Kingdom Knights: Fight the Scandal

1 Peter 3:15-16: "But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander." (NIV)

Saturday, December 10, 2005

Aslan, Gandalf and Harry

Jonathan L. McCarthy

From what I understand, there have been three theatrical fantasy hits over the past few years - The Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter and now The Chronicles of Narnia are promising great things. As Christians, we need to dissect the differences and perhaps similarities of these productions in light of God's word before we donate ourselves carte blanche to indulge. Many of us, of course have already seen LOTR, but Chronicles of Narnia and HP remain untouched by some. I'll give you my run down, and then open the platform for discussion.

The Lord of the Rings: Some say that this has a lot of Christian symbolism, but I honestly wasn't struck by an over-abundance of hidden meaning. I did think something of Gandalf fighting with the balrog for three days and "rising" again, and perhaps one could interpret the Return of the King as symbolic of the Return of THE King, but again, ambiguity clouds the vision. Besides, Tolkien himself declared that he "detested allegory wherever I smell it." If the work isn't symbolic in any form and fashion, then the fact of Gandalf's being a wizard and using spells poses a Scriptural problem. How can one of protagonists be acceptably using undefined powers? Moreover, the words associated with Gandalf – wizard, spell etc. infer evil power. Even the name Gandalf means "sorcerer-elf". I have friends who believe differently on this, and have tried to explain the mystery to me, so I'm welcome to challenges/clarifications.

Harry Potter: I must confess that I know little about this, simply because I've kept a wide distance from it. I've skimmed one or two articles in a Christian magazine about it, but in general I've steered completely clear. I haven't heard good reports. I've been told that Harry is a sorcerer, which definitely is in contradiction to Scripture.

Chronicles of Narnia: I believe I'm most conversant on this series. I'm ready to give the thumbs up on this one for several reasons. 1) The symbolism is clear. Aslan = Jesus, Witch = Devil, Edmund = fallen humanity. 2) Therefore the power manifested by each of the characters is acutely defined. 3) Furthermore, while the lines of distinction between "good" and "evil" aren't so clear in LOTR, they are clearer in this book. Aslan is good because he represents Jesus and his perfection, forgiveness, sacrifice etc. The Witch is evil because she represents the Devil, hatred and usurpation. I haven’t seen the newest production yet, but if it follows the book, it should be good.
chanel handbags
Now that I've briefly drawn the lines, I'd invite you all to take part. Let me know what you think.

posted by Jonathan M @ 12:56 PM  

22 Comments:

  • At 5:02 PM, December 12, 2005, Blogger Lindsey said…

    Narnia has been a personal favorite of mine since I was little. I LOVE Lotr. And I enjoyed Harry Potter as well. *crowd gasps in shock*. Yeah- I did. :P I was going to give you a whole list of reasons why/why not Harry Potter is not bad, but that would have made for a veeeery long comment. Thankfully, I found this link: http://www.fuller.edu/news/pubs/tnn/2003_October/3.html which explains everything that I would have said quite nicely. :) At one point, I was very anti-Harry Potter, but then I read the books warily with my dad and we decided that, for our family, it was going to be OK. As for LOTR... as I said, I'm nuts about it! I'll defend that one later. Right now I have to go do school. :) I'll come back later! In the meantime, click the link! :)

     

  • At 5:07 PM, December 12, 2005, Blogger David Ketter said…

    Well, I do disagree on Lord of the Rings but I have my own reasons for Harry Potter. I'll provide links for all of that soon. Review for Narnia coming to the Account soon!

     

  • At 5:34 PM, December 12, 2005, Blogger Lindsey said…

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

     

  • At 5:36 PM, December 12, 2005, Blogger Lindsey said…

    Argh, this is getting me frustrated! :( The link is still wrong. For some reason, blogger seeems to be cutting out the last part: /html. Just type that in after the rest and it will work. :)

     

  • At 9:09 PM, December 12, 2005, Blogger Jonathan M said…

    Lindsey, would you mind just summarizing what the site says about Harry Potter. I'm not trying to be rude. I'm not sure if my parents would want me checking out the site and it would be easier for me to address the challenge if it were right in front of me. Thank you!

     

  • At 2:06 PM, December 14, 2005, Blogger Lindsey said…

    Sure, I'd be glad to! :) I'll try to come here after school, but I'm swamped right now; that is why I did not comment yesterday.
    :(

     

  • At 12:23 PM, December 16, 2005, Blogger David Ketter said…

    Jonathan:

    Here is the link to my series "Christianity and the Lord of the Rings." This is just a cursory overview but it's definitely a start. Click Here.

    Lindsey:

    The article's main flaw is that it assumes Harry's world is fictional. Actually, Rowling violates fantasy protocol by having all magic, etc. occur in the real, "Primary Universe." There is nothing unreal about Modern-day England. Not only that, humans, in general, should not be able to learn magic because, as Tolkien has so strongly put it, magic perverts the mortal character.

