So, remind me again why Harry Potter is 'evil'?

[jelly]

Back when the books were super popular and the first couple movies came out, my parents were among the ranks of "Harry Potter is completely sinful because it promotes witchcraft" rebellion that consisted of over-protective Christian parents everywhere. So of course, I had nothing to do with it. As years progressed, my parents became more lax with standards, but I chose to keep ignoring the series because I simply didn't have a lot of interest. However, as of lately with the epic finale being released, the incredible success of the movies has been almost impossible to ignore. Everyone I knew was talking about it, film reviews everywhere have been giving the films endless praise, and this movie trailer...



...is by far the most epic movie trailer of the year, hands down.

Seriously, the incredible success of the Harry Potter franchise is mind-blowing. It's the highest grossing film series of all time, far surpassing the likes of Star Wars and the Lord of the Rings. Every single sequel has been a complete success. So I was finally like, "I really can't keep claiming to be a fan of film while choosing to ignore one of the most influential film franchises of our time", so I dove into the world of Harry Potter.

The first couple films were... laughable. Just incredibly cheesy and cliche'd. But then they started to get better. By the time I walked into the theatre to see The Deathly Hallows Part 2, I was a complete fan. Amazingly, the finale was completely satisfying. I walked out going, "I just watched one of the greatest movies of all time".

Why are the movies so good? Because the story is really, really good. After finishing, I shared a brief laugh with myself at the thought of all the ignorant parents and families who have put up a huge deal over nothing and missed out on a truly amazing experience. Even if you're still one of those "witchcraft is evil" type people, relax. The use of magic found in Harry Potter is not 'promoted' or 'evil'. It's merely presented as a fictional aspect in a fictional world, no different than the use of the Force in Star Wars or the fictional aspects of fantasy found in Narnia or the Lord of the Rings.

Anyways. I know this has been argued to death and the topic may hardly even be relevant anymore, so if nothing else, take this as an encouragement to go watch the Harry Potter movies. Seriously. They're amazing.

[gunblader3]

If you thought the movies were good because of its story, you should check out the books. They were also massive hits and some of the best selling books as well. Though I am a bit biased against the movies because of some important elements in the book were either omitted or skimmed over just for the sake of showing off the special effects.

Anyways the reason why some Christians were against Harry Potter because as soon as they hear anything about Witches, they get the notion of evil beings that influence the lives of others with spells and curses and worshiping the devil. Which is funny because many of these Christian adore the LOTR series yet Gandalf is a warlock, a male witch. Its just another example of people judging something without looking into its contents.

[Termite]

I must say, Voldemort's more intensive dark arts bothered me, and the divination... however, I'm still finishing the series. (I've seen the first five) Basically, I'm indifferent. They're adorable when they're younger, and the special effects are awesome... but they will never be Lord of the Rings for me.

[ric]

I lol'd at the continuous 'NOOOOOO!!!' all throughout the second half of the trailer, but, ya, that was pretty epic I guess.

I could probably see it if I really wanted to, but I just don't. Maybe I'll watch them when I'm old and there's nothing better to do.

Also, I recently read this article, but I really didn't want to revive any old arguments by posting it. But, please, read this article. It's great.

(By the way, Andrew Peterson is a Christian Singer-Songwriter/Author.)

http://andrew-peterson.com/blog/harry-p ... sus-and-me

[Knight Fisher]

I lol'd at the continuous 'NOOOOOO!!!' all throughout the second half of the trailer, but, ya, that was pretty epic I guess.

I could probably see it if I really wanted to, but I just don't. Maybe I'll watch them when I'm old and there's nothing better to do.

Also, I recently read this article, but I really didn't want to revive any old arguments by posting it. But, please, read this article. It's great.

(By the way, Andrew Peterson is a Christian Singer-Songwriter/Author.)

http://andrew-peterson.com/blog/harry-p ... sus-and-me

Andrew Peterson FTW. That guy is awesome.

[Amethystic]

Well, don't I feel like the odd one out.

