Harry Potter, Chronicles Of Narnia, Lord of the Rings

Interestingly enough, this has been one of my most favorite subjects to discuss, and have had much controversy over it. Before I go on, take note if you are Tolkien or Lewis fan please indulge me as I lay out my case. I am not condemning anyone or saying your living in sin by reading or watching HP, CN, LOTR; however, I encourage you to at least entertain and heed my thoughts. There is so much occulted desensitization that has transpired in the culture over the past 50-75 years. This phenomenon has drawn millions of people to embrace “white” magick or sorcery as an acceptable solution for dealing with the trials of life. With society now captivated by the philosophy of sorcery, spells and incantations, and with no moral absolute to hold to, it is no wonder that so called “white” witchcraft has become an “acceptable” for the heroes of a supposedly “Christian” fantasy story. What I question here is how biblical thinkers could rectify and the justify occult themes and practices by Tolkien’s heroes and by Lewis. Though we may want to cheer on Frodo and Gandalf as they trek through the hard marshes and swamps of Middle Earth, the story can be likened to a sumptuous meal with a place setting of snakes and a garnish of arsenic.

As long as one doesn’t care what’s alongside or what the final outcome may be, then as long as we just say the story is teaching spiritual truths, and then everything will be OK. The more troubling is the fact here is that LOTR and CN has become so overwhelmingly accepted by Christians as a Christian story which supposedly gives an accurate portrayal of God’s values and truth, though it wholly abandons God’s absolute forbiddance of pagan practices regardless of how noble the use may be. There seems to be a near complete lack of understanding about just how serious this issue is in the sight of God. It is so easy to understand why non-Christians see the obvious contradiction in the denouncement of HP while many Christians hold Tolkien and Lewis up as an icon. HP, LOTR, and CN are marketed side by side and both are read and endorsed by an enormous amount of adults and children. It is occult desensitization. Why can’t we Christians understand that the world doesn’t see the difference? Our response as Christians is to understand that the occult, the same practices promoted by Tolkien’s and Lewis is repulsive in the site of God. He condemns such in no uncertain terms with the use of the word “abomination” three times in Deuteronomy 18:9-12 we had better call evil “evil” and never confuse it for “good.” However, we need to hit Scripture first.

Deuteronomy 18:10-12 Let no one be found among you who sacrifices his son or daughter in the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, or casts spells, or who is a medium or spirits or consults the dead.

Acts 19:11-20 Now God worked w with unusual miracles by the hands of Paul so that even handkerchiefs or aprons were brought from his body to the sick, and the diseases left them and the evil spirits went out of them. Then some of the itinerant Jewish exorcists took it upon themselves to call the name of the Lord Jesus over those who had evil spirits, saying “We exorcise you by the Jesus whom Paul preaches" Also there were seven sons of Sce'va, a Jewish chief priest, who did so. And the evil spirits answer and said, "Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are you?" Then the man in whom the evil spirit was leaped on them, overpowered them, and prevailed against them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded. This became known both to all Jews and Greeks dwelling in Ephesus; and fear fell on them all, and the name of the Lord Jesus was magnified. And many who had believed came confessing and telling their deeds. Also, many of those who had practiced magic brought their books together and burned them in the sight of all. And they counted up the value of them, and it totaled fifty thousand pieces of silver. So the word of the Lord grew mightily and prevailed.

These are just the few Scriptures that condemn all sorcery as opposed to a proper sense of dependence upon God. In Galatians 5:20 witchcraft is listed as being one of the acts of the sinful nature. God doesn't associate himself at all with sorcery . And you can't use sorcery for God. The book of Revelation contains several passages that condemn sorcery in the strongest terms (9:21; 18:23; 21:8; 22:15). That said, how do we define morally acceptable use of “good” magic in fiction? What’s the difference between white and black magic? Where, and how, do we draw the line? How do we distinguish the truly worthwhile (Tolkien and Lewis), the basically harmless (Glinda, Cinderella’s fairy godmother), and the problematic or objectionable in TV shows, movies, books and so on? And where on this continuum does HP, LOTR, and CN really fall? What so called "Good" magic in books, films, can me being a Christian read or watch that I feel comfortable with.

