Atheism for Children
by Candice Watters on 10/29/2007 at 10:20 AM
I love December -- snow, Christmas and blockbuster films. This year it's The Golden Compass, the first in Philip Pullman's His Dark Materials trilogy, a story many are comparing to the works of J.R.R. Tolkien, C.S. Lewis and J.K. Rowling. He even hails from Oxford.
In Shedding Light on His Dark Materials, author Kurt Bruner writes:
Unlike Tolkien's works of Christian imagination or Rowling's relatively innocent fun, many of Pullman's spiritual undercurrents run in direct opposition to the God of Christianity.
Some have gone so far as to call Pullman "the most dangerous author in Britain" because his trilogy presents a universe in which rebellion against a tyrannical "Authority" is encouraged, the church is depicted as an oppressive institution that suppresses truth and freedom, and "his dark materials" (a concept borrowed from Milton's Paradise Lost, regarding Satan's rebellion) open our eyes to the "truth" that we came into existence out of our own energy rather than being created by some illegitimate, decrepit deity.
Though Pullman lives in Oxford, "he has never achieved the scholarly merits or academic status of either [Tolkien or Lewis]," writes Bruner, though "he did teach part-time for several years at Oxford's Westminster College before dedicating himself to writing full-time. So while only on the fringe of the academy, Pullman's imagination has flourished in the city many consider the capital of fantasy literature. And it shows. His brilliant craftsmanship betrays a love for some of the most influential British authors of all time."
An article in the Washington Times focuses on the concerns of Catholic blogger Mark Shea:
Pullman's a zealous atheist, so you get what you pay for. Unlike [J.K.] Rowling, Pullman is not subtle. He states in interviews that he is writing an anti-Narnia series."
"What Pullman wants to do is proselytize for atheism," said Mr. Shea. "Pullman is writing with an agenda. He's a good writer, what it makes his books even more insidious.
Pullman's not just a good writer, but an award-winning one. The Golden Compass won England's Carnegie Medal and the Guardian Fiction Prize. The American Library Association deemed it a Top Ten Best Book for Young Adults.
The Times article notes that according to Shea, what makes Pullman's books so worrisome is their appeal to the masses, most notably, masses of children.
Most atheists promote their ideas through dry academic treatises, said Mr. Shea, "but the masses don't pay attention to that. They pay attention to story and fiction. And this is where Pullman is dangerous — he promotes atheism through children's story.
Come December, in addition to an extra-large bucket of buttery popcorn, you can get a heaping dose of angry anti-God propaganda for children.
1. Canadian Boy said the following at 11:10 AM on Oct 29:
Here's a surprise: I LOVE the His Dark Materials trilogy. I read them when I was in grade 8, and I don't think any other series ever pulled me in like this one did (well, except for The Hardy Boys when I was in grade 3). Pullman is an extraordinary writer, and he knows how to tell an epic story without going above 600 pages (JK Rowling could learn a lesson from him about that).
Funny thing is, the time that I read the books is when I was furthest from God- and reading them actually made me realize how real He was. There'd be points in which I'd read certain "anti-Christian" messages and think "Wait a minute, that's not how it is at all!" and I'd remember what I'd learned in church. I'd always keep in mind that it was a work of fiction- in this fantasy, made-up world there is no God, and the Church is more like an authoritative government than it is a religious institution. But in this real world, it is nothing like that.
Adding on to the world of Pullman's mind, it's actually extremely depressing. It's dark, it's gloomy and there's little hope, because there is no God and no faith. Lyra and Will try to find meaning in themselves, but it's really ambiguous if they succeed or not.
So, yeah, I love the books, and I wholeheartedly recommend them to anyone who likes a good fantasy novel. It's gripping, it's emotional and it's exciting. Oh, and it has talking armoured polar bears.
2. Jamie Morton said the following at 11:11 AM on Oct 29:
Is it just me or does that last sentence seem unnecessarily incendiary?
I always find it frustrating to read works by atheist authors; I feel like my mind is being "pulled from the straight," to borrow a Woolfian phrase. But since you've already referred to Milton . . .
Even Milton, who was a staunch, radical fundamentalist, recognized the importance for freedom of press. That's what Aereopagitica is all about. Milton recognizes that many books published in his time and area are wrongly reasoned (in that they are contrary to a fundamental and correct interpretation of the Bible), yet he was fiercely against the idea of censorship. Why? Because he recognized the necessity of exposing people to wrong reason in order that right reason might be a choice.
In the same way, I believe that my parents' desire to protect me from certain ideas severely stunted my spiritual growth. I was never taught to question, therefore never to exercise reason, be it right reason or wrong reason. Which is why I don't have a problem with children reading a book like this. Perhaps the author is trying to brainwash children into believing what he believes, but aren't there Christian texts that attempt to do the same thing. Well-intended or not, true or not, brainwashing is brainwashing, and in inculcating children early on with any kind of idea--even if it's supposedly true--you take away their ability to reason and therefore disable part of their God-given free will.
3. Kit said the following at 11:51 AM on Oct 29:
While it is true that children are impressionable, they are not ignorant. A young adult who has been raised on CS Lewis or the like can find interesting points of debate in literature such as this, and can sharpen his or her belief system by directly contesting and arguing the points of the author. In fact, I would go so far as to say young adults should read these sorts of things and analyze them, sharpening their own beliefs as they learn to intellectualize their own faith. It would be very beneficial to institute Sunday School classes dealing with these sorts of things, rather than the typical young-adult SS which, indirectly reminiscent of TEEN magazine, often only touches on questions like, "I like a boy. How should I handle it?"
We as Christians are afraid of debate. We are literally shaking in our shoes to debate these issues in the 'real world' because we know we will get shot down by people who have more intellectual fodder against the Christian faith than we have for it. We need to know why we believe rather than merely believeing it blindly or even beliving (sp?) it on personal experience. Contrary to popular belief, Christianity is quite intellectual. The problem is, we don't search it out and certainly shy away from counter-arguements.
Reading books contrary to the Christian world-view will not cause children to become indoctrinated with heathen beliefs and turn into wild, paper-clothing wearing, guitar playing tree hugging hippies (I am not implying environmentalism is a bad thing, either). From my observation, often, the only people who abandon the faith are those who find no answers to the complex questions Christianity presents; people who are not intellectually challenged in the faith.
Sooner than later, young adults will come in contact with the realities of the 'real world' anyway. Why not allow them to read this, then discuss with them the world-view being presented and why it is inaccurate?? If discussed objectively, it will probably enhance their understanding of Christianity and the inherent truth of it.
There is a great book entitled "Loving God with all your Mind" that deals with the anti-intellectualization of Chrisitnaity in America...very interesting...a must-read for anyone discouraged with this issue in churches today...
4. Allyson said the following at 11:55 AM on Oct 29:
I find it increasingly difficult to sheild my child from world values. I was raised in a family that values all literature and there were never any restrictions to what we could and could not read. It's unfortuanate that authors are writting with hidden agendas, and it's even more appauling that they are targeting children.
5. Adam Sloope said the following at 12:05 PM on Oct 29:
Oh no! I really wanted to see this movie. I probably still will, because I think it will be an interesting conversation starter and for mere entertainment purposes. I do find it scary though that an atheist is now making movie with the intentions of being anti Narnia. Children will be loaded up on this idea that rebellion is a great thing instead of obedience to God being good. I find it sad and utterly pointless for atheist to do anything with a cause. Their religion or cult in itself is without cause because they believe the absurd that everything just came together and that we don't mean anything... I think that most if not all atheist have been hurt and are angry at God or Hid church in some form and that is what keeps them so motivated and gives them a cause. Their cause is to go against the very God they say doesn't exist.
6. Diane said the following at 12:15 PM on Oct 29:
I will watch it.
7. JB said the following at 12:36 PM on Oct 29:
I really enjoyed the books. They're like what you would get if CS Lewis had been a huge fan of Nietzsche.
The kind of atheism you get from Pullman isn't the sort that argues that only the material world is real - it's more of a critique of the Church in history. The religious characters are vicious, Puritanical hypocrites who only lust for power. On the other hand, angels and souls are real. The archbishop of Canterbury has actually recommended the books and said that they can profitably be read as a critique of corruption in the church rather than as a critique of religion per se. I think that might require a bit of creative interpretation, but it's plausible.
8. Gene said the following at 1:38 PM on Oct 29:
Not sure about the little jab at J.K. Rowling, but many have argued for the Christian elements in her Harry Potter stories, and she herself just recently confirmed the deep Christian roots and imagery in the stories.
9. Loris said the following at 2:00 PM on Oct 29:
I'm concerned that this will create another anti-book scare within the Christian community like there was with the Harry Potter books. I consider the Harry Potter books to be relatively harmless, but the point is that many, many parents freaked out and banned them without knowing much about them. While I don't advocate at all that parents should just let their kids read (or watch) anything, it really makes Christians look ignorant and reactionary to unequivocably shun a piece of pop culture their kids are coming in contact with WITHOUT KNOWING A THING ABOUT IT.
Now I agree that the easiest way to brainwash a generation is with clever, well-executed stories. Since the danger to our children's faith in the "His Dark Materials" seems so obvious, shouldn't a conscientious parent pick up a copy to read BEFORE their kid comes home from the library buzzing with enthusiasm for the new series their friend down the street is reading?
My parents took a similar approach to the one I advocated with movies, especially. When I was young and watching kids movies, my parents watched them first to screen for content. But I don't mean "screen for content" as in if they found something they didn't like, they wouldn't let me watch it. No, instead they would watch it with me and explain to me why they disagreed with certain parts and how some element of the story ran counter to how a Christian little girl should act, i.e. Ariel disobeys her loving (if portrayed as unfairly strict) father and is rewarded for it at the end. Once they were sure I understood what they were trying to tell me, they had enough confidence in me to let me watch/read the item in question, knowing that when I came to the parts they had pointed out, I would be uneasy because it was contrary to what I had been taught. And you know what? I always WAS uneasy when I came to those parts of the story.
I really believe that children can handle a lot of themes with their faith intact if the parents go in ahead of time and use the material in question to teach the child how to think for itself and compare what it is being presented against what it already knows from the Bible. I know that approach led me to deeply appreciate my parents as I entered college and realized I already knew how to critique what I was reading. It showed they respected my intelligence and trusted me enough to honor their teaching even when their eyes weren't directly on me.
10. Adam T. said the following at 2:03 PM on Oct 29:
Interesting comments, Canadian Boy.
I think to lots of folks, part of the appeal of LOTR, Narnia, etc. is that they evoke a 'feeling' of longing... of nostalgia for a wonderful place we've never been. And of course as a Christian I think it works because that place we 'long' for is the world as it was supposed to be - unfallen.
And so while I haven't read them, I can't help but think that Pullman's books might generate the opposite feeling: that 'this just isn't right'. I think for many people a book like that would ring hollow, in a sense; they'd 'see through it' spiritually though they may not consciously understand what they were feeling.
Of course, that may differ for children. In any case, if the books are as good as some are saying, it'll be interesting to see how they stand the test of time.