    I and a few friends wrote some articles on the topic of Harry Potter and you can find those at Harry Potter: To Read or Not To Read?.

    Let me know what you think.

    David

     

  • At 1:54 PM, December 16, 2005, Blogger Lindsey said…

    Cool- I'll have to read your series! did you complete all of them, or just one? Only the first link works.

    Ok- yes, magic does occur in the real world. But it is nothing like occult. Rowling took all her ideas from fairy tales and myths. Every "spell" is obviously derived from Latin. They do not call on Satan or demonic powers. "Magic" is not a result of some higher power- it is simply there, unexplained. All a wizard is, is someone born with magic in their blood, who can learn spells. If you are not a wizard, you're called a "Muggle"- that's the normal people. Muggles are never encouraged to do magic- they simply can't. The reason I'm OK with Harry Potter is because it is easy to discern between the fantasy of that world and the danger and sin of occult practice in ours. The magical world of Harry Potter bears every resemblance to a fairy-story, and none to the occult; for instance, there are unicorns and dragons and mythical beasts of all sorts. There are mermaids and fairies. Clearly fantasy. Harry Potter has a gripping plot, realistic characters that you can sympathize with, and it is well-written. Dr. Dobson said, (I'm pretty sure) that if the child could discern between real-life and fantasy easily, then it would probably not be a bad idea to read the books together. In our own family, the discernment between Harry's world and ours was always crystal clear, but some children have difficulty seperating fact from fiction. I would not recommend Harry Potter to such a child. But as long as you can appreciate Harry Potter for what it is- a fairy-tale that is purely fiction- then I see no harm in it... sorry this was so un-organized, I'm rather in a hurry right now... well, I hope that this helped a tiny bit.... I have to go now; I have tons and tons and tons of schoolwork calling me!! :D

     

  • At 2:01 PM, December 16, 2005, Blogger Lindsey said…

    I started to read your HP article, David- very nicely written by the way- and you said "Magic" was the stuff of fairy-tales, and does not exist, but "Magik" was the word used with the occult practices. In Harry Potter, the word is "Magic" with a "C"- thus making it the stuff of fairy tales. :)

     

  • At 10:07 PM, December 17, 2005, Blogger David Ketter said…

    But it is nothing like occult.

    I'll have to disagree with that. Harry Potter has basically become the posterboy for real-world occultists - Wiccans, Satanists, neo-pagans, and more. Many a Wiccan has stated how surprised they are that Harry mirrors their own rites and how "great" this is for Wicca. For more on that, I would encourage you to read "Harry Potter and the Bible," "Fantasy and Your Family," and "Harry Potter, Narnia, and the Lord of the Rings" all by Richard Abanes for details on that. (As a note, Mr. Abanes is an expert on cults - including Wicca, Satanism and neo-paganism).

    Harry Potter has a gripping plot, realistic characters that you can sympathize with, and it is well-written.

    I read Harry Potter and found none of those...One, the plot was stereotypical and quite dragging. Two, I can't sympathize with a compulsive liar that always gets rewarded for disobeying rules. Third, Rowling is NOT an great writer. Frankly, commercial authors like Tom Clancy and Stephen King have a more professional writing style...actually, even Dan Brown (accursed though he be) is better at writing than Ms. Rowling.

    But as long as you can appreciate Harry Potter for what it is- a fairy-tale that is purely fiction- then I see no harm in it

    Unfortunately, that is what it isn't. But that ties into all evidence presented.

    In Harry Potter, the word is "Magic" with a "C"- thus making it the stuff of fairy tales.

    Oh sure, she spells it the traditional way for very good reason - to hide the truth. Rowling has admitted that she knows a great deal about Wicca and has always been "keenly interested" in the occult arts from her childhood. The fact is, Harry Potter's sorcery mirrors the magick of Wicca and not the magic of fairy tales (which, by the way, never revolve around magic but Harry Potter certainly does).

    Hope that clears some things up.

     

  • At 10:46 PM, December 17, 2005, Blogger Lindsey said…

    "I'll have to disagree with that. Harry Potter has basically become the posterboy for real-world occultists - Wiccans, Satanists, neo-pagans, and more. Many a Wiccan has stated how surprised they are that Harry mirrors their own rites and how "great" this is for Wicca. For more on that, I would encourage you to read "Harry Potter and the Bible," "Fantasy and Your Family," and "Harry Potter, Narnia, and the Lord of the Rings" all by Richard Abanes for details on that. (As a note, Mr. Abanes is an expert on cults - including Wicca, Satanism and neo-paganism)."

