sinful -- after all, we are all sinful! If you are going to judge them harshly for their faults, then you had best be prepared for a harsh judgment of your own faults.

Look, sometimes just saying "don't do that" isn't going to stop people from doing what they are doing. A large majority of the time people won't listen unless you are a little stern with them. It's not judging, it's giving them what they need. It's called tough love.

I do not think we can judge, based on the knowledge we have, whether JKR is a believer, and I don't think it is very nice to say she is not if we have no evidence that she is not, such as a public statement from herself. I have never seen that, although I did read that she is a member of a Christian congregation in England. That doesn't necessarily signify that she has a relationship with Christ, but I don't think it's very Christian to declare that she is a pagan if there is nothing supporting that theory and she is a member of a Christian church ... Like I said, the benefit of the doubt is what I hope other believers give me if they see me acting or speaking in a non-Christian way, in a moment of weakness ...

Who cares if she is a Christian or a wiccan? It doesn't matter, What she writes is wrong. It's like if a non-Christian sins and doesn't get away with it, does that suddenly make a Christian sinning okay?

Please will someone agree with me on this?

inkspot

10-21-2005, 04:47 PM

Saruman

10-21-2005, 05:03 PM

I agree with you, Jalapeno, in part, and dissent in part (concerning your statement about who cares if JKR is Christian or wiccan...I care! It makes a great difference, and her writings will undoubtedly reflect her views in life, even if she is just writing for literary entertainment).

First I cannot accept inkspot's views concerning "judging" others. Of course we are not called to judge others. Yet I do believe there is a difference in the terms "judging" (actually condeming someone) and "adjudging" (or, deeming someone to be something or to do something, and so on based on certain actions or statements). When I posted my thoughts concerning the world of Harry Potter and its author, JKR, I was not posting to say that I condemn the author. It was my belief that the author was a practicing pagan, and her literature certainly does not seem to take any Christian twists or turns. And someone earlier in the thread posted that one shouldn't be looking at witches or wizards in the story, but just looking at it as fiction. I'm sorry...I can't read something and look at it as pure fiction without being able to discern some underlying morals that clearly protrude in the text. Tolkien and Lewis wrote fiction, but within their works their views and thoughts were clearly interwoven in their literature.

How do you know JKR is a practicing pagan and what the state of her heart is? Has she said this in an interview, or are you personally acquainted with her?

To my knowledge she has not publicly made any statement about her faith -- and actually said that if she did, it would make the direction the books are heading too obvious. (Which to me implied that if she were a Christian and spoke up about it, that would make the Christian direction her books are heading too obvious...

If indeed JKR made the above statement...my next question concerning the issue is, if she is purportedly a born-again Christian, why shouldn't she freely confess it and thereby confess the intentions of her writing these books? Some have contended that the Harry Potter books condone lying - when the need calls for it - and so on. Are these Christian themes? I think not.

My tendency is to give the church-goer credit for knowing Jesus rather than to look for evidence of Christ in them...

We are called to be fruit-inspectors, and not to assume that everyone who attends church is automatically a born-again Christian. That is a critical error.

I do not condemn JKR or her Harry Potter books, nor do I condemn your enjoyment of them, inkspot. You have every right to enjoy this literature. But in your defense of it, I think you place a great passionate emphasis in the literature's underlying tones and subtle meanings and arduously defend its "Christianity." As far as LOTR and CoN are concerned and their authors' use of "magic" (Tolkien even writes about how the hobbits, particularly Sam, consider Galadriel and the elves' natural capabilities to be "magic," in which point he was mistaken; he also writes about calling Gandalf and Saruman and their companions "wizards," which was what Men in that age mistakenly called them) I think the authors (Tolkien and Lewis) never intended on going into any pagan depths with their use, as I believe JKR does. Their intention was purely for a "ringing" good story through the fictional worlds of Narnia and Arda, and in them are interwoven Christian thoughts and - yes - allegories.

JKR's use of Harry Potter, however, in my estimation and in my opinion, dabbles with paganry. This is my opinion on the subject.

Inkspot: I am sorry if you may find me odious after reading all this, but my intent is not to bash you personally. I feel that your views and takes on Harry Potter are a little off, and I state as such my thoughts on the issues at hand.

PrinceOfTheWest

10-21-2005, 05:14 PM

I think Goldenrod will agree with you, no questions, Jalapeño. I am sure many people agree! You are not alone.

But I did not see the difference between magic in CON and magic in HP outlined in your post, and that is what I am having trouble grasping. It is wrong for Harry to say spells from a spell book, but it was okay for Lucy to do so. Why? GR has tried to explain it before, but I am not getting the difference. And as for magiC vs. magiCK, I don't even understand what that's all about.

Tough love, I thought, was when parents put their kids out of the house if the kids wouldn't behave, on the assumption that it is better for them to get a dose of reality than to have their parents fixing all their mistakes for them or enabling them to carry on as drug fiends or what have you? I don't think that's any kind of way to introduce people to Jesus, if this is what you are talking about? Perhaps I am misunderstanding you.

I don't understand what you are saying in the last sentence here about a non-Christian sinning? As to whether JKR is a Christian or a Wiccan, people were saying previously in the thread that she was some kind of pagan, and I didn't think such speculation was very nice on our parts. As for what she writes being "wrong," that is what we are discussing here. What I am trying to figure out is: in a fantasy world, why is her magic wrong, but CS Lewis' magic okay?

Any thoughts? :o

Intricate issues here, and many of them. Let's take one: the morality of Lucy's reading from the book of spells. Recall, she said two spells, the one that allowed her to eavesdrop and the second that made the Duffers visible. Aslan scolded her for the first - not because it was magic, but because it was eavesdropping. It apparently was morally acceptable for Lucy to read the second spell, in fact, arguably it was why Aslan guided them to the island in the first place.

"But wait", you might say. "Lucy in Narnia was under different rules. Things might be acceptable for her there that are not here." I would grant that (though notice that humans are not typically expected or allowed to use magic in Narnia - I think that instance with Lucy is the only one.) Other creatures can (remember Dr. Corneilus and the enchanted sleep?), and humans can use magical devices (e.g. Susan's horn), but humans per se seem to be out of bounds.

I'd apply the same principles to Rowling's works. To say a priori that what she's writing "is wrong" is to make an unsafe assumption. She's setting up a alternative reality - close to but not exactly like ours, and in that alternative reality, things such as magic are innate to some people but not to others (muggles), and sometimes doesn't occur in people you'd expect it to (squibs). If I were to write a detective story set it modern day Columbus, Ohio, and it was clear from the story that it was the same world as we all live in, and in the middle of the story I had the main character start drawing pentacles and reciting spells, that would be wrong.

Regarding the use of magic, as such, it may be prudent to look at how Lewis deals with it in another of his books, That Hideous Strength. In there, Merlin awakens from a long hibernation, and though it's clear he has some innate preternatual powers, it's also clear they aren't really safe, even for him. But he is the instrument, and when the powers of the oyersu pass into him, he does some very destructive magic - but all under obedience. Another place to look is Lord of the Rings, wherein Galadriel does "elven magic" when she fills and enlivens her mirror - but even then she points out to Sam that there is a difference between that and the "deceits of the enemy."

If I had to give my opinion on Lewis' & Tolkien's view of magic, I would say that they thought delicate stuff to handle, and always unsafe for humans on earth. For my part, I woudn't be surprised if their main objection to Rowling's works was not the magic (which is treated like a technical skill - as if they were learning medicine), but the absence of any moral guidance or sense of God. The series deals with some pretty heavy topics, but never is there any mention of a source for morality: everyone is just supposed to "know" what right and wrong are. A tremendous opportunity which, I think, Rowling is passing up.

PrinceOfTheWest

10-21-2005, 05:19 PM

I certainly wouldn't consider any analog to the Trinity to be found in the Potter series. In fact, that's one difference between her work and that of Lewis & Tolkien - they were both so totally steeped in Christian thought and imagination that Christian imagery was woven into their work. They couldn't help it. Rowling, who I'm sure is a decent person, and (by her own admission) a member of the Church of England, is not even in their league, so I wouldn't expect to see much Christian symbolism in her works.

The thing that everyone seems to keep missing is that the Potter books are public school stories, and public school morality and situations are expected in them: nothing more. I've written in another post my opinion of the use of magic in the books, so I won't restate it. But I wouldn't look for anything beyond a standard novel between those covers.

inkspot

10-21-2005, 06:01 PM

So Lewis and Tolkien's magic is different because they don't show humans practicing it, on earth. But Dr. Cornelius is half human, and Merlin is human and on earth, and they both practice magic in Tolkien and Lewis stories. I am still not getting it, I guess.

Besides that it seems to me HP is not actually on our earth. It's a fantasy world, too.

Agreed, if you had a character in a story suddenly draw pentacles and recite spells, that would be indicative of Satanism, but I don't see an pentacles or references to Satan in the HP stories.

I am not personally saying they are Christian stories, I am reserving judgment on that, but I say that the things Inked has cited in these and other threads do have value and relevance as Christian symbolism if someone is looking for them.

