Hats wrote:"Frodo! Cast off your [s]sins[/s] into the fire!"
goldenspines (post: 1405337) wrote:Therefore, I do wonder at why you don't like either of them, unless you don't like fantasy in general (which is understandable).
"I have a very visual imagination. I see it, then, I try to describe what is in my mind's eye." (The Associated Press, Sheila Norman-Culp, New York)
I agree. it al depends on ones point of view. Will you see the bad in it because it says "wizard". Heck LOTR has wizards. It's what it portrays. The storyline is griping and the characters are awesome. I voted "I like it but would reccomend it to only a few people" because most of the people I know would hate it XDRegarding what I feel your poll is most concerned with, I was increasingly surprised as I read the series at the amount of bad publicity the series gets from the Christian community. Yes, the story is about wizards, but the magic is clearly fantastical (and even powers of divination--reading palms and tea leaves, phony psychics--are often scoffed at by the wisest of characters), and the themes woven into the story really line up with Christian thought. Some aspects of the story even serve as parallels to Christianity. I found myself drawing parallels from many of the scenes in Harry Potter to my own relationship with Christ. So in that regard, I think Harry Potter is a book series that Christians should stop running from and start reading, because there's more to be found in this series than witchcraft and wizardry.
Alcuinus (post: 1405345) wrote:To answer in reverse I love fantasy. I don't care for magic but fantasy and fantasy creatures is altogether fascinating to me. My problem with HP is its ties to the occult. I find the evidence of them being channeled disturbingly significant enough to cause concern:
Now that all seems like that should be fine and good, however, once one learns that this "mind's eye" is a phenomenon described in the book as an occult practice things turn a bit uncomfortable. (quoting www.goodfight.org):
I think it's disturbing enough along with the saturation of wizards and magic and the official HP products produced (teaching children real occult practices) that it should be avoided.
A lengthier article (the one I quoted) can be found on goodfight.org
According to the article, Twilight may have been channeled as well.
I apologize if I have said anything offensive (I have not done so to the best of my knowledge but I srsly don't want this to turn into anything ugly )
Alcuinus (post: 1405345) wrote:To answer in reverse I love fantasy. I don't care for magic but fantasy and fantasy creatures is altogether fascinating to me. My problem with HP is its ties to the occult. I find the evidence of them being channeled disturbingly significant enough to cause concern:
Now that all seems like that should be fine and good, however, once one learns that this "mind's eye" is a phenomenon described in the book as an occult practice things turn a bit uncomfortable. (quoting www.goodfight.org):
I think it's disturbing enough along with the saturation of wizards and magic and the official HP products produced (teaching children real occult practices) that it should be avoided.
A lengthier article (the one I quoted) can be found on goodfight.org
According to the article, Twilight may have been channeled as well.
I apologize if I have said anything offensive (I have not done so to the best of my knowledge but I srsly don't want this to turn into anything ugly )
goldenspines (post: 1405352) wrote:Ah, okay. That makes some bit of sense. Except, you are basing your opinion of the book off of another's opinion of the book, not on the actual book itself (not to mention, they seem to be basing their opinions off of quotes not found or seen in the actual books). Had you read the books yourself, I would have understood your opinion a bit better. I do encourage you to read the Harry Potter books for yourself someday to form your own opinion on them.
I see. I think it is valid to use other sources, however. My goal is to simply say, "This person has researched it. Please see what they have to say". Furthermore, the quotes from that site are from Rowling herself, the absolute best interpreter of her books.Atria35 (post: 1405359) wrote:No, I don't find this offensive. I just find it interesting- you see, the people on this site have not quoted or cited anything from the books to back up thier stances, instead relying on the interpretations of other people, who are quoting yet more people about the books. And not including any specific quotes or examples at all. In any journalism class, you will be told that this is Bad Reporting. It would be completely unacceptable unless you were writing for, say, the National Enquirer.
That is true and I implied if not said as such. I said it was disturbing when you understand how she understands the phrase. If indeed she understands the term in the realm of the occult, it only then becomes a potential problem.Atria35 (post: 1405359) wrote:But as a writer, I have had dreams that inspired me, like when I had a dream about wandering through a forest (I wrote a short story on that), and sometimes I have inspiration that just nags me until I write in down. This seems to be a common phenomena for writers- I cannot count the amount of times I have heard similar words.
