Harry Potter and the Bible: The Menace Behind the Magick by Richard Abanes

Harry Potter and the Bible: The Menace Behind the Magick Reviews

• 
  Becky

  Ahh, right. Where to start... I have so much to say! I wish that you could all see my notebook. Aside from my atrocious handwriting, it is 12 full-size pages filled with my scribbled, jotted, many underlined thoughts, reactions and questions, as well as quotes, semi-quotes, references to quotes and page numbers for still more quotes.
  It's not pretty. Really. But it WAS necessary. So many of the things that I jotted down had me rolling my eyes, thinking "Is this guy SERIOUS?". I just read this entire book, and I still don't understand most of his claims, arguments, assumptions and conclusions. I like Harry Potter, so I am obviously one of the "undiscerning" readers mentioned in Douglas Groothuis's foreword, in which he proclaims that I am about to read a "rare voice of sanity, reason and biblical discernment" regarding the Harry Potter books. Hmm. Well. Good thing he hasn't started off by annoying me or alienating me as a reader... Oh. Oops.
  
  Anyway, offended by being called incapable of reason and insane before the book even starts, I still tried to read it objectively. From what I could see, Abanes's case comes down to several extremely repetitive points:
  
  1) The setting of the "real world" makes it difficult for kids to differentiate between fact and fiction.
  Apparently, because this is a fiction book that takes place in the United Kingdom where people actually live or can visit, it makes it nearly impossible for the reader to understand that it's not real. He makes reference to comments on message boards and letters (etc) which have kids saying things like "Wow! I wish I could do magic..." or "I wish I could go to Hogwarts..." and the like, and claims that these kids are dangerously close to becoming official occult followers. Which is utterly ridiculous and a huge logic leap. Kids whimsically wishing for something doesn't imply that they can't understand it's not real. I used to WISH I had a real My Little Pony to ride, but I didn't actually believe they WERE REAL. Kids know how mundane and normal and boring their life is. School. Homework. Bed. Repeat. They have no control over anything at this point - parents decide their lives. They just wish for some fun.
  
  And, kids are much, much smarter than they are given credit for, in my opinion, although apparently not in the author's. Abanes seems to think that kids who read and like something will then rush off to try it with no thought. And while that may be true of some people, it is untrue of most. He gives an example in his book (after talking about how wormwood is used in HP and is an actual ingredient in absinthe) of someone looking up a recipe for absinthe online, making it and getting sick. He writes it in such a way as to insinuate that the person who did this was somehow influenced by the wormwood mention in HP. Another big leap. He also seems to forget parents, even while writing a book geared toward them. It is a parent's responsibility to teach their children, not JK Rowling's.
  
  He goes on later in the book to say how Christian writers CS Lewis and JRR Tolkien both wrote fantasy stories involving magic, but these are OK because their magic is not HUMAN magic, and it is clearly in a fantasy world.
  
  2) The magic described and portrayed in HP is actually representative of the Occult, which is denounced repeatedly and harshly in the bible.
  Abanes's argument here seems to be that because JK Rowling researched and used real modern and historical practices, ideas, references, and substances (like wormwood above), as well as mythology and legend etc, that she is "thinly veiling" her belief in the occult, and not only introducing children to it, but grooming them towards it.
  His "biblical" definition of occultism is extraordinarily all-encompassing, and ranges from astrology to conversing with spirits as a medium. Anything, essentially, that tries to understand or influence the world or ourselves that is NOT Christian in nature or done for the glory of God, is defined as being of the occult, and therefore dangerous and evil. He references many passages in the bible which denounce occultism, but never answers the ever present "WHY?" question. But hey, rules are rules, and the rule-maker need not explain, right?
  
  Moving on, Abanes makes another huge leap in talking about the pets in HP, stating that they are familiars to their owners. Witches' familiars are defined here as a "low-level demon" in the assumed shape of an animal. He says, "Mrs. Norris, owned by the school's caretaker, exhibits some of the characteristics of a familiar. In Book III, Hermione gets her own familiar -- a cat named Crookshanks." He then quotes a renown Wicca practitioner, Starhawk, on the tradition of familiars, and then quotes a passage from "Witchcraft In England" which rehashes again what familiars are and confirms (again) the belief that witches used them in "the later centuries of [the:] witchcraft-belief". Abanes then says, "Obviously Harry and his friends are indeed making contact with the spiritual world." What? How is that obvious?
  
  Abanes did include a very small section each to explain Paganism, Wicca and Satanism. I think he kind of shot himself in the foot if he was trying to turn people away from these, though. He failed miserably at making them unattractive, and to be honest, actually succeeded in piquing my interest in learning even more about them. Pagan and Wicca followers have a "reverence for the Earth and all it's creatures, generally see all life as interconnected, and strive to attune one's self to the manifestation of this belief as seen in the cycles of nature." Ooooh! DANGER! DANGER! (Sorry, I couldn't resist.)
  I'm not going to go into the major points and details, but it is interesting, and I would recommend reading about them yourself. I did see a lot of my own "worldviews" represented in Paganism and Wicca, such as my relativism (a view that ethical truths depend on the individual or groups holding them -
  www.Merriam-Webster.com), which essentially means that what is good for me is not good for everyone else, and what is good for others may not be what is good for me. I'm OK with that. Abanes is not, and apparently has a problem with personal and private beliefs not in accordance with his own. He seems to feel that his way is the only way.
  