As to the objection that there is no God mentioned in HP to guide morality: no more is there one mentioned in LOTR, yet we all agree it is a Christian/Catholic work. It is implied. And by the refernces Inked has cited of Christian symbolism in HP, I think you could say God is implied, if you are looking for him. I don't know what JKR intends, I don't know if she meant the stories as Christian literature or pagan literature, but it seems to me if you give Tolkien a break, you have to give JKR one, too:

Why is Tolkien allowed to write a book that totally doesn't mention God, but when JKR does, her book must be pagan? Maybe she is not the master that Tolkien was, but that doesn't mean that if you are looking for God in her works, you won't find the symbols. Indeed, if you follow Inked's posts here and in other threads, you would find them.

I think the HP stories are very good adventure stories, and I hope that by the end of book seven, we will also see that they have built to the crescendo of a very moral -- even Christian -- message. And I think it is sad that people discount them off-hand as satanic and "wrong" because of the magic, which seems to me no different than any other fantasy magic.

Why should JKR have to stick to the JRRT CSL mold as for which people use magic in a fantasy story and where?

More later on other issues -- must run. Blessings to you! :D

PrinceOfTheWest

10-21-2005, 07:16 PM

I agree with you - I, personally, enjoy the Potter books, but much as I enjoy secular science fiction (e.g. Phillip K. Dick). I don't think they are explicitly anti-Christian, and I certainly don't think the exercise of magic in them to be explicit Satanism. I sympathize with what Pope Benedict wrote when he was Cardinal Ratzinger: that the absence of any moral guidance to the works is a major deficiency, especially when they could do so much in that area. I think they have well-directed morals, but as with most modern works, little foundation for those morals. Even from an author without the Christian grounding of CSL & Tolkien, much more could be made of that than is.

Saruman

10-22-2005, 03:26 AM

As to the objection that there is no God mentioned in HP to guide morality: no more is there one mentioned in LOTR

Yes, there is. Tolkien even created a character called Eru Ilúvatar, "The One," who shaped and created all things (although there is no direct mention of a Trinity, of course...it is all part of Tolkien's fiction, and yet he still shows there is a God in his stories who is deeply interested in all the affairs of Arda, and of Middle-earth - i.e. sending in the Istari to counter the growing threat of Sauron, etc.).

inkspot

10-25-2005, 08:14 PM

Yes, there is. Tolkien even created a character called Eru Illúvatar, "The One," who shaped and created all things
I do not remember this at all from LOTR, and I have read all three books several times. Perhaps I blocked it out or something. If so, my error. Sorry!

faeriechylde

10-25-2005, 09:12 PM

I do not remember this at all from LOTR, and I have read all three books several times. Perhaps I blocked it out or something. If so, my error. Sorry!
The mention of "The One" does not actually occur in LOTR, except (I believe) in the Appendices. Further information on Him can be found in the Silmarillion, which contains a creation account and other history of middle earth.

Saruman

10-26-2005, 02:39 AM

inkspot

10-26-2005, 05:43 PM

Well then, certainly we cannot say that God plays a distinct role in LOTR as he does (as Aslan) in CON, and I would say if he is only mentioned in the appendix or in a separate book (Silmarillion), we cannot defend the idea that there is a "God" figure in LOTR and therefore should be one in HP. If you think about it, Dumbledore has represented spiritual authority to Harry, and any time Harry has disobeyed Dumbledore, the results have been tragic -- so there is more of a "God" personage there than there is in LOTR. This seems a moot point as far as a reason for condemning HP unless you also condemn LOTR for the same reason. To me, it seems that way, I mean.

faeriechylde

10-31-2005, 08:22 PM

If I am not mistaken, I believe Ilúvatar is referred to in FOTR, while Frodo and Sam meet the group of Elves outside the Shire. It's been a while, but there is a passage making reference. Most information and history on this character is found in The Silmarillion, as faeriechylde pointed out.
Sorry, Curumo, but I have read LotR all the way through at least ten times, and am reading FotR right now, as a matter of fact, and could not find the passage you are referring to. The Elves sing to Elbereth, which causes Frodo to recognize them as High Elves, but I cannot find that Gildor or any of the Elves with him mentions Iluvatar (either by that name or Eru or the One) at all.
In any case, I agree with Inkspot that the fact that God is not mentioned or characterized in any form in Harry Potter is not a valid reason to condemn it. God is not even mentioned in Esther, a book of the Bible (!), not to mention many other books that are worthy of reading for other reasons. I believe that Harry Potter does present a certain amount of correct spirituality in the form of Dumbledore's speeches on the values of truth, honor, loyalty, and (most importantly) love. I agree that this is not taken as far as it should be, and in many cases a true moral compass seems to be lacking in the HP books, but there is still much good in them, and many things taught that are worth learning.

Aslan the Wise one

10-31-2005, 11:11 PM

I'm with you faeriechylde on this one, were are you in Fotr.? i'm reading the Sil right now for the forth time...

inkspot

11-01-2005, 09:28 AM

In any case, I agree with Inkspot that the fact that God is not mentioned or characterized in any form in Harry Potter is not a valid reason to condemn it. God is not even mentioned in Esther, a book of the Bible (!), not to mention many other books that are worthy of reading for other reasons.
I forgot that about Esther -- good call, Fae. :D

faeriechylde

11-01-2005, 09:17 PM

I'm with you faeriechylde on this one, were are you in Fotr.? i'm reading the Sil right now for the forth time...
Right now I am at the beginning of "The Bridge of Khazad-dum." They have just escaped the Chamber of Mazarbul with orcs (and a balrog, but they don't know it yet) following them. I am rather loth to continue because I hate it when Gandalf falls, but I will eventually, haha. I am also reading Silmarillion aloud with my sisters. I have never read it all the way through before, so I am enjoying it very much.

K.Evenstar

11-02-2005, 08:43 AM

I am a Christian. I have written a fantasy book. It is not an allegory of my religion, and in it sometimes the characters do things that I don't agree with. I don't condone everything that my characters do - if they only did the right thing the whole time, it wouldn't be believable. Does that mean I am telling people to get jealous, violent or to run away from their fears? No, of course it doesn't. Just because I write a thing doesn't mean I am telling people to go out and do it. I also include (shock horror - magic.) That doesn't make me a pagan, or advocating the occult. It is, as I said earlier, Fantasy. Make-believe. Daydreaming. A story.

JK Rowling is doing the same. I have no reason to disbelieve her when she says she's a Christian. Claims that she's trying to persuade children into the occult are malicious lies - If she says she's just telling a story, then she's just telling a story. Though Harry isn't a "good boy" (who would read about him if he was?) the values of the book - love, sacrifice, courage etc, are the important things. Just because the gospel isn't spelt out, doesn't mean it's an evil book.

inkspot

11-02-2005, 03:38 PM

Rowling is doing the same. I have no reason to disbelieve her when she says she's a Christian. Claims that she's trying to persuade children into the occult are malicious lies - If she says she's just telling a story, then she's just telling a story. Though Harry isn't a "good boy" (who would read about him if he was?) the values of the book - love, sacrifice, courage etc, are the important things. Just because the gospel isn't spelt out, doesn't mean it's an evil book.

Good points, Evenstar! I agree with you.

shield lady

11-05-2005, 01:53 AM

NO WAY!
the bible "and you shall know them by their fruit"
(i can't remember where)

PrinceOfTheWest

11-05-2005, 07:17 AM

NO WAY!
the bible "and you shall know them by their fruit"
(i can't remember where)

Granted - but to which fruit are you referring?

inkspot

11-07-2005, 04:02 PM

Welcome, Shield Lady! I didn't see you post before. :)
Yes, what "fruit" of the HP books are you referring to?

Vanceone

11-18-2005, 03:13 PM

inkspot

11-18-2005, 03:59 PM

Besides, in todays world I bet JKR could never have been published if she was explicitly religious. It's a shame, but sometimes you have to smuggle your values under the table, as it were, for anyone to read them at all.
Wouldn't it be cool if this were the case and HP is building toward a dramatically symbolic Christian message? This is what I am hoping for, because I like the books, too.

Soli_Deo_Gloria

11-18-2005, 07:14 PM

Hmmmmm.......

This may be the wrong place to post this since the thread appears to be mostly about other religions, but perhaps some one could direct me to the correct place to answer my question.

. Does anyone else see a problem of rebellion in Harry Potter? I have read the first book and seen the three movies and my greatest concern rebellion. Harry never seems to be punished for breaking the rules and often takes authority to himself. I am in the military so I believe in using "chain of command". If there is a problem talk to the guy one on one. Then take someone else, then if nothing is resovled hand the problem to a higher authority.

. Harry does what he sees needs to be done and never suffers repercussions, and he is usually right. In conclusion, it seems end justify the means. I can give examples that I saw if someone wants but I am on a time crunch right now (why is so much work assigned before breaks?)

. I have not read the whole thread or many related threads so if this has been dealt with before or is being dealt with somewhere else do tell.