Anyways the reason why some Christians were against Harry Potter because as soon as they hear anything about Witches, they get the notion of evil beings that influence the lives of others with spells and curses and worshiping the devil. Which is funny because many of these Christian adore the LOTR series yet Gandalf is a warlock, a male witch. Its just another example of people judging something without looking into its contents.

Not all Christians who avoid things like Harry Potter do it just because there's witches, (Though I'd like to go on record as saying that's a VERY good reason to avoid something. Last I checked witchcraft = BAD.) and in fact there are many people who have researched the series and have decided it was in their best interest to avoid it--because of an educated conviction, not a knee-jerk reaction.

Yes, I believe that Harry Potter is ungodly and should absolutely be avoided--I also avoid a lot of other things that most people (including Christians) deem as 'okay'. I've largely avoided Star Wars, Twilight, Lord of the Rings, and I'm even a bit on the fence about the Chronicles of Narnia; all of these stories contain some sort of magic, which is really just another name for supernatural power that doesn't come from God. I'm not perfectly consistent in what I do and don't avoid in this respect (Are the Disney movies I watch spiritually damaging? I hope not.), but "avoid magic" is definitely one of my basic policies.

I have several good friends who love Harry Potter, and they usually tell me one of two things: they either say, "There's good versus evil in the story!" or "It's not real, it's just a book!" Well doesn't that first statement apply, to some extent, to most books and films that should be avoided? There is usually a "good" side and a "bad" side in a story, whether the characters are mice or magicians. Self-sacrifice bearing similarity to Jesus' sacrifice is also a common plot device. The characters are trying to the right thing; it doesn't mean they are doing the right thing. And just because something isn't "real" doesn't mean it's not influencing how we think and what we believe is acceptable. Sure, you might not start holding Wiccan ceremonies in your youth group or anything crazy like that, but it's these little concessions that open people up to becoming more accepting of evil. Also, witches are real, and some of them have real supernatural power. (There are obviously plenty of gimmicky, ineffective witches out there too, but then, aren't there also gimmicky, ineffective Christians?)

If it were up to me the church would take a stance and tell people this stuff is wrong and should be avoided, but in the absence of that they should at least tell people to respect those who have chosen to avoid these sorts of things rather than call them over-cautious or ignorant. It's a lot harder to resist the culture trends than to go along with them, and it doesn't help any of these people when their fellow Christians are putting them down for trying to be careful.

[jelly]

Yes, I believe that Harry Potter is ungodly and should absolutely be avoided--I also avoid a lot of other things that most people (including Christians) deem as 'okay'. I've largely avoided Star Wars, Twilight, Lord of the Rings, and I'm even a bit on the fence about the Chronicles of Narnia; all of these stories contain some sort of magic, which is really just another name for supernatural power that doesn't come from God. I'm not perfectly consistent in what I do and don't avoid in this respect (Are the Disney movies I watch spiritually damaging? I hope not.), but "avoid magic" is definitely one of my basic policies.

Despite your disclaimer about not being consistent, I really don't understand how you can passionately say all of that and yet still be a huge fan of Artemis Fowl, a book series that's completely filled with magic. I would say it's even a good bit more 'ungodly' then most of those series you listed.

Amy, what's your definition of 'fiction'? I could write a book with a bunch of happy children who find some golden mushrooms in the woods, eat them, and suddenly have the ability to fly and do other cool stuff. Would it be spiritually damaging for you to read my book? Of course not. I've presented an entertaining story with some fictional elements to keep it fun and interesting. Sure, you could say that the golden mushrooms are "ungodly because they provide supernatural power that doesn't come from God", but that's just dumb, because it's obviously not real. Now there's obviously a huge difference, but at the same time, I don't really think there is. Your argument looks just as ridiculous to me when you're trying to tell me that a fictional world is 'spiritually damaging'. You're going to tell me that you'll probably fall away from God if you start reading a book where a bunch of kids can make things move with their wands?

