How do you feel about movies with magic and such?

[Jerry]

Maybe it's time to throw out the Anime then...

[Annie]

Tifa, you probably figured that when you posted a question like this one, you'd get a variety of answers. I won't even give you my personal opinion about books (or movies) in which "magic" figures into the plot...I'll just say that it's not at all like anyone else's who has posted here.

The point is that you need to do what you (your husband, really) think(s) is right. If "magical" and fanciful stories bother you, then avoid them, and be prepared to explain to your children why your family chooses not to read/listen to/watch such stories.

[Amaryllis]

There is no 'safe' entertainment nowadays. I'm specifically talking about media. Movies dealing with magic issues are evil enough, but I thought that other genres (such as anime or documentaries) are more viewable. It's just shocking the amount of swearing that they use in anime series. I'm so frustrated because I feel as if I cannot get away from any of these no matter what show I watch.
talktotifa, I think that you were so right in giving it up, it's quite a dangerous waste of time.

Maybe it's time to throw out the Anime then...

It's something that has become necessary but I don't understand why I'm still clinging to it.

[Jerry]

The point is that you need to do what you (your husband, really) think(s) is right. If "magical" and fanciful stories bother you, then avoid them, and be prepared to explain to your children why your family chooses not to read/listen to/watch such stories.

Does she? How about doing what God says is right?

Galatians 5:19-21 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

[Annie]

Does she? How about doing what God says is right?

I think you might have misunderstood. "Doing what God says is right" is what I meant by "doing what [she] and her husband think is right." I am taking it for granted that they are making decisions like this based on what they believe God would have them to do. (In case I was unclear, before, Tifa, this should clarify what I was saying. Do what God would have you to do, and be prepared to explain to your kids why you believe that's what He would have you do. I'm sorry if I was unclear. )

[edf203]

This is slightly off-subject, but can anyone who UNDERSTANDS the Chronicles of Narnia books explain what is wrong with them? The "magic" mentioned in the books (at least the "magic" related to the good guys) is CS Lewis's word for any supernatural act, including the work of God (or Aslan, as he is called in the books).

I have heard a lot of griping about the Chronicles of Narnia and their "magic" or "fairytale creatures", but never heard a solid argument that wasn't based on hearsay. I don't mean to sound critical, but being a fan of the series and their author, I get a little perturbed when people condemn something they don't understand.

Edited April 6, 2011 by edf203

[Salyan]

We had a discussion about this a couple of years ago! I'm going to just repost what I said there.

You know, I love Narnia. Or is that loved? I've always enjoyed fantasy/science fiction. Sometimes the books/movies I indulged in were better than others and sometimes they were worse, but Narnia always topped my list of favorites as one of the 'better' ones (along with LOTR). I considered it to be allegorical fiction -- some Christian message, but mostly just a fun read (or watch -- I had the older movies and really enjoyed the first of this new batch.) And I knew the difference between fiction and fact! So what was the matter if it had some pagan mythology mixed in?

However, recently I finally had to choose to give up most of my fantasy reading -- including Narnia. Why? Because I finally realized that it was not honoring to God. I'm not writing this to sound 'holier-than-thou.' It was a really hard decision to make (and yes, I know that choosing to honor God should not be a hard decision, but I'm still human and I really did love that series), and I want to share why I now believe that Narnia is not something Christians should indulge themselves with. By the way, I have read the books countless times, and watched the various movie versions as well (except the new Prince Caspian), so I am familiar with the contents.

1. Pagan mythology
Whoever of y'all has read the books know that they are full of dryads, nyaids, fauns, and other various forms of Greek mythology. This never used to bother me. However, these are not just 'walking trees' and 'living waters.' Lewis refers to them in his books as 'tree-gods,' 'tree-goddesses', the 'river-god and his daughters.' They are actually called gods in a matter-of-fact way -- as if it is quite natural to have multiple gods. Whatever happened to "thou shalt have no other gods before Me?" Lewis had a huge interest in pagan religion. He believed that Christianity could find its roots in the old pagan religions.
In Prince Caspian (the book), there is also a scene where Bacchus comes to celebrate a victory with the children and Aslan. I had always overlooked this. If you look him up, the worship of this false god (historically, he isn't called a god in the books) was always accompanied by orgies and immorality. According to Wikipedia, he was the god of wine, and the patron of ritual madness and ecstasy. The excesses of his worshippers actually caused the Roman Senate to forbid the worship of this demon.