Goldenrod22

11-19-2005, 01:42 PM

I agree. Harry Potter, I think, encourages what I call the 'stupid parental figure' attitude in young kids. After all, let us say that Harry thinks himself to be better than the Dursleys, better than his peers, and better than the teachers at Hogwarts. He does not show Christian humility in dealing with those who he is 'better' than (have you ever seen those that boast and believe themselves to be the mental superior of others?). He seeks to make himself number one, no matter who he has to push aside to get there. Did you notice the general attitude Harry takes against the Dursleys, once he has the chance to get at them for what they did to him? Hagrid chooses to revenge Harry as well, punishing the Dursley son in order to further hurt Mr. and Mrs. Dursley. The kids in Hogwarts that threaten to go to the teachers for the rule-breaking Harry is doing are 'tattletales', and Hermione is designated as a 'hissing goose' for telling Harry & Ron not to break the rules. She then joins them in breaking the rules.

Essentially, Harry is allowed to do whatever he wants as long as the outcome is good (at least for himself). He does not have to obey anyone, listen to any adult, or follow the same expectations as the other students (after all, he is the 'gifted' one...an excuse).
This works out to Ms. Rowling's ultimate advantage, as Harry conveniently does not have parents to listen to.
Myself, the idea that 'as long as you can get away with it, it's okay', just does not pass.
In the real world, where kids will have to grow up and obey the decisions of bosses, the government, and other leaders, they will not get to cast a spell for revenge in order to solve their frustrations. They will not get to physically attack the 'bully' (unless they are juvenile delinquents) and solve their problems that way, or learn an incatation to increase their powers in fighting those at the workplace.
You get my idea. :)

LadyEm

11-19-2005, 02:10 PM

I think perhaps the answer to this lays in the fact that despite people being Christians, anyone, child or adult can be rebellious. It's one of the many flaws that human beings have. Christians are no different they are just the same old flawed human beings who happen to have accepted grace. That's the only difference.
I am not hugely familiar with a lot of Harry Potter, I really love the stories, but I have not had the time with being in college to read a whole lot of them. However, from what I have seen in the movies and in little bits I have read, Harry has been through more than what most people have gone through in their lifetimes.
How many children do you know in real life who fight in battles with evil lords, and have been through all the things that Harry goes through to overcome, on his own?
If it were in this reality, he probably would be stuck going to psychologists for the rest of his life to deal with half the things that he's seen.
It would not be realistic for Harry to deal perfectly and be perfectly behaved after going through all of this.
No human being would be.
It would be completely and utterly unrealistic for Harry not to have flaws in himself.
From what I have seen in the movies, he does have compassion for other people and will help them despite inflicting worse things upon himself. He does have other aspects of important things Christians espouse, and I think a lot of the things he is forced to do he doesn't have a choice in.
What I am saying is two things: His rebellion is perfectly normal, it might not be good, but it is life and people do react this way.
I am also saying that #2, Harry's character has been through more than any of his friends at school. My feeling of his superiority problem, as you call it, could possibly be rooted in the fact that he is different from everybody else because of everything he's been through. He's had to hash it out and fight alone and he has survived. That sets him on a completely different plane than anyone else, whether he wants it or not. I seem to remember that Harry never wanted it.
That would lead me then to suggest that it is not superiority, but a conscious feeling of knowing he is different from others, whether he likes it or not.
Real life also doesn't have perfect endings, a perfect moral at the end where everybody learns something good and fluffy and says they are sorry.
Children are also not stupid. When I was younger, my parents taught me what was right and what was not and I could distinguish what I was reading from real life.
Also the entire novel is fantasy. Every little part of it is fantasy, including the way they interact with each other. Most kids don't fight evil lords or run around on very dangerous adventures with each other.
I also think that it is important to be open to real life as Christians...just because something is wrong, doesn't mean it isn't a reality in the world, and it isn't a reality in our own selves.

Soli_Deo_Gloria

11-19-2005, 03:19 PM

*GASP* I just got done reading this thread. That is alot in one sitting.

Inkspot, you should reread your posts, it was interesting to see your opinion develop.

For my part, I woudn't be surprised if their main objection to Rowling's works was not the magic (which is treated like a technical skill - as if they were learning medicine), but the absence of any moral guidance or sense of God. The series deals with some pretty heavy topics, but never is there any mention of a source for morality: everyone is just supposed to "know" what right and wrong are. A tremendous opportunity which, I think, Rowling is passing up.

This I believe is one main point of contention (sp?) over the magic in Harry Potter. CoN and LoTR both have their magic grounded, to use a Electrical Engineering term. The use of magic has a reference point, a person or character who defines the "good" use of magic. CoN it is Aslan, LoTR it is Eru, though you have to dig to find that out. The point is that there is a standard, a true, right, and good way to use magic emulated by a perfect character who can not err.

HP on the other does not have, yet, such a standard. I have only read book one *joins unleavened in ducking bricks* but you guys do a great job of summerizing important points without giving away plot. Perhaps Dumbledore (sp? and ducks bricks) is that standard, but personally setting a fallible human as a standard scares me.

Without this standard we have a hard time evaluating Rowling's use of magic (ask a EE guy to evaluate a circuit without a ground, it is impossible). I echo Inkspot in hoping book seven provides a Bible-based standard.

If we apply the Bible as a standard to Harry Potter we run into, and have in this thread, of stumbling across fantasy and reality. Is OT verbage to be taken literally into this fantasy or not? Only HP creator, JK, can specify the standard, just like only our creator can specify ours.

Side point. The Biblical problem with witchcraft is rebellion against the natural order God has created. Wanting to control the world like God can, making ourselves as powerful as God, alot like satan's goals. So is Harry's use of magic rebellion in his world? Jadis's use of magic was rebellion against Aslan. Sauron's use of his given abilities, his magic so to speak, was in opposition to Eru. Unfortunately there is no standard in Harry's world for him to oppose, just sides of a conflict. Ally with Voldemort or Dumblebore. Since Harry's fantasy world is much like ours it is possible to relate his use of magic to the use of magick (hope I used that term correctly) in our world which would leave Harry in a hairy position (ha I kill me!). To not relate his magic to magick leads us to the discussion of Harry's morals. As a rebellious child who breaks rules and flaunts authority, as he does to an extent in the first book, he is evil, as we all are without Christ. As a loyal follower of Dumbledore he is, as I gather, for the most part a pure righteous character.

Wow, that is alot of writing basically all to say Rowling could clear alot of controversy by providing an outside standard, beyond muggles and wizards, that would dictate the use of magic. And until she does I do not see an end to this debate that will satify both sides.

LadyEm

11-19-2005, 03:23 PM

Soli_Deo_Gloria

11-19-2005, 03:30 PM

Thanks GR and LadyEm. I just finished reading the thread the Bible and Harry Potter which I believe you both posted in. Two questions.

One, GR do you believe the HP series has any hope of turning around. Simliar to Inkspots recent statements in the afore mentioned thread.

Two, LadyEm, do you feel that Harry is making headway in being less rebellious, or even that he needs to make such progress? I agree the world is not perfect and good. The character of Harry has gone through alot of crap, but I would hope he would work out such issues.

LadyEm

11-19-2005, 03:34 PM

Ah, Harry Potter. That is my main fandom at the moment. Some interesting questions are in this thread, though. I just have one question for those who automatically think all mention of magic makes the books evil. What do you say about Katherine Kurtz's Derynai series? There, the characters use magic much more than Harry Potter does; both for good and bad... but it's also very religious (in a way, Catholic)--as in explicitly religious. The hero's of the story do magic all the time; much more drastic magic that HP does. But they also are very good people, most of them. I would like to think that the Derynai series is spiritually uplifting--yet from the things I've read here, one would assume that she wrote it to get people into Satanism.

Plus, HP is not finished yet. We don't know what will happen--I think to judge it before it's done is not really fair. Harry Potter does not contain instructions for how to work magic. Magic appears to be neutral--it both heals and harms, depending on how it's used. Just as certain chemicals can heal, or harm. Or other things. Even religion is bad, if misused.

As for JKR being a born again Christian--I don't know. Since she belongs to the Church of Scotland, which as far as I know is like the Church of England, I would imagine she might not be what most call a "born again." But I don't think that that excludes her from being a Christian, anymore than it excludes a Catholic or Greek Orthodox person, or Calvinist either.

Besides, in todays world I bet JKR could never have been published if she was explicitly religious. It's a shame, but sometimes you have to smuggle your values under the table, as it were, for anyone to read them at all.

The Church of England is as much of a true church as anyone else. I do know that in recent years, there's been such a surge of renewal in that church that it has spawned huge evangelical youth churches and youth organizations such as Soul Survivor out of it, who have in turn impacted the entire world.
Also, there is not the same sort of divisions in churches in Britain as there is in North America. I spent some time with Soul Survivor and at different churches there, and it is very different.
The Church of England is Anglican, and the British branch of the church does not always agree with the things North American Anglican churches do.
That said, it is impossible to make judgment on a person's beliefs by simpling recognizing what church they are in. It is after all about the person's relationship with God that comes into question and their personal beliefs.
If JK Rowling says publicly that she is a Christian, we have no call to dispute that. Additionally, God is the only one who ever truly knows the state of a person's heart, and there are lots of people who have a lot of religiosity, know a lot of theology from the Bible and have no relationship with Him at all, but go through all the outward appearances of being a Christian. This goes throughout the ENTIRE church on this earth, from Catholic to non demoninational Charismatic.
As a Christian, I would have absolutely no qualms writing like JK Rowling. In fact, if I can write a story as good as she does, I'd be quite thrilled.