11. Kit said the following at 2:14 PM on Oct 29:
Allyson, you said "It's unfortuanate that authors are writting with hidden agendas."
Authors of great literature have always had hidden agendas. CS Lewis' sole agenda was to intellectualize Christianity. Kate Chopin's sole agenda with "The Awakening" was to promote radical feminism in an era when women were expected to shun their identity. Charles Dickens' agenda was often to expose corruption in society. Annie Dillard attempts to reconcile naturalism and environmentalism with Christianity.
I'm not sure I know of an author without an agenda, and reading this is no different than reading anything else--you have to decide for yourself what the overarching truth in the novel is...
12. Ted Slater said the following at 2:19 PM on Oct 29:
A question for all of you: Do you practice media discernment? If so, how? If not, why not?
13. Holly said the following at 3:02 PM on Oct 29:
On HDM: fabulous entertainment and no threat to anyone's faith. Despite being incredibly well-written and enjoyable as stories, the overall gloom makes the worldview ANYTHING but attractive.
On Ted's question: yes, in the following ways: Films -- I use Plugged In and other review sites to check out the content of movies before considering seeing them. Television -- don't own one. Music -- aside from praise and worship, my musical tastes run to classical and jazz, so there are no lyrics. LOL. Books -- I read the cover blurbs and flip through, sampling passages here and there, before deciding to read them. If the writing is inferior or the content offensive, I have no problem putting them down.
14. Tami said the following at 3:02 PM on Oct 29:
Kit - I also like Moreland's book. I read when it was published, not long after college. It had a hugely positive effect on how I view things. I'd read so many Christian classics in college (Augustine, a Kempis, Luther)... and was really bummed at the level of stuff that was more readily available at the Christian bookstore. Moreland's book was a real encouragement.
For those interested, an additional perk of Moreland's book is a list of additional good books to read, organized by subject area.
15. Gene said the following at 3:22 PM on Oct 29:
Ted, your "question" seems to me a large case of begging the question.
Are you implying that people who read "non-Christian" material are somehow not practicing discernment?
I hope you're not advocating a simplistic hands-off approach to anything that doesn't mention Jesus on every page or material that causes us to think more deeply about our Christian faith by actually challenging it.
It's no wonder that so many of our young people are tongue-tied when trying to present Christianity to our culture.
16. Ted Slater said the following at 4:26 PM on Oct 29:
Gene -- this isn't merely "non-Christian." This is "anti-Christian." The author is bent on flipping Christianity on its head, encouraging us to sympathize with Satan and doubt God.
Consider what the author has said:
And here's a synopsis of his trilogy:
It surprises me that Christians would give many hours of their time to let the author of these books tickle their ears. Of all the good books out there, Christians choose to submit their imaginations to an author intent on seeing Christianity dissolved. I honestly don't see how a Christian can read these particular books and not be grieved.
I think most Christians don't practice media discernment when it comes to, as you phrase it, "non-Christian" media. I'm surprised to see Christians, however, come to the defense of a book whose author explicitly set out to defame Christ and His followers. This tells me that many Christians are not just passive about media discernment, but seemingly rebellious to the concept altogether.
That's why I asked about it. I truly do wonder what our readers think of "media discernment," and whether it's something we should be mindful of, or whether, for the sake of being "culturally relevant," we should not protect ourselves from even the most offensive materials.
Do I sound "tongue-tied," Gene?
17. Leah said the following at 4:37 PM on Oct 29:
Canadian Boy- I think your "realisations" during reading the book are owing to the church background that you did have. For those who have no church background, or perhaps just a little bit of Sunday School when they were 6 years old, I think that the spiritual suggestions made by the book are a lot more dangerous and misleading than the effect it had on you.
Of course, I haven't read them and won't make a complete judgment of them until I do, but the author's admittance that he is atheist and aiming to pull people the same way with his books sounds pretty incriminating to me.
18. Leah said the following at 4:53 PM on Oct 29:
Kit- I don't think Candice's problem is that we might have to engage in debate, or that "Reading books contrary to the Christian world-view (will) cause children to become indoctrinated with heathen beliefs and turn into wild, paper-clothing wearing, guitar playing tree hugging hippies".
It's the Harry Potter debate all over again, although somewhat more sinister. I'm sure it is quite fine to let young people read Pullman's trilogy, so long as they are educated enough to know it is simply a story and not real, and neither are its ideals or doctrines.
"Reading books contrary to the Christian world-view" may well "cause children to become indoctrinated with heathen beliefs" if they are not educated enough to distinguish what is completely fiction within the book. This has been proven by people's belief of The da Vinci Code. However, if the person is educated enough to know that this is a completely fictional story made up for entertainment, and does not contain spiritual realities, then you're right, they will not "cause children to become indoctrinated with heathen beliefs and turn into wild, paper-clothing wearing, guitar playing tree hugging hippies".
Ted- sorry, but you're not a young person :P Gene wasn't saying you should be tongue-tied.
Gene- I'm a diehard Harry Potter fan, but I wouldn't go so far as to say it has Christian roots. Imagery, sure, but roots? Not sure. (Yes, I read the link you posted). I must admit I've been kind of holding my breath for a few years now, waiting each time a HP movie is released, for Boundless to jump on its back, but fortunately they haven't.
19. Joseph said the following at 5:26 PM on Oct 29:
Ted I can see your point and agree with you concerning this instance. I am curious how you approach authors like Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and the other "Brights" out there. Do you avoid their material to not be influenced by them? I have not yet got around to reading Dawkins due to my already large pile of books I have yet to read but I do fully intend on reading them.
Do you see this as a possible topic that Christians should read to be able to find common ground with people that may stir deeper conversations?
20. bella said the following at 5:39 PM on Oct 29:
I've come to rely on Candice for the odd book condemnation blog every now and then......my vampire boyfriend's feelings are still hurt from her last dig, though. He'll cheer up when he sees that she has moved on to "His Dark Materials." Can't wait for the next book that offends her, especially with "Banned Book Month" coming up :)
21. Andrew R. (aka Canadian Boy) said the following at 5:42 PM on Oct 29:
Ted,
"I honestly don't see how a Christian can read these particular books and not be grieved."
Allow me to enlighten you. First off, there is no grieving how amazing the books are to the reader. Characters that draw you in and won't let go, plots that keep you reading into the wee hours of the night and twists that make you drop the book and gasp. Second, I am fully aware of Pullman's tirade against Christians- this guy has HUGE problems with CS Lewis, and I don't like that. But I can deal with it. I can read the parts of the book that are "anti-Christian" and think to myself "Man, this guy has it all wrong." I can recognize that this is a fantasy world of Pullman's mind, one that, as I said before, is gloomy and depressing. Those who've read the series will know what I'm talking about. There is a lot of dissonance, especially in the final few pages. The ending is downright depressing, and it's such because there is no God (those who've read the books- imagine how it would've ended if there WAS a God! The ending would've been HAPPY!)Reading his books the first time brought me closer to God (take THAT Pullman!), because I knew that something was wrong when I read it.
Do I use discernment? I suppose. I don't like music or movies that are saturated in swear-words. I don't like gratuitous torture scenes. But I can handle watching violence, because I know what's real and what's fake. I know Jack Bauer isn't actually hurting anyone, and if he did any of his "skills" in reality, he'd be in jail. I know that the Heroes are in a very unlikely situation and, as such, violence is necessary.
Back to the books: I'd recommend them to anyone who's a teen or older, because I know they'd be able to read it as fiction. And then we'd be able to have some great discussions (I could do a year-long Bible study incorporating HDM).
Ted, have you read the series?
22. Gene said the following at 6:23 PM on Oct 29:
Ted, have you read Paradise Lost? The most intresting character in it is Satan.
More to my point, a good general always wants to know what the other side is thinking. How in the world are we to know that if we don't read what they're writing?
I'm not talking about reading for light entertainment. I'm talking about reading to know and understand. C.S. Lewis knew the world of pagan mythology inside out. The apostle Paul could quote the Greek philosophers and poets right back at the Greeks.
Most of today's Christians ...? Well, they splutter and say, "Well, it's bad, so you shouldn't read it."
Yeah, that's really convincing.
23. Gene said the following at 6:25 PM on Oct 29:
Oh, and I haven't actually read the "His Dark Materials" books. Life is just way too busy.
But I might now, just so that I can intelligently engage in a conversation about it and not just say, "Well, I read somewhere that ..."
24. Chris said the following at 6:54 PM on Oct 29:
From the excerpt:
Some have gone so far as to call Pullman "the most dangerous author in Britain" because his trilogy presents a universe in which rebellion against a tyrannical "Authority" is encouraged
Uh, how is rebellion against a tyrannical authority bad? If anything, in this day and age when politicians score points by trampling on the very freedoms that make us what we are, I'd say encouraging rebellion is a good thing. Even modern day Protestant churches were started as a rebellion against the Catholic church.
25. Elisabeth said the following at 7:03 PM on Oct 29:
I read His Dark Materials several years ago when I was 16, and the feeling that I had when I finished book three was one of disappointment. The first two books are very good and build towards a great climax...which never really comes in my opinion. The third book felt like Pullman was just shoving his message down the reader's throat. I felt sad for him, because his hatred of Christianity is so evident. I'm so glad that I had read much better (and more satisfying) series before HDM. I felt sad for myself too, that I was lead on for three books and wasted my time reading something that was ultimately empty.
26. Katie said the following at 8:03 PM on Oct 29:
To take a quote from Kit: "While it is true that children are impressionable, they are not ignorant."
I would say that is true to an extent. (Though, as a teacher and a person who works with children a lot, YES, many of them (especially younger ones and younger grades) DO believe that teachers/parents/authors (and others) DO know everything, and whatever we say is law.
Though let's not make it obvious when we lie. We don't want to feed a lie to them all at once. Let's give them little nibbles and make it look pretty and fun. A little humanism here in school. A little rebellion and atheism there in a favorite book or movie. It's no surprise that by high school, many students are strong atheists and rebel against Christianity, good character and virtues, and ESPECIALLY against God.
And for those of you who do/will screen what your kids watch and will discuss things like this with them - kudos for you! However, many parents (even at the private Christian school where I teach), do not care what their children read or watch, do not track any of it, and will not discuss it.
Some of you mentioned that it is a great book, and will probably be a great movie - but most of you are strong enough Christians where you can see through the lies, and identify what is right and wrong with it. Many kids - especially the unsaved - will not. And why should they care - it has a great plot, the protagonist is a free-spirited girl they could identify with, and authority and rules are evil.
My last comment on this: If I were to offer any of you a full glass of lemonade with just a few drops of arsenic in it, would you take it? It would taste good - you probably wouldn't even notice the arsenic, and it would still be mostly lemonade anyway. Lemonade, anyone?
We are so careful about what we eat physically, but we tend to be rather careless with our spiritual diet.