2. Astrology/Crystal-gazing
This is in Prince Caspian (the book). Caspian's tutor tells him that the times will be changing. He has learned this information from watching 'the great lords of the sky.' I've read these books many times, and completely missed this reference to astrology. The tutor also makes reference to information learned while crystal-gazing.
Deuteronomy 18:10-11. "There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination [includes crystal gazing], or an observer of times [astrology], or an enchanter, or a witch, Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer."

3. False Biblical History
At one point in the series, the history of the witches is discussed. Aslan tells the children that the witches are descended form 'Adam's first wife,' the one he apparently had before he married Eve! I think it's the The Magician's Nephew, but my memory isn't quite sure. I wonder how many Biblically-illiterate readers will think that Adam, if he existed, really did have a wife before Eve? What was it that that last chapter of Revelation said about adding to the Word of God?

4. Witchcraft/Magic
These books are filled with references to witchcraft and magic. In The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, Lucy is reading a book of spells -- charms (again, Deut. 18:11). She casts one of them to restore the people of an island from invisibility. Aslan himself is revealed when the spell is lifted, but not a word is heard against her act of charming. The magician of the island who has enchanted them (look, there's another reference to Deuteronomy) is a servant of Aslan's.
When Christians try to allegorize Narnia, they look at the slaying of Aslan at the Stone Table as a type of Christ's sacrifice on the cross. Yet in Narnia, this event is mixed with magic. References are made to the 'deep magic.' This magic apparently controls even Aslan, as we find out from the above-mentioned invisibility episode in VDT, when he was subject to the limitations of the magician's spell.
The White Witch of The Lion, the Witch & the Wardrobe, the Green Witch of The Silver Chair, the Hag and Werewolf of Prince Caspian (who suggest the calling up of the White Witch from the dead -- necromancy). I recognize that these are the 'bad guys,' but why is it necessary for us, as Christians, to be reading about witches? They exist, but why must we fill our minds with them? This is the reason I have decided to stop reading/watching all fantasy fiction that includes witches or magic (which is most of it). The Israelites were instructed not to 'suffer a witch to live' in Israel. Why should we suffer them to live in our imaginations? Or the imaginations of our children? I was never tempted to imitate the magical part of my readings as a child, but I imitated a lot of other stories. How am I to know that my children, if allowed to read the same books, will not choose to imitate the magic?

5. Dangerous False Doctrine
Someone else has mentioned the scene about Tash, Aslan and the Calormene in The Last Battle. This is a fictional book, but the false teaching here is so subtly mixed with what appears to be truth, that it is a dangerous idea to have enter one's mind. Isn't a half-truth more dangerous than a lie?
Galatians 1:8. "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed."


I hope this post isn't too long. I'm not trying to put down anyone who enjoys the movies/books (I probably still would if I watched/read them again). It's just that, no matter how much we may like them, they include elements that we should separate ourselves from -- even as fiction. They are not allegorical. Even if they were meant to be, the amount of false teaching would make them even more dangerous -- think The DaVinci Code.

2 Corinthians 6:14-17. "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you."

The original thread was found here: My link
You should read it -- there were some excellent points made by other posters that are well worth reading. :thumb:

[Annie]

This is slightly off-subject, but can anyone who UNDERSTANDS the Chronicles of Narnia books explain what is wrong with them? The "magic" mentioned in the books (at least the "magic" related to the good guys) is CS Lewis's word for any supernatural act, including the work of God (or Aslan, as he is called in the books).

I have heard a lot of griping about the Chronicles of Narnia and their "magic" or "fairytale creatures", but never heard a solid argument that wasn't based on hearsay. I don't mean to sound critical, but being a fan of the series and their author, I get a little perturbed when people condemn something they don't understand.

Good post. Those who complain about "magic," pagan mythology, "false history," etc., in these books do not truly understand the literary genre of fantasy and the symbolism inherent in this genre. Edited April 6, 2011 by Annie

[HappyChristian]

Good post. Those who complain about "magic," pagan mythology, "false history," etc., in these books do not truly understand the literary genre of fantasy and the symbolism inherent in this genre.

That is a completely unfair broad brush by both of you. There are plenty of people who understand completely the literary genre of fantasy, and the symbolism inherent within who object to using magic as a teaching tool. Good or bad magic (funny, according to scripture, there is no good magic). And, btw, ed - Lewis never intended the Chronicles to be a Christian allegory, so he does not call God Aslan therein...he stated himself that it isn't a biblical allegory, so it is only readers who try to make it fit in that category.

[edf203]

We had a discussion about this a couple of years ago! I'm going to just repost what I said there.




The original thread was found here: My link
You should read it -- there were some excellent points made by other posters that are well worth reading.