Even if you want to remain stubborn with your stance on fictional magic, please, draw your conclusions based on the stories themselves. As in that article ric posted, you can see that the story found in Harry Potter is anything but 'spiritually damaging'. You might even benefit from it. Does that not totally trump the fact that the characters happen to use fictional magic? Now, a story in which all the morals and overtones are completely and obviously sinful COULD be damaging... but the mere use of a fictional element in a story with great morals and overtones is definitely NOT.

[Amethystic]

I do realize that Artemis Fowl does tread awfully close to that same area of fiction, which is part of the reason why I've definitely laid off the series in recent months. To say I was a huge fan, though, might be a bit of a stretch; I liked the books initially, but they've never been a 'number one' for me. *shrug* Either way you're right, I am cutting it awful close, but I'm trying to work on it.

Jelly, I just admitted I don't know where the line is drawn. I've grown up around fairytales and all that stuff just like any other kid, so the line can be pretty hazy--but when people are allowing the more blatant and spiritually involved fantasy novels into the circle of acceptable reading, it makes the distinction even fuzzier. Storytelling is one of the most effective teaching methods out there, in spreading both direct and indirect messages. People--especially kids--get attached to the characters and the stories; by identifying with these books they're learning that wizards are 'cool' and that magic isn't wrong. Even when they're being told it's only okay because "it's not real", this stuff influences them subconsciously the rest of their lives. Maybe it won't cause them any (visible) problems in their Christian walk; or maybe the subtle influences will be enough to push them over the edge and embrace the Occult. No matter how great or little the erosion may seem, I guarantee you that it is there. The Christians that aren't destroyed are neutralized--they don't know how to stand up to the demonic. What are they going to do when a member of their church becomes a witch and poisons her children's minds with New Age garbage, or their daughter starts fooling around with aura divination, or their brother goes to a crystal healer and has a missing eye grow back? These are all real problems that me and my family have encountered within our Christian circles. This stuff is real and it's dangerous, whether it's in a book or not, and until we stop treating it like it's make-believe it's going to keep negatively affecting--or destroying--people's Christian walks and cause them serious harm. It's not about, "If you read this book series you're going to become a witch!" it's about, "If you expose yourself to these materials you're going to expose and slowly desensitize yourself to the demonic."

You said, "Draw conclusions based on the stories themselves." Isn't magic the whole point of the story, though? Without magic, there is no Harry Potter; it's a central theme in the novel. I did read the article, and any apparent spiritual enrichment is purely superficial; that whole "seeing God in everything" and "is God really so small that he can't ___?" stuff is just another way people excuse their indulgences in ungodly media. Short of porn and Satanic music, you can use that kind of reasoning to excuse almost anything. And again, letting kids think that magic (even if it's with the premise, "As long as it's only fictional.") is cool and acceptable desensitizes them and influences their perception of right and wrong, what's "okay" and "not okay". It doesn't matter what other moral overtones there may be. As the old saying goes, one bad apple spoils the whole bunch.

Your argument looks just as ridiculous to me when you're trying to tell me that a fictional world is 'spiritually damaging'.

I don't understand what it is about my claims that is so ridiculous to you, but I make no apologies for what I said before. My opinion is every bit as valid as yours, so I would appreciate it if you didn't put it down with your choice of words. I don't want this to affect our friendship, even if we do disagree.

[Parker Family]

"There comes a point where Susan, who was the older girl, is lost to Narnia because she becomes interested in lipstick. She's become irreligious basically because she found sex," Rowling says. "I have a big problem with that."

Thats one of the problem I have with the author. A children's author attacking another author because she thinks that "sex" is a good thing to talk about to children?

Rowling has never finished The Lord of the Rings. She hasn't even read all of C.S. Lewis' Narnia novels, which her books get compared to a lot. There's something about Lewis' sentimentality about children that gets on her nerves.

If one has read all the books of Narnia, one would understand that Susan was too concerned about her looks then about anything else (such as school work, ect.).

Just one book can both affect people either positively and negatively and that is why one must be careful what one reads and the authors motives behind writing the book.