27. JB said the following at 8:45 PM on Oct 29:
Ted,
Rowan Williams has given a lot of interviews about his view of Pullman's trilogy (one is here http://arts.guardian.co.uk/features/story/0,,1165873,00.html) and I'm struck by how engaged he is with the text and the challenge it presents to Christianity. Williams looks at the text as a parable about a church without redemption, concerned with the preservation of a deity of the world, not superior to it. He thinks of Pullman's writing as helping us to see what our Church is not.
Pullman is clear about his personal views, sure, but he's a good enough writer we can use his books for our own ends. I think a critical reading of His Dark Materials is very rewarding. Williams writes (about both the books and the stage adaptation), "A modern French Christian writer spoke about 'purification by atheism' - meaning faith needed to be reminded regularly of the gods in which it should not believe. I think Pullman and Wright do this very effectively for the believer. I hope too that for the non-believing spectator, the question may somehow be raised of what exactly the God is in whom they don't believe."
They're really great, entertaining coming-of-age stories and if you read them critically, there's a lot of theological content worth thinking about (not swallowing whole, of course, but definitely food for thought). Seriously, give the books a try. They're not long. They won't hurt you. And talking about the content of the books and why it is or is not wrong is a lot more fruitful than talking about why we shouldn't ever read them.
28. k. said the following at 9:56 PM on Oct 29:
God is not up there panicking over books by Philip Pullman and Christopher Hitchens. Why should we? Reading The Golden Compass is not going to turn us into atheistic automatons. In high school, I read a particularly nauseating little work called Mein Kampf...it sure didn't turn me into a Nazi. (Oh, and even though I thought it was vile, it was still worth reading.)
According to Merriam-Webster, to discern is to "show insight and understanding." Nowhere in there does it recommend sticking our fingers into our ears and saying "La la la, I can't HEAR you!" when faced with something that we don't like. Literature is more than just "Christian" or "non-Christian." I've read Machiavelli, Susan Faludi, and Malcolm X...none of whom I completely agree with. Does that mean I get to ignore what they wrote? Hardly. Part of being an educated human being is recognizing that other perspectives exist...we don't have to agree with those perspectives. But we DO need to be able to exercise our critical thinking and analytical skills in addressing them.
Of course, there are logical limits: I'm not recommending watching "Naughty Nurses 8" just so we can engage with that audience. But I also don't think we should shy away from a literary work just because it's written from an atheistic perspective. Good literature isn't written only by Christians.
As for children: by all means, give them direction and age-appropriate guidance. But always protecting them, without giving them the tools to engage their culture and to think for themselves, is not doing them any favors.
29. Samuel Keane-Rudolph said the following at 10:47 PM on Oct 29:
I think it's disingenuous to rush into criticism of children's books. Many Christians did this years ago when Harry Potter was published, and were rightly derided as unthinking alles verboten critics of anything that wasn't Christian.
Yes, His Dark Materials is written by an atheist. It is roughly equivalent to Lewis's Narnia. But atheists didn't cry foul when Narnia was published, so why should Christians cry foul when the atheists have their turn? Dawkins and kind have already been having their fun with atheistic fundamentalism.
The primary strength of Christianity lies in its truth. The truth is always its own best defense. Jesus is quite good at defending Himself when we try to stay out of His way. Let's not muck up His apologetics by getting sidetracked onto criticism of legitimate free speech in the marketplace of ideas.
30. Chris Krycho said the following at 11:13 PM on Oct 29:
Ted,
I think that while we need to practice discernment, we also need (desperately!) to read books like this. We ought to read them with discernment, but then we ought to read everything with discernment. Including Lewis. There is much to be grieved by in Pullman's work, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't read it, understand it, and be able to intelligently discuss it.
I had huge problem with Harry Potter. Why? It had nothing to do with the occult material in it. I could have handled that at 7 or 8, because I'd been taught proper discernment and how to understand what was good and what was bad. (My parents are fabulous.) No, it bothered me because it just wasn't very well written, especially before Book 4.
Read The Road, by Cormac McCarthy? You should. It's incredibly dark, violent, and disturbing. It also ought to be mandatory reading for anyone (with a strong enough stomach) over the age of 16. Why? Because it's an incredible work of literature, and while it's incredibly dark, it ultimately deals in Truth: that man is depraved, but that there is Good and that it is worth fighting for. Explicitly Christian? Not even close. Absolutely worth reading? Yes.
If we applied the same standards to our reading that most Christian advocates of "media discernment" want us to (and there is wisdom in that, to a point), we would have to cut out incredible works. Lord of the Rings: far too violent. Paradise Lost: good grief, Adam and Eve were sexual beings?!! Crime and Punishment: the whole thing revolves around the axe murder of two old women. We definitely shouldn't go anywhere near those. (Please understand: I am very careful in what I watch. No sex. Very discerning on the violence. I think we need to guard our minds [Proverbs 4:23]. But we do not need to be afraid of things, and I think we all too often are.)
Now, all of those were written from explicitly Christian worldviews, and as such have significantly more redemptive power in them than HDM. That does not mean, however, that we shouldn't read HDM - and not simply so that we can critique them to anyone who will listen. Is there something to be learned from Pullman's books? I think there is. If nothing else, we can see how far man really has fallen, and I think the books are really quite the perfect illustration of the lie that led to the Fall, and indeed the lie that Satan continues to use all the time. Sounds like prime reading material for Christians who are willing to exercise their minds.
31. James said the following at 11:58 PM on Oct 29:
Candice, before I read this I saw the Fox News article on this, and I THOUGHT I saw FotF's position being one of "Wait and See" concerning the movie.
While the books certainly ARE poison wrapped in an innocent package if you're not a discerning reader who knows the Truth and is grounded in it, I'm certain (haven't read them, but I KNOW the power of books), still, the movie makers are doing what they can for the film to make it much less anti-God. This, of course, has set off BOTH groups: Christians, and Athiests. The former claiming the watering down is just to butter the kids up for the books, and the latter whining that hollywood is supposedly giving into "The Bible Belt."
I'm with Dr. Dobson on this. Let's wait and see FIRST, then render judgement.
32. Jethro said the following at 1:20 AM on Oct 30:
Something can be both a good literary work and anti-Christian you know Ted. Nietzsche for example.
33. Sheridan said the following at 2:56 AM on Oct 30:
I think it's scary to start justifying Harry Potter by saying it has 'deep Christian roots.'
I know that its other 'roots' are packed full of witchcraft, and since those books and movies have come out, witchcraft is becoming more and more prevelent with school age kids.
I do not believe you can promote witchcraft AND Christianity in the same book.
As for media discernment, I think we have all become way too desensitized.
We shouldn't have the attitude, 'well I'm mature, I'm a strong Christian, therefore I can handle these things.'
I believe God would rather us run in the opposite direction!
34. Theo K said the following at 3:15 AM on Oct 30:
Jamie Morton said: “In the same way, I believe that my parents' desire to protect me from certain ideas severely stunted my spiritual growth. I was never taught to question, therefore never to exercise reason, be it right reason or wrong reason. Which is why I don't have a problem with children reading a book like this. Perhaps the author is trying to brainwash children into believing what he believes, but aren't there Christian texts that attempt to do the same thing. Well-intended or not, true or not, brainwashing is brainwashing, and in inculcating children early on with any kind of idea--even if it's supposedly true--you take away their ability to reason and therefore disable part of their God-given free will.”
“Hear, Israel: The Lord is our God; The Lord is one: 5 and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might. 6 These words, which I command you this day, shall be on your heart; 7 and you shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise up. 8 You shall bind them for a sign on your hand, and they shall be for symbols between your eyes. 9 You shall write them on the door posts of your house, and on your gates.” – Deuteronomy 6:4-9
35. Ashley S. said the following at 7:13 AM on Oct 30:
Philippians 4:8 says
"Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
As Christians, we have a responsibility to fill our minds and hearts, not with things of this world, but with the things of God.
If you are not going to be an atheist, why would you read a story that is so anti-God? Why do we allow things that we would never allow to actually be said or done in our homes to come in through the TV? I am not saying that you can only read books with "Christian" themes (I've read books by Albert Camus and E. M. Forester), but I do agree with Ted in that we must have discernment in what we fill our minds with. And we especially must be careful what we allow to enter the minds of our children.
36. Reid said the following at 7:52 AM on Oct 30:
Believe it or not, people who are in no way sympathetic to Christianity appear to have no qualms about enjoying fantasy written by Christians--even the Narnia series, which is about as undisguised as it gets. (Odd how that isn't often mentioned in any of the media coverage for the movies, eh?) It seems to me that something like the Da Vinci Code, with its "realistic" fiction about the Church, is far more worrisome than something imaginative.
37. Andrew R. (aka Canadian Boy) said the following at 8:55 AM on Oct 30:
I just don't think that the average reader is going to read this book and think "Oh my gosh! The author is completely right! There is no God! I should become an atheist now!"
This book is fantasy. Animals talk. A knife transports people between worlds. Polar bears wear armour and fight each other. Unlike the DaVinci Code, it's not presented as "truth". And I think readers are going to recognize that when dealing with the spiritual themes.
38. Craig said the following at 9:12 AM on Oct 30:
I'm the guy who strongly disagreed with Ted about "300" (and still do), but I'm with him 100% here. I won't see this movie. Engaging the arguments of the modern fanatical atheist crowd is a priority, but doing that requires reading and thought. Viewing a fantasy film contributes very little to one's knowledge about such issues--instead, such films inflame the imagination and passions. That can be good if your passion is pushed in the right direction, but here the entire story is an explicit assault on the idea of a good God. Art is about message, message, message. I'm happy to debate theism and atheism all day long, but I'm not going to voluntarily be preached at for two hours with no chance for rebuttal.
39. Ted Slater said the following at 9:16 AM on Oct 30:
Again, I have to ask why a Christian would *choose* to spend dozens of hours reading the works of a man who is intent on blaspheming Christ and ridiculing Christians.
Pullman's expressed purpose is to challenge the notion that God exists and is good, and to challenge the legitimacy of His Church. By wrapping this theme with an imaginative storyline, he's tricking you into putting yourself under his tutelage.
There are so many good books out there. Why pour the words of this anti-Christian man into your hearts? Because he's clever with words? Because he's imaginative?
Are we so eager to be culturally relevant that we'd pollute our minds and imaginations with material that aims to cast a sinister shadow on the very nature of God?
Come on, guys -- you can do better than this. We have to stop thinking of this stuff as innocuous "literature," and see it as the product of a disingenuous man who hates your Lord and wants you freed from His "tyranny."
40. Ted Slater said the following at 9:21 AM on Oct 30:
Andrew/Canadian Boy -- no, I have not read the series. I *have* researched the author, though, and read some excerpts of the book, and so I'm not speaking out of ignorance.
While it looks like a fascinating read, I have chosen not to submit myself to its teachings. I have chosen not to give Mr. Pullman a hearing. Mr. Pullman does not want a "dialog"; he wants to see me question my faith. I've got better things to do with my time.
41. Christina said the following at 9:21 AM on Oct 30:
Ashley...thank you...i've been trying to post that verse for 2 hours now...
