The rods of Moses and the Magicians turned into Serpents
A while back, I received this letter from a pastor who follows my blog. At the time, he was unfamiliar with the debates inside Christian writing circles concerning speculative fiction, the use of tropes containing magic, and the characteristics of Christian fiction in general. That changed when he entered the ministry:
I am a brand spanking new pastor, and I am already engaged in a divisive discussion with one of my congregants about fiction, particularly the use of “supernaturalism” in fiction. For example, this person believes that when Aslan uses “magic” or does things “supernaturally” like breathing on Mr. Tumnus, and does NOT give glory and honor and credit to Jesus Christ IN THE STORY, that it is occultism, since his power is derived from elsewhere than from the one true God. I think this is a bit, shall I say, crazy. I was just wondering if you have encountered such thought elsewhere, or am I the only one so uniquely blessed!!! And what would you say about the claim that any “powers” that occur in a fictional novel, especially Christian novels, are subtly promoting occultism. Thanks for your work.
This pastor may find solace in the fact that not only is he NOT alone in this debate, but that the position assumed by this congregant is, sadly, all too common among Christian readers.
As much as I’d like to offer a definitive answer to this question — How can we know when “‘powers’ that occur in a fictional novel… are subtly promoting occultism”? — I don’t think there is one. In fact, the more we demand a definitive answer, the more we create (inadvertently?) a “magical” scoring system to sanitize our fiction for “discerning” readers.
Before I proceed, let me back up and clarify. The reason I placed the word discerning in quotations above is not because I advocate for ignorance. The Scripture is clear about our need to “test the spirits” (I Jn. 4:1), “test everything” (I Thess. 5:21), and “have [our] senses trained to discern good and evil” (Heb. 5:14). Because of this, I applaud the congregant above who asks the question. At least they are taking such biblical charges to heart. In fact, it could be said that the reader / cultural consumer who never asks hard questions about their literary and visual diet could find themselves worse off than the individual they decry as puritan. So in this sense, taking seriously the commands to be critical and discerning of what we put into our mind is healthy.
Nevertheless, there’s a couple problems with the approach and/or conclusion reached by this discerning congregant.
For one, many “Christian” things — not just fantastical stories — can be twisted to “promote the occult.” A good example could be the story of the bronze serpent in Numbers 21:6-9. A plague of serpents was sent among the rebellious Israelites. God provided a way of escape from this punishment by commanding Moses to build a bronze serpent on a pole. Whoever looked upon this image would be saved. However, years after this incident we learn that the bronze serpent was being worshiped and in a series of reformations, King Hezekiah destroyed it.
He removed the high places and broke the pillars and cut down the Asherah. And he broke in pieces the bronze serpent that Moses had made, for until those days the people of Israel had made offerings to it (it was called Nehushtan). 2 Kings 18:4
This story illustrates what is all too common among our fallen species — we worship what we shouldn’t. In many cases, even good things, sacred things, or simply neutral objects, can be deified. Whether its religious icons like crosses or statues, people whom God has used, or even systems and rituals, just about anything can be vested with a “power” never intended. Point is, fictional magical powers aren’t the only things that can be used for occult purposes.
In fact, that approach itself can become a type of superstition. Let me explain this by asking a question: Does attributing a supernatural incident to God or the devil actually change its power source? Or to use the example above, if Aslan had stopped and given glory to God, would that have turned his magic from “bad” to “good”? If so, what made the supernaturalism bad in the first place?
To follow this line of reasoning, the real “occultism” resides not in the supernatural event (Aslan breathing upon Mr. Tumnus and bringing the faun back to life), but in the author’s defining of it. Or more clearly, NOT defining it. Thus, to the more conservative Christian reader, the greatest potential “evil” for a Christian writer is to depict ambiguous magic, i.e., supernatural power not directly attributed to God.
Which makes fiction, “magic.”
However, this creates huge problems for authors, the least of which is feeling bound to clarify the source of every character’s supernatural action. Spells, miracles, alchemy, and enchantment are only tolerable in Christian fiction as long as we’re clear where they are coming from. However, this type of approach not only potentially strips our stories of mystery and nuance, we treat our readers like auditors who’ll be combing our novels for pesky heretical gnats.