    Yikes. I had no idea! I will have to look into that. Did you find this information in the books listed above or in some other place? If it was in some other place please give me the reference to it. Are there any other books you'd recommend? Other sources? This is really disturbing information. I doubt I would have read it if I knew!! Thank you for bringing this to my attention! I seriously had no idea!! At all!

    "I read Harry Potter and found none of those...One, the plot was stereotypical and quite dragging. Two, I can't sympathize with a compulsive liar that always gets rewarded for disobeying rules. Third, Rowling is NOT an great writer. Frankly, commercial authors like Tom Clancy and Stephen King have a more professional writing style...actually, even Dan Brown (accursed though he be) is better at writing than Ms. Rowling."

    Well, actually, that was one of the points I had been going to bring up in objection to it, but forgot. The lies. As the series progress, Harry has bad attitudes, lies, is disrespectful, and disobedient as well. Since they were read as a family, we were able to discuss all these truly very, very negative aspects together. This was actually the main thing we had against Harry Potter. Out of all the characters, Harry Potter (for those reasons) does not rank as a favorite. He does have good atributes, however, such as bravery and loyalty- though (of course) this does not in ANY way excuse his behavior. As for plot... I thought it was good. Writing... I suppose I shouldn't have gone so far as to say well-written; I know of many better as well, and you are probably very right to say that it is too high a compliment.

    Anyway, many thanks for bringing this very important information to my attention. I really am going to look into it. If it is really true, then I would (of course) have to agree with you. In that case I would not defend Harry Potter at all. Please realize my previous statements were made without this knowledge! I never would have defended it if I knew. I'll tell my dad about those books and ask him to get them at the library. Thank you again,
    Lindsey

     

  • At 8:50 AM, December 18, 2005, Blogger David Ketter said…

    Lindsey,

    Yes, that information can be found in those books with good explanation. If you needed more proof, you could search the internet on it (although I'm not sure anyone wants to dig that deep since it would require reading occultic material...totally up to you).

    I completely understand your position. Typically, when people defend Harry Potter, they don't see its flaws at all. You, on the other hand, were aware of them and I admire that. Best wishes as you seek the truth.

    David

     

  • At 11:46 AM, December 20, 2005, Blogger Jonathan M said…

    Wow! This is one of the best conversations I've ever witnessed via Internet. Good job guys.

     

  • At 1:58 PM, December 29, 2005, Anonymous SimonTemplar said…

    The problem with much of christianity's attitude towards fantasy is its preoccupation with the word "magic". Christianity defines the word magic negatively, when in fact the word has a neutral definition.

    Where Christians see "magic" they think "demonic" or "occult" when they should think simply "supernatural". Much of this is also based on a confusion within christianity as to what is "real".
    There are very real supernatural powers.. however those real supernatural powers have nothing at all, whatsoever, to do with magicians hurling fireballs from their fingers, or bolts of lightning, or flying, or transforming one thing into another. Arguing that such things are occult is tantamount to arguing that flying pink elephants are of the devil.

    There is nothing wrong with imagining a world in which the rules of reality are different. Such imaginations do not inherently exalt themselves against the knowledge of God and in some cases have been used to greatly serve that knowledge.

    The Lord of the Rings is entirely christian, while at the same time having nothing to do, whatever, with allegory. The Lord of the Rings, when under discussion, often reveals another great flaw with the modern evangelical view of things. It is a tendancy among evangelicals to deny the value of art in most forms, unless the art directly portrays Christ on the cross. If a fantasy story isn't an allegory.. then its not worth while.. if a novel doesn't tell a direct gospel story and contain a sinners prayer then its a waste of time and certainly can't be called christian. The same is true of music. If it isn't praise music.. it isn't christian.

    One wonders then why christians have any other paintings or pictures in their homes other than the crucifixion scene.. or why all christian wood workers aren't required to make only crucifixes. Etc.

    The Lord of the Rings is christian because it tells a story based on the truth. I once read an essay on Tolkien in which the author said "Tolkien may have been writing fiction, but he was telling the truth." I agree heartily.
    There is more worthwhile insight and truth in the Lord of the Rings than in most of the pop evangelical christian "non-fiction" peddled in christian book stores around the world.

    If a story truly communicates ideas such as beauty in all creation, faith unto death, and hope in the darkest places it has told more of the truth than a good deal of the self-help blather that passes for christian literature today.

    Magic in the Lord of the Rings is particularly different than almost all other fantasy, however. In that magic in LOTR is portrayed as power that is naturally given to some races. Elves for example are part natrual part supernatural beings.. they exist at once in the natural world and in the supernatural.. thus they innately have power that to other races appears 'magical'. Much the way healing by the laying on of hands would appear greatly magical to native tribesman upon first encountering a christian missionary.

    Gandalf and all wizards in LOTR are actually what we would call angels. They were ministering spirits created by the One, and sent into middle earth to encourage and stir up the free peoples to fight Sauron, who himself was a fallen angel. (their name in the Lore of LOTR was "maiar" a lesser order of Ainur (angels) the greater order being known as Valar (archangels).