42. Josh said the following at 9:26 AM on Oct 30:
I'd rather read an artistically excellent piece of atheist themed literature than 99% of the harmless, saccharine sweet tripe that passes for "Christian" writing nowadays.
43. Christina said the following at 9:28 AM on Oct 30:
Reid, the difference between non-christians reading our stuff and us reading their stuff is that they have no warnings or guidelines or any other reason to care - christians have been told outright through scripture to be careful what we read, watch, see, do, say...you name it.
That's what sets us apart from the rest of the world.
44. Ted Slater said the following at 9:28 AM on Oct 30:
JB -- you wrote, "Seriously, give the books a try. They're not long. They won't hurt you."
No. A friend of mine who works at Plugged In Online has been reading/studying them for a while, and has told me it takes him some 15 hours to read one book. He's reading it for an upcoming review, so he's putting more work into it than a casual reader. The thing is, he'll have spent over 45 hours reading the words of Pullman. That's a lot of time to spend with someone bent on belittling God. I really don't see the need. I don't see the benefit to my imagination or my spirit. I really don't.
So, no, I won't be reading Pullman's works. And I'm no less relevant for my decision.
I'm wondering if most Christians will be reading this series merely for entertainment, and not for the more lofty philanthropic reasons some are giving for justifying their exposure to Pullman's ideas.
45. Ted Slater said the following at 9:35 AM on Oct 30:
Andrew/Canadian Boy -- you defend the book by saying it's merely "fantasy."
Tell me -- what was the most effective means Jesus used to communicate His ideas? Parables. Short stories that captured His listeners' imaginations and conveyed a truth that connected with their very hearts.
Fiction may be more powerful than non-fiction in affecting hearts. We mustn't dismiss a work of fiction as necessarily innocuous.
46. Christina said the following at 10:01 AM on Oct 30:
I don't understand how people who claim to be christians can defend these books as simply good, fantastical, harmless literature. As has been pointed out, everything is written with a theme, a point - the spirit in which it is written can have good or bad effects on those choosing to spend their time thinking about it. Consider a song with no words that becomes the obsession of a teenage girl who then begins having suicidal thoughts and splitting her own wrists, only to learn that the song was written to be the theme for the Exorcist - this isn't simply the world vs Christians - there is a spiritual battle. And if you don't think it applies to you, then good luck staying alive. Galatians says to arm yourselves for battle. Philippians tells you to take care what you think about. This is a prime example of when discernment is TRULY necessary. I personally am not saying not to read them, but be very careful about your reasons FOR reading them - entertainment? knowledge? If entertainment, why do you want to be entertained by this? What is right, good, true about it? If its for knowledge, what do you plan on using that knowledge for? Discussing it with your children, peers, professors, apologetics?
Just saying, be a little more DISCERNING on what you expose yourself to and the reasons why you choose to do so...it could have more consequences than you know...
47. Diane said the following at 10:18 AM on Oct 30:
I am interested in watching the movie, not the books. While I read quite a bit, particularly worldview and apologetics on BOTH sides, I will not read this series as I will not/have not read Harry Potter. I tend to have a hard time keeping the Word predominant as is. However, I've been listening to Ravi Zacharias' "Mind Games in a World of Images" podcast series and he is quite like Schaeffer in saying that FILM IS PROPAGANDA! (Not like the books aren't!) I want to see it to discuss it. No, I do not watch whatever comes my way...nothing gratuitous. But, yes, this I will see. It is marketed to children and we should be educated. My children are only 3 and 2 months old. I know that I will have to make decisions based on their maturity when the time comes. There are also things that mom and dad will simply say, "No sir/ma'am" to. But, this film? Again, I'll watch it...on Netflix.
48. Kellie said the following at 10:28 AM on Oct 30:
I think most Christian "literature" found in bookstores today is of poor quality. I do read some Christian books, but I read many more secular books, particularly fiction. Secular and non-christian is very different than anti-christian. I did pcik up the golden compass at the library, I read a few pages (nothing horrid in the first chapter) and just decided against it. That isn't to say that no Christian should read it, but perhaps there should be a reason for reading it.
49. Kit said the following at 11:17 AM on Oct 30:
"Ted I can see your point and agree with you concerning this instance. I am curious how you approach authors like Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and the other "Brights" out there. Do you avoid their material to not be influenced by them?"
This is a great question. I just finished Dawkins' "The God Delusion" and found it to be, actually, a quite well-researched book with well-argued points. Did I become an atheist? Of course not. One can see where some of his views are flawed, and it was fun to write my criticisms on the sides of the pages. But did I find it enlightening, to learn how much of the world thinks, and why? Yes.
If we as Christians run away from literature such as this, we will not have a leg to stand on when people ask us to defend our faith. Only when you understand both sides can you answer their questions with logical answers that actually make scientific and intellectual sense. Too often, we say, "Well, that's what the Bible says," completely forgetting that a non-believer thinks that the Bible, if it is anything at all, is only a nice work of fiction detailing events that never actually happened, and so they do not care what it says. We have GOT to step it up. No wonder people take Christianity as irrelevant. We dismiss things we haven't read/understood because we are scared of them.
Literature like this, I think, is good for the general faith. It spurs debate, among Chrisitans and non. That's a good thing.
50. Diane said the following at 11:19 AM on Oct 30:
I just spoke to my husband about this conversation. He said that there is a distinct difference in watching/reading to be informed and watching/reading and giving an endorsement.
Can we remember that there is a fine line we are treading between what is mandated in scripture and what is lawful for us as believers? I feel like we need to remember to speak graciously to one another.
How exactly do we draw the line, as believers? Is it a matter of entertainment vs. understanding? Or, are only a select few o.k. to watch/listen/read while the rest of us just take their word for it? Sometimes yes, sometimes no? It's tricky.
51. Chris Krycho said the following at 12:11 PM on Oct 30:
Ted: There are so many good books out there. Why pour the words of this anti-Christian man into your hearts? Because he's clever with words? Because he's imaginative?
Are we so eager to be culturally relevant that we'd pollute our minds and imaginations with material that aims to cast a sinister shadow on the very nature of God?
Come on, guys -- you can do better than this. We have to stop thinking of this stuff as innocuous "literature," and see it as the product of a disingenuous man who hates your Lord and wants you freed from His "tyranny."
While there is some merit to your argument here, there's a lot flawed with it, too. Ought we ignore all mythologies? Should we not read Nietzsche? Should we throw away Steinbeck? Or should we instead dare to grapple with their ideas, confident in the truth?
Maybe it's just me, but saying, "I won't read these books because they're bad" is disingenuous. There is much to be learned from them. I'm not saying we ought to read this sort of material more than good literature created by Christians - to the contrary, I think a healthy intake of good literature founded on a Christian worldview is essential for the sanctification of our imaginations. Read Lewis, Dostoevsky, etc. But why be afraid of what Pullman has to say?
Am I recommending that we have all Christian children read these? Hardly. Am I recommending that we be at least willing to pick them up and get through them, acting with discernment? Yes, I absolutely am. I honestly believe one of evangelicalism's major failings right now is its lack of thinkers: people who have engaged the major thoughts and can engage with people at every level.
That is what Paul did. As a previous poster mentioned, he knew Greek philosophy and mythology inside out. When he went to the Aerophagus and presented Christianity, he did it in their terms, on their ground, in their context. Why are we so afraid to do the same?
And why don't we, for a change, stop bellyaching about what the world is doing that is so wrong and go create something compelling ouselves? I highly recommend Sam Briner's book Roaring Lambs on that precise topic. Instead of making such a big deal out of boycotting the bad, why don't we dedicate ourselves to making (and finding and supporting) the good? That resonates far louder with people than our condemnation of the bad. We will be far more effective in our witness by doing good than by declaiming the doing of bad.
52. Andrew R. (aka Canadian Boy) said the following at 12:39 PM on Oct 30:
To those who don't understand why myself and other Christians read (and enjoyed) this series:
What do you expect Christians to do? See no evil, hear no evil, know no evil? Just stand by as this film becomes a huge blockbuster and book sales rise?
Or should we engage in conversation with others about the book and movie? God used this "anti-Christian" book to show me who He is, who says I can't help Him do the same to others?
I stand by my belief that any Christian teen who reads this is not going to lose their faith from it. But any non-believer who reads the series, and then is brought into conversation about it with a Christian who knows the series, can learn so much about God from it.
And, man, would that upset Pullman.
53. Scott W said the following at 1:29 PM on Oct 30:
I have not read the books, but I have heard from a person who has, and who enjoyed them as a great literary work. That is, until he realized that by book three, he was stepping in Pullman's dogma. As I understand it, the first book is relatively free from Pullman's vitriol, but by the third, the protagonists actively oppose the God figure and the magisterium (the church), re-establish their own Eden and eat from the forbidden tree in defiance.
That being said, I fear that the knee-jerk reaction from Christians will make Pullman's point for him. He characterizes Christians as opposers of those who want to live their own lives. If there is a great outcry from the church, and The Golden Compass turns out to be free of discernible (by the world) evil, Pullman will have made his point and created a great real-world setting for the stage set in the second and third movies.
As I understand it, Pullman attacks God and the church, but doesn't attack Christ and his teachings of truth balanced with love and grace. Pullman's distorted view of Christians is doubtless a product of a history of the church that misrepresents God. We can keep the laws and hold them up as a standard, but we seem to have a short supply of grace and love for those who don't have the same standard.
As we respond to the release of The Golden Compass, we need to encourage great caution, especially to parents, as impressionable children are the film's intended audience. But we need to do so in the spirit of grace, staying away from personal attacks against those who can’t yet see the error of Pullman’s agenda.
54. Mandi said the following at 1:31 PM on Oct 30:
Ted, Katie, Ashley S., and Christina – bingo!
After a long hiatus from Boundless-ing because of lots of crazy wedding planning, and much-needed travels after said wedding, I've been eager to get back to this blessed pastime…though it's disheartening, maddening, and appalling to read most of the comments on this post.
I don't mean that to cast judgment. I do feel a need to ask my fellow brethren in Christ: What the heck are people thinking defending this? Or are you thinking at all? If I were on the path to destruction like this, I'd like someone to do their bit to pull me out too, so here goes.
First and foremost, if you love someone, do you sit around silently if they're being insulted or if someone is speaking blatant lies about them? Worse, do you cheer them on or defend it? Do you give them the chance to try to convince you that they're right about your loved one?
So, if love for the One Who shed His innocent Blood for you on the cross is at all existent in your heart, how can you bear 2 hours – or 15 – watching or reading material that maligns, insults, blasphemes, abuses, and otherwise does violence to even the Name of God, let alone His existence and the abundance of His love for you?
Do we not appreciate His love? Is that what it is?
Could you stand someone cursing at your mother, father, sibling, fiancé(e), husband, wife, child, or any other very dearly beloved that way, even for a few minutes???
Such energy rationalizing should give us pause -- do we really love the Name of the One we should be praising with our every word, thought, action, breath, whatever">http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=53&chapter=10&verse=31&version=50&context=verse">whatever we do.