LadyEm

11-19-2005, 03:47 PM

Well, HP is also a real human being. I'm afraid I have not read, as I mentioned, the entire series as of yet, because I haven't had time - I'm a college student, so I'm afraid I can't give a very detailed response. However, my question in return would be, why would that matter? The series, additionally isn't finished yet, albeit there is one more book coming. From your post however, it sounds like Harry's behavior is on the increase, not the decrease and my argument of course that this is related to everything he's been through.
From what I can tell, with my lack of knowlege, Harry has not had time to begin to work through these issues...they've compounded on top of each other because more things keep happening - instead of decreasing in his interactions with Lord Voldemort etc, it increases, the story gets further involvedin Harry's struggle with that darkness.
For example, in Star Wars, Anakin Skywalker struggles with similiar issues being the "chosen one" and he eventually falls to the dark side - through a choice on his own part. I am not saying this is going to be Harry by any means, they are completely different characters and personalities, but you DO learn a lot from watching the FALL. It isn't until years later that Anakin is redeemed.
Therefore, you can learn a lot from watching a characters bad form and the consequences from it. I know you are arguing that there aren't any consequences for his reactions, but I think that Harry, at least from earlier books/movies seems to have quite a pure heart towards those around him.
When people fought in the Second World War, their experiences caused them to be shell shocked and have nightmares, etc, and their behavior on the battle field, was not the same as it was when they came home to their families, though they did have to work through a lot of these things when they got home so they could rejoin society.
If you look at it this way, Harry is in the middle of a constant battle. His battlefield is his life, with his nightmares of Voldemart almost as real as his real battles with him.
Therefore, I think at this point it is not important that his behavior is getting better. In fact, I'm glad it isn't. It would be completely unrealistic.

Soli_Deo_Gloria

11-19-2005, 06:26 PM

I suppose I have the same problem with Star Wars. (BTW my condolences on college. Same here, free time is an illussion propagated by those who....are......less....busy? Nevermind, good luck with college) Even Anakin "got better." How would Anakin going dark sat with people had we all not known he eventually turned. You are really right about why he is getting worse. Too often we get trite stories about everything eventually "living happily ever after." But I see more truth in a story where even though a character goes through trials they learn, and through Christ come out of the experience with a more mature and Christ-like attitude.

Maybe that is my problem with Harry Potter. Hmmmmmmm........
Thanks for getting me thinking.

unleavened

11-19-2005, 11:26 PM

The theme of man benefitting from rebellion or sin runs all throughout liturature. It doesn't make sinning ok if good things come out of it. Face it, we have no excuse for sin. I agree with you SDG when you say it's twisted. I don't want my kids to make Harry their hero. However, I, by no means, think that makes reading the books bad. We have to be on our toes for such deceptions in every aspect of life, everything we read, everything we watch. If the kid knows this and can seperate the right from the wrong or if you can provide the seperation for them through discussion go right ahead. Read on.

The Weight of Glory

11-20-2005, 05:45 AM

I am a religious studies student at Arizona State University and in my Ritual, Symbol, Myth class we have discussed heavily the use of allegory in religious culture. Now obviously this class is taught from an academic perspective, but I have focused much of my attention on my ever growing theory that God can be found in the books of the Harry Potter series. Before I continue, I am not trying to argue relativism, and I would never suppose that Rowling wrote her series to be a Christian allegory, but I believe that Lewis would most definitely tell you that part of literary criticism is being able to make connections deeper than the external, obviously intended lessons.

I have fallen in love with the Harry Potter books both on a literary and theological/philosophical level because they are forcing readers to see certain truths. For instance, early in the series we are introduced into the the deep magic of love. Harry's mother dies in order to save him, and her sacrificial death spared him from the attack of evil. We are also introduced to the David versus Goliath idea. The idea that even the smallest of hands may create the biggest impact; as the Boy who Lived defeated Lord Voldemort as only an infant.

Most importantly though, I think that the greatest thing that the Harry Potter books do is force the reader to see things as they are. We are forced to see good for good, and evil for evil. In our society who tries to blur the truth with relative morality and political correctness, this is needed.

Saruman

11-20-2005, 01:05 PM

The Church of England is as much of a true church as anyone else. I do know that in recent years, there's been such a surge of renewal in that church that it has spawned huge evangelical youth churches and youth organizations such as Soul Survivor out of it, who have in turn impacted the entire world.

This is news to my ears! I pray you are right that there is a great revival movement in that denomination, for the news I have heard concerning the Church of England is very bad (i.e. the rampant movement of homosexuality and the approval of homosexual marriages).

Also, there is not the same sort of divisions in churches in Britain as there is in North America. I spent some time with Soul Survivor and at different churches there, and it is very different.

Are you absolutely sure about this?

...it is impossible to make judgment on a person's beliefs by simpling recognizing what church they are in. It is after all about the person's relationship with God that comes into question and their personal beliefs.
If JK Rowling says publicly that she is a Christian, we have no call to dispute that.

You hit the nail on the head concerning the state of a person's heart and the church they attend. We are commanded by Pastor Paul, the Apostle, not to say, "I am of Peter" or "I am of Paul," because of the very reason of divisions and separations (i.e. Henry VIII breaking away from the Catholic church and creating his own church because he wanted to divorce or the Catholic church proclaiming it is the way of salvation). Nevertheless, to say that we "have no call to dispute" the fact that JKR is "Christian" because she publicly states thus, is incorrect. I have made mention of this idea before on this forum and how someone already said that they would give a person the benefit of the doubt. As Christians, we are called to be fruit-inspectors. If JKR says she is Christian but the fruit of her actions and thoughts demonstrates otherwise, then I am disinclined to trust her claim.

Additionally, God is the only one who ever truly knows the state of a person's heart, and there are lots of people who have a lot of religiosity, know a lot of theology from the Bible and have no relationship with Him at all, but go through all the outward appearances of being a Christian. This goes throughout the ENTIRE church on this earth, from Catholic to non demoninational Charismatic.
As a Christian, I would have absolutely no qualms writing like JK Rowling. In fact, if I can write a story as good as she does, I'd be quite thrilled.

While I agree that God alone knows the state of a person's heart, and that there is a myriad of people in this world who have all the wonderful qualities of being religious (religion, after all, is man's puerile attempt to reach God), as a Christian, I would have qualms about writing like JKR. As I have stated before, I do not condemn anyone who enjoys her readings in this forum, but I do condemn her fiction. The concept of dabbling with (Wiccan-style) witchcraft and spell-casting (much different than Tolkien or CSL's concepts of "magic" in their stories), is to me abominable.

Again, I lay the challenge on the carpet: if JKR is purportedly Christian, and she has said in an interview that if she said what her beliefs were it would make the direction the books were taking "too obvious," then, being a Christian, what has she to fear? Ought she not to seek to witness to the world?

inkspot

11-21-2005, 08:35 AM

Welcome, Weight of Glory! I didn't see you post before! I agree with you, I think, that there may be ways to see the lessons of HP in light of Bible teaching and principles.
If JKR says she is Christian but the fruit of her actions and thoughts demonstrates otherwise, then I am disinclined to trust her claim.
I don't see where we are called to judge her "claim" to be a Christian at all. In Matthew 7:1-5, The Message bible, Jesus says:
"Don't pick on people, jump on their failures, criticize their faults--unless, of course, you want the same treatment. That critical spirit has a way of boomeranging. It's easy to see a smudge on your neighbor's face and be oblivious to the ugly sneer on your own. Do you have the nerve to say, "Let me wash your face for you,' when your own face is distorted by contempt? It's this whole traveling road-show mentality all over again, playing a holier-than-thou part instead of just living your part. Wipe that ugly sneer off your own face, and you might be fit to offer a washcloth to your neighbor.
Or more familiarly in the NIV:
"Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye."
If JKR is a Christian who believes she can use a tale of fantasy magic to ilustrate biblical truths, then she is not alone -- Tolkien and Lewis felt the same. As for the argument that there is no "God" specificly mentioned in HP books, nor is there in LOTR -- you have to read the Silmarilion to find that whole Creator concept, yet far fewer read that than read LOTR, and Aslan never calls himself God in CON, so why should Dumbledore have to be labeled God for him to symbolize God in the books? I still son't get it ...

Soli, you are so right that my attitude changed ove rthe course of this thread, because I actually read the books! I had thought they were bad cuz so many Christians said they were bad, then I read them and saw for myself that they weren't bad ... they're really good stories, matter of fact.

inkspot

11-21-2005, 09:51 AM

I think HP is punished, and horribly, for the anti-authority choices he makes. If you see Dumbledore as the authority in Harry's life, then you can see that when he defies that authority, the results are disastrous. Soli and Lady Em, you would need to read the whole series to see this developed, but as an example:

**HP Book 5 spoilers**
Dumbledore orders Harry to study "occlumency" with Snape, to learn to block his mind from Voldemort's intrusions. Harry hates Snape and refuses to take the study seriously, finally abandoning it altogether. The result is that Voldemort invades Harry's mind and convinces him that his god-father is in danger, Harry impulsively rushes off to save him, and ends up getting him killed (he was never in danger, that was an illusion V fostered on Harry because harry refused to learn to shiled his mind).