    There are so many truths and visions of virtue in LOTR that I could probably write an entire book just discussing and laying them forth.

    Harry Potter :) Here again there are a number of problems with the christian community revealed. The Manic nature of evangelical christianity in opposing fantasy and "magic" creates several problems. It makes christians look like idiots, it makes christians liars, it makes them vicious and unkind, and it serves as a focus for energies that would be much better spent elsewhere.

    First off it makes christians look like idiots because they will believe quite literally anything about a fantasy story and its author. This is evidenced by the fact that there were at least two different spoof emails put out (one by the onion and another by a canadian source) in which people were interviewed and spoke about how HP had lead them into witch craft and serving the devil etc etc. These were immediately seized upon by the christian community and recirculated as fact until they have become one of the central attack points against HP.

    It makes christians into liars because they are far to eager to find what they want to find, thus they willingly pass along all sorts of falsehoods and misinformations as certified truth. Never bothering to question any of it themselves.

    It makes christians vicious and unkind because it always leads to horrible personal attacks on the authors of such books etc. Generally the evangelical community can't think that such a satanic book could have been written unless its author is a satanist in league with the devil to corrupt the minds and hearts of our youth. JK Rowling has been repeatedly attacked and demonized by christian leaders who know nothing about her, have never met her or so much as spoken to her. Most of them have also never read the material in question.

    Lastly we live in a world that hates God, and in the US we are in the final stages of a culture war in which the judeo-christian culture, our heretige of western civilization is being destroyed utterly by the public education system, the media, the political correctness movement, etc etc. Yet many christians who refuse to see this, or refuse to do anything about it even for their own children. will gladly go to book burnings of harry potter, or cut up pokemon stuffed animals with swords.

    What good is it if your children don't believe in magic.. but do believe that they are highly evolved pond scum, that there is no God, and that they can do whatever they want and no one has the right to tell them otherwise because there is no right, or wrong.

    Harry Potter does have some problems that would keep me from recomending it for young readers. Chiefly it is the use of the words witch and witchcraft, and the practice of divination (which is the only form of what we consider magic that is actually spoken of or prohibited in the bible)
    Witches are real, and witchcraft is real and the mere use and glorification of the words could lead young people astray. However, the witches and witchcraft of Harry Potter have little if any recognizable connection. I'm well familiar with wiccanism and with neo-paganism.. I've researched the beliefs and practices of those religions and I've spoken personaly with quite a few practitioners of them.

    The issue of Harry Lying and being disobedient is another common attack against the books. Honestly this is one reason that I wouldn't recomend the books to young readers. However, the fact is that characters need to be flawed.. especially in the beginning of stories. IF characters have no flaws they come off as unhuman, unidentifiable, and unrealistic.

    The fact that Harry is flawed is very much a major point of the story line. Harry is just a kid, and not a particularly saintly kid.. he's naughty and snotty many times. Perhaps one of the biggest plot elements, that is routinely missed by christian annalysis of the books is that Harry is caught in a problematic situation in which he has the ability, and opportunity to become very powerful if only he will follow the path of selfishness and serving self. Yet on the other hand he has his friends and most importantly his family pulling at him to keep him from falling. He is and is supposed to be, very much a character on the edge.

    From the very beginning in the first book Harry is offered two paths.. one of self serving, glory and power seeking, the other of self sacrifice, loyalty, and friendship. Through out the books this element is developed again and again as Harry finds out that there are great similarities between he himself, and his arch nemesis the evil Voldemort.

    Even Harry himself fears that he will fall into darkness. At every turn it is Love that perserves Harry and keeps him from falling. Through out the story, Love and self sacrifice are presented as the foils to evil. Harry is shown through the story that the only real difference between himself and voldemort is that Harry made a choice, a choice to be governed by love and self sacrifice rather than by greed, lust for power, and selfishness.

    The books are not the best written. I happen to like the style simply because I like the english way of phrasing things. The plots are often predictable and perhaps a touch cheesy :) But I like the characters, and particularly the relationships and interactions of the characters.

    God Bless and God Speed :)

    ST

     

  • At 4:11 PM, December 29, 2005, Blogger David Ketter said…

    Simon (or should I say Josh?),

    You make an excellent case for Tolkien's Middle-Earth (a position that I wholeheartedly agree with). It is actually Tolkien's principles that lead me to go against Harry Potter.

    This is evidenced by the fact that there were at least two different spoof emails put out (one by the onion and another by a canadian source) in which people were interviewed and spoke about how HP had lead them into witch craft and serving the devil etc etc. These were immediately seized upon by the christian community and recirculated as fact until they have become one of the central attack points against HP.

    Interesting I've never read either of those emails and I still have the same position. I only came to my conclusion through a lot of research.