[Termite]

. As in that article ric posted, you can see that the story found in Harry Potter is anything but 'spiritually damaging'. You might even benefit from it. Does that not totally trump the fact that the characters happen to use fictional magic? Now, a story in which all the morals and overtones are completely and obviously sinful COULD be damaging... but the mere use of a fictional element in a story with great morals and overtones is definitely NOT.

...That guy in the article is a bit nuts if he can drag out that much spiritually out of Harry potter. Just sayin'.

[EK]

I knew a guy who read all of the harry potter books in one sitting and now he worships satan. Scary stuff, I wouldn't mess with the devil like that if I were you jelly.

[Musical Shutterbug]

Who here said that Harry Potter was evil?

[ric]

"There comes a point where Susan, who was the older girl, is lost to Narnia because she becomes interested in lipstick. She's become irreligious basically because she found sex," Rowling says. "I have a big problem with that."

Thats one of the problem I have with the author. A children's author attacking another author because she thinks that "sex" is a good thing to talk about to children?

What?! No, that's not at all what she was saying. She's saying she thinks it's dumb that Susan became irreligious because she started wanting to look sexually attractive. And all it talks about is lipstick for Pete's sake! That is pretty ridiculous.

[jelly]

lol Parker Family, nobody cares. >_> Don't try attacking one author based on your irrelevant bias for another author, or try to assume the author's motives.

...That guy in the article is a bit nuts if he can drag out that much spiritually out of Harry potter. Just sayin'.

That's not the point. The point is that the morals and themes found in Harry Potter are definitely NOT 'ungodly'.

Amy, I understand and accept your argument, and I think it's completely fine as a personal conviction. However I don't believe that you or 'the church' are at all entitled to 'take a stance' and tell everyone that it's wrong. For the same reason that you think us fans should respect the opinion of those who think it's wrong, you should definitely respect the opinions of those who don't, especially since you don't even know what it's about. I guess what bugs me most is the fact that everyone's judging the book by its cover, or in this case, making huge accusations and assumptions based on very limited knowledge. Magic is not 'the whole point' of the story. If you wanted to, you could totally place the same characters, themes, and situations into any other setting. And that's my point... you're repelled by the use of fictional magic, when really, the use of fictional magic is not even the point of Harry Potter. People like myself appreciate Harry Potter because of the excellent characters, plots and themes... not because of the use of fictional magic.

also, pshh.. since when did debates damage friendships? Not for me they don't, anyways.

[Amethystic]

lol Parker Family, nobody cares. >_> Don't try attacking one author based on your irrelevant bias for another author, or try to assume the author's motives.

Parker Family's entitled to his opinions just like anyone else, even if you happen to think they are unfounded. Putting someone down by saying "nobody cares" is uncalled for.

...That guy in the article is a bit nuts if he can drag out that much spiritually out of Harry potter. Just sayin'.

That's not the point. The point is that the morals and themes found in Harry Potter are definitely NOT 'ungodly'.

The archetypes, themes, and intentions may not be 'ungodly' in and of themselves, but it's the context that's the problem. I'm not suggesting that there's any direct pro-witchcraft message in the book, I'm saying that by encouraging kids to empathize and agree with the actions of wizards and witches they're being taught that witchcraft is harmless (and cool) make-believe and not a real supernatural threat.

Amy, I understand and accept your argument, and I think it's completely fine as a personal conviction. However I don't believe that you or 'the church' are at all entitled to 'take a stance' and tell everyone that it's wrong. For the same reason that you think us fans should respect the opinion of those who think it's wrong, you should definitely respect the opinions of those who don't, especially since you don't even know what it's about. I guess what bugs me most is the fact that everyone's judging the book by its cover, or in this case, making huge accusations and assumptions based on very limited knowledge. Magic is not 'the whole point' of the story. If you wanted to, you could totally place the same characters, themes, and situations into any other setting. And that's my point... you're repelled by the use of fictional magic, when really, the use of fictional magic is not even the point of Harry Potter. People like myself appreciate Harry Potter because of the excellent characters, plots and themes... not because of the use of fictional magic.