The point here is to highlight how our approach to fiction can often be as problematic as the stories themselves. The congregant above who worried over Aslan’s apparent lack of Divine attribution is emblematic of a breed of religious reader who approaches fiction with a rather rigid doctrinal lens. Am I suggesting that we should put down our “theological” guard when we read and be less discerning? Absolutely not. But we need to see fiction as doing something different than simply illustrating and reinforcing Bible doctrine.
Truth is, if Aslan had explained that the power came from Jesus Christ he would have been lying. Why? Because Jesus never breathed on the faun. You see, fauns aren’t even real. And neither is Aslan. So how can we say Jesus breathed life into Tumnus the Faun? Such a charge carries its own sort of blasphemy in assuming that a fictional character can be attributed with the actual power of Jesus.
(To be fair, some have pointed out the difference between allegory and fantasy fiction. The Christian claiming her story as allegory is more bound to theological rigor as it is intended to parallel some existing doctrinal truth. This is the grounds upon some object to The Shack. So this may or may not apply depending upon one’s view of Narnia, its mode of fictional transport, and how far one is willing to turn Tumnus from a fictional faun into an allegorical archetype.)
Such discussions can quickly become an exercise in endless hair-splitting. So let me return to my basic point: In their attempt to maintain theological integrity, many have embraced superstition, a “touch not, taste not” mentality (Col. 2:21) that purports a magic all its own. In other words, we believe there is magic in biblical (?) formulas. As if God was bound by incantations, recipes, rituals, and our personal holiness program.
How is this any different from sorcery?
Yes, Scripture is clear that there can be false prophets and false miracles. The world of occultism, we are warned, is not a plaything. Nevertheless, the Bible is not always clear in defining the source of real magic or the trappings for conjuring it.
Take the case of Moses’ encounter with the Pharaoh’s magicians (Ex. 7). Both sides produced, more or less, the same “magic,” turning staffs into snakes. Question: Is it wrong to turn staffs into snakes? Answer: It can’t be because Moses did it! So the problem wasn’t necessarily with the “magic” (i.e., staff charming), but with the intent, motivations, and allegiances of those who wielded it.
The similar distinction is made in the apostles’ encounter with Simon the Sorcerer (Acts 8:9-25). Simon “had practiced sorcery in the city and amazed all the people of Samaria” (vs. 9) with his magic, so much so that he was called “the Great Power of God” (vs. 10). But after Simon “believed and was baptized” (vs. 13), he coveted the power of the Holy Spirit and asked to pay for it (vs. 19). Notice carefully Peter’s response:
Peter answered: “May your money perish with you, because you thought you could buy the gift of God with money! You have no part or share in this ministry, because your heart is not right before God. Repent of this wickedness and pray to the Lord in the hope that he may forgive you for having such a thought in your heart. For I see that you are full of bitterness and captive to sin.” (Acts 8:20-23 NIV)
Interestingly enough, throughout this record Simon’s power is never attributed to Satan. However, he is upbraided “because [his] heart is not right before God.” So what was Simon’s sin? Apparently sorcery wasn’t the big one; his magic was less at issue than his sinful heart.
A case could be made, I think, that supernatural powers (and their fictional depictions) aren’t bad in themselves (see staff charming). It is the hearts and motives of the handlers that is evil. Not all staff charmers are wicked. Which means staff charming is up for debate.
The concerned congregant above (and the “anti-magic” crowd in general), go astray when they focus on forms of magic (levitation, incantations, objects, staff charming, breathing upon petrified fauns, etc.), more than the purveyors. It is far easier to make an external checklist — You know your character’s supernatural powers are NOT occult when you _________ (fill in the blank with preferred magic you avoid or attribution you render) — than to allow internal assessment and potential ambiguity.
Either way, no amount of attribution can prevent some readers from misinterpreting you. Heck, even the Bible is misinterpreted to say things it doesn’t. So why should our stories be any different? The truth is, readers can potentially mistake anything I write about as endorsing something I don’t.
Um…er…but Aslan IS Jesus in the Narnia stories. The books are allegory, and Jesus takes the form of a lion in them because Narnia is a world of talking animals, just as he took human form in our world because we’re humans. So, what’s he supposed to do? Say, “The magic comes from me! Glory be to me!”?
Anyway, you know I agree with you on this. IMHO, stories of magic actually draw me closer to God. They tug at that part of me that *knows* there is more to this world than the physical, more than meets the eye. Sure, there is evil in the spiritual realm, and occultism is what tries to tap into that. But books like Narnia and Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings and, frankly, my own novels, all use magic as a symbol, a sign pointing to the “more” we know is there, and in all of those books good triumphs over evil.
Exactly, Kat. My thoughts exactly. Though I have more to say and probably will below. 😉
Becky
Thanks, Becky. I could, honestly, go on and on about this. But I’ve said so much before–even doing a whole guest post on it right here a few years ago ;).
Me too, Kat.
Kat,
I checked out your site after reading your comments, really liked it. I’ve struggled with what I want to write because of all the negativity from other Christian friends concerning the very books you mentioned.
Thank you for the insight.
Cindy
Thank you, Cindy! Glad my comments helped. And there are lots of us who love those books, so you’re not alone :).
“So the problem wasn’t necessarily with the “magic” (i.e., staff charming), but with the intent, motivations, and allegiances of those who wielded it.”
Exactly what I was thinking.
We can only judge the fruits of what we see, not the intents of men. If we as writers have the intention to honor God with our writing then I believe that it will show.
For too long the occult has had a grip on what was rightly purchased for the Church. We were given grace (God’s POWER) to tread on serpents and basically destroy the enemy.
We’ve got a lot to learn about the spirit world as a body of believers…’bout time we took possession of our inheritance in my opinion. 😉
I think there’s more to it than intent. I think Scripture makes it clear that the Egyptians were tapping into a different source of power. Satan has real power. Look at the demoniac who could break the shackles the people used to try and control him, or the girl who could predict the future. These were things directly attributed to the demons within the people. I think the Egyptian magicians were the same. And that Moses’s staff-snake ate up theirs was the testimony that God’s power is greater and will win out. To me that’s a huge point of that historical event, not just that the magicians had a bad intent.
Becky
We can not let others write our stories based on assumptions and opinions. If I consider myself a Christian novelist, then of course my books will have Christian themes or be “clean”, but going so far as to say “I have to make my character do/say this and that”.
Nope.
Will not comply with that.
In fact, the Chronicles of Narnia, according to some, was not intended as Christian fiction to begin with(I need proof of this claim), anyway. It certainly carries the flavor of the bible in the books and film, but I digress…
Write what you want. Write what comes from your soul. People will always have opinions.
I write fiction and poetry. One of my eBooks involves genies, a believer in Christ and a human woman. I don’t know how it all mashed together, but in a science fiction/fantasy, it is obvious where the dark magic comes from.
Thanks for the post, Mike!
the Chronicles of Narnia, according to some, was not intended as Christian fiction to begin with(I need proof of this claim),
It would be more accurate to say that it was not conceived as Christian fiction to begin with, although it developed into a deliberate semi-allegory later on. See Lewis’s essays “It all began with a picture” and “On three ways of writing for children” in OF THIS AND OTHER WORLDS (ed. Walter Hooper, 1982).
Mike, I think you make some good points, but I’m concerned that it is a mistake to focus on Christian readers too much in the first place. What I mean is that we would have to ask among unbelievers to check and see if there is a connection between fantasy magic and the practice of real world magic, real occultism. Our concern should not be if a Christian reader winds up with hurt feelings because of our writings, but if a young person going through our work will become curious about the nature of something that is evil–and desire to find out more because of what we wrote.
And it just happens to be true that for some people fantasy magic really IS a stepping-stone into investigating real witchcraft–my own older sister did exactly this growing up (and she remains an Occult practitioner to this day). My older sister is hardly the only person to have done what she did. Hordes of her friends involved in witchcraft were first introduced to magic as an idea in fantasy literature.
So then the question comes to what type of fantasy magic specifically arouses curiosity about real magic? Is there any difference? Are all forms of fantasy magic the same in having this potential effect? You said in a comment that relates to this issue:
“Either way, no amount of attribution can prevent some readers from misinterpreting you. Heck, even the Bible is misinterpreted to say things it doesn’t. So why should our stories be any different? The truth is, readers can potentially mistake anything I write about as endorsing something I don’t.”
Yes, what you say is true. Some readers will misunderstand no matter what you do. But that obscures a basic reality, as does the example you picked. MOST readers, both Christian and non-Christian, recognize that Aslan is a Christ-figure, while most fantasy readers do not see anything in the Lord of the Rings that way, even though Gandalf, Aragorn, and Frodo are all given pieces of Christian imagery that Tolkien is recorded as wanting to put into his story. Tolkien was too subtle with his Christian themes for them to be seen by most readers–only Christian believers are aware that they are there at all (and not all of them at that).
Let’s also compare Harry Potter. As a self-sacrificing figure, he also has the potential to be compared to Christ (and some Christian readers avidly embrace him as such), but Harry Potter as a Christ figure is far less clear in my opinion than many other literary Christ-figures (such as the lead character in the Eastwood film “Gran Torino”) and it certainly cannot be said AT ALL that Harry’s magic originates in his role as a Christ-figure. For there are many, many others of his wizard race that do the same things he does.
SO, most readers see C. S. Lewis as Christian. Most don’t see Tolkien or Rowling that way. Note that my sister doesn’t keep copies of Lewis on her shelf, but she does have Tolkien and Rowling.
So it can be fairly said that magic without any attribution or connection to Christ, while it is still something people can misunderstand, is in fact in a different category from strong Christian imagery in a story, from a strong attempt to link magic back to Christ in a clear way. And I don’t think so just because of my sister–oodles of fantasy role playing games set in Middle Earth and fandom filled with unbelievers is a hallmark of Tolkien’s work, but not Lewis’–most Lewis fans are Christians. For a reason.
I think there are tough choices a writer who is dedicated to Christ has to make. They aren’t all related to magic. Violence is another major issue, as is sexuality. What do we show? What don’t we? There are tough choices involved and while I have made suggestions in the past on how to solve them, I don’t pretend to know all the answers.
But I am convinced it’s a mistake to say that simply because some readers will misunderstand you no matter what, that means you are under no obligation to craft how you write in a way that tries to avoid leading people astray. IF that’s true, IF people will go the wrong way no matter what you as a writer do and you have no control over their actions whatsoever, then we all might as well be writing erotica. It pays better.
Travis, I think you’ve brought up some interesting points. But I tend to agree with Mike that people can (and will) misunderstand and misuse anything. When I first started writing fantasy, I came across some occultists who were misusing Tolkien’s story for their own purposes, and I had to ask myself if I was willing for that to happen to my stories.
But here’s the thing. In Tolkien’s world and Harry Potter’s, there was a distinct line between good and evil. No one wondered if the Orcs might be good or the Elves evil. Some of the other creatures were maybe a little less clear, especially in the Hobbit, and Gollum was presented as a fallen creature with the capacity to be redeemed. But the fellowship of the ring clearly fought for the good.
Harry Potter also used white magic, and it was clear Voldemort had gone far into the dark arts, into a magic that separated him from those who wanted to use magic for good.
It’s hard to look at those stories and think there’s any confusion about which camp most represents God and which most represents Satan. Or for those who aren’t Christian, which is good and which is evil.
The original questioner seems to me to be a person without an understanding of imagination. How could anyone think of Aslan stopping to give God credit when in that world He was in the place of Jesus. He could have given thanks or glory or credit to the Emperor, but as I recall, Jesus didn’t do that when He performed miracles. It’s a bit much.
But I wonder if we can rightly conclude that the Christian writer has no responsibility for the weaker brother or for the lost who might be susceptible to the occult. As Mike pointed out, Fauns don’t actually exist, but wizards do . . . just not wizards like Rowling portrayed.
I read a book some years ago about pretend angels. Some thought it was very bad because it didn’t accurately portray angels. But I had to ask, if it’s OK to fictionalize wizards, why not angels? The characters were no more real than Harry or any in his wizarding world. So if you can accept the fact that the word might be “angel” but the character is completely imaginary, then I don’t see that anyone could be harmed. Same with “demon.”
But there are stories that borrow heavily on the actual occult beliefs and practices, and I think those might be a different animal.
In the end, I simply don’t think one size fits all. I also don’t think those without imagination should impose their standards on others who believe differently. Or that those with the freedom to write about dark characters should do so without some thought to those who might be sensitive to the occult.
Like it or not, we ARE our brothers keepers. But we writers need to struggle to understand what that means. I don’t ascribe to relativism, but I also think God made us as unique individuals for a purpose. We ought not play God and tell other people what He wants them to write. We can express our opinion, but the decisions need to be between God and the other Christian writer, I think.
Becky
Becky, I appreciate the tone of your comment, but I felt you were talking past me a bit. I never stated “one size fits all.” I stated (in more words) that while it IS true some readers will misunderstand anything, that doesn’t mean everything is equally hard to misunderstand.
And I felt Mike’s example, focused on someone who didn’t understand Aslan was supposed to stand for Jesus was a particularly misleading one–it’s a rare bird that doesn’t get that (YES, obviously there are such people, but honestly, honestly they are rare). I also felt Mike’s concluding statement of the whole post being in effect that “you can be misunderstood no matter what” could give a Christian writer an excuse to not even put out any effort at all to be clear on the subject of magic–which I believe would be a massive cop-out.
Let me be clear myself that when I said that writers have to make “tough choices” I meant we have to pray and sweat our way through things, NOT go for easy or glib answers. I agree there are no one-size-fits-all answers. I never meant to say there are. But we shouldn’t have a nonchalant “oh well, I can’t be certain how I’ll be taken so I won’t try” attitude EITHER, which I fear the tone of Mike’s post could justify.
Also, I think that most Christians who complain about magic in literature are not “weaker brothers” in the Biblical sense, fellow believers who might commit a sin if they see us doing it. Mostly they are just trying to build a false world around themselves that removes all actual moral difficulty, trying to make everything black and white.
However, there are real people who really CAN be led astray by reading the wrong thing. Just like Tom Clancy would not reveal how to actually make an atomic weapon in Sum of All Fears for the sake of his conscience, there are certain things we as individual Christian writers should avoid for our own conscience.
It’s not for me to tell you what that is for you, specifically. You have to make your own tough choices–you stand before God for what you do, not me.
But the thought that, “oh well, we just can’t help it, people will understand no matter what” could represent an attitude that leads to a dangerously callous attitude towards others. Which is why I felt it was important to confront that potential danger. NO, not everything is equally easy to misunderstand. NO, it cannot be fairly concluded that you as a writer have no influence at all upon what your readers think (even though some people will misunderstand you no matter what). Those are false ideas.
That’s why I evoked how Lewis is seen today verses how Tolkien is seen, to illustrate that one is better understood today than the other, showing that the writing really DOES matter–not because I was saying we all need to be like Lewis. I would not agree that we do.
Great points Becky.
Travis,
I really like how you’re approaching this. One issue, though, that all authors have to deal with when writing a series is that we may leave ambiguity in one or more of our novels, and then explain it in another. Thus it is important for readers of series to give authors the benefit of the doubt and to not judge until they have read the entire series.
For instance, in my own Merlin Spiral series, I don’t fully explain in book 1 what the source of the antogonist’s magic is. That doesn’t come until book 2, and so a reader might fault my lack of clear attribution and then stop reading, not taking in later writings, and so missing the whole point. This is a risk we take.
Tolkien is like this … his Silmarillion informs his LOTR trilogy, and since we know Tolkien was a Christian, it’s quite easy to put 2+2 together to get 4. This, of course, is ignored by the likes of your sister, but that doesn’t make the LOTR less Christian … just that one needs to read more broadly to understand it, etc.
And so this is the difficulty … how ambiguous should we be? I would argue that we can be more ambiguous than Lewis was, but that we should, at some point and in some writing or other, inform our readers, even if that is only in a blog post on the internet. Those searching honestly for such answers can then find them, and I think that is important.