    It makes christians into liars because they are far to eager to find what they want to find, thus they willingly pass along all sorts of falsehoods and misinformations as certified truth. Never bothering to question any of it themselves.

    I'm sure that many made that mistake (just like many macro-evolutionists make that mistake while trying to prove their very incorrect idea of origins). However, as I previously stated, my position was arrived at through thorough research. Maybe it would help if I explained a few things about my own background.

    I have always had a strong love for fantasy and lore, legend and myth. For that very reason, I read Tolkien's works multiple times in a year. I am also an avid reader of C.S. Lewis' fictional works (allegorical some, fantasy in others). Over the years, I have acquired a rather extensive understanding of mythology, ancient history, mystery religions and current "spiritualist" religions like Wicca and Neo-Paganism (note that I'm defining religion loosely here since they are not organized like other religions). That, along with my deep studies of the Scriptures have given me ample opportunity to understand much about most fantasy books - influences, etc.

    When I read Harry Potter (yes, I did read it), it struck me how she was very obsessed with evil, pagan, and sorcery-related symbols and personas. One example is Nicholas Flamel, a purported friend of Dumbledore's who, in reality, was an alchemist deeply versed in satanic lore. In the books, it is hinted that he achieved eternal life through this.

    JK Rowling has been repeatedly attacked and demonized by christian leaders who know nothing about her, have never met her or so much as spoken to her. Most of them have also never read the material in question.

    As I said, I have read the material and I've done my research and my conclusion (reached afterward) was certainly in the opposition.

    However, the witches and witchcraft of Harry Potter have little if any recognizable connection. I'm well familiar with wiccanism and with neo-paganism.. I've researched the beliefs and practices of those religions and I've spoken personaly with quite a few practitioners of them.

    Statistically speaking, your evidence falls short because it goes on secondary data - achieved from a personal result. Statistics have shown, however, that teenage interest in occultic arts has more than doubled with the rise of satanic media - Harry Potter, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, et al. Leading Wiccans of all varieties are quick to proclaim Harry Potter as a good model of their practices.

    The fact that Harry is flawed is very much a major point of the story line.

    Look at Tolkien's works. Look to Lewis' works. Their characters are certainly not perfect but they certainly do face just consequences for wrongdoing. Such is not the case for Harry. We aren't asking for a perfect kid in the books. We are asking for justice to be displayed - for a CLEAR standard of right and wrong which is something Harry Potter fails miserably to show.

    This is all really restating what I said in my articles on Harry Potter which I would encourage you to check out.
    Grace and Peace,
    David Ketter

     

  • At 1:21 AM, December 30, 2005, Anonymous SimonTemplar said…

    You must have gone to my website? If so, it is a work in progress.. very very long in progress :). I began writing it several years ago and have just recently begun to pick it up again. As a matter of fact I just fixed the email link, if you tried to use it previously. I realized that it was still pointing to one of my old email addresses.

    I am an avid fan of Tolkien and Lewis. I was a great fan of Lawhead's pendragon cycle if your familiar with it, but I was disappointed with some of his later works.
    In my opinion Tolkien was the greatest story teller of this century, and probably many others as well ;). Part of what makes both he and Lewis so great is that they had vision of life, and of the world that most people don't have.

    I wouldn't call my research on Harry Potter extensive but I've heard most of the charges against HP from the christian community and in response I've researched those charges to see if I could find any sources that substantiated them. I am speaking here of statements about Rowling, and the effects of the books, comments made by wiccans etc.

    What I found was that I was unable to substantiate any of the claims from independant sources. I found the same quotes and figures recycled by the christian anti-potter community but most of them never cited any sources for their assertions, and I could find no sources for the assertions in my own claims.

    What I did find is that a number of the "quotes" from wiccans and from kids who had been drawn into the occult which were being reprinted and reprinted in numerous christian sources were directly quoting an article put out by the Onion, a spoof newspaper.

    I have no doubt that Rowling used names from history which were connected to magic and the occult. Then again, Tolkien did the same thing, as Jonathan pointed out about Gandalf. Virtually all of the names of tolkiens dwarves, gandalf and many of the other names as well are drawn from norse pagan mythology. Tolkien used them because he liked the way they sounded. He was a philologist and studied words. He found nordic language to be inspiring in its mere phonetic qualities. Particularly Finnish (which technically is not of the germanic nordic language family, but I refer to it as nordic because it is of the same cultural area).

    The mere use of the names is thin evidence and may suggest nothing more than that she simply liked the way they sounded (especially given the nature of names in harry potter.. most are crafted to have highly peculiar phonetic quality). The worst thing you can deduce from the use of such names is that she was familiar with them and thus must have at some point read about them. Then again, so have I.. and apparently so have you.


