"But it's just FICTION!..."

[WanderAimlessly]

I think that the poster was saying that she should have filed a complaint because it wasn’t up to the store clerk to dissuade her from buying a book and giving her money to the store.

Checks again…Yep still a HE

 

[TomPiltoff]

Do you know of any Christians saying Star Trek is sin? I mean, I know this is just an example, but there’s a big difference between cartoons, aliens on TV (we all know which actors get to play them on Star Trek, for example) and what we believe to be actual facts as Christians. Unless you accept the caricature that all Christians go off on seeing anything that even ever so slightly might impact their faith. I’m referring to adults here, not kids.

I don’t know many Christians.

But I see Christians freaking out about Harry Potter, The DaVinci Code and many other harmless things, so I wouldn’t at all be surprised to see a Star Trek boycott.

 

[Joe_5859]

I don’t know many Christians.

But I see Christians freaking out about Harry Potter, The DaVinci Code and many other harmless things, so I wouldn’t at all be surprised to see a Star Trek boycott.

Not to be flip, but if you don’t know many Christians, how do you see them freaking out?

As you can tell from this other thread, there are many Christians who are not freaking out about Harry Potter, but actually like and defend the books.

The Da Vinci Code is another story. I think it’s naive to call it “harmless”. It’s spreading a very false view of history and many people look at it as fact (because that’s what the “Fact” page at the start of the novel says…it leaves the reader with the impression that this is historical fiction).

In the Potter Poll thread, you said you were an atheist, so I guess I can understand why you might think it would be harmless. “The Da Vinci Code” puts forward a very false picture of Jesus, whom we hold to be the Son of God and Savior of the world. I hope you can at least appreciate, if not agree, that this would be more than slightly problematic to us Christians.

For us, there is a lot at stake: the salvation of souls.

 

[TomPiltoff]

Not to be flip, but if you don’t know many Christians, how do you see them freaking out?

I watch the news, I post here.

As you can tell from this other thread, there are many Christians who are not freaking out about Harry Potter, but actually like and defend the books.

I never presumed or said that ALL Christians are freaking out.

The Da Vinci Code is another story. I think it’s naive to call it “harmless”. It’s spreading a very false view of history and many people look at it as fact (because that’s what the “Fact” page at the start of the novel says…it leaves the reader with the impression that this is historical fiction).

As I’ve said before, I wouldn’t consider it a big loss to my religion of somebody was swayed by watching a movie or reading a fictional book.

Someone else on this board pointed out that your faith should indeed be tested.

In the Potter Poll thread, you said you were an atheist, so I guess I can understand why you might think it would be harmless.

And why is that? Because I, as an atheist, am less of a moral person than you?

“The Da Vinci Code” puts forward a very false picture of Jesus, whom we hold to be the Son of God and Savior of the world. I hope you can at least appreciate, if not agree, that this would be more than slightly problematic to us Christians.

For us, there is a lot at stake: the salvation of souls.

I can understand why you wouldn’t like The DaVinci Code, but being vocal about it is one thing. Actually believing it shouldn’t be available is another.

 

[jmcrae]

I know that when I point out that something is fiction, I am trying to say, “Look at the genre.” Harry Potter fits into a certain genre of English literature, alongside Peter Pan, Merlin, and Grimm’s Fairy Tales, none of which are intended to be read as something for kids to try to imitate.

I don’t care for the Da Vinci Code, because I don’t happen to like that particular genre of fiction - I find it annoying. I don’t like The Gospel According to Corax, either, for the same reason. My husband happens to like this stuff, though, so it does come into the house.

 

[boppaid]

Excellent points, I agree completely. Stay strong despite attacks.

In addition to everything you wrote, I would add this: why would we willingly and avidly engage in “entertainment” that is forbidden by God (witchcraft/sorcery, defiling the holiness of Jesus in suggesting He married Mary Magdalene, etc.)?

Just out of curiosity (because I don’t believe Jesus married Mary Magdalene), why would the fact that he was married defile his holiness? Married people can’t be holy? I don’t see the connection y ou are making.

 

[deb1]

Checks again…Yep still a HE

Sorry.

