www.ambassadorherald.deviantart.com

AmbassadorHerald #fundie ambassadorherald.deviantart.com

Narnia verses Harry Potter

A while back, I encountered a question on Yahoo Answers where someone inquired as to why some people have a negative attitude toward the magic displayed in Harry Potter but seem to have no problem with the magic displayed in the Chronicles of Narnia. I decided to submit an answer for this question, but as it happened, my answer turned into more of an essay, and the topic was closed before I submitted it. However, for those of you who have wondered the same thing, I decided to post it here with some minor modifications. Just my two cents, but I think there’s some food for thought.

To begin, despite some claims from other posters on Yahoo Answers, C.S. Lewis was a Christian and the similarities between Narnia and items in the Bible was intentional. They are not strictly allegory, where one thing in Narnia equals something else in the Bible. They are called “supposals.” The basic idea was that Lewis wondered what would happen if God had created another world and chose to die and rise again to save that world as He did ours. Note that the magic in the Chronicles is almost always coming directly from Aslan if it portrayed as good (There are a few exceptions to this), so it could be considered a metaphor for the miracles of God. The witch and her magic are depicted as evil.

On to Harry Potter. These books are very well written and J.K Rowling’s style is fun and witty. They are definitely entertaining books...but I do have some difficulty with them, and only part of it has to do with the magic they contain. The difficulty is actually threefold:

1. The Magic:
The difficulty with the magical elements in the Harry Potter books is that the magic is being portrayed as being a skill that can be learned by children in our world, if they possess the predisposition for it (Yes, I know this statement is vastly simplified). In the Chronicles, the children almost never practice magic themselves, and once when Lucy tries to, in Voyage of the Dawn Treader, she ends up probably destroying one of her friendships. Humans aren’t meant to practice magic.

2. The Violence:
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone (or Philosopher’s Stone, in England) started out mildly enough. The final confrontation is a bit eerie, but nothing too horribly violent, though we do have an instance of a human being possessed by a malevolent spirit (but that fits more into category #1). By Book Two, Chamber of Secrets, we have a young girl (also possessed) killing chickens (not to eat), and quite a bloody confrontation in the climactic scene. Skip on to Book Four, Goblet of Fire, and any semblance of these being child-appropriate books seems to be lost. We have a teacher casting illegal spells, including murder and torture (albeit on a spider) in a classroom, apparently with the benevolent headmaster’s consent. We have the murders of several characters, one another student from the school; Harry’s blood being taken for a foul piece of magic (which, at least, is depicted as being evil in the scene); a servant cutting off his hand as part of the same piece of sorcery...the violence in this book keeps getting worse...and books Five and Six don’t ease up on it much (In Six Harry accidentally casts a spell that essentially has the same effect as repeatedly stabbing another student). At the time of this article, Book Seven has yet to be released. Is there violence in the Narnia books? Yes, but you will notice it is tempered. Possibly the most terrifying scene in the series is the sacrifice of Aslan, but you will note that the girls look away at the moment the witch actually kills him.

3. The Morality:
Quite apart from magic or violence in either story, is the morality that is being taught in either series. I have heard the Harry Potter series heralded as books with incredibly strong morals, but a quick examination of the books reveals this statement to be patently false. Harry consistently lies, to his teachers, to his friends, to Dumbledore the headmaster. He and his friends steal potions ingredients from Professor Snape (But who cares? We don’t like Snape, so it’s ok, right?). In fact, he’s rewarded for the first rule he breaks. When the entire class is told they will be expelled if they try to fly on their broomsticks without a teacher present, Harry takes off on his broom after Draco Malfoy, who has stolen something from a friend (But hey, it’s ok for a kid to risk life and limb for a noble cause, yes?). Not only is he not expelled, he’s REWARDED, given a prestigious place on one of the school sports teams.

Not convinced? Well, how about Professor Lupin, who neglects to mention to the headmaster that a convicted murderer is quite possibly sneaking into the school disguised as a dog? Why doesn’t Lupin say anything? Because it would be EMBARRASSING to him, and lose him some of the headmaster’s trust (which he doesn’t actually deserve because he’s been lying to the man for years anyway). But hey, it’s only Harry’s life and the lives of other students that’s at stake, and the convict has only gotten into the school twice already...so no big deal.

So what’s the difference? Don’t kids in the Narnia books get up to mischief, too? Of course they do. Digory, one of the children, does something incredibly foolish, awakens an evil witch, and brings her into Narnia with him, ruining the newly creating world before it’s a day old. But there are consequences. He has to face Aslan and explain exactly what happened. He’s required to complete a task to help mend the damage. When Edmund sides with the White Witch against his family, he’s almost killed for it (They left that bit out of the movie, but the concept was there.), and Aslan has to die in his place. The kids in Narnia make mistakes, but there are always consequences, consequences which are frequently and curiously lacking in the Harry Potter stories.

When I have kids, I want them to know that God is the only acceptable source of supernatural power in this world. I don’t want to expose them to violent scenes before they’re old enough to deal with them. And I want them to know that there are consequences to the choices they make.

AmbassadorHerald #fundie ambassadorherald.deviantart.com

There are no atheistic animals, and there are no atheistic people. God said so here, Psalm 19, and the below verse:


Romans 1:18-22—For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold The Truth in unrighteousness; because that which may be known of God is manifest in them [or, “to them”]; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead [trinity]; so that they are [or, “that they may be”] without excuse: because that, when they knew God, they glorified Him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,


Pretty self-explanatory, do you not think?

