Posted on 06/03/2004 9:38:49 AM PDT by BobbyBeeper
FIRST-PERSON: Is Harry Potter merely entertainment? Jun 2, 2004 By Phil Boatwright
"Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban" Photo courtesy of harrypotter.com
THOUSAND OAKS, Calif. (BP)--"I love Harry Potter. I think it would be so cool to be a witch," Sharon, age 11, says.
That's my answer to anyone who says J.K. Rowling's adventure series is harmless fantasy.
While the Harry Potter book and film series has held a hypnotic fascination for youngsters, its thematic foundation is troubling. Arguably, perceptive children can view such material without succumbing to the snare of the occult, but it would be naive to think that movies and TV programs containing witchcraft are not aiding the rise of Wicca in our culture.
In a television special titled "Hollywood Spirituality" which aired several years back on E! Entertainment, Raven Mounauni, a professing witch and owner of an occult paraphernalia store, credited the 1996 movie "The Craft" with inspiring young women to explore the world of witches. "I get a lot of teenage girls in here. You can always tell when 'The Craft' has been on TV, 'cause we get a big influx of girls looking for supplies."
Occult practices shouldn't be considered just diverting amusement. Ouija boards, psychic readers and other forms of misleading supernatural entertainment should not be taken lightly. In Leviticus 19:26 we are instructed, "Do not practice divination or sorcery." There are several warnings in the Scriptures, both Old and New Testament, making it clear that we are to avoid witchcraft or anything associated with the occult. So if God is instructing us to avoid occult practices, how can we justify using it to entertain ourselves?
This may not be a popular view right now. The first Harry Potter film installment earned $969 million worldwide. J.K. Rowlings' five books on the young wizard have become a phenomenon, allowing the author to become the richest woman in England, with assets beyond $1 billion. That would indicate that many parents find nothing wrong with these children's adventures.
There are even a couple of books out right now exclaiming parallels between the Potter books and the Gospel. One author suggests the books help relate Christian themes and truths, opening the door for talking about things such as right and wrong, the nature of faith, loyalty, bravery and trust. Honestly, I think that's a bit thin. Yes, Rowlings’ themes deal with honor, friendship and self-sacrifice, but the kids in Harry Potter gravitate to sorcery in order to accomplish these attributes. And even if there are positive elements associated with the series, you simply can't ignore the witchcraft equation.
Members of Wicca teach a philosophy that embraces no absolute truth or sin and replaces the patriarchal male creator God of the Bible with a belief in both male and female gods. Its credo instructs members to embrace spirits and conjure spells in order to control their lives and the lives of others. There are millions of practicing witches worldwide. Indeed, Wicca has become one of the fastest-growing religions in the world today.
OK, it's good that children are reading. But what is it they're reading? Shouldn't that be considered? When an author makes $1 billion on five books that have sorcery as a main theme, and renowned secular critics hail the films as incredible filmmaking without examining their occult roots, I question what's really behind this phenom.
Is it merely entertainment? Or is there a dark spiritual source feeding and supporting it? I realize that may sound like a stretch, but often Satan is most deceiving with a glossed-over package. Wouldn't it be a shame if kids got pulled into witchcraft, while their folks thought of the books and films as merely children's fantasy? --30-- Phil Boatwright is a film reviewer and editor of The Movie Reporter, on the Web at www.moviereporter.com. (BP) photo posted in the BP Photo Library at http://www.bpnews.net. Photo title: HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKAB
How would that be measured?
I used to ... well, "Chivalry and Sorcery" and "T.H.E. Fighter/T.H.E. Mage" as opposed to "D&D" ... but most of my role-playing friends moved out of the area years ago and it's not too much fun playing a tabletop RPG without a reasonably sized group ...
That's mainly what I use my computer for now. RPGs of all kinds .. fantasy, sci-fi, post-apocalypse adventures .. were made to be played by yourself on the computer. It's great ...
... although, now, since I order the same number of pizzas that I did when there were 12 to 18 of us playing, I have a tendency to eat too much pizza ...
Absolutely. Thanks for confirming my general ideas. We're supposed to be salt and light, not vinegar and acid.
I'm fortunate enough to have been encouraged in both Christianity and fandom by my parents. Since I'm in that community, I can reach a whole lot of people. Most fen believe in good and evil, and are willing to talk about it; for me, that makes witnessing a lot easier.
I like fannish things for the community - can't wait to get to my first con - and so playing RPGs online doesn't appeal to me. My dad and sister play EverQuest, though, so I know what you mean.
I would not compare Harry Potter to the Chronicles of Narnia or to Lord of the Rings as some have done.
But I wholeheartedly disagree with your opinion of the Potter books. And if you don't know if you've read "2 or 3" you may have "read" them, but you didn't "read" them.