The love of Christ for each of us individually passes all knowledge. How can we treat such indescribable, unsearchable, unconditional, and undeserved love with such contempt?
Do yourself a favour – or at least humour the other side of this discussion – by reading what the Prophet Isaiah said about
how much our Lord Jesus Christ suffered for us.
Read that, and then ask yourself whether Someone Who did all of that *for you*, even though you did not deserve any of it, and deserved to be in His place, deserves you taking away 2, 3, 15 hours of your time reading, watching, or defending exactly what the Devil wants people to think of Him.
55. Mandi said the following at 1:48 PM on Oct 30:
And for those who think they "can handle it", take note that Satan's spirit is that which casts doubt on or denies God. Pullman is a liar. He is lying about the identity and existence of God, and His Body, the Church. Satan is the father of lying. Whose son do you want to be? How does giving any time, energy, money, or attention to such lies of the worst kind constitute acknowledging God in all">http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=12&verse=36&version=50&context=verse">all our ways???
If God's Word tells us that we'll have to give account for every idle word we utter, how much more should we be careful about every lying word, every blasphemous word we defend, we watch, we financially support (with God's money!)?!?
And, I'm sorry, but, who do people think they are anyway to be strong enough to not let this stuff get to them?? Reading through so many of these defences, you see a lot of "I can", "I know", "I", "I", "I"….who are you to depend on your own wisdom? Lots of focus on "me" and my "strength" and my "wisdom", none on God. That's pride, and that precedes the fall and condemnation. We shouldn't be wise in our own eyes, and for good reason.
Who are we to believe we are strong enough to overcome a roaring lion? The Bible tells us that sin is strong and has slain mighty men, not wimps. Strong men who "could handle it", "who knew enough", "who knew better", "who knew the difference between right and wrong", etc., etc. -- these strong men succumbed. What makes you so special? The Bible tells us that lies and other evils will be enticing, and those who go after such enticements do so as animals, as fools.
Instead of being so proud and wise in our own eyes justifying the entertainment of lies, we are commanded to walk in the light (which is truth, not lies, since they http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=54&chapter=6&verse=14&version=50&context=verse>cannot have communion with each other), http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Peter%201:13-16;&version=50;>be holy in all our conduct and vigilant (um, how does exposing our fallen, limited, weak minds to lies about Christ hour after hour constitute "vigilance"??) because the devil is a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour (not nibble on), meditating instead on things that are true/pure/holy, etc. as other have pointed out before, being wary of those who resist the words of the apostles.
The fact that people are even discussing exposing children entrusted to us by God, to these lies wrapped in enticing stories, is beyond words, even for me (at this moment, anyway!). And please don't throw out Hitler's book as an example of something that didn't rub off on scores of kids: that's SO obviously evil, Satan couldn't pull that trick on humanity twice. And it wasn't packed so enticingly, anyway.
Finally, if you're looking for good literature, a lot has been written even before this Pullman guy ever came into existence. If you're looking for really good Christian works to edify you, why look for it the darkness found on atheist zealots' books? Why not read something more ancient than you, than your parents, than your modern philosophy professor or media pundit? Why not read the works of John Chrysostom? Athanasius? Basil the Great? How could these great men who often defended the Faith that you and I supposedly hold dear against heretics and destruction, have less knowledge, wisdom, and spiritual enlightenment to pass on to us than modern atheist tomes???
56. Ted Slater said the following at 1:53 PM on Oct 30:
Chris -- I assume it's unintentional, but you're misrepresenting my argument.
You write, "But why be afraid of what Pullman has to say?" I'm not afraid of the man or his writings. I just don't want to spend my precious hours under his imaginative tutelage.
You go on to complain about the lack of "thinkers" in Christendom. I assume you're excluding me from the "thinkers" list because I refuse to expose myself to this man's fiction. Did you intend to insult me, Chris? Must I expose myself to all the pollution out there in an effort to become more "relevant"? Am I not free to choose which media to avoid? Is there any media so corrupt that most of us would be wise to avoid it? Or is all media open to consumption by Christians? What is the criteria for making decisions about what to read/watch and what to avoid?
You talk about "boycotting." Nobody to my knowledge has advocated that. You're setting up a Straw Man, Chris. We're talking about personal media discernment, not a boycott.
Listen, as I wrote, one of my Christian friends is studying the books. I admire him for his research. But if someone is reading these for pleasure, and not grieved by the author's mockery and blasphemy and historical revisionism, I'd have to question that person's relationship with Christ. See Mandi's comment above to see what I'm getting at.
57. Matt said the following at 1:55 PM on Oct 30:
I don't think it should take that long to read the books.
Book 1: 432 Pages
Book 2: 368 Pages
Book 3: 560 Pages (all Hardcover books).
I read them a few years back and was definitely annoyed with the anti-Christian message in them. They were somewhat entertaining but not as good as books like Lord of the Rings, Chronicles of Narnia, or the Harry Potter books.
Also, I didn't like the part of the quote where it was implying that J.K. Rowling is a stealth athiest. It is my understanding that it isn't the case.
58. Ted Slater said the following at 1:59 PM on Oct 30:
Andrew/Canadian Boy -- perhaps one reason you're going through the hardships you're going through is because you expose yourself to anti-Christian material, when you could fill your imagination with rich truth about a God Who is alive and involved and loving.
I would argue that while you may not have "lost your faith" because of Pullman's work, the efficacy of your faith has not developed as it could have had you spent your hours reading, say, Scripture.
59. Diane said the following at 2:18 PM on Oct 30:
Wow.
Mandi...I am not a regular poster here, though a regular reader and lurker. I have to say, however, that your post comes off as a bit self-righteous. If one is saying they "love" the series and want to see the film because it's fantastic and is a proclaimed believer, THEN I would sit down with them and discuss the state of their heart toward Christ, their treasure (supposedly). However, if one wishes to understand the precise area in which truth is being assaulted within THIS generation toward THIS generation's children, then fault them NOT for seeking to be informed by reading or viewing the movie. Lit., media, art, etc., is the mouthpiece of culture and we would do well as believers to understand the prevailing mindset (though recycled worldview, truly) of the age so as to meet them where they are with the unchanging gospel. This is NOT emergent-garbage nor lack of discernment. There is a PHILOSOPHY being discussed in this film and books and people are absorbing it. Do you agree that SOMEONE needs to read it/watch it in order to inform believers and have something to SAY of relative INTELLIGENCE to the world when they ask what we think about it? If so, then who should that be? Should we leave that to pastors or teachers? I'm seriously asking the question. The church has left it to the preachers and intellectuals for far too long and not thought critically about what is being said in the medium people digest DAILY.
Do any of you read WORLD magazine?
Please, please try not to judge your brothers and sisters in Christ too harshly based on disputable matters.
60. Manda said the following at 2:23 PM on Oct 30:
You are accurate, Scott, when you say that it's not until book three that the dogma comes out. That's how I even figured out it was a trap. He spends two beautifully written books setting up a complex situation with lots of twists and turns and interesting characters. Then, out of nowhere, you get hit with a very hateful treatment of an anti-Christian argument. These books have been out for ages now, and at first only the adults I knew were reading them. Honestly, I had the librarian at my home library (I was a volunteer) put the books in the adult section.
61. Diane said the following at 2:28 PM on Oct 30:
No one should be telling anyone that they must read this in order to understand a philosophy. Also, no one should be telling anyone that they should NEVER watch/read it in order to understand a philosophy. For enjoyment, perhaps.
Hey, but, can't we all agree that the SAW movies NO ONE needs to see for any reason? haha anyway...
62. Ashley S. said the following at 2:40 PM on Oct 30:
I think alot of the commenters have forgotten what the title of this post is. "Atheism for Children". Everyone seems to be saying that they feel free to read these books because they can see through the lies. But what about our children?
Proverbs 22:6 says "Train up a child in the way he should go, And when he is old he will not depart from it." These books target children at a very impressionable stage in their life.
As an adult, you have the freedom to choose what you read and suffer the consequences of it. But more importantly, as adults (parents or not) it is our responsibility to train up children for Christ. How can we do this effectively if we allow them to read books that contradict everything that we believe as Christians? Someone is always going to be training our children and telling them what "truth" is. The question is, will it be us?
63. k. said the following at 3:01 PM on Oct 30:
Mandi -- I was absolutely not "throw[ing] out Hitler's book as an example of something that didn't rub off on scores of kids." (It was aimed at adults, actually.) First off, my point about Mein Kampf was even though it's a disgusting read, it's ALSO one that an educated person should be familiar with (especially students of rhetoric and history). Just because a book's content is unappealing (or its author is a real creep) doesn't mean we should automatically ignore it. Secondly, of course Satan can "pull that trick" more than once: you're lamentably uninformed if you think otherwise.
We read books for a variety of reasons: to be entertained, educated, amused, edified, etc. I read Malcolm X for entirely different reasons than I read C. S. Lewis...but both authors were worth my time and effort.
Ted -- You need to back off when it comes to Canadian Boy. Unless you are well-aquainted with CB, or have some superpowers you haven't told us about, you have no idea how effective his testimony really is. (Or, for that matter, why he went through a particular hardship, or how many times he may have read through the bible.)
64. Candice Watters said the following at 3:18 PM on Oct 30:
Wow. It always surprises me when such a heated debate ensues over the notion that a book or movie might be better left unopened. There's no way you could read everything out there, why not choose from the best. Thanks to Ashley for reminding everyone that the debate I started had to do with the fact that Pullman's work is geared toward children. To suggest that we must expose children to any and all entertainment is simply unbiblical.
BTW, I just heard from Kurt Bruner, author of Shedding Light on His Dark Materials. He's intrigued by the debate here. For all you Pullman fans, especially those who claim to be followers of Christ, please consider taking a few hours to read Kurt's book. It believe it will give you some helpful context.
65. Kate M said the following at 4:14 PM on Oct 30:
Ted, thank you for your wisdom here. I love literature, read widely and have an honours degree in the subject and the comparisons people are making with Steinbeck and Neitzsche are simply absurd. All good literature is good ultimately because it has *truth* in it - because it tries to wrestle honestly in some way with the human condition. It's not that a book cannot deal with our fallen nature or the ambiguity of evil - many of the greatest literary works do! - but Pullman's books are about presenting evil as good and God as evil. This is a deliberate lie - in a sense, the ultimate lie - which infects the whole work, nullifying the value of the characters, the writing, the imaginative quality, etc.
I will gladly concede Pullman is a technically great writer of immense talent, but he has turned his talent to evil and has been very honest about doing so. The only reason for reading his books would be to educate others about them and combat the evil he is promoting - and children and teens don't yet have the maturity or the literary skills to be able to do this.
66. Andrew R. (aka Canadian Boy) said the following at 4:39 PM on Oct 30:
Let me say right now that the books are not suitable for children. They deal with mature themes, including kidnapping, murder, fighting and bloodshed. But for teens, I do recommend them. Because they bring up amazing discussions. And they're entertaining.
