Lewis & Tolkien

i see god there too, but unfortunately it's all mixed up with lots of false teaching calling evil things good. so i let it go. after all, entertainment isn't a priority in the service of god.

have you tried the pilgrim's progress?

 

timothy1769,
The magic of Lewis and Tolkien is not "magic" it is generally speaking the nature of a being, not the common harry potter magic of witches, cauldrons, spells, etc.

There is a big difference, If you read a couple of the Harry potter threads we have discussed this at length with both quotes from all the works in question, as well as some from the "good book" which I assume is a reference to the Bible.

Lewis and Tolkien clearly both have Christian themes in their books, but in entirely different ways, as Lewis clearly wrote intentional allegory, a genre which Tolkien disliked immensly, and said any reference to reality in his books was in the mind of the reader. Magic as a black art, or even a white and/or black art is not discussed by Tolkien in the sense of the magic that is practiced by such groups as Wicca, the pattern for much of the Harry Potter magic, and admittedly, Rowlings tries very hard to make her magic "real" meaning that if you want to become like Harry Potter, you can. Tolkien's "magic" is fictional in nature, not for an ulterior motive, but to serve a purpose merely in the story. It bears little resemblance outside of the terminology to "magic" as we know it. He actually tried to find a different word to describe the abilities of many of his characters, in his mind, the "magic" of the elves for instance was not a learned art, but a part of their nature. In the section with Galadriel, Sam, and Frodo looking into the mirror of Galadriel, She refers to Sam wanting to see "elf-magic" and says the mirror is what would be called magic, although she doesn't know exactly what is meant by that. This scene is an illustration of Tolkien's reticence to use themes that could be linked to occult "magic"

The Hobbit and LOTR are two of the best pieces of modern literature ever written, and they really do have some very positive and constructive themes and lessons in them. Everything from friendship, loyalty and duty, to the supremacy of God's plan, and the dangers of complacency. I don't view them as dangerous in and of themselves. I agree that every precaution should be taken to avoid pagan and occult practice, and even the study or interest in such things, but I don't view Tolkien or Lewis' work as so called gateway mediums to get a person interested in the occult, since the "magic" in their works is far removed from the sinful practice of witchcraft, now Harry Potter on the other hand...

 

superdave,

i am sympathetic to your viewpoint, and i think that if one digs deep enough most will come to similar conclusions. but kids aren't that deep - kids see wizards, magic, spells, etc. and don't make the fine distinctions adults can. also one has to be careful regarding the "appearance of evil".

so ok, please bear with me a moment

to me it's like a fantasy story where all men and women look and act exactly the same, so any romantic involvements appear homosexual to the casual reader. yes, if one reads very closely and patches together a few scattered quotes from the book, and supplements, and author interviews, one could see that the book wasn't REALLY describing homosexual activities - but that's exactly what it would look like to children and casual readers.

imo it's just not worth it for the sake of entertainment. they both are still effectively making something evil look good.

 

that's what parents are for. There are plenty of things that my four year old sees every week that cannot be avoided that require "Parental Guidance"

I agree that LOTR requires active reading, and if you just watch the movies, you definitely do not get the full sense of Tolkien's intent. I do not encourage anyone to let their kids watch the movies until they are old anough and mature enough to make some distinctions, and the books are a pretty tough read for anyone who is young anyway.

At least with Lewis and Tolkien, if you do an in depth study of their work, and what they were all about, you can recognize that their motivation and content really are not harmful. That is in contrast to many other fantasy writers, and especially books that glorify the occult such as the Harry Potter series

 

Would it be considerd heresy here to say that I don't like either of the writers?

Having read the Narnia stuff i found it no more than fantasy, saw no real message in it unless someone specifically pointed it out. Tried the lord of the rings ..... but found it less than gripping, so didn't bother finishing it.

Can definately see the puzzlement of non-christians when christians rave on about how good these books are and how terrible harry potter is.

Regards
Bob

 

I'm sorry, but can you back this up? I realize you're defending two great authors and their work, and that's well and good. But the whole thing falls apart for me when this kind of argument is used. I've read a lot about the Potter books, but I've never seen anything credible to indicate such a claim as this.

So can you produce a source for this admission by Rowling that she bases (patterns) her "magic" on Wicca? Or that we could become like Potter?

 

Admittedly, I'm not all that familiar with Harry Potter but how can you say that it's patterned on Wicca, when Wiccans have condemned it for not being Wiccan?

 

1. You mean like the world we live in?
2. Neither are discussion boards.
3. My children read it in Christian school. They said it was boring.

I think it's unreasonable to expect that we will all like the same things or dislike the same things for exactly the same reasons don't you?

I can respect other peoples preferences as much as I expect other people to respect mine.

C.S. Lewis and Tolkien were both saved authors. They were Christian.

I am not sure why we hold fiction up to the same standards that we hold scripture. Can any of us say that we only read the Bible because it's the only pure and Christian thing to read?

 

^^I have to agree. I've yet to read any fiction (even Pilgrim's Progress) that portrays Christ as vividly and beautifully as Scripture does. I doubt that I ever will. Does that mean I can never read any book except the Bible? I believe that if we are grounded in our faith, we will be able to discern the useful from the bad, and the two will always be mixed in anything of human origin.

 

1. You mean like the world we live in?
2. Neither are discussion boards.
3. My children read it in Christian school. They said it was boring.

I think it's unreasonable to expect that we will all like the same things or dislike the same things for exactly the same reasons don't you?

I can respect other peoples preferences as much as I expect other people to respect mine.

C.S. Lewis and Tolkien were both saved authors. They were Christian.

I am not sure why we hold fiction up to the same standards that we hold scripture. Can any of us say that we only read the Bible because it's the only pure and Christian thing to read? </font>[/QUOTE]1. we need to be in world to obey christ. we have no need enjoy ourselves with fantasy books (especially ones glorifying sin) to serve christ.

2. irrelevant. discussion boards are a medium, like paper or the air yes, i make sure my time online serves the lord. admittedly some of it has a rather tenuous connection, but the vast bulk of it does.

3. you should try it, i found it to be very enjoyable, and i think you'd like it too.

tolkein and lewis were both heretics and personally i'd be suprised if either of them were saved, but obviously that's not my call (and neither is it yours, btw).

would your pastor have allowed either into church to preach or teach a sunday school class? i certainly hope not! why then should our children be exposed to their thought willy nilly? because it's fun?

every thought should be subject to christ, and i think it's not much of a stretch to say all of our time should as well. obviously we're going to fail somewhat in that, but do you not agree that's how it should be?

 

When does voicing one's opinion turn into needing to make others agree?

"Believe as I do , or you are ungodly"? Shame on you.

 

I agree and disagree Laurenda. We should be able to give our opinions without trying to force everyone to agree with every remark we make! That's what discussion means! Good reply.

Now, I've read a bit about C.S. Lewis and he was quite wishy washy and changed views many times during his life. He even made some very questionable remarks about cult leaders being 'great'. I'm not positive he was saved.

Diane

 

Quoted from Christianity Today Web-site.

 

I am the one who started this thread, so am I to assume that this was addressed to me?
I did talk about Lewis.......

</font>[/QUOTE]When I wrote this, I mistakenly thought there was only one post preceding mine, and that this was a new thread.

I'm not sure how I could have made this mistake looking back at it now. I appologize for my confusion. I see now that you have... and you did.... Thank you for not being mean spirited when pointing out my mistake. Very kind of you.

 

He died, Laurenda, 34 years later, the same day as JFK. It was the later years my info concerns.


Here are some quotes from C.S. Lewis'

Diane

 

Your point is?

 

wisdomseeker,

you make some good points, may god lead us into all truth.

regards,
timothy