  He did portray Satanism as being "bad", although he made clear that modern Satanism is not technically worship of Satan, but worship of the individual. Satanism "emerged when various aspects of all these (pagan, et al) traditions were blended together by persons seeking to fight Christianity's growing theological and moral influence [between 400s -1600s A.D.:]." (I got a real chuckle out of that. Apparently the Crusades and mass murders in the name of Christianity represent the "moral influence" of the faith. Best. Euphemism. EVER.)
  
  He mentioned Sean Sellers, who was physically and sexually abused, neglected, and abandoned as a child and teen, who found himself getting involved with Dungeons & Dragons as an outlet, and later Satanism. There he found acceptance and understanding, until things started getting too deep and cult-like, which is very different from the religion started by Anton LeVey. Sellers, fearing for his sanity, reached out repeatedly for help... his parents, their Christian ministers, church run support groups, etc, and they turned their backs on him each and every time. In the end, he immersed himself in Satanism completely, and ended up murdering three people, being arrested, sentenced to death, and becoming a born again Christian in prison. Abanes blames the D&D as the "gateway" to Satanism for his downfall, but fails completely to mention the many, many people who let Sellers down when he needed help the most. (This is just one of many examples of how Abanes cherry-picks his arguments.)
  
  3) Vulgarity, profanity and general lack of biblical morality in the Harry Potter books. (Characters lying, stealing, cheating, cursing, drinking, etc. And the amount of "gore" in the books, including Nearly Headless Nick and the Headless Hunt.)
  His point is that he doesn't feel like there is enough delineation between "good" and "evil". The good guys should be all good, or if they falter, they should pay for it immediately. Bad guys should be all bad, and should absolutely pay and fail.
  But MY argument is that the world, and life, is rarely delineated in such stark, black and white terms. Good people do bad things, bad people can do good things, it's the way of the world. And the real world doesn't always mete out appropriate punishment for misdeeds based on a religious belief. The world is impartial... Religion is not.
  Abanes's first example of the immorality of the children is that they disobey rules. I think this is the main stick in his craw, because so much of organized religion centers on obeying without question. He also really has a problem with the word "git", which is a derogatory word that means idiot. He claims that this is profanity, which I guess is subjective, but to me, it's slang, not profanity.
  Children are children, and they ACT like children. They disobey, mouth off, curse, treat each other unkindly, hold grudges, make enemies, make up, cheat, etc. But even as they do so, they are learning. Holding them to adult standards of behavior is unrealistic and unfair, especially a religious standard that was never intended to be in the equation at all.
  
  He also repeatedly laments the increase of "New Age Spiritualism" in modern times, causing what he calls a "Post-Christian" world, which is helped along by books, movies and media, namely "occult" books like HP, etc. He repeatedly inserts statistical data, which in itself is suspect to me, as 7 out of 8 people know that 60% of all statistics are made up on the spot (as this was... :P), so... I'm a little wary of just accepting his claims. He acts like popularity itself is cause for alarm. More than once, Abanes seems to indicate that because Rowling was poor before she wrote Harry Potter that her popularity was helped along by, if not evil, definitely occult forces. He also seems to take issue with the fact that JK Rowling has not publicly made known her personal religious beliefs. As if it matters. Her beliefs are personal, and her books are fiction. They have nothing to do with each other in my mind and opinion, but Abanes thinks that because she's not proclaimed her Christianity, that she's probably an Occultist. Again with the black and white, 'with us or against us' theme.
  
  I think that's what bothered me most about this book. I tried to read it objectively and fairly, even though I myself am agnostic, but so many of his arguments are just statements without any basis. Comparisons which are... ridiculous. It's like he was writing this for people who think exactly as he does, but just didn't know it yet, and who wouldn't question his claims. At the end of the book, he gives practical advice for Christians (who should now have many, many concerns about the book) to go forth with gentleness and kindness when discussing the book(s) with others that they feel the need to educate. Good advice, yes, because I do not want someone calling me a "heathen" for enjoying these books, BUT this book only succeeded in making claims, not proving them.
  
  Not only that, but as I mentioned before, he clearly, blatantly and shamelessly picked around the things that he didn't want to address, and beat into the ground the few points he did.
  
  For instance, he mentions CS Lewis's Narnia series, and *spoiler* Aslan sacrificing himself for Edmund */spoiler*, but Lily's own sacrifice for Harry goes without mention. And he's not unaware, just to be clear, as he quotes Voldemort telling Harry that his mother died to save him, and that she will have died in vain, as well as Dumbledore's explanation of Lily's love sacrifice. He just ignores the sacrifice of the one, and lauds the sacrifice of the other, because it suits his theme.
  
  He claims that the HP books are vulgar and full of violence etc, and that they are inappropriate reading material for children, yet ignores the fact that there is ridiculous amounts of violence and death in the Lord of the Rings trilogy. And the bible, for that matter.
  
  He also derides the use of runes in HP, but makes no mention of the fact that Gandalf used them in Lord of the Rings. Apparently that's OK because, while runes are definitely "Real Occult", LOTR was not set it in the real world.
  