As I said before, tons of people we know are going to see the movie and read the books. I, for one, will be prepared to discuss it with them. I am fully convinced that, if we play our cards right, these "anti-Christian" books can be used to lead people to Christ.
Mandi- To me, not everything is black-and-white. I agree with Diane, you came off as self-righteous and holier-than-thou in your post. I know my Lord died for my sins. And I know people mock Him all the time. But when they do, I don't ignore them. I engage in dialogue about what they are saying. I don't agree with them, but I that doesn't mean I have to avoid their messages.
Ted- That was a nice hit below the belt. I will ask you to stop now.
67. Hannah C said the following at 4:41 PM on Oct 30:
I read these books a couple years ago. They are very well-written and quite interesting fantasy.
But as the trilogy goes on, more and more objectionable stuff is put in. If I was to reread them now I would probably notice more what is objectionable. As it is, I clearly remember finishing the series and recognizing that the end was very atheist, anti-Christian, anti-God.
I would not go see the movie - not because of what's in the movie or not, but because of the object Philip Pullman had when he wrote the books. I don't want to support that financially in any way.
68. Jo said the following at 4:55 PM on Oct 30:
I haven't read the books, nor do I intend to, so I'm not going to debate this particular literary choice.
However, from the comments it seems both sides are very defensive and very opinionated, and very unwilling to see the other point of view.
It's a huge issue, how to work out our faith as foreigners in this world, to put our identity as children of God into practise in every area of our lives, especially those areas that aren't mentioned specifically in the Bible. Our culture is a very very different one to the culture of the New Testament - not less Godly, but very different. How do we apply our new identity to the world we live in?
I know it sounds wishy-washy, but this is a personal thing. Every believer is different and has different temptations and different sensitivities. Every believer needs to listen to the Spirit, be aware of what he is being exposed to and make informed choices about what to give his time to.
k. made an excellent point: "of course Satan can 'pull that trick' more than once" - and it will be easier for him to do so if we are uninformed about the values and ideas that shaped our culture in the past, and continue to do so today. In the case of Hitler, will history be less likely to repeat itself if we banish 'Mein kampf' from our eyes and refuse to look at it? No, it will be MORE likely.
WE MUST BE AWARE. I really think that's the most important thing of all. We're told to be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves. That doesn't mean all of us *should* expose ourselves to anti-Christian ideas, but it also doesn't mean that all of us *should not* do so. We can't start condemning each other like this. Yes there are some good points to be made; we mustn't lie to ourselves about the real reasons we choose to read/watch these things (ie justifying it on the basis of being informed, if really we're only interested in entertainment), and also I would be very cautious about recommending such things to all believers - what is helpful to you may be a hindrance to others. But most of this world is mixed, and I don't find it a stretch to imagine that even someone like Pullman might have some valid things to say about the church and the abuse of religion throughout history. And if my friends were reading his books, discussing them and being influenced by them, I absolutely would read them in order to be able to engage in conversation with them about the issues raised.
Above all everything we do and say should come from a foundation of faith and trust in God, and a knowledge of who we are in Christ: new creations, and foreigners in this world.
69. Ted Slater said the following at 6:07 PM on Oct 30:
Andrew/Canadian Boy -- my comment wasn't intended to be a "hit below the belt." Sincerely.
It's my prayer that you consider what I wrote as you (and not I, of course) evaluate the state of your heart and how your media choices affect it, to your benefit or to your detriment.
70. Sheridan said the following at 6:24 PM on Oct 30:
I don't think you need to read a book so you can be 'informed' and at the same time not endorse it. If you BUY that book, or PAY to see that movie, you are endorsing it whether you like it or not. I don't need to see the Davinci Code to be informed about it. I've read the reviews in the paper, I've heard my friends talk about it.
Am I being ignorant? No Way! I believe God would rather us be ignorant to the world and wise in Godly things anyway.
I have heard people say " I'm watching this, but I don't endorse it"
funny enough they are the people that also say, "I can say the f word and as long as I don't say it in an 'angry' way."
Stop justifying yourselves people.
You dont 'need' to read that book.
And if you need to read that book to help your christian faith, as some of you are implying...that is sad. Most of the greatest christians in history only ever read the bible.
71. Gene said the following at 6:45 PM on Oct 30:
Sheridan
So how do you then explain the apostle Paul's ability to quote the Greek philosophers and poets back at the Greeks? Or Francis Schaeffer's deep reading of all the current philosophies of his day?
A review might be enough for a movie, but it's certainly not enough for a 3-book series. Reading for knowledge and understanding is not endorsing. After all, someone had to read Da Vinci Code in order for you to merely rely on their various reviews and critiques. And Candice approvingly cites Kurt Bruner's critique of HDM, which means Mr. Bruner doubtless read the books as well.
If you want to remain unarmed in the culture war, please remain so. Remember that merely quoting Scripture to someone who does not accept the authority of Scripture has zero effect.
72. Ted Slater said the following at 7:29 PM on Oct 30:
Gene, surely you're not equating the cleverly written works of fiction by Mr. Pullman with the philosophers that either Paul/Saul or Francis Schaeffer studied. Surely you're not saying we're ignorant by choosing not to submit to his anti-Christian story telling. Surely you see the difference between a philosopher's treatice and a crafty work of fiction whose aim is to destroy the faith of children.
Am I "unarmed" because I choose not to fill my imagination with fiction intended from the beginning to cast doubt on the very character of God?
Yes, some people study it in order to serve others. That's helpful. But many read it for pure enjoyment. The cognitive dissonance is that they're enjoying a book that outright slanders their Lord.
You say that Scripture is impotent. No, not at all. It's a two-edged sword. It cuts deep. It does not return void. Even when those who hear it deny its power. We do not need to watch any particular movie or read any particular work of fiction in order to deliver the Word with more relevance. Do we?
73. xeres said the following at 7:30 PM on Oct 30:
I just had a discussion on discernment as well as how to be in the world but not all of the world. We can't resort to cultural isolationism or immersion when dealing with media and the arts. With isolationism, you got the witness but you have no audience to share the Gospel or a Global view. However, with immersion, you have the audience but you have no Witness or the fruit of the Holy Spirit to back up your faith whatsoever. The Bible warns against these two stances. Jesus is extremely harsh on those who take either side. What Jesus calls us is engagement (which is not easy).
74. EmmaLee said the following at 7:46 PM on Oct 30:
"Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things." -Philemon 4:8
"Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience. Be not ye therefore partakers with them... And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret." -Eph 5:6-7&10-11
Gene: "Remember that merely quoting Scripture to someone who does not accept the authority of Scripture has zero effect."
Hopefully quoting scripture here amongst Christians will have some effect.
75. Mandi said the following at 9:16 PM on Oct 30:
Diane and Andrew R./Canadian Boy,
I read through the post(s) you considered so offensive again, looking for the offence. To be honest, I can't see where it is. Has the Scripture I've tried to direct the Pullman defenders to convicted you? Nowhere have I claimed to be blameless in showing a lack of love for my Lord, or pride. I have been guilty of these things too, but by God's grace, I and other Pullman detractors are seeing something more clearly about the dangers of his work than others. Nothing wrong with trying to point people to the Truth in God's Word about Christ's love for us, what our lives in Him should look like...or about how devious, hungry, and persistent Satan is, and how dangerous pride is.
As I said earlier, if I was blinded about something in particular, I'd really hope someone cared enough about me to take the time to get me back on track. I was not judging people, but actions: i.e., lack of love for the most gracious Redeemer (quoting a passage from Isaiah that sums up just how much suffering He went through for us to prove that love quite nicely), and pridefulness. When I called Pullman a liar, I did so meaning to link to this passage of Scripture instead of the same one on the next line, but those are God's words, not mine. It may seem harsh, but if you believe that God's Word is absolutely true, you cannot come to a different conclusion about Pullman, based on his own words.
I stand firmly by my contention that a Christian giving this man's blasphemous lies any time, thought, or defence is an appalling way to live out love for Christ, and defies everything the Scriptures tell us about Satan and the way he works.
Sorry, but this should be a no-brainer. It is incredibly disturbing that this kind of a debate is happening between Christians. Especially because these plots are meant to entice children.
But even if they weren't, I, for one, dare not think myself strong enough to handle testing God to keep my faith intact after such exposure, or fighting Satan head-on myself. Scripture tells me that's prideful and foolish. I have enough problems trying to lead a holy life and resisting Satan's subtle attacks on my faith and love for Christ, let alone his blatant and well-packaged ones.
You make much of the "exposure" issue in the context of being able to answer inquirers or opponents. I highly doubt you'd think it necessary to have "exposure" to pornography to equip yourselves to make a very strong case against viewing pornography. Would you? You don't always need to see something to know why it is wrong. You don't always need to watch something to know why it would deeply wound the heart of your Lord if you did. Knowing the general idea, generously supplied by the author and others in this instance, is more than sufficient to enable you to discern whether such books or movies are things God's children, of any age, should be reading or watching.
And for the record, Diane, I don't consider people blaspheming, insulting, dectracting from, abusing, or lying about God to be "disputable matters". Those actions, ideas, philosophies, and worldviews are just wrong, objectively wrong.
None of this is to say Pullman is a write-off, by the way. Some of the worst blasphemers and persecuters of Christ and His Church have later repented and become strong Christians. Like the Apostle Paul! Let us pray for Pullman's salvation, and that of the whole world, instead of entertaining ourselves with his lies. If he has such God-given talent to write as people claim, God can use his abilities to entertain and edify people with truth, instead.
76. Mandi said the following at 9:50 PM on Oct 30:
k.,
I don't think it's too delusional to say that humanity will not be dragging 6 million Jews and 8 million non-Jews out of their homes in a short period of time, in a small geographical area, to be split up, gassed, thrown into ovens, or otherwise systemically murdered anytime soon. At least non *born* human beings. Sorry, but you just can't argue from the extreme like that to make a point. We have lived to *see* the results of widespread acceptance of the ideas in that book. That book is now recognized as evil, by most people, if not just for the awful results came of it's author's rule.
You just can't compare something that's had such evil fruit, and that's so blatantly racist, to "just a story" that's been described here as enticing, excellently written, gripping fiction.
When I was in university, I had a hard time finding copies of Margaret Sanger's writing, which are racist, classist, and otherwise eugenic in the extreme, but I did. I sought out her work to prove the eugenic, racist, classist, hateful roots and motivations behind the abortion movement for a paper I was writing. But those works rank up there with Mein Kampf: so absolutely over the top evil, it's hard to miss it -- AND they were not specifically written to trash my Christian faith. Had they been, I wouldn't have read them. Pullman's work is. He says it is. Therefore, there's no reason to read it if you love the Lord and believe what the Bible says about Truth, lies, Satan, antichrists, and overconfidence in oneself against sin.
JB, offered that God was not in a panic about these books. I'd suggest He's mightily grieved by the number of people who will be led away from His eternal Kingdom about this, even on my flimsy understanding of the Scriptures and His plan for salvation, anyway. But it's certainly a great way for you to avoid making an actual counter-argument to the points your detractors have made, by just belitting them.