White magic and black magic have as their source, Satan. The power that we receive from God is through his Holy Spirit and is a result of our submission to his Lordship and his will. Is it not about personal power or any power that comes from nature but it is power received from the Holy Spirit to always glorify God and perform his will and not our own. The power of the Holy Spirit working through the Christian will never contradict Gods Word. If God wanted his power to be identified with magic he would have said so through his word, thus making it clear to all. In the book of Acts, we find books of magic being destroyed, not being used by Christians. The goal is to honor God and bring him glory. How do we decide which is good and which is evil? For the Christian, our source of truth and our "measuring rule" for discerning good and evil is through the Word of God. "Magic" takes place through the spiritual realm and is evident to us in our physical world. We are like babies when it comes to understanding the spiritual realm and must rely on the Word of God and the Holy Spirit to guide us. If something is clearly declared wrong by the Lord, it is wrong; our opinions have little weight compared to the Word of God. But as Christians we all mature at different rates. What I find as okay now, the Lord, in His time, may show me that it really isn't ok. At that time I will have to make the choice to follow Him or my own way. That is why we all may have different ideas about what is good and evil, but if our ideas do not line up with the Word of God, we need to change them.

The fiction writer or director of films can create any world or "reality" they choose, even defying the laws of physics, i.e. Superman. His ability to fly is in conflict with the laws of aerodynamics. Likewise, a fantasy writer can create a world where white magic is god or a god among many gods. Within the context of the story, he controls all and knows all. Where a problem can occur is when a non-discerning reader accepts the "reality" of the fantasy world and transfers it to real life. In the case of Superman, the reader would die by jumping off a tall building. In the case of a "god of white magic", the reader assumes white magic is good because it was good in the book he/she just read. That is why we are told in Scripture to test the spirits, because we can be easily misled, even when our intentions are good. Satan wants to rob us of God's best by substituting something of his making. The less we are aware of his methods, the more likely we are to be led astray. Satan will always seek to counterfeit the power of God; what better way to confuse.

An observer may call an act supernatural or 'magic", and it may be by human standards, but it is a natural act for God. The Bible provides a lot of warnings against deception, since we are all easily deceived. The fact that God tells us to have nothing to do with sorcery, should be sufficient enough for us to heed Him. While we play word games with "magic", Satan laughs, since we want to attribute to God what He has warned us to avoid. Having witchcraft or magic in books or movies, makes it all the more interesting and appealing to us but, that doesn't justify the means of it being "Okay" or “Good” when God's Word says it's wrong.
There is a significant difference between the Bible and other writings are that the Bible is written by the Holy Spirit and the other stories/books/movies are not. When the human authors of the works in question employ story elements that are at odds with God's Word, and even their heroes (good guys) use these means, that is an indirect way to desensitize us to them. We can then accept a little bad for a greater good. I wrestle with these issues with the movies/books that I like, but that does not change what the Word says about them. Again, we are told by the God to avoid sorcery and magic; we never find Christ using it, or His disciples, to accomplish good. I do not want to be found guilty of calling was is evil "good" for the sake of any exciting story, great plot, or fantastic special effects. Some say that in LOTR the writer Tolkien wanted to distinguish the difference between power from God, and Sorcery from Satan. That is false. Tolkien's writing, based on what he said in a 1956 letter he wrote, "There is no 'allegory' -- moral, political, or contemporary -- in the work at all. It is a 'fairy-story' ... [written] for adults (The Letters of J. R. R Tolkien, page 232)

Now I’ve read and watched the HP, CN, LOTR, series, and have seen dangers in all of them! We as Christians see the evil in HP, and condemn it. We as Christians see CN or LOTR, and view it as “good” or “acceptable”. What difference does it make if the sorcery is bad, good or acceptable? Especially by the author's or directors definition, when God has already spoken. The fact that Christians so eagerly go out of their way to defend sorcery in "Christian" books and films, explains my position that in CN, and LOTR, that it desensitizes us to accept what God makes clear we should avoid. These same stories could have been written without the sorcery, but that would not have been as appealing to an audience that is interested in the "spiritual" world; unfortunately that interest in the "spiritual" is more fed by religions that embrace secret knowledge and powers than that of the Spirit of God.