  I could go on and on, (12 pages of notes, remember?), but I think this is enough to get my point across. In the end, it seems like Abanes is saying, "Christianity is right, and anything that doesn't shout that from the rooftops is wrong. Period. End of story." That's an opinion, but it doesn't make it the right one. I think people are entitled to believe what they choose, just as readers (of all ages) are entitled to read and enjoy what they choose. Parents have a responsibility to talk to and teach their kids right from wrong, and morals and ethics, etc. That is not the job of the Harry Potter books, or ANY books. Religious texts are wonderful and useful to many people, but that does not mean that fiction and entertainment should seek only to rewrite/retell them.
  
  Read and make up your OWN mind about books. :)
  
  PS. Hi Brady! ♥
  
• 
  Kandice

  I want to begin by saying how I acquired this book. My 7th-grade son was approached by a strange child asking if he liked Harry Potter. My son answered yes, and was offered a “cool” Harry Potter book. This book.
  
  The very first page of the actual book opens with the quote “Any time the dark side of the supernatural world is presented as harmless or even imaginary, there is the danger that children will become curious and find too late that witchcraft is neither harmless nor imaginary.” Lindy Beam-Focus on the Family.
  
  Because this book is supposed to represent the moral Christian community, it seems a bit silly that they actually believe that reading the Harry Potter series is going to turn our children into practicing, and somehow evil, witches and wizards. They can’t actually believe the world Rowling has created is real. Can they?
  
  The book was written after the publication of Goblet of Fire. The first few chapters of the book address each installment of the series. Each is dissected and references to occult, Wicca, and paganism beliefs are brought to our attention. The distinction between magi”c” and magi”ck” are explored. “C” is merely sleight of hand used by stage performers and perfectly acceptable. “CK” is actually the manipulation of forces and energies and is definitely not acceptable. This manipulation can actually be attributed to Satan. WHAT?
  
  After each of the first four volumes is deconstructed and analyzed, Abanese goes on to explain the differences between good Christian literature (Lewis, Tolkien, Carroll, etc.) and Rowling’s paganistic, and evil writings. Rowling’s wizards are human, whereas Tolkien’s wizards are not human at all. Tolkien’s represent good and evil “angels” or demons. Lewis’ good and evil are allegories for Christian beliefs, and their power is derived from the “One”, or God, and the “Other”, or Satan. THIS is the difference? Despite an entire chapter devoted to this idea, I can’t understand the distinction. They are both fantasy worlds conceived in the author’s imagination. The fact that two of the authors’ were practicing Christians, and one merely believes in God, makes no difference.
  
  Abanese then goes on to lay the blame of 17-year-old Sean Sellers’ death sentence for three murders, on a love of Dungeons&Dragons, which led to his Satan worshipping. Abanese admits Sellers was abandoned as a child, physically, mentally, and sexually abused, but still attributes his “fall from Grace” to occult influences and compares the dangers of Harry Potter to this situation. “Be warned, lest you be damned” or some such nonsense. This seems to me to be a blatant search for blame other than circumstances. Abanese states Sellers turned again, and again to Christian leaders for help and was turned away. I find it hard to believe a game led to his murderous actions, or that loving the world of Harry Potter will, if unchecked, lead our children down this same path of destruction.
  
  I was compelled to read this, as I have never understood the arguments against Harry Potter. Now that I have, I have an even firmer belief in the advantages Rowlings worlds have given our children. The ability to differentiate between good and evil, right and wrong, fantasy and reality. She shows them loyalty, friendship, and love, and above all doing the right thing is not always the easy thing. It’s our job as parents to teach our children, but Rowling gives them examples on their terms, aimed at their interests and hearts. What a great starting place. We should thank her not only for getting them reading but for that.
• 
  Manybooks

  Honestly, but EVERYTHING I have so far read by Richard Abanes has absolutely and utterly been what can only be called reactionary, anti-enlightenment, unintelligent trash, and Harry Potter and the Bible: The Menace Behind the Magick is no exception. And quite frankly (and I make absolutely no excuses whatsoever for my attitudes and my somewhat vehement negativity), while I would never ever attempt to get Abanes' oeuvre banned or censored in any way (as that would simply make me the same as him and his ignorantly brainless "ban the Harry Potter series" acolytes), I would also only ever recommend Harry Potter and the Bible: The Menace Behind the Magick for an intellectual and critical perusal exercise, and then only to and for those readers who are actually both intelligent and well-read enough to realise a few main and significant truths about both Harry Potter and the Bible: The Menace Behind the Magick and author Richard Abanes' religious and social worldview (his own and very troubling Weltanschauung).
  
  For not only is (at least in my opinion) Richard Abanes with the attitudes and philosophies presented in his Harry Potter and the Bible: The Menace Behind the Magick in no way even remotely a true Christian (rather the exact opposite, if you are able to catch my drift), but come on, if you have actually read J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter series, you would (or rather you should) know and understand that in EVERY single novel of the series, Harry Potter and his friends are actually and continuously engaged in fighting against mayhem and evil in the form of Lord Voldemort and his supporters (who is meant to represent not only a mirror image of Satan and other such entities, but has also always been for me a reflection of unreason, of anti-enlightenment, of a racist and viciously undemocratic, dictatorial Social Conservatism that is in many ways very hugely and as much as this might enrage certain fundamentalist "Christians" such as Richard Abanes et al akin and alike to those who want to ban the Harry Potter series, to those who consider the series and author J.K. Rowling as somehow dangerous and occult-like, in other words, Richard Abanes' printed words, they always do remind me very much of Lord Voldemort himself, of Lucien Mafoy and ALL of the "keep our witches and wizards" free of Muggle blood occult-like presences, of those who desire to destroy not only Hogwarts, but the entire world).
  
