Activity

@jared-williams

Before I give a brief reply, I’d like to say a couple things.

First, using the phrase ‘taking in magical content is a sin’ is such a broad phrase that it was not wise for me to say it. So my apologies.

Secondly, let me just say, Jared, that I have never seen this argument for why magic is okay before (it’s usually vernacular and definition silliness xD), so I appreciated reading your defense.

Now that I’ve got those out of the way, let me try to make what the bible says I bit clearer in response (I sometimes make a hash of what I’m trying to present). The first thing that I need to deal with is our definition of pharisee. I obviously did not present what I was trying to say well, but to elucidate, what I meant by ‘letter of the law followers’ essentially encapsulates everything you said pharisees were. And you are correct, legalism, in its most precise definition, entails claiming that one’s convictions that fall under christian liberty, are actually explicitly taught by the bible. However, I find that the bible does explicitly teach against this matter of magic/supernatural in entertainment, and thus, I do not believe that it is legalism to claim that these things are wrong. I will explain why shortly.

Before I cover your main point, I must remark on this:

Magic in Harry Potter does not stem from the demonic realm.

Then where it is from? Let me explain by covering what I believe to be your main point (correct me if I’m wrong):

It is not a sin to read such a story from the Bible, even though the protagonist uses spiritual/supernatural powers that are contrary to the natural laws and cannot be classified as a natural inborn talent.

This statement–which I believe is your central point–I agree with. My personal taste in literature makes me think that having the God/Creator of a world give a person special powers is rather cheesy and trite, but that is beside the point (and I do read books with this in it). However, when you extrapolated from this example, I believe you missed one vital point. In every single example you gave, it was God  who gave Samson and the prophets power. So, if you as a writer want to write a book where the God of that world gives your character power, I believe you are within Christian liberty to do so. However, most fantasy books that contain supernatural power do not do this whatsoever. Since you used Harry Potter as the example, I will continue on with it. Harry attends a school of divinations, spells, and dark arts, to learn them. Emphasis on learn. God does not give him powers, he acquires them through this learning. There is not getting around it: this is witchcraft personified.

This leads me back to your point that Harry’s powers do not come from the demonic realm, and my questioning you as to where it comes from. Here was the reason for my question: if God is not the one giving the power, then that power is not coming from God, and thus, it is a form of witchcraft and the power is coming from some supernatural realm that is not God. If God grants something, there is not Harry Potter style meddling and learning evolved. Frankly, Harry Potter is the purest form of what witchcraft was throughout the middle ages and before (in the instances it was real anyway). It doesn’t get much clear than the way Rowling presents it.

Now, let me cover what I believe to be your other main point–again, correct me if I am wrong in the way I construed your words.

You stated: Convictions vs Bible Teaching (actual moral law) are like:

Playing cards (within christian liberty) vs gambling (not within christian liberty–which some would claim it is by the way)

Drinking wine vs Getting Drunk

And finally: Magic in literature vs Magic in real life. I hope I cleared up the difference between God giving a character power, and Harry Potter style power. I would like to discuss these examples in regard to Harry Potter style power (aka, magic).

Unfortunately for me (because there are several books I really want to read right now but I can’t xD), these analogies are not applicable. Put simply, here’s why: Drinking wine and playing cards are activities that people associate with sins, but they have nothing to do with the actual sin. On the other hand, if I was a writer was to create a character that attains and uses supernatural powers not given to them by God (like Harry Potter does) to win the day and as a cool ‘this is fantasy’ ability, then I am, no matter what I intend, showing readers that I think meddling with supernatural abilities and meddling in the sub-natural realms, is okay. Think of it like this:

Character is sent on a quest

Character learns how to commit mass murder

Character commits mass murder to defeat the villain

Book ends with character living happily ever after in a happy world despite all the mass murders of innocents

My point is, we as authors like to pretend that supernatural power in the Harry Potter style is okay because it’s not real, it’s just in a book, so it doesn’t really matter, it’s all christian liberty, right? Unfortunately, no. Even if the murder was just in the book, it is showing the readers that committing such an act is perfectly okay. Of course, readers now days would be shocked by that murder example but be perfectly fine with the most extreme forms of witchcraft. This is because people no longer understand the true depravity of witchcraft, and that things like Harry Potter reflect that depravity but present it as if it is a perfectly fine thing to do.

I hope that made sense.

To restate my point one more time: I believe you are correct about it being fine to have a character who is given power by God–the single Creator of the world (at the very least, this is definitely within Christian liberty). However, books like Harry Potter are not given their power by God. They attain it and learn it which means, without a doubt, that power is not coming from God. To say it is coming from God is an incredibly dangerous, and unfounded belief. Finally, having characters who use magic/non-God-given-supernatural abilities who use those abilities to win the day is telling readers that magic and supernatural powers (dark magic, white magic, same thing) are okay–even if only subconsciously. Books reflect life, there is no getting around it. I believe that entertainment problems such as these are much bigger deals and erode the Church much more than people think.

I know conversations like these are really not great to have over the internet since its hard to change minds and we can come off too strongly by accident, but I do appreciate your replies.

One side question: I think supernatural content in the bad way clearly includes gods (not counting the Creator), demons, angels, etc, I assume you agree from what your unique reasoning, but do you?