[HPforGrownups] Re: _Harry Potter and the Bible_

[John Walton]

No: HPFGUIDX 17529

Welcome to Richard, who's either just joined or just delurked. It's very
flattering to be able to discuss the aspects of your book with which some of
us take issue with you onlist. Please do bear in mind that the members of
this list do respect and trust each other implicitly, so when you denigrate
Dave (or any other member), we do naturally have a negative reaction to you.

> I then go on to simply state that it seems biased to
> attribute exceptional moral fiber to Harry for one specific deed,
> which is in reality, quite a natural response.

Simon's point, that Harry rescues Gabrielle at this juncture, as well as
saving Pettigrew's life in PoA, is excellent. Surely this does show moral
fiber?

> I agree he did a great thing, but this natural response to
> save friends is hardly exceptional, when the same person
> behaves in a most unethical way faced with other scenarios.

When? Where? Give us references (chapter, not page, because not all of us
have the same edition), please. I don't think any of our 1100+ members would
consider Harry unethical.

> Again, only half-truths here. I do indeed talk about
> occultism in America and also mention studies indicating that
> occultism has factually been linked to teen violence and
> adolescent problems. Tis is documented people, and it has
> NOTHING to do with religion, Christian or otherwise.

Show me documentary evidence, by a *respected* source (this would exclude
Bob Jones University and its ilk, by the way). Not *one* child who has had
links to Paganism or the occult (see below for definition) has ever killed
anybody or even participated in any of the recent teen violence across the
US -- it's completely contrary to the tenets of Paganism. (Here, in
Paganism, I'm referring to many different Earth Religion paths.)

Perhaps you should have done some more research before making statements
like that. Hope your book's not the same.

> This is the most suberbly poor definition of occultism I have
> ever heard. Any religion scholar would agree. The world of the
> occult and its practices extend back thousands of years to the
> ancient mystery religions. the word literally means hidden, or
> veiled,

Remember that the "mystery" in "mystery religions", as I said earlier,
refers only to the "central mysteries", which *all* religions have.

"Hidden" has NO NEGATIVE CONNOTATIONS. I can't stress that enough. If
members of a religion are systematically hounded, tortured, murdered and
worse (Salem Witch Trials, anyone?) simply because of their beliefs,
becoming "hidden" or "occult" is really rather a rational response. So,
witchcraft and Paganism quietly got on with their practices and didn't tell
anyone lest they try to burn them at the stake (again).

Again, I hope your book doesn't show this lack of research.

> as in information that is not obtainable via the natural
> senses or channels of knowledge.

Depends what you mean by the word "natural". As nature-based religions,
Paganism is totally natural by definition. And could you define what you
mean by a "channel of knowledge"?

> The occult includes those various practice that attempt to go beyond our world
> and gather information through use of divination techniques. To go any further
> in explaining this would require far too much space.

::sigh:: You've misrepresented "the occult" again. While I can't claim to
speak for the rest of the occult, I'm happy to say that Paganism considers
that it works in our own world, not on some spirit level (apologies to Al
there...). I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "divination techniques";
could you clarify?

You might want to do some more research and perhaps make changes in the next
edition of your book.

>> Never mind that it is  quite unclear what the Bible means by a witch.

> This is patently absurd and untrue. Books and books and books by renowned
> Bible scholars clearly know exactly what the Hebrew words in the Old Testament
> for witch meant.

Yes, they do know, don't they. And what does the word in question mean?
"Poisoner", not "Witch". Sure, *that's* a reason to burn little old ladies
with cats at the stake, throw them into ponds, ad nauseum ad infinitum...

>> Penny wrote:

>> I was hoping someone would report in on whether this book was trash or at
>> least worth reading for an intellectual exercise.  Sounds like the former
>> from Dave's comments!  I'd been toying with ordering it <snip>

> Richard responded:

> Interestingly, rather than make up their own minds, these individuals simply
> choose to believe good old Dave. Is that wise?

Sure. What's the wisdom of spending (however much your book costs) if I
*know* I won't like it? I simply don't have enough money to buy all the
books I want *and* send my $99.95 monthly donation to the "Help Harry Potter
Destroy The Moral Fiber Of The Western World", c/o Pat Robertson,
Hicksville, USA.

> Is that intellectual?

Of course. It's taking evidence presented by a known and respected source
(Dave) and weighing it up with contrary evidence on this list (only you,
Richard, who's suddenly appeared/delurked) to make a decision whether or not
to buy it. I'll take Dave's opinion on the matter until I have evidence to
the contrary.

> Is that fair?

Probably not. But, to coin a cliche', Life Ain't Fair.

>> Amy Z wrote:

>> What goes on in HP has nothing to do with Paganism other than its  positive
>> valuation of magic and the word "witch."

> Richard responded:

> Untrue. The books also contain positive presentations of occult
> techniques and practices (astrology, numerology, channeling,
> etc). That cannot be denied.

Rubbish! "This is a COMPLETE misrepresentation of the points in the
book, and it is difficult to understand how "RICHARD" could have
misunderstood." The Divination class and all its acts are not presented in a
positive light. They're presented as a bunch of mumbo-jumbo, to the extent
that Hermione, the most academic and sensible character we see, actually
*leaves* the class because it's not worthwhile. The only reason Harry takes
Divination is that Ron is doing so. I suspect the only reason Ron is doing
so is because it's an easy grade. The two boys are unable to follow
Hermione's lead in leaving because they are not taking any extra classes
which would let them replace it.

Moreover, the fictional/mythological acts described by JKR are nothing more
than stage magic, as opposed to occult practices. You cannot read tea leaves
as Trelawney does, nor does her way of gazing into a crystal ball work. I
honestly can't remember any numerology in the books (unless you're talking
about Harry and Ron making up Divination homework), and the "channeling"
presented in the book has n-o-t-h-i-n-g to do with "real life" channeling.
Believe me, I've seen it done.

Again, I find myself thinking that your research is flawed and wondering
just how thoroughly you read the four books -- go do some more research,
look through our Files section and other online resources, and then rethink
your arguments. Perhaps, since you criticise Dave for making points without
references, you might want to show us the positive light in which Divination
is presented. Please use chapter references rather than page references for
those of us with different editions.

Again, Richard, you really need to research your arguments and "facts"
better. This is especially important when lambasting others for not quoting
directly from your esteemed tome.

I am still of an open mind regarding whether or not I should purchase this
book, having taken on board comments from both Dave and Richard. Would
anybody else like to join in?

Anybody interested in learning more about "the occult", Wicca, Witchcraft or
Paganism should head on over to the excellent "Witch's Voice" at
www.witchvox.net

--John

____________________________________________

Don't join the book burners. Do not think you are going to conceal thoughts
by concealing evidence that they ever existed. -Dwight D Eisenhower

John Walton -- john at walton.to
____________________________________________