The 'mind's eye' is a common reference for when someone sees something in their imagination- when they can visualize something, but the event is not physically happening in front of them. I don't remember word-for-word what is in the books, but it's a common enough phrase that I would not be surprised if it popped up. I use the same terms for when I imagine the next scene in a story- I almost don't see anything with my physical eyes because I'm so involved with my imagination.
Actually... that was expounded on by one of the sources I can't site XD]link[/URL])Atria35 (post: 1405359) wrote:There's also the 'witchcraft' thing, and that it teached them the occult- it's not quite accurate. What happens in the books is not similar to any occult practices. It's really very similar- pretty much identical- to the magic and witchcraft found in Chronicles of Narnia and LOTR. But few would accuse those of being occult in content/origen.
LadyRushia (post: 1405367) wrote:...more often than not the things that Christians make a stink about the most, the things they claim are the most dangerous and scary things in the world, are often only seen that way because they have not taken the time to understand something.
"In the Author’s mind there bubbles up every now and then the material for a story. For me it invariable begins with mental pictures. This ferment leads to nothing unless it is accompanied with the longing for a Form: a verse or prose, short story, novel, play or what not. When these two things click you have the Author’s impulse complete. It is now a thing inside him pawing to get out. He longs to see that bubbling stuff pouring into the clean jam car. This nags him all day long and gets in the way of his work and his sleep and his meals. It’s like being in love."Alcuinus (post: 1405345) wrote:Now that all seems like that should be fine and good, however, once one learns that this "mind's eye" is a phenomenon described in the book as an occult practice things turn a bit uncomfortable. (quoting www.goodfight.org):
I think it's disturbing enough along with the saturation of wizards and magic and the official HP products produced (teaching children real occult practices) that it should be avoided.
Nate (post: 1405372) wrote:The problem is that the magic portrayed in Harry Potter, D&D, Narnia, whatever is not like magic in the real world. It's completely made up and has no basis whatsoever in reality.
Not trying to belittle your convictions, I'm just saying you can't really compare fictional magic and real magic. It'd be like thinking toys actually act like they do in Toy Story, or judging real cats based on the movie Cats and Dogs. They're not realistic in the least.
ich1990 (post: 1405374) wrote:I respect your opinion, and I don't think you should watch or read something that disturbs you. I do think you have the writing process entirely wrong. Seeing vivid images of your characters and having a compulsion to get them out on to paper is part of the normal creative process. If there is anything supernatural about it, it is God's creative stamp on our soul.
Alcuinus wrote:I understand they are different... but by definition and your own admission, they are the same to a degree.
even still, you refrain from using the word you (kind of) mentioned because of it's connections today...
Alcuinus (post: 1405369) wrote:but... if that's the case... hentai and homo anime and manga should be fine? no... we make a big deal about something not because it's dangerous... not because it's scary... but because we see it as displeasing to God... not to us. If I believe (as some may not) that portrayal of magic is as displeasing to God as the practice itself (something He calls an abomination) I am to act on that... I srsly hope the vast majority of people are not as shallow as to call something wrong just because it's dangerous. :S
The "question" of Harry Potter - good fun, or evil vehicle for witchcraft? - has circulated through Christian culture since the first movie introduced the boy wizard to the mainstream in 2001. Eight years later - years that have brought the series' conclusion and Rowling's admission that her Christian faith deeply influenced her work - many evangelicals still oppose the book's positive portrayal of witchcraft and wizardry, fearing it gives curious children an entry point into the occult.
Christianity Today magazine has weighed in on the controversy; I personally believe the books are not only harmless, but can also deepen our faith by engaging our hearts and minds in an epic story that explores some very biblical ideas, a la Tolkien and Lewis. The series' conclusion relies heavily on Christian imagery (I'll stop there to avoid spoiling Deathly Hallows' incredibly powerful finale), and in the end, we see that the spells and potions are merely plot devices to depict themes of good vs. evil, the importance of sacrifice, and the power of love. Even the Vatican has stepped out in support of Half-Blood Prince, giving the film a surprising two thumbs up to its treatment of adolescent love.
Alcuinus (post: 1405366) wrote:but I dislike C.S. Lewis mostly for his universalist inclinations >.>
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests