DorkmanScott posted:I disagree with that assertion and/or that definition. To call something Satanic is to say that it actively and intentionally allies itself either with the philosophy or actual being of Satan. Just because something does not ally itself with Christianity -- even positions itself against it -- does NOT make that thing Satanic, particularly when it does not believe in God OR Satan. At the risk of Godwining myself, it's like saying anyone that is not Jewish is automatically a Nazi. There is a knee-jerk negative reaction to the notion of Satan and to say that anything not Christian is automatically Satanic creates an inappropriate pro-Christian bias in the conversation. Maybe it's just not Christian.
Jedi_Keiran_Halcyon posted:Anyone who sets themselves against Christianity is satanic in the sense that their attitude/actions are Satan-like. Anyone who sets themselves against Jewish people is Nazi-like, even if they don't call themselves a Nazi.
Jabba-wocky posted:That is, while DorkmanScott is correct in noting that not all things opposed to Christianity would necessarily meet the formal definition of "satanic" he leaves us with the implicit, but clearly nonsensical suggestion that we should somehow find any Christian opposition to anti-Christian material irrational, so long as it does not meet the aforementioned formal definition.
Jabba-wocky posted:In the second place, and perhaps most importantly we need to review the Christian objections to witchcraft. It is certainly not, as DorkmanScott suggests, ignorance
Jabba-wocky posted:The argument form most quarters, insofar as I have heard, is not that it is necessarily some crypto-Wiccan recruitment tool.
Jabba-wocky posted:Rather, people object to it for the same reason that minorities ask for more positive representation in the media, anti-drug groups discourage displaying smoking in feature films, and some people concerned with reducing childhood aggression campaign against video games. In each case, there is a common recognition that what our culture places value on has an impact on the life outlook of members of the society. While this impact is by no means uniform, the general trend can be observed that things portrayed in a positive light tend to be considered positive, over time. Thus, the concern here is that if the reader sympathizes with magic-using protagonists, one might expect that this could lead the child to take a less negative view of magic subsequently.
Jabba-wocky posted:Seeing as how, given what I've laid out above, such a viewpoint would be outside those taken by a wide majority of Christians, it is unsurprising that many Christians would have this objection. Or, more simply still (since, as one might rightly point out, both heroes and villains use magic in this series), if use of magic is seen as "normal" it would be difficult to simultaneously see it as harmful as, for instance, Paul seemed to preach. Thus, there is again a conflict of messages. For what it's worth, though, I do see some of the same problems with Lord Of the Rings.