    I have no doubt that you have done your research. The problem I have is that I simply don't trust most sources within the evangelical christian community to get their facts straight. I have researched a number of topics like this and found the same thing in everyone. Christian sources were full of data that was cited from other christian sources (if it was cited at all) and when I followed the chain far enough back I found that the information was either made up and simply reprinted till everyone believed.. or more often it was based of a completely misunderstood and out of context bit of information which was misinterpeted or grossly exagerated to the point of being nearly unrecognizable in its later incarnations.

    this is not the result of dishonesty, but rather of two things. #1 Christians tend to trust each other. #2 many christians have been sloppy in their research and citations of their sources. (not implying that you have been sloppy).

    On the issue of media influence and the boom of interest in the occult/pagan religions, I do not deny at all that there has been a boom in interest among young people in the occult and neo-paganism. However, I think that in the area of occult and paganism, media has not created the trend, it has followed the trend.
    I think the growth of this interest among the youth predates the factors you list, such as buffy and HP. I began to encounter an explosion in interest in wicca and such long before I ever heard of HP or Buffy the Vampire slayer.

    I think rather that this explosion is due to the fact that the cold scientific rationalist view born in the enlightenment era is dying. People, particularly young people have lost faith in that view because it has not met their needs, and has not fulfilled them. As a result they are turning to a supernatural view.

    I think what we are seeing is actually very like what C.S. Lewis wrote about in "That Hideous Strength" with N.I.C.E. a merging of scientific with supernatural.. of humanism with spiritism/occultism etc.

    If you have read Lewis' space trilogy the final book seems almost prophetic when you compare it with the rise of the new age and wicca/neo-paganism. I would point out that wicca/neo-paganism bears very little real connection to historical paganism other stealing some imagery and names.. the actual beliefs of the religion are actually a mixture of european medieval occultism, victorian spiritism and eastern mysticism. Both the "new age" and wicca are the heirs of the victorian occultists like Crowly.

    I suppose I had better wind up my ramblings as I'm beginning to head off topic. :)

    God Speed and God bless
    ST

     

  • At 3:31 PM, December 31, 2005, Blogger David Ketter said…

    I found the same quotes and figures recycled by the christian anti-potter community but most of them never cited any sources for their assertions, and I could find no sources for the assertions in my own claims.

    I've seen a lot of that myself and really despise it since, in their ignorance, they discredit the extremely strong case against Potter. My recommendation is to check out the books by Richard Abanes:

    "Harry Potter and the Bible"
    "Fantasy and Your Family"
    "Harry Potter, Narnia, and the Lord of The Rings"

    Mr. Abanes is not only an expert on cults and the occult, he also makes sure that he uses veritable sources (and there's huge lists of citations in each book).

    I have no doubt that Rowling used names from history which were connected to magic and the occult. Then again, Tolkien did the same thing, as Jonathan pointed out about Gandalf. Virtually all of the names of tolkiens dwarves, gandalf and many of the other names as well are drawn from norse pagan mythology. Tolkien used them because he liked the way they sounded. He was a philologist and studied words. He found nordic language to be inspiring in its mere phonetic qualities. Particularly Finnish (which technically is not of the germanic nordic language family, but I refer to it as nordic because it is of the same cultural area).

    You do have a point. However, she didn't just use Flamel's name...she referred to the actual person - a violation of Tolkien's principle of separate universes.

    As for Tolkien's keen use of older Nordic/Finnic names, he wrote (I'm trying to remember in which book) that those were not the actual names but they were as close as it could actually come in the known tongues of men (all part of the story).

    I do not deny at all that there has been a boom in interest among young people in the occult and neo-paganism. However, I think that in the area of occult and paganism, media has not created the trend, it has followed the trend.

    Point taken. However, they have certainly not remained neutral since they (implicitly) encourage it through positive portrayal of the supernatural apart from the One True God, that is. (Note, that as we speak ABC is coming out with a degraded show called "The Book of Daniel" that is about an apostate preacher - Anglican, if I recall correctly - who has no business being a preacher having meetings with a man that is obviously Jesus...IT'S BLASPHEMOUS what is said and approved!)

    I think what we are seeing is actually very like what C.S. Lewis wrote about in "That Hideous Strength" with N.I.C.E. a merging of scientific with supernatural.. of humanism with spiritism/occultism etc.

    It's funny that you should mention that since I actually wrote a post about that on my blog called The Prophetic Lewis.

    I would point out that wicca/neo-paganism bears very little real connection to historical paganism other stealing some imagery and names.. the actual beliefs of the religion are actually a mixture of european medieval occultism, victorian spiritism and eastern mysticism. Both the "new age" and wicca are the heirs of the victorian occultists like Crowly.

    Granted, but all roads lead to Rome, or in the case of mysteries and the occult - Babylon. Historical paganism was little more than polytheism but the secret arts are still revered regardless of whether they are stolen or not.