Harry defied Dumbledore's authority, and it cost him the one person he loved best in the world, his only sympathetic "relative," his god-father Sirius Black.

There is no way to say that Harry's rebellious behavior is not "punished." It is not punished in the sense of the word that someone sits him down and gives him a good talking-to or a time-out, that would be facile. It is punished by the real consequences that he'll have to live with the rest of his life ...

Harry breaks the rules quite a bit, but he rarely defies the one authority figure in his life, Dumbledore, and when he does, the results are terrible for him. This carries far more weight, in my mind, than any Sunday School story moralizing that could be done. That would make the tales boring in addition to untrue to human nature and God's nature.

Also, Harry spends a lot of his time wishing he weren't who he is, so that can hardly be called feelings of superiority. And, despite being treated with contempt by his own family most of his life, he has developed a great deal of compassion and a sense of justice -- witness how he refused to alllow Sirius and Lupin to kill the traitor Pettigrew, despite his sure knowledge that Pettigrew had betrayed his parents to Voldemort. There are many virtues on display in these stories, if we can stop focusing on the supposed evils of the fantasy magic.

Saruman

11-21-2005, 10:42 AM

Once more I believe you have misunderstood me, my friend inkspot. Or, I should say, at the very least, you have misinterpreted the concept of judgment, as we have discussed earlier in this thread. There is absolutely nothing wrong for me to stake a claim that I believe JKR is not sincerely a born-again Christian:

Mt 7:16-21: Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. Not everyone that saith unto Me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of My Father which is in heaven.

Even though Jesus was particularly speaking of "false prophets" in this passage, the concept of knowing one by his fruits permeates throughout the New Testament:

Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in Me. (Jn. 15:4)

All I am saying is, just because JKR makes a claim that she is "Christian" doesn't mean there is any evident fruit that is born in her life to support this claim. Remember that ye shall know them by their fruits.

Our pastor gave an interesting lesson yesterday morning concerning the times in which we live, and how so often men (particularly Christians) take to themselves a view of God that suits them best, in their own mind, their own perception of God, thus wrapping Him in a box of their own. I don't know about you, but I don't think any concept of goodness or morality can come from JKR's books in any shape or form, particularly not through the form of spell-casting and witchcraft. As I've already mentioned, there are great differences between JKR's works concerning "magic" and Tolkien and Lewis' works concerning "magic."

LadyEm

11-21-2005, 11:35 AM

I agree Inkspot.
I never said that Harry didn't go unpunished I was just arguing the fact that his behavior seems normal, and being rebellious at times isn't that odd nor should it be a moral reason not to read the book or let your children read the books.
I do need to read the books before I can comment any further, because I've completely reached the end of my own knowledge.
But I completely agree wtih you.

inkspot

11-21-2005, 12:27 PM

Oh, sorry, Em, I did understand what you were saying -- I just included you in that because I am encouraging you to read the books when you have the time. I never read them because so many Christians were down on them, then when I did read them, I was pleasantly surprised. I totally agree with what you said, too. :)

LadyEm

11-21-2005, 12:35 PM

:) No problem Ink :)

I just haven't read them because I haven't had time, lol. And here I am arguing for them...hehe

inkspot

11-21-2005, 12:40 PM

Yah, many people say there is a big difference in the magic, but I never have understood the explanation of what that big difference is.

As far as I can see, the only difference is that Tolkien and Lewis were pubic about their faith and the fact that their works were symbolic of biblical themes, and JKR has been silent on this issue, aside from her membership in the Church of Scotland.

But evaluating the work on its own, Harry is learning:
* Courage
* Obedience/respect for authority
* Trust
* Loyalty
* Self-sacrifice
* The power of love

These are good themes, and if you look for the biblical archetypes in the work, you can find them ... and if you regard the magic here as a fantasy because HP's is a fantasy world, I don't see why this "fruit" of JKR's possible walk with God isn't valid. (Not that she has claimed to be an evangelical Christian or asked us to believe HP exhibits biblical principles -- she's hasn't, but if we are going to appoint ourselves judges of her work and decide whether she is a Christian based on it, I don't see where she is disqualified.)

Again, I am probably just slow to understand why magic in CON/LOTR is good, and magic in HP is bad. But I haven't yet seen an explanation that has made that distinction for me, when we allow that all three works are fantasy stories.

I don't know if JKR intends any religious symbolism in her work, she hasn't said that she does. She may not be a Christ follower in any sense we can understand. She hasn't said that she is. But there are lots of great fantasy stories out there that aren't evil, even if there authors aren't believers, I think.

waterhogboy

11-21-2005, 12:44 PM

Lady Em, you are both wrong and right. The Anglican church in Britain is not particularly...... 'commited' these days. There are of course Anglican churches that are Bible believing, theologically accurate, born again churches - but these are few and far between. Being an Anglican has become a thing of tradition now, much as being a Catholic has too...

What you said about Soul Survivor I don't understand??? Thats not a church, its just a Christian camp that happens each year. There is alot of division of churches over here..... :confused:

LadyEm

11-21-2005, 01:03 PM

There is a Soul Survivor Youth church in Watford, on the outskirts of London, there is not just youth festivals.
Here's the link to the church site: http://www.soulsurvivorwatford.co.uk/

Thanks for clarifying WHB, about the anglican church...that makes sense.

unleavened

11-22-2005, 07:08 PM

Again, inky, I havn't read the books either - no time. I'm just commenting on what I've seen in the movies. True, his reaction to dumbledor is appropriate or he gets what he deserves, but I don't like how he treats the other athorities in his life. But like I said I don't condemn the book or even the movies. I just have little issues with them as I do with most books or movies I read/watch.

susan19

11-26-2005, 09:26 AM

No matter what there is now bible in Harry Potter!!

she-elfwarrior19

11-26-2005, 09:57 AM

Welcome susan19, good to here your opnion. Welcome again.:)

inkspot

11-26-2005, 06:30 PM

No matter what there is now bible in Harry Potter!!
You do not think there could be biblical symbolism?
Like, all the rejoicing when Harry is a baby is like the angels welcome Jesus?
Like, Harry's lightning scar as a result of his battle with Voldemort could be a reference to the way Jesus said he saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven (Luke 10:18)?
Like, Harry's mother's sacrifice of herself endowing him with a deep protection from evil could be similar to how Christ's love for His children protects them (and He even sacrificed Himself for us?).

I don't know if JKR is going for a Christian theme, but I definitely see how some of the symbolism could be Christian.

Vanceone

11-27-2005, 02:47 AM

Like I've said before, Harry Potter is my main fandom. Now, I happen to be a Christian, and I don't find anything wrong with HP so far (although there are major issues I currently have with HP, the whole Witchcraft thing is not one of them). I, too am confused by the condemnation of magic in HP, while excusing magic in LOTR and CoN. In HP, magic is just a tool--it's how the tool is used, whether it be good or bad. I remember reading in another fantasy series--David Edding's Belgariad, where this question was addressed. The one character found he could do magic, and was terrifed. He was told, though, by another character, a blacksmith, that it is just another ability. The blacksmith can beat everyone up--the hero could do magic. It's all in the control of the abilities we have.

In LOTR--Sauron and Saruman used magic for evil; while Gandalf and the elves used it for good. In CoN, the white witch and the emerald witch use it for evil. Aslan, the stars, and the hermit in Horse( a clear human, by the way, ) use it for good. It's all in the use.

Here in our world, not all supernatural events are evil, or come from an evil source. Certainly, if you worship the devil, etc. or whatever people mean by Magick (with the K), that's evil. Yet, if you go to God, and have authority from Him, supernatural events can also occur. Walking on water, for instance, as Peter did. To me, it is the source, the intent, and the reason which makes things good or bad, not an automatic "never shall this type of thing ever, ever be good" statement.

Thus, I don't think HP is evil, per se, just because it's using what is called magic. In fact, according to some people I know, HP is, at bottom, a very Christian allegory, or theme. Do I believe it? I don't know--but some compelling cases can be made. This is John Granger's work, for those who might know of him. It raises some fascinating questions.... but that's likely a little too indepth for this forum, as this is a Narnia, not a Harry Potter place. :)

Darth_Digger

11-27-2005, 08:24 AM

Saruman

11-27-2005, 11:33 AM

You do not think there could be biblical symbolism?
Like, all the rejoicing when Harry is a baby is like the angels welcome Jesus?
Like, Harry's lightning scar as a result of his battle with Voldemort could be a reference to the way Jesus said he saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven (Luke 10:18)?
Like, Harry's mother's sacrifice of herself endowing him with a deep protection from evil could be similar to how Christ's love for His children protects them (and He even sacrificed Himself for us?).

I don't know if JKR is going for a Christian theme, but I definitely see how some of the symbolism could be Christian.

Anybody can take a familiar theme known to everyone and use it as part of their story.