Given that the Chief Vatican Exorcists statements clearly demonstrate that you've read more of Harry Potter than he has then you should. he might know all about the Devil and the occult, but he doesn't know a single thing about the books he's condemning.
Simply his line about the rule breaking in HP shows he knows nothing about the books. They don't break rules for their own benefit, they break rules to stop the most evil person in the world of Harry Potter (Lord Voldemort). In the HP books when they break rules for the normal childish reasons is when they are most likely to be caught and punished, they only manage to get away with it (by telling the truth if they get caught, not by lying) when what they're doing is for the good of the school and all mankind. That right there shows he's working from a position of absolute ignorance.
Undoctored photos or video would be a good start. In the case of UFOs, an actual spacecraft or alien would be incontrovertable. In the case of the "occult", there would have to be some sort of similar impact upon the physical world, or it would be undetectable to our senses. If these alleged phenomena are entirely nonphysical, then I submit that mental illness is a far more likely source.
Fen should be an ideal audience. They believe in good and evil, they have an innate trust for each other, they gather periodically in groups of various sizes to listen to each other, and they're generally a lot more willing to believe in ideas others write off as "fantastical" (which is how many people avoid God). I'm glad there's people like you out there counteracting the foolishness.
Well, I don't play the online RPGs; if I want interaction, I want it with someone I can see and associate with. The stuff I play is straight solo computer gaming .. Fallout, Fallout 2, and the like. That way, I can play as long as I like, stop when I like, and I don't fall behind or lose track of what's going on.
So much for the Vatican's Chief Exorcist. Discostu has spoken.
In the HP books when they break rules for the normal childish reasons is when they are most likely to be caught and punished, they only manage to get away with it (by telling the truth if they get caught, not by lying) when what they're doing is for the good of the school and all mankind.
Of course. Bless their hearts.
In ethics, this is called the ends justifying the means. This idea is erroneous because it violates the first principle of ethics, to do good and avoid evil. Like all successful lies, it's close to the truth.
The devil is good at what he does.
Question:
Rahab hid the Israelite spies, and lied about them being there. Does the Bible say this was a bad thing, or a good thing?
Some of us actually strive to make decisions for ourselves.
I figured. This is a category error. Spirits are... spirits, non-material beings.
Exorcists generally regard aversion to Jesus' name and the crucifix, sometimes holy water, as signs of demonic possession.
Incontrovertible proof usually consists of the subject speaking in languages of which he has no knowledge, speaking backwards, levitating, or possessing knowledge of things that he couldn't reasonably know. There's actually a mention of this in the Amazon ouija reviews I posted above.
This is an example of choosing the lesser of two evils. She could either hide the spies and lie about their whereabouts, or turn them over to the enemy.
She chose the lesser of two evils. The lie remains intrinsically evil, but since she chose the lesser evil of the only two options available to her, she is absolved of moral culpability.
So if a mass murderer was on the lose and you could stop him, but you were under curfew and lot allowed to leave your room you'd stay and not break the rules?! You sound like the guy in Dr Strangelove who didn't want to break the Coke machine to use the change to make the phonecall that would stop nuclear armageddon.
The most important principle in ethics is to do the most good. That if you have to break some rule to save a life then the rule was either in error or simply not written to deal with the situation at hand. By your absolutist logic we never should have gotten into WWII, after all "thou shalt not kill" is a rule, forget the fact that we were acting in self defense and by our actions kept the Jews from being erradicated, we don't want to break any rules ever for any reason. Time to get out of the absolutist world and join us in reality, in the real world there are times when rules wind up in conflict with each other and we must decide which one is the better one to follow. Breaking curfew to save lives is a perfectly valid rules violation, and it always will be.
So how is "the lesser of two evils" any different from "the end justifies the means"? You do something wrong because the outcome is better, right?
One can argue that the examples you cite from Harry Potter are examples of "the lesser of two evils", as well - lying versus aiding the evil side, breaking rules to save lives, etcetera.
Great, you just absolved Harry and crew from all the same rules violations that Dumbledore does. Congradulations. They chose the lesser of two evils, breaking curfew (or going into forbidden areas) rather than allowing murder to occur.
Well, he has more experience with exorcisms than you or I or anyone else here, regardless of whether or not you are Catholic.
They may be. But you wouldn't know whether or not they existed if they didn't have some sort of effect on the physical world. I can't see the wind, but I can see its effect. If "spirits" don't have any effect upon the physical world, then for all practical purposes we can disregard their existence.
Incontrovertible proof usually consists of the subject speaking in languages of which he has no knowledge, speaking backwards, levitating, or possessing knowledge of things that he couldn't reasonably know.
Show me undoctored video of somebody levitating. Short of something of that nature, stories of "demonic possession" are no more credible than those of "alien abduction".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.