-Robert
Robert, great points. 🙂
Travis, I haven’t read the follow-up comments to yours so forgive me if I’m covering the same ground. You said, “it’s a mistake to say that simply because some readers will misunderstand you no matter what, that means you are under no obligation to craft how you write in a way that tries to avoid leading people astray.” I absolutely agree with this! I hope I don’t appear to be suggesting that Christian writers can be reckless with their handling of darkness and evil, because I don’t. I just believe that, unless you’re really spelling out the nature and intent of your magic — “Faun, come forth! Praise Jesus!” — you will inevitably run into criticism from those who can’t handle any ambiguity.
In fact, even your comparisons between Narnia, LotR, and Harry Potter, aren’t nearly as clean-cut as you suggest. Perhaps it is clearer that Lewis was a Christian and shadowing biblical truths. But apparently even THAT wasn’t enough for some readers (the congregant mentioned above). So while I’d agree that Christians must take care how they present magic, unless we SOMEHOW make certain readers recognize our “Christ figure” character, we will continue to bump into the same problem of misinterpretation.
Although I agree that most Christians recognize the Christian symbolism in Narnia, I know some personally who look at it more literally than that. And what do we see when we look at it literally? We see creatures from mythology that engaged in Bacchic revelries before descending into a state of eternal winter due to the spells of a witch. If a Christian can’t get past that to see that is the symbolism of humanity without Christ, then really, who cares? Nobody needs to read Lewis or any kind of fantasy. Expecting “correct” interpretations from others is where the writer errs and becomes a dogmatist much like the congregant. In the same way, many Christian writers mistakenly believe *their* work is the white magic that must cast its spells on readers (not that they would couch it in those terms), and they are often disappointed when the spell doesn’t work on readers who have no time for their subtlety. And mostly, I’m with Travis that Christian writers must be careful. All that being said, the Christian writer who is simply trying to tell a good story and whose conscience is clean before God should not at that point try to convince people like the congregant of the value of their work, or to bemoan their issues, etc. It’s simply wasted energy that could be put into writing.
Jill, you make great points.
Well said, Jill.
Mike, I think your congregant mentioned is a truly unusual person. It isn’t at all common for people not to realize Aslan stands for Christ. So while I can agree that there are people who will misunderstand anything, I felt you made the case too strongly.
I’m glad to know that you agree with me on the importance of doing our best to be clear as writers, even if we will sometimes be misunderstood. I was really wondering if you did agree, since your literal bottom line was the point about some readers not understanding no matter what. Good to know I saw that wrong. 🙂
It’s really a shame that people take their own personal weakness/sins, and project them on everybody else. “Reading Raven Boys makes me want to get a pack of Tarot cards and track ley lines … Therefore EVERYBODY reacts the SAME WAY! And that’s SINFUL and must be STOPPED!”
If misinterpretation of a work of fiction is a sin or a weakness in the way you mean, then we are all doomed. As somebody who TA’d for a college literature class and who has spent a lot of time in writing workshops, I can tell you that you can get 30 different interpretations and variations on interpretations to one short story.
Mike,
I really like your point, which I had never thought of, that reader’s who want some “formula” to make the fiction safe are in a way trusting in superstition. It is amazing how easy it is to be superstitious, myself included, and all of our Christian trinkets encourage this, including crosses, bumper stickers, WWJD bracelets, etc., etc., ad-nauseate-me-um.
(On the side, how do we then write about an era when superstitions were the norm? How do we present that honestly? a question for another day…)
Back to the topic, I deal with this very issue in my second novel, MERLIN’S SHADOW, by presenting the Christians with the relic of the Holy Grail. I then use this to teach an object lesson as to what the true object of our faith should be, not in things or superstitions, but in God. I actually make Merlin so mad that he twice tries to destroy the grail.
As a counter-point, the antagonists have two objects of power and put their trust in them. And yet we do the same today … cell phones, cars, electricity … all of these “magical” things hold our allegiance and we are awed by them so much that they “enchant” us and so easily pull us away from God and spending time with him.
Anyway, great discussion you’ve started!
-Robert
The thing is Magick is presented in The Bible as a Sin when Human seek o use it even if the end result of their seeking a genuine miracle form God. This is particularly true of necromancey. Take Saul going to the Witch of Endor
There is endless debate among Christians on what happened here. It generally seemed agreed the real Samson appeared to him, but is this a rare God ordained exception, or does it show talking to the deal theoretically possible?