  And while Richard Abanes might indeed pontificate in Harry Potter and the Bible: The Menace Behind the Magick that the Harry Potter series is destructive and a threat, sorry, but it is actually the other way around (as it is not the Harry Potter series that is a universal threat, but individuals like Richard Abanes and other extremist Social Conservatives of the so-called Religious Right, who really are Christian only in name, who really do not represent the teachings of Jesus Christ, but are, in fact, like Lord Voldemort of the Harry Potter series, the epitome of anti-Christianity, against everything that Jesus Christ and his messages of tolerance and love stood for and should stand for, and I do most strongly and vehemently stand by this assessment).
• 
  Swankivy

  I was curious what objections the Christians had to the Harry Potter phenomenon, so I read. Though the author had done his research, I was pretty appalled to see him making excuses for Christian fantasy writers (e.g., Lewis, Tolkien) and saying it was okay for them to have magic-using characters (like the elves in Lord of the Rings) because they were using inborn abilities while Harry Potter kids are studying the occult. (Er, no, the Harry Potter kids had natural magical abilities that they used with no training, even if they did later go to school to refine them.) Anyway. I didn't rate this book low just because I don't agree with it; I rated it low because it was so obvious to me that the author was capable of doing good research but did not do so in an honorable objective way. He was searching for evidence specifically to prove his point and skewed the evidence when necessary in order to make it say what he wanted it to. I find this very dishonest. I do think he's right (putting aside any feelings *I* have about whether it's bad for children to get into Wicca) that the Harry Potter books have enough references to "real" magic stuff that kids could get interested in if they were paying enough attention, but most kids who weren't going to get interested in "real witch" activities when they were older ANYWAY are not going to be persuaded to do so by these children's fantasy books.
• 
  Tiffany

  This book absolutely did not live up to its title. The title, Harry Potter and the Bible, implies that Abanes would go through the Harry Potter books and find examples of how the series matches up with or disagrees with what is said in the Bible. For the most part, though, there are hardly any mentions of the Bible. A couple of paragraphs in various chapters have cited the Bible, but mostly it's more about A Stereotypical Christian and the Stereotypical Christian Beliefs held by that person, and how Harry Potter IS GOING TO RUIN OUR WORLD. (Rowling researched magick! Rowling researched Wicca! The characters are witches and wizards! Those are occult and Wiccan ideas! Our children, just by reading these Harry Potter books, are signing up on Wiccan and Occult websites! It's already begun! Our children are Satan-worshipers!) It reads like just a bunch of alarmism and paranoia. I mean, I thought that even at the first pages, but then there was chapter 10: ten pages about a Satan worshiper who murdered his family. ... What else could be the point of this pretty large chunk of the book other than to not-so-subtly imply that the Harry Potter books are going to turn your precious children into parent-murdering Satanists?!? But, oh my God, this event happened *11* years before the first Harry Potter book came out, so please explain to me how that murderer is at ALL related to Harry Potter books, other than just the author's way of trying to alarm and scare the bejeesus out of parents and "good Christians."
  
  There's also a pages-long tangent about feminist neo-pagans... Okay, it's a threat to your Christianity, but what does it have to do with Harry Potter? You may be trying to make the point that feminist neo-paganism is anti-Christian, and also that Harry Potter and it's "occultism" is anti-Christian, but that doesn't mean they should be mentioned together as even remotely connected. Again, you're just being an alarmist about everything you think is threatening "Christianity."
  
  Abanes also seems hypocritical, or completely uncritical to the ideas that would disprove his point. For example, he spends a chapter discussing how Harry Potter is *not* in the same tradition as The Lord of the Rings series or Narnia books. In his explanation of why C.S. Lewis' books are okay, he says, "...the 'Christian theology' [and his use of quote marks is obviously to mock the fact that someone he quoted called the Tolkien and Lewis books Christian theology] in Lewis' fantasy is veiled beneath various characters (e.g., Aslan the Lion)." ... Wait, what? Aslan the lion is a VEILED reference to Christian theology?!? Every book I've ever read about Lewis and the Narnia books basically shout "ASLAN IS JESUS!" So, how is that veiled?!?! Abanes goes on to say that "there is no direct [his emphasis] association that can be made between the books and any contemporary religion. In Harry Potter, however, a direct link to paganism/witchcraft is made via the presentation to readers of current occult beliefs and practices." WHAT?!?! Again, "ASLAN IS JESUS!"! How is that not a direct association with Christianity, which, I believe, is a contemporary religion?? And as far as Harry Potter being a direct link to *paganism* and the occult, that was a point *you* created, sir. Not everyone believes the link; the "ASLAN IS JESUS" link is accepted by almost everyone who has read, studied, or read about the Narnia books.
  