 

[deb1]

I

I can understand why you wouldn’t like The DaVinci Code, but being vocal about it is one thing. Actually believing it shouldn’t be available is another.

You and I agree. Very few Christians call for an outright banning of material. I think that most people have learned that boycotting something only draws more attention to it and fuels people’s curiousity.

I do think that discussing this and attempting to dissuade other Christians from reading or using the offending product, song, or book is the most reasonable course. But that is very different then banning the material.

 

[TomPiltoff]

You and I agree. Very few Christians call for an outright banning of material. I think that most people have learned that boycotting something only draws more attention to it and fuels people’s curiousity.

In a roundabout way, that’s good.

But I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t also thinking ‘but shouldn’t the first reason be that it’s WRONG to expect things that offend your particular religion to be unavailable to everybody?’

 

[deb1]

In a roundabout way, that’s good.

But I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t also thinking ‘but shouldn’t the first reason be that it’s WRONG to expect things that offend your particular religion to be unavailable to everybody?’

Yes. I agree. But we can still use reasoned debate to convince people not to read the material. We can also discuss why the material offends us or make suggestions that other Christians not read it.

 

[TomPiltoff]

Yes. I agree. But we can still use reasoned debate to convince people not to read the material. We can also discuss why the material offends us or make suggestions that other Christians not read it.

Of course.

 

[historybrat]

Yes. I agree. But we can still use reasoned debate to convince people not to read the material. We can also discuss why the material offends us or make suggestions that other Christians not read it.

I have no problem discussing the merits or lack there of any book. I’m an avid reader and I usually find my next book by talking to other people and finding out what they like or don’t like. What bothers me is I’ve noticed on this forum that many times (although by no means all the time), when someone dissents and says they like a book, people attack them, start calling books evil, suggest banning them, say that the person is corrupting children, etc. So far on this thread nobody has (sorry that I jumped the gun earlier )

If you want to debate and give good reasons why I shouldn’t read a book that fine, but ultimately its my decision. Fiction is just fiction. It’s neither good (in a moral sense) or evil. In the end it really is just fiction. It’s only what we do with it that gives it character and meaning. Fiction in and of itself cannot damage our faith, only we can do that. Fiction cannot cause kids to believe in witchcraft, only we can do that.

Historybrat

 

[deb1]

I have no problem discussing the merits or lack there of any book. I’m an avid reader and I usually find my next book by talking to other people and finding out what they like or don’t like. What bothers me is I’ve noticed on this forum that many times (although by no means all the time), when someone dissents and says they like a book, people attack them, start calling books evil, suggest banning them, say that the person is corrupting children, etc. So far on this thread nobody has (sorry that I jumped the gun earlier )

If you want to debate and give good reasons why I shouldn’t read a book that fine, but ultimately its my decision. Fiction is just fiction. It’s neither good (in a moral sense) or evil. In the end it really is just fiction. It’s only what we do with it that gives it character and meaning. Fiction in and of itself cannot damage our faith, only we can do that. Fiction cannot cause kids to believe in witchcraft, only we can do that.

Historybrat

Well, I think that some fiction could influence people for evil. I read Mien Kempf to try and understand why the German people followed Hitler. i still didn’t understand(seemed poorly written to me) but the book did have a very horrible influence.

Also, if the author is evil then the reasoning that he will use while writing the novel will be evil. I don’t know if that makes the book itself evil, but certainly the ideas that the author tries to convey might be evil.

Another example…a few years back there was a female author trying to get a book published that claimed that kids were not harmed by pedophilia. Public outrage kept that book from being published. This was a nonfiction book but if the same author used those claims to write a fictional book in which children are enjoying being sexually abused, I think that I would call that evil.

 

[TomPiltoff]

Well, I think that some fiction could influence people for evil. I read Mien Kempf to try and understand why the German people followed Hitler. i still didn’t understand(seemed poorly written to me) but the book did have a very horrible influence.

Also, if the author is evil then the reasoning that he will use while writing the novel will be evil. I don’t know if that makes the book itself evil, but certainly the ideas that the author tries to convey might be evil.

But the biggest lesson we learn from Hitler is not to be so easily swayed by rhetoric.