    Grace and Peace!

     

  • At 4:13 PM, December 31, 2005, Blogger Jonathan M said…

    I'm glad to see another person taking interest in our blog. Good to meet you, Simon.

    I know this may be off the topic a little bit by now, but a few of your comments in your first post I couldn't let drop untouched. :-)

    "The problem with much of christianity's attitude towards fantasy is its preoccupation with the word "magic". Christianity defines the word magic negatively, when in fact the word has a neutral definition. Where Christians see "magic" they think "demonic" or "occult" when they should think simply "supernatural". Much of this is also based on a confusion within christianity as to what is "real".
    There are very real supernatural powers.. however those real supernatural powers have nothing at all, whatsoever, to do with magicians hurling fireballs from their fingers, or bolts of lightning, or flying, or transforming one thing into another. Arguing that such things are occult is tantamount to arguing that flying pink elephants are of the devil."

    I can conceed your thesis to some degree, but really, think about it. If you're using a word in any sense but the commonly concepted meaning, make your definition clear. I feel that everyone at least has some idea of the demonic when they hear words like 'sorceror''witch''magic ball' etc. So if these things aren't demonic then why have these authors not clarified that? If I tell you that I have a dog, I should fully expect you to imagine a four-legged creature. However, if I want a dog to mean something else, I must redefine the word. So unless these authors are redefining their words publically (and I do believe Tolkein did it to some extent), they are inviting critque from conservative circles.

    "It is a tendancy among evangelicals to deny the value of art in most forms, unless the art directly portrays Christ on the cross. If a fantasy story isn't an allegory.. then its not worth while.. if a novel doesn't tell a direct gospel story and contain a sinners prayer then its a waste of time and certainly can't be called christian. The same is true of music. If it isn't praise music.. it isn't christian. "

    An important thing to remember is that Christian life is about Christ. Therefore, you can hardly blame us for questioning the value of anything that doesn't value that center piece. We are sojourners on this earth. We've only got a little time left. I guess I can best say it in an anonymous quote that one of my friends uses. "Only one life to live, 'twill soon be past. Only what's done for Christ will last."

     

  • At 5:56 PM, December 31, 2005, Anonymous SimonTemplar said…

    I am please to meet you as well Jonathan. :)

    David, I will speak to your points first as you posted first.

    The point of language in Tolkien is a good one. Tolkien was wrote his stories as though he were translating an ancient set of documents that he had come into posession of. As a result he translated the main language as english.. the related languages he translated as languages related to english..
    For example.. the Rohirrim language is Anglo saxon.. this does not mean that Tolkien intended that the Rohirrim actually spoke anglo-saxon.. rather he was intending it to reflect that the language of the rohirrim had an archaic relationship to Westron, the common speech which was spoken by the hobbits.
    The Gondorians spoke Westron but the spoke a more formal pure version of it so this is reflected by their grammar and vocabulary tending towards more formal and less coloquial english. Elvish and evil languages are given no real world equivalents but are rendered in their actual own invented language. Elvish being heavily influenced by Finno-ubric language which is present in scandanavia.. but yet its origins are totally different than the rest of european langauge. Dwarvish has its own invented elements but is heavily influenced heavily by old norse, thus showing how it should be concieved of as related to the common speech.

    Quite an ingenius method of doing things.

    I am interested to see where you will go with your hints of taking things back to the mystery religions of Babylon. This is another area where there is a great deal of misinformation within the protestant church. I've done alot of study on theology, philosophy etc.. but my primary training is in history. I'm well versed in ancient history and ancient religions. As a result I've seen alot of claims made within christian circles about the mystery religions and the origins of babylon that are completely unsupportable.

    So I'm interested to see where your leading with your comments on that topic.


    I've been interested by the rising popularity of psudo christian biblical topics, of course horribly masacred by hollywood. I think its a facet of the rising interest and need for the supernatural. The enemy is a master of deception and the best lie is the one thats closest to the truth.

    Jonathan,

    I agree that people should use words to mean what they are supposed to mean. Which is why one of my main objections to Harry Potter is the fact that it uses "witch" and "witchcraft" and "divination". Those words refer to real things regardless of how HP represents them, thus they are dangerous.
    The problem is that people have a habit of changing words based on their perceptions.
    Most people do not concieve of the word "magic" to be demonic. This is something faily unique to the evangelical/protestant community.
    The problem is that people's vocabularies today are relatively poor and they don't understand the differences between similar words. For example.. most people tend to see "sorcerer" and "wizard" or "magician" as synonymous but they are not.