Well that's where we disagree; the church has to speak up on these issues, or nobody else will. Suggesting that the church take a stance on important societal issues is not disrespecting the fans in any which way. And yes, I do know what I'm talking about. I know what happens in the stories, and I get that the characters don't run down the halls of Hogwarts screaming, "EVERYBODY DO WITCHCRAFT!!!" And maybe the characters and plot could be translated into another genre, but that's not the point. The point is that the story does involve magic. The characters are surrounded by magic, they practice magic, they often solve their problems with magic, and they view magic as a good thing.

also, pshh.. since when did debates damage friendships? Not for me they don't, anyways.

With all due respect, you would never be this brash if you were actually speaking to someone in real life. (At least, I hope you wouldn't.) Even when I discuss this stuff with my real world friends, we always maintain an attitude of respect and courtesy. That way there's no hard feelings.

[jelly]

Well that's where we disagree; the church has to speak up on these issues, or nobody else will.

The church has to speak up on these issues because you happen to be convicted about them? You can't expect 'the church' to shove a message down people's throats and not let them decide things for themselves. YOU may know what you're talking about and understand that witchcraft isn't the primary focus of the story, but lots of other people will just be like, "Harry Potter is COMPLETELY EVIL because my pastor said so!" The amount of fuss and controversy that came from Christians when the Harry Potter books came out was entirely embarrassing and uncalled for. JK Rowling didn't deserve to be attacked with the massive bias that she got attacked with, because 99% of the people attacking her didn't even know what the books were about besides the fact that they contained magic. How absurd is that?

also, pshh.. since when did debates damage friendships? Not for me they don't, anyways.

With all due respect, you would never be this brash if you were actually speaking to someone in real life. (At least, I hope you wouldn't.) Even when I discuss this stuff with my real world friends, we always maintain an attitude of respect and courtesy. That way there's no hard feelings.

Hence = the internet. If you've ever felt personally insulted by me, I apologize. Otherwise, feel free to continue debating without trying to bring up personal feelings.

[Termite]

...That guy in the article is a bit nuts if he can drag out that much spiritually out of Harry potter. Just sayin'.

That's not the point. The point is that the morals and themes found in Harry Potter are definitely NOT 'ungodly'.

Perhaps. But are they godly morals in which we should follow? Yes, 'good wins', but at what cost? Lying, sneaking about... where is the line drawn?

I understand both sides to this... However, you could be a bit more polite, Jelly. Don't lower your standards of conversation even if it is just 'the internet'.

[Parker Family]

"There comes a point where Susan, who was the older girl, is lost to Narnia because she becomes interested in lipstick. She's become irreligious basically because she found sex," Rowling says. "I have a big problem with that."

Thats one of the problem I have with the author. A children's author attacking another author because she thinks that "sex" is a good thing to talk about to children?

What?! No, that's not at all what she was saying. She's saying she thinks it's dumb that Susan became irreligious because she started wanting to look sexually attractive. And all it talks about is lipstick for Pete's sake! That is pretty ridiculous.

Hmm... I may have interpreted the thing wrong ... Oh, well, I apologize

[Graces4you]

"There comes a point where Susan, who was the older girl, is lost to Narnia because she becomes interested in lipstick. She's become irreligious basically because she found sex," Rowling says. "I have a big problem with that."

Okay, this has nothing to do with Harry Potter, but the way I look how Susan forgot about Narnia is she became conformed to the world. She became of the world, too caught up in life to think of narnia, so she forgot about it. It's sort of like if we take our eyes off of Jesus and loose faith in him, we sink into the waves.

[Officer David Harley]

My problem with Harry Potter isn't the witchcraft, I'm to into si-fi and fantasy to care about that, but that firstly: she is a terrible author and needs to learn how to write, and secondly: Ring around Frodo's neck- Horcrocks around Harry's neck, Gandalf the white- Dumbledore the white, short people having to destroy stuff to save the world, short people needing the help of friends, short people knowing they will die to complete their mission, seeing any similarities here? I find it irksome when people copy someone else's idea and then carry it on for 4,175 and taking that long to finish a series that could have been finished in the first book by killing the 'hero' and making a better story in the end.


Officer David Harley