The Role of Religion in the Potterverse was Magical Latin

[Carol]

No: HPFGUIDX 186169

Magpie wrote:
> I don't think that story was very uncommon at the time Christianity started, actually. Saviors dying and then raising from the dead for humanity etc.--I think Christianty was one of many cults with that idea.
> 
> Though I'm sure for most people today that story=Christianity, and those people include JKR.

Carol responds:
But, as others have pointed out, those dying gods (Dionysus, Osiris) are resurrected but they don't sacrifice themselves to save others. Christ is the only god, god/man, or son of a god who dies to save sinners. (To Christians, of course, he's both God and the Son of God, but we don't need to go into that sort of detail here.)

Magpie: 
> Though Harry Potter, being an ordinary person, can't die for other's sins the way Jesus did. The whole point was that he was/is God.

Carol:
Exactly. And that's what separates Jesus Christ from the dying gods of Greek and Roman mythology. But, despite Harry's humanness (unlike Jesus, he doesn't actually die), it's Jesus that he's connected to thematically because of the motif of self-sacrifice (and agape love). Osiris and Dionysus have no connection that I can see to the Harry Potter story. 

Magpie:
 In the Narnia Chronicles Aslan actually is Jesus replaying the same story. 

Carol:
Yes. The Chronicles of Narnia, and specifically "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe," is self-evidently a Christian allegory, which HP clearly is not, despite the Christian symbolism.

Magpie: 
> I would say Harry is pretty self-consciously being written as the Christ-figure--though you don't need to be Christian to get anything out of that story. For it to really be pushing Christianity itself, imo, Harry would have to be saved *through Christ* not die himself for others and return. But I still thought of DH that this is where we find out Harry is Jesus. (Which I thought was a bit much for me to think about Harry, but wasn't surprised by it.) I don't think HP as a story really says anything insightful about Christianity, but there are places--particularly in Harry's final sacrifice and return--that I definitely figured Rowling was thinking of Christ.

Carol responds:

Just to clarify the concept of Christ figure: a Christ figure is not Christ himself but a symbolic character who resembles Christ in important ways, usually by sacrificing himself to save others. Aslan is not a Christ figure in this sense but an allegorical representation of Christ. Symbols are complex and subject to interpretation; allegories are simple, straightforward, and pretty much unmistakeable.

I agree that JKR is not pushing Christianity itself though she came closer to depicting the WW (and Muggle Britain) as a Christian culture than she did in earlier books. But saying that Harry is (or can be interpreted as) a Christ figure is not the same thing as saying that he's "the" Christ figure (there's no such thing), much less that he's Christ himself. A Christ figure is a human character who parallels Christ in some ways. Gandalf and even poor Frodo (who needed Gollum to help him accomplish his mission as Jesus needed Judas to accomplish his) can be interpreted as Christ symbols, but, obviously, neither intended as an *allegorical representation* of Christ like Aslan. A Christ figure remains flawed and human, unlike Christ, who (for Christians) is simultaneously human and divine.

I am almost certain that JKR *intended* Harry to be a Christ figure, but it's up to the reader to accept or reject that interpretation. Others, such as Harry as a (symbolic) Christian attempting to become (unconsciously) more Christlike or Harry as epic hero journeying (in every book) to the Underworld are possible. So are many other interpretations that ignore archetypes, symbols, and allegory.

Carol, who thinks that the Christian symbolism is undeniable but is perfectly happy with other approaches to the books as long as they can be supported by canon