    A sorcerer specificly means someone who seeks magical power through contact with evil spirits, and especially applies to divination and necromancy

    the term Wizard originaly meant simply "wise man" it also carries the meaning of a clever or skilled man and "one skilled in magic"

    Magic itself originally refered to any supernatural and mysterious power (derived from the magi priesthood of persia and babylon.. the same guys who came to visit Jesus and worship him and give him gifts).
    Magic also means the use of spells, incantations, charms or rites to produce a supernatural effect. This instantly sets off christian's occult radar again but the word spell for example simply means "to talk" or "a spoken word" so when Joshua commanded the sun to stand still.. he used a spell because he spoke a word intending to bring about something supernatural.

    Incantation simply means a set of words said or sung with the intent of producing a particular effect, or as part of a ritual.

    What christians are doing with these words is saying Dog, and expecting that everyone should think of "doberman" rather than a four legged canine animal.

     

  • At 11:16 PM, December 31, 2005, Blogger David Ketter said…

    Simon,

    I am interested to see where you will go with your hints of taking things back to the mystery religions of Babylon. This is another area where there is a great deal of misinformation within the protestant church. I've done alot of study on theology, philosophy etc.. but my primary training is in history. I'm well versed in ancient history and ancient religions. As a result I've seen alot of claims made within christian circles about the mystery religions and the origins of babylon that are completely unsupportable.

    First thing to note is that I am using Babylon in a tentatively loose sense. In this instance, I refer to Mesopotamia proper - the so-called "Cradle of Civilization." From the Scriptures, we know of Nimrod the Mighty Hunter before the LORD who built up Nineveh and, according to the best scholarship available, began the building of Babel, that is, Babylon as well. I need not go into all of that, since you are plainly (and have stated) that you are well-versed in history.

    Idealogically speaking, we know that humanism, cosmic humanism, and even marxism can be related to Nimrod's rebellion. (based on the statements of the people in Genesis 11)...

    Mythology plays a strong role as well. We know that all the world was once gathered in Shinar and they were scattered when they rebelled. We see common mythological and religious beliefs (floods, gods, demi-gods, death and afterlife, and sacrificial rites that are foreign to traditional God-fearing practices that were in place since the time of Adam). Compare, for instance, goddesses like Ishtar and Astarte. How about Semiramis and Isis? Horus and Tammuz? The list goes on...

    Historically, we also know that Mesopotamian civilizations were know n for both their academic prowess and their superstitious rites. They were first to study astronomy but introduced astrology as well. They were skilled in anatomy but practiced divination through reading remains. They built canals and magnificent walls and palaces but put most of their greatest efforts in temples and shrines to gods made of stone.

    Obviously, this hardly scratches the surface but I am really looking forward to your response.

    Grace and Peace,
    David

     

  • At 9:56 PM, January 03, 2006, Anonymous SimonTemplar said…

    Have you read Much GK Chesterton? I'm just beginning his "Everlasting Man" but the entire beginning of the book is about the startling and completely over-looked (in secular circles) fact that the very earliest evidence of mankind, indicate that humans were just as human then as now. The gap between man and animal as evident then as now.

    The evolutionary mindset believes that by trying to make early man seem more primitive and so far removed from us in time that it some how covers the fact that this the only surviving evidence of early man is art. Art which shows detailed study of animal life and appreciation for it.

    This is even more starkly realized when you begin to closely examine the rise of the first civilizations in Egypt and Mesopotamia. It is quite comical sometimes the picture that is created by the assumptions of Historians.

    We have a situation where, for appearently thousands upon thousands of years people lived in small tribal settings never producing anything capable of lasting through time, no writing, no cities, no pottery, nothing... Then in the space of a few hundred years, litterally the blink of an eye in the evolutionary scope of things, people suddenly build large cities, monumental buildings produce sophisticated works of art involving everything from painting to sculture to lost wax metal casting and other forms of metal working. They invent vast trade networks spanning thousands of miles and detailed economic systems including such concepts as letters of credit and banking systems.

    what is even more incredible is that this completely amazing phenomenon occured not once.. but twice, simultaneously in two different locations which supposedly had no significant contact with each other.

    This is quite as startling as if we were to go on an expedition to the amazon and find that in the middle of the jungle the local natives had built new york.

    And yet, historians insist upon assuming that none of these developments came about until the ancient people suddenly realized they had too much time on their hands... "hey.. we can make more food since we started irrigating so I don't have to farm now... so what should I do.... hmmmm I know I'll invent religion and build a huge monumental temple!!"

    Equally as humorous is the assumption that the same people who could accurately observe and chart the movements of stars and planets apparently without the aid of any devices such as telescopes, and could invent complex trade and business networks, based their entire religious system on being afraid of weather and lack of understanding of natural cycles like the seasons.


    Ahhhhh academia :)

     

  • At 9:02 AM, January 07, 2006, Anonymous SimonTemplar said…

    Going back to the original topic of the discussion here :)

    This is a link to a good review of the HP books (as well as numerous other fantasy works).

    http://www.christianfantasy.net/harrypotter.html

     

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home