1. I see your point, but the book itself addresses this point. I don't have an exact quote, but it is just after the character Bacchus is introduced. Lewis says that the mythological characters are not the same in Narnia as we think of them on earth, but "tamer". His point is that these are not the pagan gods we are thinking of, but he is using their names to symbolize the feelings in the scene (for example, during all of the feasting and joy, he includes the mythological character associated with partying, but makes the distinction between orgies and celebrations).

2. Lewis also discusses this in Voyage of the Dawn Treader, that the stars in Narnia are actual spiritual entities like angels or humans, with thoughts and feelings. They are also servants of Aslan, and arrange themselves according to his bidding. I this way, the inhabitants of Narnia can get real messages from the arrangement of the stars, unlike people on Earth. This is not astrology in Narnia so much as it is science. The Narnians know that the stars act a certain way (different from our stars) and they respond accordingly.

3. I still don't know what Lewis was going for on that one. Lilith is an evil spiritual entity from Jewish folklore who supposedly was Adam's initial wife. Of course, this is completely bogus, and, due to the legend's fantastical nature, no one really believes it anymore, but I think Lewis was trying to play on Jewish mythology, not add to the Bible. Lewis was a Christian who believed the Bible, and judging from his other works (for example, Mere Christianity or the Space Trilogy) he is not theologically off-base. Jadis (the White Witch) is from Charn, not Earth, so I don't understand how she could be related to Adam. Jadis is also explained to be part Jinn and part giantess. I don't know which of these stories is correct, but it seems as if Lewis changed his mind a few times with regards to Jadis's origins.

4. The term "magic" in the Narnia stories refers to witchcraft only when dealing with the evil characters. Aslan's use of the term "magic", esp. "deep magic", refers to "magic" that he created. It is the supernatural laws that govern the world that he set up before it was created. In short, the "magic" could be described as "the way Narnia works". The book of spells was given to Koriakin (I probably butchered the spelling) by Aslan to govern the Dufflepuds. If you notice, the "magic" practiced by the good guys is almost more like a science. When you blow the magic horn, somebody appears. When you wear the magic ring, you enter/leave a dimension. These are not caused by seances or incantations. They just work that way because that's the way Narnia was built.

PS: As for children mimicking magical practices, children just aren't that stupid. There is magic in the Bible (witch of Endor, Egyptian methods of divination, etc.), but no one mimicks that. There is a difference between "filling your head" with something and simply acknowledging its existence.

5. Please explain number 5 in greater detail. I read the Last Battle, and know the scenes to which you are referring, but I don't remember any false doctrine. Could you give a specific example?
I know about the part where the Calormenes say that Aslan and Tash are one, but this is later shown to be false. I am also familiar with the Calormene who thought he was a servant of Tash, but in his heart he served Aslan by the name of Tash. Whatever he called it, the person he served was Aslan, so he went to Aslan's Country after his death. Lewis explained this point thoroughly.

Finally, the Narnia books do honor God, as they are not only about Him, but they make great points about God and His plan for salvation (which is laid out in detail in the first book). Lewis made one great point in particular: regardless of the names and labels we give something, it is what it is. The young Calormene at the end of Last Battle said he served Tash, but to him, Aslan was called Tash and Tash was called Aslan. His reversal of the names meant nothing to the real Aslan, however. Likewise, "magic" in Narnia is not necessarily the same magic on Earth, and just because the word "magic" is used doesn't mean there is actually any witchcraft going on. We should not on such evidence condemn an entire series that, in fact, makes some excellent and necessary points.

[Annie]

That is a completely unfair broad brush by both of you. There are plenty of people who understand completely the literary genre of fantasy, and the symbolism inherent within who object to using magic as a teaching tool. Good or bad magic (funny, according to scripture, there is no good magic). And, btw, ed - Lewis never intended the Chronicles to be a Christian allegory, so he does not call God Aslan therein...he stated himself that it isn't a biblical allegory, so it is only readers who try to make it fit in that category.

LuAnne, I agree that CON is not an allegory. And who said anything about a "teaching tool"? I'm sorry...didn't mean to broadbrush...We were talking about CON only, right? And, if CON is not an allegory, then why all the fuss about The Last Battle and "false history" and "false doctrine"? Edited April 6, 2011 by Annie

[Annie]

1. I see your point, but the book itself addresses this point. I don't have an exact quote, but it is just after the character Bacchus is introduced. Lewis says that the mythological characters are not the same in Narnia as we think of them on earth, but "tamer". His point is that these are not the pagan gods we are thinking of, but he is using their names to symbolize the feelings in the scene (for example, during all of the feasting and joy, he includes the mythological character associated with partying, but makes the distinction between orgies and celebrations).