  If anything, this book should be called Harry Potter and How It's Against What Hard-Core, Easily-Offended Christians Believe. Proportional to the length of the book and the title, there's very little reference to the actual Bible and passages in it; the book just implies what the hard-core Christians are afraid of and how Harry Potter and Rowling are totally leading your children down that exact path. Or it could be called Harry Potter, and the Bible because it's not often about the two things in relation to each other; there are sections about Harry Potter and then there are sections about the Bible, but very little about Harry Potter *and* the Bible.
  
  If there were half-stars, I'd give this 1.5; but since there aren't, I have to go more on the "yuck" side than the "it was okay" side and just give it 1 measly star. I mean, there were *a few* places where Abanes makes interesting points, but mostly it was just "HARRY POTTER IS GOING TO DESTROY YOUR CHILDREN!!"
• 
  Adam Ross

  Abanes makes some good points about real-world occultism, but none of his complaints can stick to the Potter novels. He so consistently misunderstands the Potter novels that it is clear he should stick to refuting the occult in our world.
• 
  Cindi

  this tome purports to explain why j.k. rowling's blockbuster novels are just pure evil(tm). you can tell by his spelling of "magick" that abanes is no fan. skip this hysterical, poorly written volume in favor of john killinger's god, the devil, and harry potter; it offers a glimpse into this dark side of harry without being so egregiously ... stoopid. read fall 2004
• 
  Adriane

  
  
  Ok, so this will be a hard one to review, I gave it a one because it wasn't enjoyable to read at all, it had blatant spelling errors, and was incredibly repetitive. So the basis for the authors main argument is that kids can't tell reality from fiction, that the fact that they read Harry Potter means that they are going to go out and try to do witchcraft on their own. This is incredibly offensive to me, because I was a child once and having adults be this distrustful over something so minor was a huge annoyance, I was like Rowling pretty lucky in that my mom would generally let me read anything I took and interest in, sometimes reading the same book with me so we could discuss anything that bothered me. I'm mainly citing in this situation when as a 12/13 yr old in middle school I started reading Crichton, pretty hard core science thrillers, these diverged from my normal adult flavored Star Wars books so my mom took an interest to make sure I wouldn't get scarred.
  
  Speaking of Star Wars, even as Avery young child, though I wished to be and pretended to be a Jedi, I knew for a fact that this dream would never come to pass. This didn't lead me down a dark path of drugs that ultimately lead me to join the Jedi religion in Australia. Assuming that all children are going to just turn against everything they know that their parents have taught them because a book gave them an idea is a bit silly. But I digress......my point is that almost every point in this book is invalid.
  
  Example: Abanes says that C.S. Lewis' classic Narnia series is very subtly Christian, while Harry Potter is blatantly trying to turn little children pagan. Ugh, where to start with this one, first off, Lion-Jesus isn't all that subtle, it's a great literary device and add depths to the story that it didn't have before the situation arose, but it's been pretty obvious to anyone who's read the books what the meaning is. On the other hand Harry Potter has no obvious religious anything, they're just stories about a boy in school making friends and fighting evil...like you do. Any mention of the occult no matter how well researched is going to turn some faithful Christian kid pagan.....that's not what these books are about. And to the point above, just because a dude named Nicholas Flamel existed doesn't mean that alchemy actually works or that kids believe they can become immortal or turn lead into gold.
  
  My review comes down to a few things, one is trust your kids, you're the one who raised them, you're the one who taught the. Right and wrong, they aren't going to forget all that just because some characters in a book are snotty to each other now and again. Next is, being reactionary about something you personally perceive as a threat shouldn't affect everyone outside of your per-view, basically, teach your kids and you'll be fine, it's not fair to try to ban a book series just because it has some things in it you don't agree with, acting like everything that everyone else likes is a personal attack on you isn't going to make anyone listen to your ideas in act it will have the opposite effect. So chill....
• 
  Gabriel

  Oh, religious fundamentalism—how I really don't miss you.
• 
  David Sarkies

  An anti-Harry Potter Book
  23 July 2011
  
  As I was scanning through my document which contains backups of all of my commentaries I discovered that this one contained only a really short paragraph which, well, explains the book, but doesn't actually tease out the themes. The paragraph is as follows: A pretty one sided look at the Harry Potter Series. Everything that he criticises the books about can be said about Star Wars, but I have never heard anybody write a book attacking those movies.
  
  It's true, isn't it? I've seen countless of books, articles, and heard sermons as to why Harry Potter is evil and Christians should stay away from it, but nobody has ever mentioned Star Wars (and guess what, Abanes' does not mention Star Wars either, though he does mention Lord of the Rings and the Narnia Chronicles). Mind you when I said a 'pretty on sided look' I should have really said 'an incredibly one sided look' at the Harry Potter books.
  
  Okay, I myself am not really interested in the Harry Potter books and have only ever read one of them. I might read others if I have time, but they are not high on my reading list. There are lots of books out there and Harry Potter is not really one that seems to grab my attention. Anyway, I have seen all of the movies, and while they say that the book does tend to be better than the movie, the movies of this series are good enough for me, and the only reason that I ended up seeing them is because my brother loves Harry Potter (and we don't see him rushing off and joining a Wicca Cult).
  