 

[timotheos]

Fiction is very influential. An entire generation of people have a seed planted in their head …

This is a great thread.

Yeah, fiction is influential. It seems that fiction is written with a primary purpose - to entertain; although it may secondarily also educate. The really popular stuff is more likely to be purely entertainment, thus making gobs of money for the author and publisher (really, isn’t this the main reason for writing?).

So what will sell? Whatever people will buy. Some will be good, some bad, some garbage.

Fiction can be influential on a intellectual level, but I think most of the popular fiction written these days to entertain does not strengthen so much as dull the intellect. So while I agree reading a book about wizards is not likely to make one believe he/she can wave a wand and turn a schoolmate into a toad, it’s equally unlikely the reader gains any new insights into humanity or morality either. Mostly it’s junk food for the brain, a sugar high, leaving one with a craving for more, and not likely to make you any smarter in the process.

• Tim

 

[deb1]

But the biggest lesson we learn from Hitler is not to be so easily swayed by rhetoric.

No. The biggest lesson is that people are sheep, just like Jesus said. Sheep will follow their leader right off a cliff, so will many humans.

There were some studies done in the sixties that involved the willingness of subjects to shock another person based on being persuaded to by a authority figure. Two-thirds of those tested were willing to get into the dangerous level of voltage if an authority figure told them to, even if the subject showed discomfort in obeying.

 

[TomPiltoff]

No. The biggest lesson is that people are sheep, just like Jesus said. Sheep will follow their leader right off a cliff, so will many humans.

There were some studies done in the sixties that involved the willingness of subjects to shock another person based on being persuaded to by a authority figure. Two-thirds of those tested were willing to get into the dangerous level of voltage if an authority figure told them to, even if the subject showed discomfort in obeying.

Yeah, that’s exactly the point I was making.

Do not be easily swayed by rhetoric = do not follow blindly.

 

[edwest2]

There is no “one size fits all” way to look at this situation. As a writer, I am in a cooperative relationship with my reader. I have to have an intention in what I write. Words need to be chosen, ideas needed to be presented a certain way.

Writing just to make gobs of money still involves intention. And the public expects a certain level of quality. If an artist draws a hundred bad images, no one is going to buy them. It’s a myth that an author can get his book self-published and that somehow means he has learned his craft. If he was a bad writer before, just having a book in print doesn’t change that.

Look at TV. Desperate Housewives is in my top three list for really dysfunctional, fictional TV. If those people were real, I’d run as fast as I could from all of them. And some people who lack discernment and a sense of Christian morality, find this sort of thing entertaining? It’s like watching a series of train wrecks in slow motion. Yech!

So, yes, it does affect people to some degree. The degree changing depending on what beliefs the reader has to begin with.

God bless,
Ed

 

[He_Man]

I have no problem discussing the merits or lack there of any book. I’m an avid reader and I usually find my next book by talking to other people and finding out what they like or don’t like. What bothers me is I’ve noticed on this forum that many times (although by no means all the time), when someone dissents and says they like a book, people attack them, start calling books evil, suggest banning them, say that the person is corrupting children, etc. So far on this thread nobody has (sorry that I jumped the gun earlier )

If you want to debate and give good reasons why I shouldn’t read a book that fine, but ultimately its my decision. Fiction is just fiction. It’s neither good (in a moral sense) or evil. In the end it really is just fiction. It’s only what we do with it that gives it character and meaning. Fiction in and of itself cannot damage our faith, only we can do that. Fiction cannot cause kids to believe in witchcraft, only we can do that.

Historybrat

You can replace fiction with nuclear weapons, child pornography, and alcohol for an alchoholic. I doubt you’ll get many supporters on any of those three.You are arguing that the problem is with humans, not human creations. The Church teaches though we have a responsibility to protect ourselves and others FROM the world. Why would they do this if the problems were all internal ones?

 

[He_Man]

Yeah, that’s exactly the point I was making.

Do not be easily swayed by rhetoric = do not follow blindly.

Your personal opionion aside, the notion that we humans have NO responsibility to protect each other from that which others cannot protect themselves is neither biblical, nor in line with Church teaching, which reduces its relevancy in this context.