AmbassadorHereld #fundie ambassadorherald.deviantart.com

What are some of these 'Doctrines of Devils'? Here is a short list of a few that come to mind:
Theistic Evolution (Evolution period),
Vatican II (Catholics),
The Emerging Church (Purpose Drivenism),
Book of Mormon (Mormonism),
Pre-Tribulation Rapture,
Sodomy (Gay/Lesbian),
Abortion,
Wicca (Witchcraft),
Divorce,
Good works gets you to Heaven,
Etc . . .

AmbassadorHerald #fundie ambassadorherald.deviantart.com

Using the evolutionary claim that dinosaurs evolved into birds as a base, which is scientifically impossible and Biblically false, Else began working with the idea of dinosaurs giving milk to their young in a manner similar to bird—like pigeons, emperor penguins, and flamingos. They feed their young from crop glands at the back of the throat by opening their mouths. Paleontologists already knew that dinosaur babies grew quickly, like pigeons grow to 85% of their adult size in just four weeks. Else assumed that there must be similar events happening to cause the two similar results. He observed that milk is often “spiked” with additives, such as antibodies, antioxidants, calcium, minerals, fat, protein, carotenoids, and growth hormones. If dinosaurs did the same thing, then the mystery of their rapid growth would be solved.

Else decided to take his hypothesis and apply it to the herbivorous duckbills: Hadrosaurs. These are pretty common in the fossil record, so a fair amount is known about them. Hadrosaurs were herd breeders with nest-bound young fed by parents. There is also strong evidence that hadrosaurs raised their hatchlings in vast nesting colonies where they cared for them for some time, similar to the nesting colonies of seabirds. Baby hadrosaurs would not have been able to feed themselves enough to sustain life, yet somehow they managed to grow rapidly—from a 300-gram hatchling to a 20-kilogram juvenile in just eight weeks. Personally, knowing it was eight weeks is a just guess, since fossils do not tell time but are merely a splint moment captured in stone.

Professor Frank Seebacher, of the University of Sydney, has told Australian Geographic that the controversial idea will be very difficult to prove and will likely remain only an idea, although that’s what science is made of. With the modern trend of dinosaur bones, such as finding fossilized skin, fully mummified corpses, and even un-fossilized blood (look these up online or inquire in the comments), we may prove it yet. But Paul Else is probably hypothesizing the wrong method of milk-production. Birds would not be applicable except to the winged pterosaurs, which are the flying dinosaurs.

God is pretty clear in Lamentations 4:3 that dragons lactate, because they have “shad”, or the mammalian pouch(s) to hold and dispense milk. Birds do not lactate, which disqualifies Else’s hypothesis as far as method. He is almost certainly correct about dinosaurs and milk, because God agrees, but he needs to think more mammalian and less avian. This is just one Biblical example of why getting your scientific information in-line with The Bible is important. It’s so you don’t go into mythology, such as evolution.

AmbassadorHerald #fundie ambassadorherald.deviantart.com

Now, God has a sense of humor. Believe me, He does. Just do some studying of the Platypus in Australia. I believe that this creature was created simply to make evillusionists' heads spin. That one creature has features from many animals. For example, it has milk glands, fur, leathery eggs, echo-location ability, a duckbill, webbed feet, poison spurs, etc. As Ken Ham from AnswersInGenesis.org says, "If you want a transitional form, this creature is just about everything!" God must be laughing at the confusion this creature causes the myth of evillusion.

AmbassadorHerald #fundie ambassadorherald.deviantart.com

We have probably all heard of the Killer Whale at SeaWorld. This Orca has been involved in three human deaths, and is to blame for two of them definitely. But perhaps the greatest horror of the story is the Whale is being let back on stage! Giving it the chance to kill another person when it so pleases. Sure, we know the arguments, "It was just playing," and "it didn't know better." Give me a break.

God has very specific instructions on the matter! All the way back to Noah, just immediately after the Global Deluge, after his family had exited the Ark, God gave mankind the orders of the new world. Look here:

And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, "Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth. And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea; into your hand are they delivered. Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things. But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat. And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man's brother will I require the life of man. Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in The Image of God made He man. And you, be ye fruitful, and multiply; bring forth abundantly in the earth, and multiply therein." —Genesis 9:1-7.

That is a lot of text, I know, so let me quote part of it again. Genesis 9:5, "And surely YOUR BLOOD of YOUR LIVES will I REQUIRE; at the HAND OF EVERY BEAST will I require it, and at the HAND OF MAN; at the hand of EVERY MAN'S BROTHER will I require the LIFE OF MAN." If a human life is snuffed out at the paw/claw of an animal, that animal has forfeited its right to live! This Orca, this Killer Whale, must DIE!!!

I am sorry for all the caps here, but I am furious about this Whale, a known Killer, not once, not twice, but THREE TIMES, 3x, has been let free of God's law without even a punishment! Nature lovers have a double standard! "Oh, these whales are so intelligent, they need equal rights as any human." But then when they kill a person, "Oh, they didn't understand what they were doing." Which is it? Smart or not??? Can't be both.

Plus, animals have ZERO rights. Why? There can't be rights without RESPONCIBILITY!!! Are these whales Responsible for anything? No. If the whales act up and don't listen, the show is cancelled. Would your boss at work cancel something just because you won't listen to him? No, you'll either make a fool of yourself, or be fired, or both! You are responsible, these whales are not. They're treated as a two-year-old, who isn't responsible for much of anything yet.

Yes, I know we all don't know whales, neither do I, but I do know horses! So I put it to you, are your pet dogs and cats, or horses if you have them, are they Responsible for anything? I can tell you right now they're not. Sure, if you train them to do something at a show and they won't do it that day, they can't really be punished, no matter how upset you are. They can learn what makes you happy and what will make you unhappy, but that is because they love you and don't want whatever punishment for breaking the rules will be. But responsible they are NOT!

I say GET BACK IN LINE and stop doing what is ILLEGAL by God's standards. God IS the Authority after all!!!