  I guess what this book demonstrates is the wilful ignorance that most fundamentalist Christians seem to display and to me this is one of the reasons people are put off of Christianity. For instance, he tells the story of a man that was abused as a child and then got involved in Wicca for comfort. However when he began to feel uncomfortable, he tried to get out but nobody within the church was willing to help him, so he become more involved and ended up getting executed for a triple murder. Arbanes basically blames Dungeons and Dragons for this when if you read over this story again we discover that this man reached out to the church for help and was rejected. To me this sounds as if Abanes has such a rosey coloured view of the church that nobody, especially the leadership, can ever be blamed for the inevitable results of their sinful actions.
  
  I suspect that this has something to do with to do with the biblical teaching of sin. If we sin then we can only hold ourselves accountable and we cannot lay the blame upon anybody else. Well, that is partially true, and anybody who uses phrases like 'the Devil made me do it' is washing their hands of self responsibility. I am a big believer in being responsible for one's own actions. However we tend to forget one of the statements that Jesus made 'if you lead one of those little one's to sin, then it is better for you to have a millstone tied around your neck and thrown into the sea.' Namely, what Jesus is saying here is that while we are responsible for our own sins, we also need to be very careful on how we relate to others. This is not just a question of tempting somebody to, say, take drugs, this is refusing to support, comfort, or help somebody who is in trouble. Many people walk away from Christianity simply because there is a lack of support within the church, and when I say lack of support, I generally suggest that the members of the church spend more time condemning than they do forgiving.
  
  There is also another example of a Christian author targeting a popular product and suggesting that this is the cause of what is wrong with society, and that if they do not make a stand against it then society is only going to collapse. It was not all that long ago when people who took a stand against the church for its false teachings were burnt at the stake, but now this church, who was once persecuted, is doing the persecuting. To me it is an aspect of fear, a fear of the unknown, a fear of what is popular, and especially a fear of change. Yes, Jesus does talk about the road less travelled, and not doing things because everybody else is doing it, but I don't think that necessarily refers reading the Harry Potter books.
  
  Talking about popularity: what about going along with the church (and I am not talking about the universal catholic church here, but the church of which you are a member) simply because everybody else goes along with the church, or the church tells you to do it? Take gay marriage for an instance. The church tells you that it is wrong and that homosexuality is a sin: does that mean that you should agree with what they are saying without actually questioning it? Does that also mean that you should condemn homosexuals because they tell you to? How about making a stand against such bigoted and one sided views? The problem is that the church can hold a huge amount of power, and to speak out against such things can find you being alienated from the church – that is until you repent. Then who are you repenting to, are you repenting to God or are you repenting to man? If you are repenting to man then the problem is that you are putting yourself under the power of that man. If you have sinned against another man, then sure, go and apologise, however if you have sinned against God, repent to God, not to man, because it is your relationship with God that needs restoring, and by repenting to God you are not putting yourself under the power of this one particular man.
• 
  C

  A thought-provoking exploration of the dangers of the
  Harry Potter books (presenting witchcraft as positive and morality as subjective). The book makes many valid points, but it overestimates the dangers and overreacts to them. I know many fans of the Potter books, and to my knowledge none of them have delved into witchcraft or occultism. The book is repetitive, making the same basic points throughout the book, and giving different examples. The most helpful chapter is the one comparing magic in Rowling's Wizarding World to magic in Middle-Earth and Narnia.
  
  The author summarizes the books by saying, "The novels actually are filled with potentially harmful messages exalting occultism and moral relativism."
  
  Notes
  The Potter books promote what the Bible condemns: witchcraft, sorcery, divination, fortune-telling, mediumship, spellcasting, potions, necromancy, astrology, numerology. Rowling argues that magic is a mere literary device and her books don't advocate "learning magic," but "she has taken great pains to ensure that the occult-related material in her volumes accurately reflects true occultism. In fact, up to one-third of the occultism in her series parallels information Rowling uncovered during her personal studies of witchcraft/magick." (interview on The Diane Rehm Show, 10/20/1999).
  
  The Potter books present ambiguous or unbiblical morality, even by "good" characters: lying, cheating, stealing, taking revenge, disobeying rules, crude language, swearing. Kids and adults don't follow objective standards of right and wrong, but their own self-interests and subjective rationalizations. Kids and adults break rules, even their own.
  
  Forward
  Bible forbids magic: Deut 18:9-14; Gal 5:19-21; Rev 9:20-21; 18:23; 22:15; 2 Kings 9:22; 17:17; 21:6; 23:24; Acts 8:9-24; 16:16-18; 19:19; Isa 19:3; 47:9-15; 1 Chron 10:13-14; 2 Chron 33:6; Micah 5:12; Nahum 3:4-7; Lev 19:31; 20:6, 27; 1 Sam 28:7-19
  
  Sorcery in a Stone: A Closer Look
  Rowling: "Harry wants to get back at Dudley … [A]nd we readers want him to get back at Dudley. And, in the long run, trust me, he will."
  
  Enter the Chamber: A Closer Look
  Potter books don't contain true incantations, but do illustrate importance of spells to occultists, and significance that words play in casting spells.
  
  Potter books include many elements of actual witchcraft and occultism (e.g., Hand of Glory).
  
  Potter books go beyond using magic as a mere literary device to delving into it.
  
  Potter books include divination and other forms of communication with the spirit world, including communicating with ghosts, magical creatures, and enchanted objects. The Bible condemns communication with any part of the spirit world besides God.
  
