Ah, but the problem is that the Bible contains several warnings against exactly this. If you’re a literalist, then you’re faced with a big problem: either you admit that witches and sorcerers actually exist and have real magical powers, or you admit that the bible is giving you ultimately pointless repeated warnings against something that doesn’t exist in the first place. Indeed, “thou shall not covet” and taking the lords name in vain are both examples of belief in the mystical power of certain words and actions (the evil eye).
So many literalists find they HAVE to believe in at least some form of magic, usually explained as just a trick Satan uses (he’ll make things happen if you do this or that ritual).
Actually, I don't see the problem. There were plenty of cultures which had oracles and sorcerers. The Bible says not to consult them or practice any of their arts. Whether they actually work or not is irrelevant. The sections on witches and soothsayers essentially say 'Other people do this. As your God, I command you not to.'.
Whether a curse actually works is also irrelevant. If it does, than by casting one you've harmed another person out of anger or hatred. If it doesn't work, you've still acted with the intent to harm somebody.
BTW-
There are a few Dopers who’d disagree with the assertion that witchcraft does not exist. AFAIK Freyr has no proof that his prayers to Freyr(and presumably Freya, Odin and the rest of the Asgardians) have any real effect. However, I know that I have no proof that my prayers to Adonai(Elohim, Shadai, Elohey Avraham, etc) have any real effect.
Doc, I don’t think many sheeple are intellectually sophisticated enough to make the distinction you describe.
In my experience, they are more likely to think in the way that Apos was talking about.
Where I come from, Fundie churches prey on the undereducated. Someone who was never taught to think critically is way more susceptible to fall for the sensationalism of Xian glurge and Fundie Porn.
I have heard people say to me in all seriousness; “Satan is REAL.” I was at a loss when I heard this. What do you say when someone tells you that they actually believe there is a scarlet-skinned man with goat legs, horns and a goatee, making terrible things happen to kittens and babies and poking athiests, gays and abortion providers with a pitchfork?
A local paper that is published by a Fundie church actually attributed occurrences like car problems and feedback in the church stereo system to Satan. WTF!?!?!
With these people, the minute you say “magic” or “witchcraft”, they think “SATAN’S PLAYGROUND!” It’s an illogical, animal-brained, alarmist response. Their outrage is automatic.
What do you say when someone tells you that they actually believe there is a “scarlet-skinned man with goat legs, horns and a goatee, making terrible things happen to kittens and babies and poking athiests, gays and abortion providers with a pitchfork”? I have no idea. I’ve never known anyone who actually believed this. Even among the most fundamental of my friends. This is a strawman argument. “It’s just sooo ridiculous to believe in this guy with horns and a pitchfork. Ha ha ha! Of course these people are just too stupid for words.” But see, you’re the one equating Satan with that image. And you may find it ridiculous to believe in spirits or spiritual things at all, I don’t know. But please don’t make the assumption that just because someone believes in evil or an actual spirit of evil, or fallen angel, they automatically must believe in your picture of it. Most people are not that simple-minded, even fundamentalist Christians, believe it or not.
OK, thirdwarning, fair enough. But what about the NEXT paragraph that I wrote? You have to admit that blaming everything that goes wrong in your life on SATAN is extremely ridiculous.
I also saw a woman who claimed to have once been a witch. She was being interviewed on 100 Huntley Street, a Fundie television program here in Canada. She blamed things like her debt and eventual homelessness on Satan. As if some malevolent spirit would have anything to do with her spending habits, bank account, or mortgage. Puh-leeze.
It’s when Fundies start blaming material and secular problems on Satan that I begin rolling my eyes. You wanna blame the Prince Of Lies for your spiritual despondency? Your selfishness? Your doubt? Go ahead. But please don’t blame him for your stereo feedback, or the vapour lock in your Chevy, or your collection of Precious Moments figurines (although you might be onto something there).
And you know what, I do believe that some people are that simple-minded. Especially Fundies. I just can’t respect the intelligence of anyone who takes The Bible literally, or anyone who believes anything someone else tells them, without some critical thought.
As for believing in spirits and spiritual things, if you must know, I’m a witch. My spiritual practice involves a lot of introspection, study, and analysis. I do have respect for religion and spiritual practice in general (so please don’t lump me in with the group of people on this board who do not).
I had a debate with a Baptist fundie once (IRL) where it basically boiled down to him telling me that I couldn’t read the bible and not believe everything it said. </hijack of my own thread>
Thanks for all the great responses guys! This is the first time I’ve had a thread go multiple pages!
I dunno: if they don’t actually work then the warnings seem particularly shrill and pointless. Not all witchcraft is wishing nasty things on people: some of it is curing warts. And does this mean that the Bible thinks thall shalt not suffer to live a person who performs rituals that don’t work? If it’s all about bad thoughts and wishes, why not simply condemn bad thoughts and wishes? Why does it become worlds more dangerous when it involves burning incense? So I think you’re arguing uphill here. That clever semantic interpretation might make it work in modern days is hardly the point: it’s what the people believed who wrote the text that matters.
Hey, that’s fine, and they can argue that all they want, or not. I just think that it’s interesting that to most fundamentalists the Biblical seems to clearly imply that Harry Potter really could fly around on his broom. That you can convince yourself that’s not what it says is beside the point: what matters is that for a significant population, that IS what it implies.
Changing the appearance from a red guy with horns to a “spirit of evil” or a “fallen angel” is still just as stupid. The notion that there’s some evil anti-god plotting against humanity is just asinine and illogical on several levels.
Why did God create Satan? God is omniscient, right? So god knew Satan would be evil, right? So why create him?