2. Lewis also discusses this in Voyage of the Dawn Treader, that the stars in Narnia are actual spiritual entities like angels or humans, with thoughts and feelings. They are also servants of Aslan, and arrange themselves according to his bidding. I this way, the inhabitants of Narnia can get real messages from the arrangement of the stars, unlike people on Earth. This is not astrology in Narnia so much as it is science. The Narnians know that the stars act a certain way (different from our stars) and they respond accordingly.

3. I still don't know what Lewis was going for on that one. Lilith is an evil spiritual entity from Jewish folklore who supposedly was Adam's initial wife. Of course, this is completely bogus, and, due to the legend's fantastical nature, no one really believes it anymore, but I think Lewis was trying to play on Jewish mythology, not add to the Bible. Lewis was a Christian who believed the Bible, and judging from his other works (for example, Mere Christianity or the Space Trilogy) he is not theologically off-base. Jadis (the White Witch) is from Charn, not Earth, so I don't understand how she could be related to Adam. Jadis is also explained to be part Jinn and part giantess. I don't know which of these stories is correct, but it seems as if Lewis changed his mind a few times with regards to Jadis's origins.

4. The term "magic" in the Narnia stories refers to witchcraft only when dealing with the evil characters. Aslan's use of the term "magic", esp. "deep magic", refers to "magic" that he created. It is the supernatural laws that govern the world that he set up before it was created. In short, the "magic" could be described as "the way Narnia works". The book of spells was given to Koriakin (I probably butchered the spelling) by Aslan to govern the Dufflepuds. If you notice, the "magic" practiced by the good guys is almost more like a science. When you blow the magic horn, somebody appears. When you wear the magic ring, you enter/leave a dimension. These are not caused by seances or incantations. They just work that way because that's the way Narnia was built.

PS: As for children mimicking magical practices, children just aren't that stupid. There is magic in the Bible (witch of Endor, Egyptian methods of divination, etc.), but no one mimicks that. There is a difference between "filling your head" with something and simply acknowledging its existence.

5. Please explain number 5 in greater detail. I read the Last Battle, and know the scenes to which you are referring, but I don't remember any false doctrine. Could you give a specific example?
I know about the part where the Calormenes say that Aslan and Tash are one, but this is later shown to be false. I am also familiar with the Calormene who thought he was a servant of Tash, but in his heart he served Aslan by the name of Tash. Whatever he called it, the person he served was Aslan, so he went to Aslan's Country after his death. Lewis explained this point thoroughly.

Finally, the Narnia books do honor God, as they are not only about Him, but they make great points about God and His plan for salvation (which is laid out in detail in the first book). Lewis made one great point in particular: regardless of the names and labels we give something, it is what it is. The young Calormene at the end of Last Battle said he served Tash, but to him, Aslan was called Tash and Tash was called Aslan. His reversal of the names meant nothing to the real Aslan, however. Likewise, "magic" in Narnia is not necessarily the same magic on Earth, and just because the word "magic" is used doesn't mean there is actually any witchcraft going on. We should not on such evidence condemn an entire series that, in fact, makes some excellent and necessary points.

You sound like my kind of person, ed. I don't agree with everything you said here (for example, the "plan of salvation" in LWW is not like the real "plan of salvation" in a lot of ways), but I am a Lewis and Tolkien fan...and I completely agree that the "magic" in these books is not at all what Scripture condemns. Edited April 6, 2011 by Annie

[HappyChristian]

LuAnne, I agree that CON is not an allegory. And who said anything about a "teaching tool"? I'm sorry...didn't mean to broadbrush...We were talking about CON only, right?

Are not all books teaching tools in one way or another? But, the reason I stated that is because allegories are teaching tools: they are written that way for a particular lesson. And, as we agree, the Chronicles are not.

The broadbrushing is stating that people who complain about the use of magic (and, since there are witches throughout the books, it isn't just "magic"), etc. don't understand the genre...when perhaps those who speak out against it don't like the genre at all.....not just the Chronicles.

[Annie]

The broadbrushing is stating that people who complain about the use of magic (and, since there are witches throughout the books, it isn't just "magic"), etc. don't understand the genre...when perhaps those who speak out against it don't like the genre at all.....not just the Chronicles.

All of the complaints I've seen are rooted in a misunderstanding of the genre of fantasy/fairy tales. The reasons people give for "not liking" the books spring from this misunderstanding. Salyan's post is a classic example of this misunderstanding. Edited April 6, 2011 by Annie

[HappyChristian]

All of the complaints I've seen are rooted in a misunderstanding of the genre of fantasy/fairy tales. The reasons people give for "not liking" the books spring from this misunderstanding. Salyan's post is a classic example of this misunderstanding.

Right.