1: Rejoicing when Harry is a baby - I think anybody would rejoice at a baby, unless they are truly twisted.
2: A battle scar from a fight with Voldemort being a symbol of Satan falling from heaven - I have no idea how you could have concocted such an idea from this scene.
3: The love of Christ fills and surrounds us entirely, and while we are His ultimately, we are subjected to natural occurrences in this world. The Lord is always watching over us, and His hedge of protection is around us, but that's not to say He will not allow us to go through trial and hardship (see the Book of Job). And at any rate, the idea that his mother left protection for him sounds much like ancient Celtic or Druish occultism.

All in all, I see this book as pagan and hardly worthy of being called in the slightest "Christian." If Harry Potter is Christian, then I am inclined to believe that the Kuran, the Hindu Vedas, and other writings, are also Christian. They certainly include various "Christian" themes (there are certain inherent truths in the universe that cannot be denied), but what's to say that Satan cannot take the truth of God and twist it in a way to keep men off the straight and narrow?

If JKR is truly a Christian, wouldn't she want to share the sweet message of the Gospels? Hmm...she has me wondering.

NarniaForever

11-27-2005, 06:03 PM

Well, I think that if parents are afraid their childern will have corupted minds after reading the Harry Potter books then they should look at the world around them such as music, etc., my parents are like that, I'm a christian and lover of the Rowling, Tolkein, and Lewis books, my parents hate halloween, I've never even tricker-treated before. But they know that I know that the magic in Hp is fake and that I do not take it seriously. My best friend is not allowed to read the Hp series, but it's ok for her to read the Lord of the Rings. I don't understand, she knows it's not real, but they prefer her not to assciate with the lot. Just last year I thought the same until, my cousin lent me the first book, my parents didn't care too much. But they didn't want me reading them when I was younger, but now it's ok. So I think that childern should not read the Hp series unless they are of the age 11 or above.

Aslan the Wise one

11-27-2005, 09:13 PM

Not to be rude or any thing but you really find chrisitan themes in a aid for Mic'ds if you look hard. I did not say that i'm just repetting what CSL step-son told me.

Darth_Digger

11-28-2005, 11:45 AM

sounds good to me!

inkspot

11-28-2005, 04:16 PM

Oh, I don't know if those things are Christian symbols in HP, but when Susan said no way could the Bible be in HP, they came to mind.

I didn't concoct anything about the lightning scar, I just thought that's how symbolism worked: something that referenced the devil in one work (lightning) could be a reference to the devil in another work? Maybe that isn't exactly symbolism, but it's a kind of hearkening to?

And all the magic world rejoiced when HP (as a baby) defeated Voldemort, and I thought it could be seen as a hearkening to the way the angels rejoiced (and encouraged the shepherds to rejoice) when Jesus came as a baby to defeat the devil here? You know, on that day in the HP world, the magic people were joyfully embracing the muggles, and you could see it as kind of the way the angels broke out of heaven to sing for the shepherds?

Clearly, the idea of a love so strong it demands you lay down your life for the beloved is an idea that originates in the Bible (John 15:13), so that can't be discounted.

I don't know if that's what JKR intended, but there could be parallels, and I thought that's what symbolism was about, finding a reference to one work in another work, maybe I have got it wrong?

It's not clear to me whether JKR's completed work will be only a good adventure story or have a clear Christian message, but I can see it going either way because, like Vanceone, I do not see a problem with the magic in the book. It's a fantasy book, and the magic is a fantasy -- there's no devil in the book, there's just a parallel world where magical things happen, some good and some bad ... which sounds to me like CON and LOTR.

inkspot

11-28-2005, 04:23 PM

I think that you can find Christian themes where you look for them, too, and I am surprised that more Christian parents, who let their kids read HP, don't try to help them discover those themes.

NarniaForever, I dont remember if I saw you post before -- so welcome! I think your parents are wise, and I agree with you that the HP books are not for young kids.

Our daughters started reading them when they first came out, and the girls were maybe 10 and 12, so now they are big teenagers and I don't worry about it. But the last three books in the series have been rather scary for youngsters.

NEllas of Dorthonion

11-28-2005, 04:38 PM

I've never even tricker-treated before.
wow another family who dosn't go tricker-treating. My parent's haven't forbidden me form readding/watching them. They don't like the Harry Potter books/movies because theres magic in it. when i pointed out to my mom that the con and lotr have magic in them to she said that she didn't like them because the main caricature uses magic.

PeterHighKingofNarniaetc.

11-28-2005, 08:21 PM

i think it is ok as long as it does not make u want to become a real life whitch or wizard so i would say from experiance withn my mom that it is really hard to convince some people but to just say that in essencethey are not evil but have a bit of a influence on the mind of the weak kinda like the jedi mind trick :) the lotr books were decidedly christian books as tolkien was a devote one

CSLewisFan

11-28-2005, 09:51 PM

Ok people, well i'm a christian, but i know a lot of people that have a problem with harry potter. Now my thing is, is how is it much different than lord of the rings, both have good and evil. Both use magic as a means to fight. Most people get hung off on the witchcraft naming, but where is the difference in teh books though? It doesn't looks so much like witchcraft except for the potions stuff. Most of it looks like wizardry to me. which is what gandalf uses. Now some people have given me the arguement of the fact that maybe its a ploy of the enemy to make us think that witchcraft is ok and stuff. My thing is that i think people are looking too deeply into it. For me it doesn't affect me as i've read much crazier fantasy books. I just think its a part of the reason that LOTR has been deemed safe for some reason, even though they are not christian books. Now some will argue that they are, they aren't because tolkien gave lewis a hard time about writing allegories, they have the influence but are not strictly christian books. So my question is how do i help my arguement with the fact that i like them, but I just can't get people to get past their mental block on harry potter. They just don't seem to get it.

tg

How do you make the distinction between what is referred to as fantasy magic (a element that an author uses to explain what is hard to describe other wise); and occult magic (demons toying with humans that are willing to be toyed with)?

I love fantasy books, they are my favorite type to read in fact.

But the question as Christians we must first ask is: Why do you feel the Harry Potter books represent the occult, while you believe that Tolkien’s, CS Lewis’s, and Paolini’s, (all favorite authors of mine), simply represent fantasy.
How are you making that distinction?

Harry Potter books are NOT children’s books.
It is much to my dislike that the books are heavily marketed towards youngsters. I think that if read at all, the reader should be mature enough to analyze and enjoy a well written book while being able to make a distinction between supernatural reality and a fantasy story.

What makes Harry Potter occult based when other fantasy books are not.
Your opinion may be that it is the difference is made in the spiritual beliefs.

I’m going to take the liberty of taking this statement a bit further and assume that your saying that Christians have a Christ based worldview thus they don’t write things intrinsically “wrong” in their books.

However non-Christians have the ability to write things that they were taught or believe are ok, but by Christ’s standards, are not.

I agree completely, many times talented authors that are non-Christians make a tough choice and often a compromise for Christians who are not completely comfortable with reading the material.
However I do not believe Mrs. Rowling has done so for several reasons.

"Children who read about Harry will probably discover little to nothing about the true world of the occult." Lindy Beam, Focus on the Family

I agree with Ms. Beam, the Harry Potter books portray nothing of what I have read the essence of the occult to be.

For instance when making “charms” and “enchantments” the characters in the Harry Potter series say what they want to do... while speaking Latin.

This is very different to appealing to demons and performing ceremonies and rituals that the occult is fond of.

"Harry and his friends cast spells, read crystal balls, and turn themselves into animals—but they don't make contact with a supernatural world." –Charles Colson

This is an important thing to consider when comparing Christian fantasy literature and contemporary fantasy to decide whether it is a moral decision:

Do the characters in the books reach into the supernatural world?

I don’t believe Harry Potter does.

If it is good. Than it is God's. I believe Harry Potter is a great story. It is not for youngsters, but it is good.

I'll leave you with a quote from my Sociology professor: "Many religious people shun the Harry Potter stories because of the magic it contains. However, from a sociological symbolic interactionists’ perspective, the stories are not about magic. They are about friends, family, enemies, good, evil and how those components interact.

inkspot

11-29-2005, 11:20 AM

I agree with what you say, LewisFan, for the most part.

I am curious if you mean that you believe Christians can't write anything "wrong"?
I’m going to take the liberty of taking this statement a bit further and assume that your saying that Christians have a Christ based worldview thus they don’t write things intrinsically “wrong” in their books.

Of course many devout Christians have written many wrong things. The beloved Martin Luther went a little nuts on the anti-Semitism, great man, great writings, but a little out there on a subject that I don't doubt brings God much grief.

Faithful Christ followers are at their best when they allow Christ to live through them, and at their worst when they use their own abilities to try to get at Christ or do something for Christ in their own power ... then I think believers can certainly write stuff that is mistaken.

Maybe I misunderstood what you said? :o

CSLewisFan

11-29-2005, 12:12 PM

I was saying that it is possible for Christians to do intrinsically wrong, and for non-Christians to do good. (In the way of literature.)

Sorry if you misunderstood due to my misrepresentation ;)

inkspot

11-29-2005, 01:27 PM

I was saying that it is possible for Christians to do intrinsically wrong, and for non-Christians to do good. (In the way of literature.)