I think that Christians need to be aware of CN and LOTR, Biblically. Are works such as The Lord of the Rings, Chronicles of Naria doctrinally sound and do they reflect a biblical worldview? No. First off, Narnia is not a parable and not Biblical. There is much confusion over the definitions of a parable, a fable, and Biblical Truth. I recommend you check read this http://www.seekgod.ca/fables.htm Paul warned in 1 Timothy 1:4 Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith. We have clear Biblical instruction to not be involved with fables, myths, fiction and so on. It does not say we can read fables and be edified. It does not say we can read or write fables and learn sound doctrine from them or use them as an evangelism tool. It says to have nothing to do with fables. But please, this cannot confused with Christ teaching in parables, which some have tried to say is the same thing. If it was the same thing, we would not have been given these very serious warnings and commands to have nothing to do with fables. A Parable, which Jesus used frequently, is a short story of everyday life used to teach a moral by comparison or by implication. According to Strong's Concordance, it is "an earthly story with a heavenly meaning." Jesus taught the truth with situations that could easily be applied in our own lives. He did not immerse those stories in witchcraft and false gods, nor did he purvey lies of the occult. Those who propagate the idea that a fable is the same as Christ's parables are misinformed and Biblically inaccurate.



Youth pastor Connie Neal in the Christianity.com interview article, Harry Potter and the Disputable Matter, view the PotterNarnia, etc., issue as being where cultural and spiritual issues overlap. However, witchcraft is a religion which is diametrically and purposefully opposed to God. Just because the vast majority of people enjoy or accept it, does not mean Christians should. Mrs. Neal stated,”....some people will say, "We condemn Harry Potter because the characters on the side of good practice witchcraft, suggesting that witchcraft is acceptable." There’s also the complaint that the Potter books bring in elements of astrology, the use of crystal balls, and spell casting. But all of these elements are also in the Narnia books! In The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, one of the good characters, a little girl named Lucy, casts a spell to make invisible creatures visible again. Now, what is the literal interpretation of that? That you can do spells as long as they are the "right" spells, and you cast them under Jesus’ authority? "
So, the same elements being in the Narnia and LOTR books is the argument that makes Potter acceptable fare? If we apply the same kind of censorship to other pieces of literature as we do with Harry Potter, where does it stop? If you say, "I will not read a story that has any wands or spells," then you have to get rid of over two-thirds of classic children’s literature, including. Cinderella, Peterpan, and Beauty and the Beast!


What Scripture actually supports the reading of witchcraft and fables to children when they are filled with the same occult imagery and practices? That's the most important question. It is not about opinion, as I said earlier it is about what God says. It is not censorship to not read Potter or other occult focused material, myths and fables. It is being selective and discerning. My goal throughout this blog post, is to speak the Truth of God's word, not my opinion or belief.

Here is a following article from Amy Hollingsworth, a Home-schooling mom. She advocates Tolkien, Lewis and Rowling as worthy authors for Christian families. "....Opponents of fantasy say that it creates an unreality that’s not healthy for kids. I say it gives them an outlet to express very real fears and concerns. And so it was with The Hobbit. When I picked it up from the library shelf one day, I thought my kids and I would enjoy it for a few weeks and then be done with it. But five months later, we were still reading. Not because it’s an enormous book (my husband read three Tom Swift books to my son and daughter in the time it took me to read The Hobbit to them), but we were savoring it, letting its images linger, unwilling to depart from Tolkien’s great imaginative world any sooner than we had to. The focal point of the novel is a diminutive creature named Bilbo Baggins. Bilbo is a hobbit, a creature with hairy feet, a fruity laugh and a preference for safety and routine (adventures, after all, “make you late for dinner”). That all changes one day when a wizard named Gandalf and thirteen dwarves show up at his hobbit hole. The Tookish part of Bilbo (a less respectable branch of the family tree, one that actually succumbed to adventure from time to time) is slowly awakened. Bilbo is hired as a burglar, to steal back the treasures hoarded by the dragon Smaug.