But those things are pointless anyway, the point is trying to talk to the dead is a Sin.
“But those things are pointless anyway, the point is trying to talk to the dead is a Sin.”
I’m sorry, but I have to disagree with your last statement. Remember when Christ Himself spoke with Moses and Elijah at the Transfiguration? Christ is our guide, we are to copy Him, so if it were necessary I believe we could talk to the dead.
However, as believers we have the Holy Spirit to guide us, therefore we don’t need guidance from dead prophets.
The Transfirguation is a Glimpse of the Future Kingdom. Does not contradict it being a Sin to seek such communication.
The Bible is very clear about how Christians should deal with magic and those who practice it. We can try to talk our way out of it or to rationalize it as OK, but the Bible very clear. I’m not telling anyone how to deal with it…just reminding everyone what the Bible says. Go where you will from here.
Keith, you need to define “magic.” Was it magic when Jesus put mud on a blind man’s eyes and then he could see? We say it was a miracle. But what’s the difference between a miracle and magic? Nothing but the source of the power.
So, right, we aren’t supposed to be involved with magic, which is power from Satan. But in a fantasy story, if the author speaks of magic which has a source that is good, is that the kind of magic the Bible tells us to avoid? Especially in a world that doesn’t identify God in the same way or have the Bible?
I submit, it is not. Just like the wizards of Harry Potter weren’t the wizards of the Bible, I think “magic” can be other than the magic of the Bible.
Becky
(I’ll preface these remarks by saying that of the British Christian writers I know, or know of, this subject isn’t even a consideration.)
Magic works in some of the worlds I describe. It’s as intrinsic to the warp and weft of the land as sunrise and sunset. How to access that magic differs, and that determines the nature of the magic users: in Down, trying to stop the magic happening is more of a problem, and it’s more like electricity, used for good and evil; in Arcanum, it takes rote learning, painful tattoos and torture, and consequently the hexmasters are powerful, terrible, and ultimately shown to be evil.
The mistake I feel you’re making is that you’re importing how magic works in our world into another, entirely fictional world. There’s no reason – no good reason, anyway – as to why this should be. Narnia is a magical world, peopled by talking animals. And if you can accept talking animals… I’m left wondering why the White Witch turning some of them to stone is a problem.
To Keith and Simon — both of you are stating true things on this subject in a distinction which gets buried and/or intentionally clouded in this discussion. Keith is saying, and he is correct, the Bible is anything but “ambiguous” on this subject. Deut. 18:9-14 and Rev. 22:15 will not be erased no matter how many blogs are written against them or how much satanic sophistry is applied. God is crystal clear. Good guys do not practice magic, God’s people do not love or practice magic, only the doomed and the damned. Sorcery is indeed the sin God says it is, period. And to claim that those of us who believe it’s real are guilty of it is madness. That’s like saying since I believe that God really meant it when He said “You shall not commit adultery,” that makes me an adulterer. Madness. From whom does this sophistry come? Did God really say? Yes, He really did. Magic is sin. That’s what God says, and Keith is right. But you are also right, because you speak of different worlds, not this one. And here is where the we love magic people crash and burn. They don’t make this distinction, they don’t want this distinction because they want magic to be okay in our world because that’s where the money is. But in Narnia, “magic” represents not the power of Satan but the power of God, the very Word of God. “Magic” has a different definition in Narnia because Narnia is a different world. The Great Emperor of Narnia defines what “magic” is there by the Word of His Son Aslan, just as YHWH Lord God of Hosts in His Word in our world calls it toevah, abomination. The source of it is no trifle, it is everything. The power of God in this world is never called magic, and magic is never called good. But I cannot say what God, Eru, Aslan, may say about it in another world. It is not the same, and you are right in making the distinction. Thanks to both of you for your candor and clarity.
Mike,
Thank you so much for taking the time to address this. I belong to an online critque group and we were discussing this recently, I’ll be sharing this with them.
Enjoyed reading through the comments of others as well, very insightful and helpful.
I’m noticing a lot of the same arguments I encountered during my Christian metal days. It’s all such a tired conversation and I don’t want to waste energy on mealy-mouths or Very Concerned and Very Moral Worrywarts, instead of writing (or playing, as was the case back then).