Sorry if you misunderstood due to my misrepresentation ;)
No, it was probably just the way I read it. I see what you are saying now. My mistake. :)

Darth_Digger

11-29-2005, 02:17 PM

yeah it does a bit really....!

CSLewisFan

11-29-2005, 03:13 PM

inkspot

11-29-2005, 04:11 PM

If it is allegorical/symbolic of Christian themes in any way, it is not nearly as blatant as CON -- you would really have to work to find it. But I am reserving judgment: I think with the final book, JKR could well deliver a strongly Christian ending, especially if Harry ends up having to choose to lay down his life for his friends ... I think that would be sad, but I would be happy if it turned out JKR has all along been crafting a saga with a Christian message.

Even if she isn't, I think the stories are good adventure/fantasy tales, and I don't find them evil. I did not read them for a long time because so many Christians had denounced them, but when I read them for myself, I did not find them to encourage Satanism or the occult. The magic in them seems to me like CON/fantasy magic.

WhiteWitchMeeka

12-01-2005, 11:42 PM

I don't think that Harry Potter is good because the Bible say's that wichtcraft I a sin.
SO I don't Like it Because The Bible say's that.

It's time for my two sense, I was going to leave this alone and not say a word but it's time....

This whole thing about Harry Potter encourging witchcraft, you can turn it around and say the same about Chronicles of Narnia. I'm so sick and tired of hearing, Harry Potter is the devil and witchcraft is wrong. Well take it from a real witch(Wiccan), The stuff that happens in Harry Potter is not what we really do. We're not "I'll get you my Pretty" Or Fly on brooms. Wicca is worship of nature. We don't wave our wands around and turn others into toads.

Parthian King

12-01-2005, 11:53 PM

She is evil and that's what is so darn cool about her.

Well take it from a real witch(Wiccan), The stuff that happens in Harry Potter is not what we really do. We're not "I'll get you my Pretty" Or Fly on brooms. Wicca is worship of nature.

Does the admiration of evil and the admiration of nature go hand in hand? It seems that Jadis rather hates nature, since she won't even allow the seasons to take their natural course, and turns little living creatures into stone. For C.S. Lewis, evil, as embodied by Jadis, is nature's enemy, while Aslan, who ultimately crushes her, is not only nature's friend but nature's Creator. Have you read the Magician's Nephew, or even The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe, WhiteWitchMeeka?

WhiteWitchMeeka

12-02-2005, 12:03 AM

Does the admiration of evil and the admiration of nature go hand in hand? It seems that Jadis rather hates nature, since she won't even allow the seasons to take their natural course, and turns little living creatures into stone. For C.S. Lewis, evil, as embodied by Jadis, is nature's enemy, while Aslan, who ultimately crushes her, is not only nature's friend but nature's Creator. Have you read the Magician's Nephew, or even The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe, WhiteWitchMeeka?

Oh I know, that's not why I like her. Yes I read all the books and own them. Oh coming up with a name on a site is hard everyone should know that. I was just making a point, that Harry Potter is not real witchcraft.

I like her because she is totally insane, intellagent, beautiful. :D Plus I do love the winter.

I wasn't even talking about Jadis in my comment about we could turn this around. I was talking about the goodies of the bunch.

Parthian King

12-02-2005, 12:07 AM

Is she intellagent, really? With what she comes to, I guess I couldn't see that in there...

Potter is fiction, and I think most know that.

WhiteWitchMeeka

12-02-2005, 12:09 AM

Is she "intellagent," really? With what she comes to, I guess I couldn't see that in there...

Potter is fiction, and I think most know that.

LOL I think she is!

Yes though most find it evil, and I was just stating a fact. In fact there are some Wiccans that hate Harry Potter. I did a whole report on this in college.

shhhh I like Aslan too. Just don't tell her that.... ;)

Also I hope I did not offend anyone. I was just trying to state a fact.

Parthian King

12-02-2005, 12:11 AM

Your secret is safe with me, Edmund, er, WhiteWitchMeeka. :)

TimmyofOz

12-02-2005, 12:47 AM

It's time for my two sense, I was going to leave this alone and not say a word but it's time....

This whole thing about Harry Potter encourging witchcraft, you can turn it around and say the same about Chronicles of Narnia. I'm so sick and tired of hearing, Harry Potter is the devil and witchcraft is wrong. Well take it from a real witch(Wiccan), The stuff that happens in Harry Potter is not what we really do. We're not "I'll get you my Pretty" Or Fly on brooms. Wicca is worship of nature. We don't wave our wands around and turn others into toads.

As a Christian, I can't worship nature. It is forbidden. I rejoice seeing God's work in Nature. You quote the Wizard of Oz. There is a strong point to be made in that book/movie and the LWW. The chrildren aren't magical (sorcerers) and yet they defeat the witch. It is the biblical principal that though I am only a Christian I can stand against the powers of evil. That is why I don't like Harry Potter. It is one sorcerer against other socerer. Thus who is truely good and truely evil.

WhiteWitchMeeka

12-02-2005, 12:55 AM

As a Christian, I can't worship nature. It is forbidden. I rejoice seeing God's work in Nature. You quote the Wizard of Oz. There is a strong point to be made in that book/movie and the LWW. The chrildren aren't magical (sorcerers) and yet they defeat the witch. It is the biblical principal that though I am only a Christian I can stand against the powers of evil. That is why I don't like Harry Potter. It is one sorcerer against other socerer. Thus who is truely good and truely evil.

My Point is, they are fiction, not real. There is nothing wrong with Harry Potter, because what he and those in the books no one can do in real life.

TimmyofOz

12-02-2005, 01:02 AM

Just as WoOz and LWW are fiction. Harry Potter is good fiction, but as a Christian I have a habit of seeing things thru my world-view while I read. Just as you do I bet as a Wicca. Do you agree with the Christian ideas of CoN while you read it or do you ignore them and just like fantasy with magic.

LadyEm

12-02-2005, 01:09 AM

My Point is, they are fiction, not real. There is nothing wrong with Harry Potter, because what he and those in the books no one can do in real life.

THANKYOU for speaking up and saying this.

If there is *no* reality in the spells and wands and flying broomsticks (I mean really flying broomsticks??) that are in HP books - wouldn't it be logical to conclude that HP is not promoting *witchraft* but a fantasy novel, as Meeka has pointed out, has nothing to do with reality?

Additionally, Timmy, it is also sorcerer against sorcerer in LOTR - look at Gandalf and Soroman? they battle it out in his tower, very obviously using wizardry and magic.
There is nothing about worshipping nature in the HP books, so that can't enter into the debate about HP.
Worshipping nature is what real witches or wiccans do, as Meeka has said (Meeka please correct me on any points I get incorrect), and learning magic spells, waving wands and fighting evil wizards is what HP does.

As Christians, of COURSE we don't worship nature, we worship God. But even in our own Christian allegorical literature (I am not claiming that HP is allegorical, it is simply just a GREAT fantasy story) we have wizards (Gandalf) and witches (Jadis).

WhiteWitchMeeka

12-02-2005, 01:10 AM

I ignore them. Why nit pick everything when the writer has ment it for kids to read? There are so many kids in the world that don't read and have a hard time with spelling, grammar. I was one of those who had such a hard time with grammar and such. Then I started reading Harry Potter and CoN(Again) and my grammar had inproved. Then I read other books and so forth making my vocabulary much better.

WhiteWitchMeeka

12-02-2005, 01:12 AM

THANKYOU for speaking up and saying this.

If there is *no* reality in the spells and wands and flying broomsticks (I mean really flying broomsticks??) that are in HP books - wouldn't it be logical to conclude that HP is not promoting *witchraft* but a fantasy novel, as Meeka has pointed out, has nothing to do with reality?

Additionally, Timmy, it is also sorcerer against sorcerer in LOTR - look at Gandalf and Soroman? they battle it out in his tower, very obviously using wizardry and magic.
There is nothing about worshipping nature in the HP books, so that can't enter into the debate about HP.
Worshipping nature is what real witches or wiccans do, as Meeka has said (Meeka please correct me on any points I get incorrect), and learning magic spells, waving wands and fighting evil wizards is what HP does.

As Christians, of COURSE we don't worship nature, we worship God. But even in our own Christian allegorical literature (I am not claiming that HP is allegorical, it is simply just a GREAT fantasy story) we have wizards (Gandalf) and witches (Jadis).

No you said it all perfectly.

Edit: Also VERY good point with the Lord of the Rings. I should have remembered that myself being my Mom is a huge LoTR fan.

Saruman

12-02-2005, 01:22 AM

Additionally, Timmy, it is also sorcerer against sorcerer in LOTR - look at Gandalf and Soroman? they battle it out in his tower, very obviously using wizardry and magic.

You've certainly got the movie down rather well, but must never have read the books. Saruman and Gandalf never had said battle. Tolkien's talk concerning "magic" of the elves and wizards is really not "magic" at all as you know it, but it is the natural capabilities which they possess, the elves being of a high race, and the "wizards" (Men of Middle-earth mistakenly called them wizards, as Tolkien wrote) being as angels (or so the translation of Istari goes, being messenger).

