Harry Potter

[GreenMunchkin]

What are your thoughts on it?

 

[MrJim]

I saw the first movie on video, didn't read any of the books, just didn't seem that interesting.

 

[GreenMunchkin]

Do you think they lead people (kids, especially) to get involved in the occult? Or at least to become interested in it?

Do you believe they carry any sort of spirit inherently?

I should have posed those questions straight off the bat

 

[MrJim]

Yeah probably, I've never fully recovered from the Wicked Witch in the Wizard of Oz and those freaky supernatural "Mrs" characters in A Wrinkle in Time really messed me up

Here's the deal:

Anything, and I mean ANYTHING, that is representing life apart from God seems to be inherently evil.

I even consider something as benign as Spongebob as suspicious. Not because he's a bad character, but because it is representing a life (even if cartoon) apart from any reference to God. Examine most children shows~they are this way. Stories l've always loved, like Cleary's "Henry Huggins" or White's "Charlotte's Web", depict lives where God is not involved, where Christ is not daily part of life.

Potter is an easy target, but look at most all the television even for grownups [I unplugged from TV over a year ago so I don't know what's pop right now] but is God and Jesus Christ central to the plots, or is it life without?

Now for those that will defend stuff that isn't "overtly religious" all I'm saying is in reference to the nature of secular (simply meaning things of no religious basis) influences to children in regards to lifestyle is a danger, whether overtly occultic (Potter or even Cinderella) or banal (Bugs Bunny or Spongebob).

 

[GreenMunchkin]

Do you reckon things like Potter are *especially* dangerous, though?

I have to say, there's a show called Charmed, and I think that's one of the most overtly genuine occult tv programmes we've had for a good while.

 

[MrJim]

Do you reckon things like Potter are *especially* dangerous, though?

I have to say, there's a show called Charmed, and I think that's one of the most overtly genuine occult tv programmes we've had for a good while.

I remember seeing that when I'd spin channels. The witches were cute

As to being especially dangerous, I suppose. Was "Bewitched" especially dangerous?

Obviously the darker the subject/tone the more blatant the blasphemy the more concern there is, but to a large degree sin is sin. The occultic witch and the secular businessman both face an eternal torment apart from Christ.

 

[daniel777]

yes, i think potter is especially dangerous.

 

[daniel777]

here's what i posted in another forum. i really don't feal like typing it again.

the problem with potter is that, unlike the other fairy tales, it paints witchcraft in a positive way and surrounds it with mystery, adventure, and power. yes this does affect people. why would people find fantacy so appealing unless it's something they want to be true. well SURPRISE the fantacy is based off the reality of true witchcraft. in potter witchraft is itself the magical land, the bad guy, the good guy, and surrounded with fantacy so that it makes the real thing appealing. and people do get sucked into this stuff.

 

[Simon_Templar]

people react based on perception rather than on actual understanding of content etc.

It is unfortunate, in my opinion, that HP uses the word witches and witchcraft etc, because of the fact that they are names of a real false religion.
I don't think HP is remotely "real" in terms of its occult portrayal etc. No one is going to learn witchcraft from watching HP, or reading HP.

I would say that it is probably unwise to expose children to it simply because of the confusion it could create for them. As for adults, I don't see a problem with it.

The books raise some interesting ideas and things to consider. More than I expected at first. I think, over all the reaction of the conservative/fundamentalist crowd to the books has been sad. The author claims to be a christian (presbyterian) and has no connection to occult practice, and has stated that she never intended any of the content to reflect any real occult practice. Yet she has been demonized by Christians and depending on who you talk to, she is accused of being a witch who is trying to seduce children into the embrace of the dark arts etc etc.

In response to MrJim, I can see your point, but I think that things don't always need to be overt. Romans 1 says that even the invisible attributes of God are made manifest in creation. Thus works which display a true view of creation, of the world etc, are conveying things about God.
On that score, the issue has a lot more to do with the consumer than the creator. I can watch starwars and pick out all sorts of things that in my mind relate to God. Others watch it and get nothing of the kind.

 

[GreenMunchkin]

I remember seeing that when I'd spin channels. The witches were cute

As to being especially dangerous, I suppose. Was "Bewitched" especially dangerous?

Obviously the darker the subject/tone the more blatant the blasphemy the more concern there is, but to a large degree sin is sin. The occultic witch and the secular businessman both face an eternal torment apart from Christ.

The bit I bolded... that bit especially is really interesting. Hadn't ever thought of it like that. I suppose, though, secularism while an affront to God, it's the rejection of Him, but it's not an abomination, whereas occult practises are. Sin is sin, but occultism defies the first commandement.

yes, i think potter is especially dangerous.