En route, he and the dwarves run into all kinds of obstacles: trolls, wolves, elves, goblins, giant spiders, a bear-man and an amusing little creature named Gollum (who hisses and refers to himself as “precious”).
Besides giving Jonathan an outlet for his fears, The Hobbit also gave his imagination a jumpstart. Usually a prolific writer, Jonathan had hit a dry spell for nearly half a year. But The Hobbit had sparked a revival, and Jonathan was again trusting in his ability to create—although he did borrow freely from Tolkien’s images and style. He sat at the computer for hours (even forgoing a few football games with friends), composing an epic about a character named Gnome. Unlike Bilbo, Gnome was a rather tall fellow; like Bilbo, Gnome had a dislike for adventure (“He preferred to work in his office,” Jonathan wrote).

...When he wasn’t content with the plot he was weaving, Jonathan started on a second story, this time Gnome had an alter ego, a boy named Steven (yes, the name of his friend who questioned our choice to learn at home). He originally wrote Steven as a sort of bad guy—he grabs the mayor by his shirt collar in one scene—then changed his character to the hero...Jonathan also realized that to become a great writer you have to read great writers. He noticed that when he began to write again, he borrowed not only from Tolkien, but also from two other favorite authors: J.K. Rowling and Clyde Robert Bulla. I was quick to point out (with perhaps more relish than was called for) that none of the novels adapted from the Pokémon movies made it into his mix. ...As I looked back over the last months, I realized what an impact that little guy had had upon my little guy. Bilbo had encouraged Jonathan to start writing again, to trust his imagination. Bilbo had broken the Captain Underpants curse, and Jonathan was choosing to read C.S. Lewis’ The Magician’s Nephew instead. And Bilbo gave Jonathan the courage to confront a dragon of his own, one who twisted words to make him doubt.

As I read this Article, notice her statement "Bilbo had encouraged Jonathan to start writing again, to trust his imagination,” The imagination of the heart, I mean the heart is desperately wicked, and I don’t t think imagination is to be trusted. Children are just as able to think about and be part of sin as adults. Children are to be 'trained up in the things of the Lord.' This hardly qualifies for that….

So back to what I was saying earlier, another question should be who is keeping an eye on all those proclaiming C.S. Lewis' false Jesus and false gospel presented in this fable, as the Truth of Jesus Christ. And who proved those claims to the very Word of God with the religious advocates of this fable would claim to be the authority they live by. One cannot claim it's 'sort of' like the Scriptures or sort of like the gospel or sort of like our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ or it is not. It either is Biblically correct and accurate or it is not!
Ted HaggardPresidentNational Association of Evangelicals said this: “‘Word has it; Aslan is on the move,’ is now more than a quote from 'The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe.' The reality is that a quality film adapted from the great C.S. Lewis book, true to the book’s story and theology, ‘will move’ into millions of hearts and minds starting, this Christmas....

Are you freaking kidding me!? 'The gift of Aslan"? "True to the book’s story and theology, ‘will move’ into millions of hearts and minds"?What part of those thoughts reflect the Truth of Jesus Christ and being 'true' to the Word of God, in any way, sort or form? Apparently that gospel message is so hidden, distorted or contrary to Scriptural truth, that this Christian missed it and instead found the real message of Jesus Christ and the truth of the Gospel in the Word of God. It saddens me.

While many Christians claim that the story is an allegory of Jesus Christ and the gospel, Lewis himself insisted that it was never intended as an allegory. According to USA Today, "Lewis insisted the Narnia books were not allegory — where things are meant to represent something else — but were a supposal of how it might have gone if Christ had come to a world of talking animals and become one of them."
Here is a second article, Mission America explained their support for the movie and C.S. Lewis, and noted this, "As he [Lewis] wrote to some Maryland fifth graders in 1954, “I did not say to myself ‘Let us represent Jesus as He really is in our world by a Lion in Narnia’; I said ‘Let us suppose that there were a land like Narnia and that the Son of God, as He became a Man in our world, became a Lion there, and then imagine what would happen.’”