As for the HP books, I can't say that they are good fiction. Perhaps they do not necessarily represent the "Wiccan" frame of mind, but they sure do condone a lot of witchcraft and spell-making and the like. And anybody who has a reasonable state of mind can easily point out certain inherent "morals" in any story, be it written by a Christian author or no. Being a Christian, I cannot say I would want my children to read this series. With CoN and LOTR, however, I have no problem. A complete difference in their nature and uses.

WhiteWitchMeeka

12-02-2005, 01:29 AM

You've certainly got the movie down rather well, but must never have read the books. Saruman and Gandalf never had said battle. Tolkien's talk concerning "magic" of the elves and wizards is really not "magic" at all as you know it, but it is the natural capabilities which they possess, the elves being of a high race, and the "wizards" (Men of Middle-earth mistakenly called them wizards, as Tolkien wrote) being as angels (or so the translation of Istari goes, being messenger).

As for the HP books, I can't say that they are good fiction. Perhaps they do not necessarily represent the "Wiccan" frame of mind, but they sure do condone a lot of witchcraft and spell-making and the like. And anybody who has a reasonable state of mind can easily point out certain inherent "morals" in any story, be it written by a Christian author or no. Being a Christian, I cannot say I would want my children to read this series. With CoN and LOTR, however, I have no problem. A complete difference in their nature and uses.

I've know Christians to say LOTR is evil. In fact I went to a church where they were against it. There were only a few that were into it. My family and another. I personally don't Like LOTR but not because of that, but because my mother wore me out on "Grima this, Grima that," lol She has a thing for Grima.

Saruman

12-02-2005, 01:34 AM

This is true. I also know Christians who believe LOTR to be evil. And you know what, I will not badger or bug them about not wanting to read it, just as much as I won't badger or bug someone about reading the Harry Potter series. I do, however, believe the two works have been written on separate lines and with different intentions.

TimmyofOz

12-02-2005, 01:34 AM

Let's me as a Christian define my terms as I see them WhiteWitchMeeka. You call yourself a Wicca. I would use the term Pagan. Not to be mean, but Pagan means you worship nature and the gods of Nature or the World (Baal, Zeus, Satan, Allah, etc.). Just as when I pray, when you say prayers to Nature or reciting prayers for protection in this world, I might say you are reciting spells. Thus the term witchcraft. It isn't like the books, that is fiction, but that is I as a Christian views the world. My terms may seem mean, but that is because over the centuries they are wrapped around areas that Christians stand against. :)

WhiteWitchMeeka

12-02-2005, 01:44 AM

LadyEm

12-02-2005, 01:47 AM

Again with the wiccan's worship satan. We do NOT.

Regardless of what Christians believe is ultimately *behind* the worshipping of nature, which is what I think Timmy was referring to, I have to interject this:

Wiccans=worship nature
Satanists=worship satan (quite intentionally)

WhiteWitchMeeka

12-02-2005, 01:52 AM

Ah but on that your even wrong True Satanist do not worship Satan. My couisn used to be a Satanist and had the whole Satantic bible. Though I don't know much about this so I'm not going to argue lol.

I forgot the name of the God that they do worship.

PrinceOfTheWest

12-02-2005, 01:53 AM

WhiteWitchMeeka

12-02-2005, 01:56 AM

Saruman

12-02-2005, 02:02 AM

A simple response at best will be what I here will write, but I have heard a wonderful description of man and his created, inherent nature as being in this light: man has, in addition to his natural drives for hunger, thirst, etc., a worship drive. He was created (originally) to worship God. But, if he chooses and refuses to worship the One God, then he must worship someone or something, whether it be the Sunday night football that he must watch religiously, or the lust for material pleasures to satisfy his personal wants, he will go for it. Men today may not necessarily worship carven images so much as they do worship the "spirit" behind the carven images. A man lusts for what he desires, and thus worships the lusts of his flesh. It becomes the master passion and dominating force in his life.

Just another witness and testimony that man has been created much in the likeness of his Creator; but what will man choose? To forsake the world and accept the gift of life in and through the Christ, or to follow his own designs and lusts, and so die?

TimmyofOz

12-02-2005, 02:07 AM

If I understand TimmyOfOz's point, he's pointing out that the classic definition of paganism is the worship of a created thing as opposed to the uncreated Creator. Human history clearly shows that the worship of a thing ultimately leads to the worship of some sort of personification of or force behind the thing. I may begin by bowing to the oak, but I'll end up bowing to the "spirit of the oak". I may begin by offering to the sun, but I'll eventually start telling tales about the genius of the sun, and giving it names like Ra. Timmy himself is the authority on what he said, but he seemed to be using a technical term in a precise manner.

You understand me well PotW. WhiteWitchMeeka, I was careful not to call you a Satanist but a Wicca (Pagan). There are pagans that do directly worship Satan. Satan is a created god and those who worship him are also pagans. A Christian rejects all gods of Nature and the World. I see my God as the creator as PotW said. Thus I wouldn't call myself a pagan. I know WhiteWitchMeeka, you see Nature as eternal and not created, so you don't like the word pagan. but I was giving you my definitions of terms. And Lady I wasn't trying to insult you either.

WhiteWitchMeeka

12-02-2005, 02:24 PM

You understand me well PotW. WhiteWitchMeeka, I was careful not to call you a Satanist but a Wicca (Pagan). There are pagans that do directly worship Satan. Satan is a created god and those who worship him are also pagans. A Christian rejects all gods of Nature and the World. I see my God as the creator as PotW said. Thus I wouldn't call myself a pagan. I know WhiteWitchMeeka, you see Nature as eternal and not created, so you don't like the word pagan. but I was giving you my definitions of terms. And Lady I wasn't trying to insult you either.

On contrary My friend, I do believe in creation. As I said in the Creation Vs. Evaluation thread, I think Evaluation is silly. It's just something I never stopped believing.

DavidB

12-04-2005, 06:13 PM

CSLewisFan

12-04-2005, 07:58 PM

A previous post mentioned a CBC interview with JK Rowling. That may have been from the CBC-TV (Newsworld) show HOT TYPE with Evan Solomon. In the interview she says she is a Christian but not of the fundamentalist variety.

Harry Potter quiz
http://www.dickstaub.com/links_view.php?record_id=4604

Is it just me, or does this forum have five Harry Potter threads??

I don't know about that, DavidB. Any parallels to the Christian faith were unintentional on the part of the author.
But I think it is good to point out the moral themes in the books.

As I think I have posted before... here are my thoughts and my take on the Harry Potter story.

Children who read about Harry will probably discover little to nothing about the true world of the occult.
I agree with Ms. Beam, the Harry Potter books portray nothing of what I have read the essence of the occult to be.

1. In the story, Harry Potter and his friends are not religious, they are not evil, and they do not practice witchcraft, or anything that slightly resembles it.
They point wooden wands and speak words in Latin/Italian.

The official term for this is "mechanical magic" or "fantasy magic".

2. The events, props, happenings, and places are not real.

You cannot really fly on a broom, turn yourself into a mouse or a dog, with a magical crack transport yourself around the world, or any other of the childish (however very entertaining) ideas in the story.

You cannot do these things through Wicca, Satanism, Christianity, magic, or sorcerery. It isn't real in any respect.

"Harry and his friends cast spells, read crystal balls, and turn themselves into animals—but they don't make contact with a supernatural world."

3. The Harry Potter story is... well, a story. That is all it is.

"Children understand the difference between a story and reality, and these are stories," she said. "It's a wonderful way for children to use their imaginations."

If children can understand the difference... why can't we?

Final thoughts? For Christians, Wiccans, average parent, or any other person who questions whether or not it is ok to enjoy the Harry Potter story....

If you cannot understand the difference between fantasy, mechanical magic and the supernatural... Do not read fantasy non-fiction. Do not read the Harry Potter story.

-Austin

WhiteWitchMeeka

12-04-2005, 08:06 PM

Is it just me, or does this forum have five Harry Potter threads??

I don't know about that, DavidB. Any parallels to the Christian faith were unintentional on the part of the author.
But I think it is good to point out the moral themes in the books.

As I think I have posted before... here are my thoughts and my take on the Harry Potter story.

1. In the story, Harry Potter and his friends are not religious, they are not evil, and they do not practice witchcraft, or anything that slightly resembles it.
They point wooden wands and speak words in Latin/Italian.

The official term for this is "mechanical magic" or "fantasy magic".

2. The events, props, happenings, and places are not real.

You cannot really fly on a broom, turn yourself into a mouse or a dog, with a magical crack transport yourself around the world, or any other of the childish (however very entertaining) ideas in the story.

You cannot do these things through Wicca, Satanism, Christianity, magic, or sorcerery. It isn't real in any respect.

3. The Harry Potter story is... well, a story. That is all it is.

"Children understand the difference between a story and reality, and these are stories," she said. "It's a wonderful way for children to use their imaginations."

If children can understand the difference... why can't we?

Final thoughts? For Christians, Wiccans, average parent, or any other person who questions whether or not it is ok to enjoy the Harry Potter story....

If you cannot understand the difference between fantasy, mechanical magic and the supernatural... Do not read fantasy non-fiction. Do not read the Harry Potter story.

-Austin

*Applauds you* Well Said!!! I wish I would of done a better job of saying that.