77. Chris Krycho said the following at 11:23 PM on Oct 30:
Ted,
Apologies. I did not mean for the post to come across the way it did, and to be honest I probably should have edited it a bit before posting it. It seems to all flow together as one coherent strain of thought, but it really wasn't. I misunderstood your position: it seemed to me you were arguing that we should not read this book, period. I was mistaken, as that was not what you were saying. Apologies.
I do believe that many Christians who are (1) adults and (2) in situations such that they are called on frequently to deal with topics of this sort have a responsibility to at the very least be familiar with the basis of Pullman's works and in many cases even to have read them so as to be able to say, "No, here is where this goes wrong; here is the error."
To be fair, I think you strawmanned me back a bit. :-P I wasn't in any sense trying to defend the books, or to say you're not a thinker - I know you are from personal experience, and I very much appreciate that (though we of course occasionally disagree). I was commenting on what I saw as the appalling unwillingness to engage and critique these works by almost all Christians. Colson has condemned these books roundly - and advocated that we be familiar with them, so as to be ready to make a defense.
Certainly I am not saying (and this is where I think you made a Strawman back :p ) that we need to blindly accept whatever the world throws at us, nor that we ought to read this for entertainment. Nor am I saying that most Christians should read this. Most adults should be familiar with it, and I think many can and should read it, not to entertain (which you'll note was never part of my argument) but to understand.
My initial response was mostly to your comment that we have to stop thinking of this stuff as innocuous literature and see it as intentional deception. I agree in the first part: it is not innocuous (nor is any literature), but the second was where I disagreed with you; and there only because this is true of many works we still deign worth reading. What makes this one particularly different? [I'm not planning on watching the movie by the way, and I'll probably borrow the books from a library: one significant element of my media discernment is what I choose to put my money towards... interestingly, like a "boycott" but one based on personal decision, not Christian community "enforcement" (which is not what you were advocating, I understand).] Please understand, I meant a clear transition before my paragraph dealing with the absence of thinker in evangelicalism, and I didn't write it properly, thus implying I meant you: I did not. Again, my apologies.
Mandi - you're saying that Nietzsche isn't filled with considerable amounts of falsehood, and intentionally? Nietzsche may have recognized the consequences of "killing God" but that didn't make him any less the atheist or the humanist philosopher. That Steinbeck wasn't a person whose works are filled with humanist sentiment? Yet both are worth reading because of the quality of their thought, the fact that they did point out some true things, and their incredible influence on the thought of those around us. Likewise with Pullman, at least on the last count, and possibly the second. (Not that he's anywhere near the level of Steinbeck or Nietzsche.) Just because a person's work has much falsehood is not a universal reason not to read it. It is a reason to read it very critically, in some people's cases. (I probably will, because the circles I run in often end up with dialogue about these things, and I need to be able to be - not relevant, as some have suggested I am claiming a need for - conversant.)
Most of us probably should not read these books. There is no point. We should read the reviews of others who have taken time to study them for us, and spend time thinking about the issues they pose for us. That is the work of any good apologist (which I believe we are all called to be). But please ponder before you put your money to support a man whose stated goal is to destroy Christianity.
[Ted, I think we're in closer agreement than either of us thought. :-) ]
78. James said the following at 12:04 AM on Oct 31:
I'm with Mandi here. Pullman words on why he wrote those books caused my stomach to knot up....much like the subject of abortion whenever that comes up. Sorry for the parallel, but this is a true observation of my own body's physical reaction to those things. And yes, I see both as equally sickening.
I am a writer, by hobby and partially by trade (I'm a systems engineer: doc management, maintenance, and creation are part of the job), and I can say that what a writer INTENDS when he writes a work is INCREDIBLY important in discerning the meaning behind such things. The worldview an author brings to the table in his works ALWAYS is exhibited and infused in his work.
Pullman's satan-hardened heart is clearly shown if those who are Pullman-detractors who have read the books are correct (I say this because I have not read the series....yet. I will check out from the library, NOT buy them), and this really should be dead on CLEAR to you folks.
People, there's a world of difference between reading this stuff, reading tripe like Dawkin's book (one that recieved the review from an ACTUAL philosopher that said, "I would describe this as sophmoric, but that would be unfair to sophomores"), and reading Plato or Aristotle. Respectively you see an increase in those seeking Truth. Pullman knows it and hates it and wants to bring people away from it. Dawkins doesn't buy it and thinks folks should buy his view, and the philosophers of ancient greece were trying to figure out truth.
It's Pullman's works we should stay away from. There are a select few who, I say, should expose themselves to such stuff but in order to help inform the rest of us of the poison. I do leave it up to the conscience as to whether or not YOU should read this stuff. But, remember that this series was targeted for KIDS. Children and teens, who are almost always notably lacking in their discernment...Christian or not, shouldn't read this stuff AT ALL. At best it'll give them indigestion. At worst, it could cause a severe stunting of the child's spiritual growth as he goes off after other gods for a time (for those kids already saved). Expose yourself to the danger if you decide to, but do NOT endorse this for kids and teens....PERIOD. That kind of thing is included in the statement about what happens to those who lead his flock astray.
79. JB said the following at 12:51 AM on Oct 31:
Philip Pullman's theology/philosophy/cosmology is wrong. But, you know what, it's instructively wrong. There's a nun who turns from her faith because she thinks Christianity is about denying all the pleasures of this life. There's a church that doesn't know anything about salvation and suppresses all dissent because it thinks it needs to protect the authority of its god. There are several characters who struggle with a conflict between their personal desires and their obligations to those they love.
These are things worth thinking about. Understanding where Pullman goes wrong allows us to see why we are right. Seeing Pullman's misinterpretation of our faith allows us to clarify that faith. Seeing where Pullman gets things right is instructive as well.
If you're too busy to engage the text that way, fine. If you're not up for that kind of intellectual work, that's cool too. But why condemn those of us who are?
I wonder how some of the commenters get through life only reading things they know they wholeheartedly agree with beforehand. If it's even possible, it sounds really boring.
80. Sheridan said the following at 2:21 AM on Oct 31:
This kinda subject has been tense since Harry Potter and Davinci Code.
Firstly, lets chill with the 'Godliness rating'.
For those who take the stance 'I am only reading these materials to be informed' lets just see what you really said:
CANADIAN BOY
So, yeah, I love the books, and I wholeheartedly recommend them to anyone who likes a good fantasy novel. It's gripping, it's emotional and it's exciting. Oh, and it has talking armoured polar bears.
JB
I really enjoyed the books. They're like what you would get if CS Lewis had been a huge fan of Nietzsche.
and I cant go on copying and pasting all the comments on here from people happily admitting they ENJOYED reading this book.
Hmmmmm....just to be informed huh?
And Gene,
you said:
'More to my point, a good general always wants to know what the other side is thinking. How in the world are we to know that if we don't read what they're writing?'
in the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve originally only knew GOOD. and that was the way God wanted it to stay.
notice what the devil used to draw them in:
"You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman. "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.
So basically, Adam and Eve decided that they wanted to know what the 'other side was doing'.
Did it do them any service?
Do we really need to know what the devil is doing on the other side of the fence?? I think most of us can see the outworkings of it anyway. lets not choose to jump the fence just to get a better view!
81. Naomi said the following at 2:56 AM on Oct 31:
The book has explicit anti-Christian comments such as saying Christianity is a very "convincing mistake."
I am myself interested in the film because it was said that they want to "soften" its anti-religious sentiments.
Still, children easily believe. The faith of a little child is priceless. I wouldn't encourage them to read this book but I can't bar them from it either.
God is real. I will just state this simple fact.
82. Jo said the following at 3:40 AM on Oct 31:
Xeres - YES, I agree with you 100%.
83. Andrew R. (aka Canadian Boy) said the following at 7:39 AM on Oct 31:
Mandi (et al)-
I read the books when I was not a Christian. They were the beginning of my pathway to finding God. I read them again when I was a Christian. I lost nothing of my faith- in fact, I'd say it was strengthened because I was able to recognize the lies that Pullman created.
So please don't tell me what I, as a Christian, should not be reading, especially when you know nothing about me.
"I was not judging people, but actions: i.e., lack of love for the most gracious Redeemer"
Thank you for judging my love for Jesus. Funny, I thought only God Himself was able to do that.
84. Loris said the following at 8:25 AM on Oct 31:
The danger of these books' philosophies is why PARENTS should read them before their kids find them in a library or a friend's house. I've seen the movie trailers and they look very attractive. There are going to be a lot of children begging to see the movies and not understanding why they won't be allowed to unless their parents know what the plotline contains and can explain their reservations to the child. Just saying "No, it's bad." without giving a kid a reason makes you look heavy-handed and unreasonable to a child. And if the child doesn't believe you know what you're talking about and goes and reads the books behind your back, then you are going to have to do a lot of recovering ground. I hate to assume Christian children can be so manipulative, but I'm speaking from experience. I was an inquisitive and stubborn kid myself. I know that when my parents told me about something I wanted to read or see and it was obvious they had checked it out thoroughly beforehand, I was able to accept the "Not until you're older and here's why." Their approach helped me to respect their rules because I knew they had a good reason for what they required and they were always willing to tell me what the reason was.
So no, there is no need to indiscriminately let your kids read/watch anything, but we are all extremely influenced by media and trends, like it or not. If something looks attractive, a kid will want it, and Christian parents have a responsibility to check things out ahead of time. But in my mind, just hearing that something is bad is not good enough. Children have a hard time accepting generalities when you are witholding something they want. But if you are able to cite specific examples, that will build your children's trust in you. Not to mention if you have non-Christian friends who are enthralled by these books and upcoming movies, you have a chance to discuss it with them and an opening to share the gospel.
85. Heather said the following at 8:43 AM on Oct 31:
"1Be imitators of God, therefore, as dearly loved children 2and live a life of love, just as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us as a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God.
3But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God's holy people. 4Nor should there be obscenity, foolish talk or coarse joking, which are out of place, but rather thanksgiving. 5For of this you can be sure: No immoral, impure or greedy person—such a man is an idolater—has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.[a] 6Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of such things God's wrath comes on those who are disobedient. 7Therefore do not be partners with them."
If we are to imitate God, how does supporting such anti-God books/movies fall into that category? By supporting such, does't that in the long run become partners with them?
86. Andrew R. (aka Canadian Boy) said the following at 8:53 AM on Oct 31:
Sheridan:
I never said I read it just to be informed. In fact, pretty much all of my posts explicitly state how much I enjoyed the books. So don't make a straw man and rebutt something I never said.
Also, you said: "Do we really need to know what the devil is doing on the other side of the fence?? I think most of us can see the outworkings of it anyway. lets not choose to jump the fence just to get a better view!"
First law of warfare: know thy enemy.
87. JB said the following at 9:10 AM on Oct 31:
Sheridan,
I don't see giving a book a critical reading and enjoying it as mutually exclusive. Isn't it part of the fun of reading to really engage a text, to pick it apart and find what you like and what you don't, and investigate where the author is coming from and what she's doing? At least, I don't think it's a bad way to pass the time. In Pullman's books, by and large it's the form which is irreligious, not the content. That makes it easier to enjoy the story while questioning the context of the action that Pullman chose to write about. If it was a list of 101 blasphemies, I agree that engagement and entertainment might be mutually exclusive though.