Basically in simple, but rather complex terms, Lewis was presenting what he claimed was the Son of God who visited the fictional Narnia as a lion instead of a man. And he behaved and spoke there as he actually would have in our world. Therefore what is portrayed is this lion/christ is presented with words and actions put into his mouth which are not of the Scriptures and which no one has the authority to do, since Jesus Christ is God manifest in the flesh. Think about that…
Aside from the blasphemy, the heretical teachings and putting the words and teachings as to what "Christ" would have said in this occult based fable, is there any Scripture that supports this 'other Jesus' and this new 'gospel message"?

As Ted Haggard and I’ve heard so many others suggest, "the Apostle Paul employed 'all possible means that I might save some.'". Except, the Apostle Paul told the Scriptural truth and did not employ the occult as truth, myths as truth or present another gospel or another Jesus. That is the true, real, difference.

In the 1988 version of CN reviewed by Christianity Today, I thought this was interesting. This is what is noted, "...This version owes its great length partly to the fact that it has retained almost everything from Lewis's book,...Edmund heads for the White Witch's castle to give them all away, he begins to wrestle with his own conscience, depicted here as a sort of ghostly copy of himself that emerges from his body to talk to him every now and then. At one point, after talking to this doppelganger, Edmund tells it to "disappear."...

The BBC version includes the Father Christmas episode; however, ...it leaves out some of the mythological references in Lewis's original novel that might rub some Christians the wrong way. These include the bit where Mr. Beaver explains that the White Witch is not human because she is descended from Lilith—a demonic being who was Adam's first wife, according to medieval Jewish legend—as well as the bit where Mr. Tumnus regales Lucy with stories of how the Roman god Bacchus and his drinking buddy Silenus feasted with the forest people. (This last element becomes especially important in Prince Caspian, but the BBC eliminated it from their adaptation of that book, too.)

Seymour's script also adds a curious bit of dialogue after Aslan comes back from the dead and explains the Deeper Magic. Susan and Lucy ask why he didn't tell them that he knew he would rise again (a fair question, since Jesus had predicted his own resurrection to his disciples), and Aslan replies, "I knew of the old incantation, but it has never been put to the test, until now." The girls then marvel that Aslan took such a "risk"—as though he had been uncertain of the outcome. Some critics, like Steven D. Greydanus, have said this line is "rank heresy" against Aslan's omniscience..." Did you notice something? Aslan's omniscience? Incantations, deeper magic? What Scripture about Jesus Christ would that be portraying? Since when is a made up creature to be worshipped and considered omniscient according to the very Word of God? Isaiah 42:8 says: I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.

I could go on further, and give lots of mythological and occult creatures presented in Narnia, HP, LOTR However; I’ll sum this up in some few long last words. The concept of 'magic' always associated with magicians, sorcery and so on. In the Scriptures, magic and witchcraft itself is defined with terms such as alchemy, astrology, palmistry, numerology and the use of charms and magic, clairvoyance, divination, levitation, evil eye, hypnotism, necromancy, shamanism, telepathy, trance, voodoo and so on. Astrology is considered the common denominator in occultism.

Doesn't Almighty God view those things as an abomination to Himself? Is it therefore not of God to suggest that this Aslan, who many would claim is representing Jesus Christ, is being presented as speaking things that Jesus Christ would never speak or having him do things which Jesus Christ would never do, according to the Scriptures? And that means another Jesus is being presented which we are to have nothing to do with.
The parallel to Scriptural Truth ends at the front cover of the book. Did Jesus Christ need 4 children to help him overcome evil? Was He killed one day and with the help of those children, rise the next, or are the Scriptures clear about 3 days and Jesus Christ was raised by the hand of the Father? I have more to come on the way, in part 2 of this blog.


.