Welcome to the forum! Tell you what's interesting: in another place at CF, people were discussing how they literally felt itchy with the need to get the latest book. Like they could barely sit still and they they had all this nervous energy, and one woman got it and posted at about 1am and it was like she'd gotten a fix of a grug or something. That was peculiar, and raised some questions for me.

 

[daniel777]

when a persons desire becomes so strong that it consumes them; it is something to ask questions about. thanks for the welcome

 

[Lisa0315]

It is extremely difficult for me to consider fantasy as "evil". I do understand the concerns. However, even C.S. Lewis SciFi triology could be considered quite occultish depending on the reader. Sword of Truth series by Terry Goodkind (is that is name, I forget.) is definitely very, very adult in content and quite occultish as well.

Yet, I enjoy these books. I have since I was a kid. The Narnia Chronicles, LOTR, they are no different really with witches, and other creatures, but at the heart of every book I mentioned is the struggle between good and evil.

I would not condemn a Christian for not reading these books or for not allowing their kids to read them, but I do not want to be condemned by enjoying them myself and for allowing my kids to. Admittedly, my kids are now almost 20 and almost 17.

Lisa

 

[daniel777]

the difference b/t the books you mentioned and Harry Potter is that each of those books were written with the intent of allegorizing Christianity. also none of the other books shared a fragment of closeness to ocultism that Potter shares. like i said previously, the main difference is that potter appeals witchcraft to readers by glamorizing it. the witchcraft in potter is shrouded in power, mystery, adventure, justice and friendship/relationship. another problem is that in reality, that's what/who God is.

also how many of us when we were young wanted to emulate our heroes.

 

[Lisa0315]

the difference b/t the books you mentioned and Harry Potter is that each of those books were written with the intent of allegorizing Christianity. also none of the other books shared a fragment of closeness to ocultism that Potter shares. like i said previously, the main difference is that potter appeals witchcraft to readers by glamorizing it. the witchcraft in potter is shrouded in power, mystery, adventure, justice and friendship/relationship. another problem is that in reality, that's what/who God is.

also how many of us when we were young wanted to emulate our heroes.

Uhm, Sword of Truth series, if I am not mistaken, was written by an atheist.

Lisa

 

[daniel777]

Uhm, Sword of Truth series, if I am not mistaken, was written by an atheist.

then i wasn't refering to him, i apologise. but the others are all christian allagories.

 

[Lisa0315]

then i wasn't refering to him, i apologise. but the others are all christian allagories.

Well, like I said, I would not condemn you if you chose not to read HP. I haven't read all of them either, but to me they are just fantasy, not evil.

Lisa

 

[daniel777]

Well, like I said, I would not condemn you if you chose not to read HP. I haven't read all of them either, but to me they are just fantasy, not evil.

ok. i disagree with you, the message the books cary is bad. i think that things such as demons, ghosts, witchcraft, talking to the dead, do have a strong appeal to most people. and after they're sucked in, most of the time they don't leave.

but to me they are just fantasy, not evil.

i'm sorry, but the problem is bigger than just you. not everione knows Jesus

you gave your reasons, i gave mine. we can't make the other agree, if they don't want to. and drop the condemn thing, no ones on their way to your home with torches and pitchforks. condemning involves action. no one's moved against you in such a way. and no ones even judging you (even though paul does say it's good withing the chruch, just be sure to base it off scripture).

 

[~*Lady Trekki*~]

If I had children, I would not allow them to see or read anything of Harry Potter. Obviously from my username y'all can tell I like Star Trek. So I don't generally have an issue with science fiction. But when it includes the occult I don't like it at all. For example...anything with vampires or werewolves gives me the creeps. To me HP is in league with that kind of fiction.

 

[Lisa0315]

ok. i disagree with you, the message the books cary is bad. i think that things such as demons, ghosts, witchcraft, talking to the dead, do have a strong appeal to most people. and after they're sucked in, most of the time they don't leave. you gave your reasons, i gave mine. we can't make the other agree, if they don't want to. and drop the condemn thing, no ones on their way to your home with torches and pitchforks. condemning involves action. no one's moved against you in such a way. and no ones even judging you (even though paul does say it's good withing the chruch, just be sure to base it off scripture).

When I used the word, the verse, "There is no condemnation in Christ" was in my mind. I wasn't using it to be manipulative or insinuating that anyone was condemning me. I was just saying that I do not condemn you and I hope you do not condemn me. I think it is just another way of saying "Agree to Disagree"

Lisa

 

[daniel777]

When I used the word, the verse, "There is no condemnation in Christ" was in my mind. I wasn't using it to be manipulative or insinuating that anyone was condemning me. I was just saying that I do not condemn you and I hope you do not condemn me. I think it is just another way of saying "Agree to Disagree"

okeydokey