If God hates Satan so much, why doesn’t he just get rid of him? He’s God, right? He’s omnipotent, right? So why doesn’t he just snap his fingers and make Satan disappear?
Why would Satan try to battle against an entity which he knows for a fact he can’t defeat? Why would he knowingly fight a futile war which will ultimately land him in the old lake of fire?
Why does Satan want “souls?” Why does he give a shit if humans get redeemed or not? Doing it to spite God would not be logical because God, being omniscient, already know who will be “saved” and who won’t and it’s really all up too God anyway, isn’t it? God can save whoever he wants, right? If he doesn’t want somebody to go to the fiery pit, he can just grab them and toss them into heaven, right?
It’s logically impossible for Satan to do anything against God’s will. God already knows everything that’s going to happen, and everything is going to happen as he willed it. God cannot be surprised or thwarted in anyway. Satan’s very creation and continued existence is purely because of God’s will. If Satan can’t do anything that isn’t God’s will, then Satan can’t be evil because God’s will can’t be evil…or can it?
I didn’t lump you in with anybody. I simply objected to you painting all Christian fundamental believers with the same brush. Of course there are some in that category who believe some quite silly things. I would imagine that applies to any group of people. There are atheists who believe that aliens have done medical experiments on them. I’m willing to bet that there might even be a witch or two out there who believes a few things that don’t necessarily reflect the best of the group. Doesn’t mean they are typical.
I don’t believe Satan/Lucifer/Prince of Lies/etc. has a finger in every single thing that goes wrong in people’s lives. For pete’s sake, the natural world has enough capacity to go haywire all on its own. And we as humans have more than enough ability to mess things up. We don’t usually need any help, and I’m sure he has more important things to do than mess with the wiring on my stereo.
What about all the GOOD things the books introduce children to? (loyalty, doing the right/noble thing etc… They don’t mention those do they, these religeous nuts.
Or you recognize that the Bible is giving you repeated warnings against relying on anything other than God. The point is, Christians are supposed to put their faith and their trust in God alone. Going to other sources for help is like denying the sovereign power of God. So whether those things actually do have power, or are just superstitions, they are not to be relied on, consulted, or used.
And if you’re a literalist, the presence of evil in the world is not a question. The presence of spiritual beings who would like to pull one away from God is also a literal interpretation. I don’t know that it’s a question of magical powers, but that they would turn you from reliance on God alone.
If one believes that only God is to be trusted, worshiped and followed, then relying on other means of supernatural activity would be wrong. Again, I don’t know of and have never met anyone who actually believes that children can learn to do the things that Harry and his friends do. The perception is that the books present a reliance on magic or other forms of supernatural power as a positive good. So they are possibly influencing children in a direction that is against the teachings of their faith. Many parents, not just Biblical literalists or Christian fundamentalists, prefer not to have their young children influenced unduly by ideas and attitudes the parents disapprove or disbelieve.
It’s my opinion that if you’ve raised your children correctly, you needn’t worry about them seeing things which you consider wrong, no matter how they’re presented. After all, when they get into the “real world” they’re going to see all sorts of immoral behavior around them, and most of it will be presented in a positive light. After all, no one would ever be tempted into using drugs if those who offered it to them said that it was terrible.
On the contrary, I see it as being beneficial. What better time to have a discussion about your family’s values than when seeing something which contradicts them? Asking a child, “What do you think about [that behavior]? What do you think the character should have done instead?” is much more beneficial than simply stating, “________ is wrong!” Actually getting a child to * think * about why a behavior is forbidden or harmful is much more effective than just issuing a proclamation.
My parents never censored my reading material or movies that I wanted to see. Occasionally, we’d chat about what I was reading or watching, and explored the ethics therein. We had some great discussions, which I found really enjoyable. In doing so, they taught me a far greater lesson than snatching a “bad” book from my hands could have. I read things that some parents would probably forbid their children, but my parents trusted in my judgement, and my ability to discern right from wrong because they had given me a good foundation.
Of course I’m aware that sex can be a recreational activity. Just plain fun, sometimes, in spite of the fact that our kids think we’re old. And obviously not everyone agrees that sex should be reserved for marriage. But so what? That is what I believe. And it’s what I teach my children. How could I do otherwise, when that would be outside my moral code?
But I do wonder where you got that part about blind adherence to a handful of laws. I never said that. The only thing I said was that I didn’t want my young children exposed to the totally opposite idea, put to them in a positive light. That doesn’t mean I haven’t explained to them why I believe as I do. Why I think it’s better to keep sex within marriage. What I think they will gain from it. And believe me, they are well aware, as they get older, that many other people disagree with that. I think you got the impression that I laid down the law and that was the end of the discussion. No. The discussion is ongoing, and adapts as they grow.
Of course I’m aware that sex can be a recreational activity. Just plain fun, sometimes, in spite of the fact that our kids think we’re old. And obviously not everyone agrees that sex should be reserved for marriage. But so what? That is what I believe. And it’s what I teach my children. How could I do otherwise, when that would be outside my moral code?
But I do wonder where you got that part about blind adherence to a handful of laws. I never said that. The only thing I said was that I didn’t want my young children exposed to the totally opposite idea, put to them in a positive light. That doesn’t mean I haven’t explained to them why I believe as I do. Why I think it’s better to keep sex within marriage. What I think they will gain from it. And believe me, they are well aware, as they get older, that many other people disagree with that. I think you got the impression that I laid down the law and that was the end of the discussion. No. The discussion is ongoing, and adapts as they grow.
Okay, sorry if this double posts, I can’t tell if it went through the first time.