  Children can become so enthralled with magic and wizardry that they seek it out in the real world. In 2000, the Pagan Federation had to appoint a new youth officer to deal with "a flood of inquiries" triggered by the Potter books.
  
  Azkaban's Prisoner: A Closer Look
  Bible never presents witchcraft positively. It presents spells, sorcery, divination, witches, witchcraft as "mere superstitions that do have a dark reality behind them."
  
  Definitions of good and evil in Potter books aren't biblical definitions. In Potter books, both sides rely on same power source (magic), both sides are subjective in their discerning right from wrong, and both use similar acts to pursue their goals (occultism, lying, rule-breaking).
  
  "Good" characters (e.g., Trelawney) engage in divination, fortune-telling, mediumship, palmistry, tea leaves, fire omens. Books also feature arithmancy, numerology, charms.

  Rowling's message is simple: If someone is "good" and he has good intentions, or if he is particularly clever, or exceptionally bright, or somehow more special than others, then he can break rules, lie and steal.

  The only characters that seem to care about following rules are evil ones like Dursleys, or mean characters like Snape and Filch.
  
  Potter books contain negative depictions of disciplinarians and positive depictions of deceitfulness.
  
  Goblet of Death: A Closer Look
  

  Rowling's books, at the very least, will desensitize children to the dangers of occultism, which in turn may create in them a general sympathy toward a spiritually detrimental set of beliefs. For some children the Potter series may even spark a desire for genuine occult materials and paraphernalia.

  What Potter books teach
  1. Disobedience isn't a very serious offense.
  2. When rules/laws are broken, it's possible to find a way to get around punishment, by lying or using connections.
  3. Obedience should be forsaken in favor of one's own desires.
  4. Sometimes it's appropriate to deceive or conceal information, even from one's own spouse.
  
  Potter books don't contain a battle between good and evil, but between horrific evil (Voldemort and his side) and lesser evil (Harry and "good" characters) "that only appears virtuous because it is so much less offensive and frightening than the greater evil. … Harry and all the other 'good' characters are simply using one set of sinful behaviors to defeat another set of sinful behaviors." The Bible teaches that we're to overcome evil with good (Rom 12:21).
  
  The Enduring Battle: Good versus Evil
  "Many occultists (especially witches) view magick as something that actually is quite natural, rather than supernatural. … magick is merely a way of harnessing natural forces yet to be discovered by science."
  
  Rowling has stated that she doesn't believe in the supernatural "wand waving sort of magic," but has never disowned other types of magick such as "natural" magic accepted by occultists.
  
  

  The Harry Potter books might lead some children into the world of occultism since the series contains actual beliefs and practices associated with witchcraft and paganism, including: divination, astrology, numerology, familiars, pagan gods/goddesses, spellcasting, potions, necromancy (i.e., communication with the dead/ghosts), mediumship/channeling, crystal gazing, palmistry, charms, arithmancy and magick.

  The Enduring Battle: Choosing Sides

  Clearly, the art of magic—i.e., seeking to bring about change in accordance with one's own will through various ceremonies, rites, rituals, spells or charms—is resoundingly condemned by Scripture.

  Beyond Fantasy: Tolkien, Lewis and Rowling
  Tolkien's and Lewis' fantasy tales take place in mythical worlds, whereas Rowling's takes place in our world, with contemporary forms of occultism.
  
  Rowling's books use a different definition of magic than Lewis' and Tolkien's.
  
  Rowling's books promote a different concept of right and wrong than Lewis' and Tolkien's.
  
  The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings are rooted in Tolkien's Christian faith. Tolkien's works are unabashedly Christian, unlike Rowling's.
  
  In Tolkien, when a good character commits an evil deed, they suffer as a result, or must atone.
  
  The "magic" in Tolkien's books isn't "the occult-based contemporary-pagan magic Rowling employs." Tolkien disliked the word "magic" and only used it because he couldn't find a better word. His "magic" doesn't include supernatural power, and isn't acquired by lore or spells; it's a natural ability given to certain characters (e.g., Elves). "Magical" objects receive their special qualities through "lore" which Tolkien likened to science and tech, and the objects are created in ways that conform to Middle-Earth's laws of nature.
  
  In Tolkien, when non-magical people get too close to magic, there are drastic and negative consequences.
  
  In Potter books, wizards are humans. In Tolkien, wizards are Maiar (angel-like beings) sent to assist Elves and Men. The powers of the Maiar and Valar are part of their nature, and aren't obtained through occultism.
  
  In Tolkien, Iluvatar (God) oversees the battle between good and evil. In Rowling, there's no such being.
  
  In Narnia, there's no religion that's directly associated with our world. In Potter books, there's a direct link to paganism and witchcraft.
  
  The Witch in Narnia is based on old, widely accepted symbols of evil. In Potter books, witches and wizards are children who have much in common with readers of the books.
  
  Narnia has no concept of "dark side" versus "light side" battle. In Potter books, there's a neutral "power" that has a light and dark side, and both sides draw upon that same "power."
  
  In Narnia, the conflict is between two kinds of magic of different origin's. Aslan's magic is good because it comes from the Emperor Beyond the Sea, who has legitimate authority over everything. The evil side's magic is evil because it comes from an illegitimate authority that has usurped power.
  
  In Narnia, good characters don't overcome witchcraft by learning more witchcraft, but by becoming servants of Aslan, who conquers evil. Rowling's characters overcome evil by using the same magical power as Voldemort.
  