Mandi,
Clearly you shouldn't read the books if you're really convinced they'll lead you way from the faith. I'm just saying that I don't think an adult giving the books a critical reading is in danger of such a thing. Pullman is a good writer, sure, but he's not superhumanly convincing or anything. Make your own choice, by all means. I just ask that you respect the ability of others to make other choices as well. You seem to imply that we're all much more susceptible to opposing ideas than I think is the case. If Pullman's work posed such mortal peril, surely we'd all be atheists by now just by virtue of everything else we encounter in our society by accident.
88. Diane said the following at 12:29 PM on Oct 31:
Mandi-
Allow me to explain. Your post(s) carry a tone which perhaps isn't true to your verbal tone if we were, say, having this conversation in a Starbucks. Much of internet conversation is misunderstood because of this disability. Please forgive me if I mistook a stridency in your post which was not in your heart.
With that said, you seem very passionate about this as we should be with our convictions. We should not ever violate our conscience, as I've learned, because that area of conviction might be a unique area where God is at work. This is not subjectivity or relativism. There are some issues which are explicit in scripture and we must agree on. Then there are disputable matters (alcohol, dancing, music, movies, etc.) I know I probably have areas in my life which are sin for me because of unique conviction and you might not see it as sin because of your freedom in Christ. Can we agree on this truth?
I want for us to have a conversation among believers about what is permissible and/or beneficial without saying that there is NO WAY a believer can watch/listen to/read/drink and be "in Christ." I believe that this book series and movie is such an issue. You say,
"Sorry, but this should be a no-brainer. It is incredibly disturbing that this kind of a debate is happening between Christians. Especially because these plots are meant to entice children."
It obviously is NOT a no brainer. There seem to be plenty of healthy, fruitful "brains" here seeking after Christ, walking the same line between the godly, permissible, beneficial in this info-media-saturated culture. You said it is incredibly disturbing that we are having this conversation amongst believers? Oh my goodness. Not only is that naive, it defeats whatever purpose you have in swaying hearts and minds away from the evil of this series! Why should we not have this discussion amongst believers? What of the younger in Christ who need discipling? What of the lost who need to come to the end of their assumptions, deeply rooted in philosophy they gleaned from media they digest? Who can they talk to? When Francis Schaeffer opened the doors to L'Abri and kids who were caught up in the lifestyle and spirit of the age, do you think he said that there is no discussion/debate on this matter? Or did he listen to Led Zeppelin (highly involved in occult)and read the books influential at that time and watch the movies with blatant philosophical statements being made in them? This was part of his whole apologetic approach. No, I believe we need to ALWAYS have debates like this as long as we are on this earth. I do not think it is fruitless.
"And for the record, Diane, I don't consider people blaspheming, insulting, dectracting from, abusing, or lying about God to be "disputable matters". Those actions, ideas, philosophies, and worldviews are just wrong, objectively wrong."
I, for one, never said that these were innocent, that children should read them, that we should enjoy them, and/or not read/watch with an eye trained in discerning truth from error. (although there is, in my own mind, nothing wrong with thinking the cinematography of a film is great without approving of the message) My aim in possibly viewing the film is the same is, let's say, Ravi Zacharias, Lewis, or Schaeffer. This is not rooted in lust of the world but because I study these things/philosophies in light of the Holy WORD so as to equip others (particularly women) to have an intelligent answer to those around them. No, we aren't to watch, read, listen to EVERYTHING. Yes, we are to guard our hearts as the wellspring of life. But, some might have a calling to this ministry. Or, some might think it worthwhile to read DaVinci Code, or His Dark Materials, or watch "What Dreams May Come" or another "thinker" film...and most CERTAINLY those which are aimed at our most vulnerable if by any means to save some. We SHOULD read publications, criticisms, go to art galleries and musicals written by people saying SOMETHING. What are they saying? What are these people telling other people?
We need to be able to talk about this, particularly amongst believers.
89. Seth M said the following at 1:13 PM on Oct 31:
Matthew 10:16
I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.
James 4:7
Submit yourselves, then, to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you.
90. Jo said the following at 1:41 PM on Oct 31:
I really don't like it when people just quote scripture in these comments, without explaining the point they're making. Maybe it's just me, but I find it quite infuriating. :/
91. Diane said the following at 2:10 PM on Oct 31:
I do want to ask, though, to what degree to we exercise our Christian veto power? I ask this under the assumption that we agree all media-- whether print, film or canvas--has an underlying worldview. Do we split hairs when it comes to anti-God philosophy in the movies we watch? I mean, do we accept the neo-eastern mysticism of Star Wars but not HDM? Do we watch the sorcery of Gandalf and the pagan-mythological characters in Narnia and not approve of Harry Potter? (I am aware of the distinctly Christian base in both LOTR and CoN. But, non believers get into the fantasy of these works for entirely different reasons. Is that reckless of these Christians to write such fiction? See the movie, "Ringers" for examples.) I am really trying to get to the root of this. All non-Christian worldviews are just as insidious as Pullman's (perhaps even more so) overt anti-Christianity as it ALL detracts from God's glory and reality of TRUTH. Do we just avoid media altogether? No, we would seek an alternative, possibly from Lifeway bookstore or Christian radio. But, did you know that many CCM artists have heretical views? (Oneness, modalists, etc.) Did you know that many titles being sold at Lifeway and the like are suspect as well? I am just wondering to what degree we take this. Where IS the line? This is a sincere question. My husband and I talk about this quite a bit, so I am interested in your responses. Let's try to be consistent.
92. Sheridan said the following at 5:37 PM on Oct 31:
Canadian boy...You should add on to your last statement perhaps?
Know thy enemy whilst really enjoying his literature and recommending it to other people.
I know what your trying to say in the sense that it helps to know the battle plan of the other side...but do you really think that the Allies in WWII were saying to each other, 'Hey check this out, dude how good is Hitler's battle plan? the guy is a genius! yeah sure he's killing heaps of Jews, but at least he has some great imagination!'
I think not.
there is a big difference in knowing the enemy's battle plan, and loving it.
93. Seth M said the following at 8:57 PM on Oct 31:
Just for you Jo...
Matthew 10:16
I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.
What I meant by that was that we need to have knowledge about the subject at hand in the sense that we should know what it is and wether it is or is not in accordance with what the bible teaches. That said I don't need to read a book blatently portraying God as evil to learn about what atheism says and is. We are to be innocent in the sense that a child is innocent, that doesn't however mean ignorance.
James 4:7
Submit yourselves, then, to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you.
Someone further up in this hailstorm of comments made a comment about running from Satan he is to flee from us not the other way around.
94. Jo said the following at 12:22 AM on Nov 1:
Thank you Seth M. :)
95. Christina said the following at 9:19 AM on Nov 2:
There is only one temptation mentioned in the entire bible that we are given command to literally flee from - sexual sin =p
Now, there have been some really good points here, and honestly I think a blog on the subject would be in order!
Someone mentioned wondering what is the line between being careful of what you fill your mind with as in Philippians 4:8 and being shrewd as in Matthew 10:16?
What drives that discernment? Simply wisdom? I know its wrong to just go out and fill your head with whatever secular culture puts out just to be "culturally informed", but I also agree that it is necessary to know what we are dealing with and just as unwise to shut out the world and cling to your bible in the vaccuum you've created...
So, Ted...do you have any input?
96. Ann said the following at 8:52 AM on Nov 16:
A little lie in truth is just as dangerous as a straight up lie. Consider this senerio...
Some siblings came home from school one day very excited a/b a particular movie. They told their father a/b it and how it had a good rating by all the most popular stars and all their friends were going to the theater to see it. Sure it had a few cuss words and only took God's name in vain 2 times, but they would just ignore that. Several scenes in the movie showed girls dressed very immodestly and another scene encouraged disobedience to authority. The father said he didn't want them to be influenced by those "bad traits" portrayed in the movie. But the kids insisted that they had been raised very well and would not affect them in any way, b/c they were mature enough. The father told the kids to give him 24 hours to think a/b it. The kids knew they had won! They went away sure that this weekend they would be in the theater w/ their friends. The following day after school, the kids were surprised to find their Dad home early and in the family room sitting on the couch with a plate of brownies on the coffee table. He instructed them to sit down. They did and asked what was up. He said he had reached a decision a/b them seeing the movie. The Dad proudly described how he had gotten off work early to come home and make brownies for his kids. He had used the best brand of brownie mix, fresh eggs and was extra careful in his measurements. The stove was cleaned before he baked them at the exact temperature instructed. The alloted time for cooking had passed and out came steaming plump brownies! The kids were grateful, yet confused. "Dad what is your point in all this?" they inquired. He said all you have to do is eat one of my brownies and you can go to the movie. The siblings looked at each other and then their Dad and asked what the catch was. He said, "oh, I forgot to mention that there is a tablespoon of dog poop in the mix. Don't worry though, I mixed it in really well, and the high temperature at which I baked it would have probably killed any bacteria in it. It won't kill you. You probably won't even taste it!" The kids all got up and walked away. Moral is: A little bad spoils all that is good. A little lie cancels truth. The only exception is the Truth(Jesus) which can cancel and clean from all lies.
Also another point to ponder is"not offending the weaker brother". what might be ok for me and safe, might lead a weaker brother or sister into sin. It's a hard responsibility. think on it. A friend reminded me that we are to be holy as He is holy. How does viewing this movie or other ungodly movies becoming holy?
97. Ann said the following at 9:13 AM on Nov 16:
What we believe about God determines the way we live. ~ "You have forgotten me and trusted in lies."Jeremiah 13:25
God never intended that we know evil by experiencing it for ourselves. ~ "I want you to be wise about what is good, and innocent about what is evil." Rom.16:19
98. Diane said the following at 7:33 AM on Dec 4:
Sorry to dredge this back up again...but Al Mohler's treatment of the subject is both illuminating and instructive.
http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=1065
I have to say, having not read or (obviously) seen the movie yet, my opinion of Christians ENJOYING this film has changed. I see nothing in this that a believer should enjoy (aside from cold, artistic merit)having a solid, biblical understanding of truth. Having read Dr. Mohler's article, I still want to understand the worldview presented, but, clearly, this is sinister stuff! I would even say that IF Pullman writes well, he is borrowing talent and time from His maker he HATES...and that makes his life and message even more heartbreaking. I like what Mohler said about taking a deep breath and realizing that this will not topple the Christian faith at ALL. But, let's stay engaged and not hole ourselves up in fear.
Al Mohler's radio broadcast on it talks about how he does NOT do boycotts and that we are playing right into Pullman's hands BY our resistance and fear of these books and not joining the discussion of ideas. Now, I have to agree about this...have we cloistered ourselves too much? We have an ANSWER to these things! Ahh, so many thoughts...so little time.
I think I am going to buy the books this week.