  Potter books are completely dependent on magick. Lewis uses magic sparingly, in a highly stylized manner that doesn't connect with the real world.
  
  Rowling's books are meant to entertain, whereas the Narnia books are meant to present the story of the Bible.
  
  Lewis' and Tolkien's books treat morality and integrity as important. In Potter, morality is presented inconsistently, with muddled ethics. Misbehavior is condoned as long as the outcome is fun or rewarding.
  
  Lessons Learned: Comments and Controversies
  A lot of the "magick" in Potter books mirrors real occultism practiced in neopaganism and Wicca, which are contemporary religions, unlike "witchcraft" in fairy tales. Although Potter books don't present formal doctrines of contemporary witchcraft/Wicca, they glamorize occult practices.
  
  Lessons Learned: Closing Thoughts
  Good messages in Potter books
  • Remain loyal to your friends
  • Don't murder
  • Share
  
  Underlying lessons in Potter books
  • Lying, stealing, cheating are not only acceptable, they can be fun.
  • Astrology, numerology, casting spells, performing "magick" can be exciting
  • Disobedience isn't very serious, unless you get caught.
  • Being "special" means you deserve to escape punishment for your bad behavior.
  • Rules are made to be broken.
  • Revenge is acceptable.
• 
  Alex

  I don't think Harry Potter is evil (I'm a Christian, and I think the books are wonderful), but I do understand why some people do not want to allow their children to read the books, so I picked this book up, just to see the other side of the situation. I don't feel like it was well-written at all (I feel like it was written the way I wrote papers in school...trust me, mine weren't that great, as partially evidenced by the above pretty-sure-it's-a-run-on sentence), and I think a lot of it was because he kept saying the same things over and over again. While I do appreciate some of his points (things about revenge, etc.), I don't feel like the author understands children at all. He attacks Rowling for allowing the kids to disobey their teachers and the rules set in place, but (and I'm not saying it's okay to break rules and engage in other such behavior) he doesn't seem to understand that these characters are kids. I know some of the adults break rules, but the author mostly attacks Harry and the others simply for being pre-teens/teenagers. Also, except for the Harry Potter novel, the Narnia novels, the Lord of the Rings novels, and the Bible, most of his research appears to have been done online; I don't mind a bit of online research, but I don't feel like getting all your research from newspaper articles and interviews (for a book, anyway) is really the best scholarly approach.
• 
  Nathan Willard

  This book is terrible, even on its own terms. The first half of the book goes into summaries about why each of the first four Harry Potter books works to draw people into witchcraft and present unchristian values. The second half seems to be lifted from a previous work by Abanes on the occult, as it was fairly generic "occultism is bad."
  
  The big problems identified by Abanes in the first half of the book were:
  1) The primary "unchristian" morality was neglect of the rules of Hogwarts by both Harry & Co and the teachers (who choose not to expel them after the Chamber of Secrets incidents).
  2) Rowling uses famous alchemists and occultists from history as characters/inspirations in the books, showing that she is interested in drawing people into witchcraft.
  
  There are frequent references to "prominent internet wiccans," and a fair amount of guilt-by-association. His belief that her occult obsession leads to her historical inclusions causes him to assume many of her greek references are coincidences, despite her classics degree.
  
  So, the books are bad because people disobey strict rules and because they contain interesting historical tidbits. Showing distaste for humor, realism and education is fairly impressive, but makes for a bad, bad book.
• 
  Big Mike Lewis

  Be smart. Don't mix fantasy with reality. Don't go overboard though.
• 
  Curtis

  Can I rate it "no stars"?
• 
  Darcy

  Poorly argued points, and poorly researched. I can completely respect someone's opinion when differs from mine if it is logical and well argued, but that is NOT the case with this book.
• 
  Katt_goddess

  Disclosure - it only took me a couple of days to actually read this but I wanted to write my own review of this 'review' before purging it from my reading lists. At this point, I wish I had made notes while reading it of all the instances of blatant stupidity to post in this review. As it is, I didn't. My apologies to people who do enjoy a good rant that also contains direct quotes. Please trust me that I did read this book and likely spent more time reading it than the author did reading any of the books he was tasked with reviewing.
  
  I will only give the author credit for maybe reading the first of the four books in the Harry Potter series that he was supposed to review for this book. And that's only because the first book is the shortest of the given four. Even then, it feels shoddy and cherry-picked with instances of outright lie for lies sake that any child would be able to poke a hole through. Example right off the top of my head is how Abanes insists that Dudley was viciously attacked by Hagrid's magic for no reason at all. Seriously? Dudley got his little piggy tail because he outright stole Harry's birthday cake - the only cake / birthday present he had ever received - and was stuffing his face with it while his parents were busy insulting Harry's dead parents and the headmaster of Hogwarts in front of both Hagrid and Harry. He was being a piggy and he got a piggy tail. An easily removable one apparently as that's how Harry got his trip to the London train station - they needed to stop at a hospital to get the thing removed before school started. But let's forget that Dudley or the Dursleys in general did anything to deserve anything because after all, Hagrid is a horrible magic-welding brute.
  
  Hermione? According to Abanes, she only becomes friends with Harry and Ron after deliberately turning into a nasty little liar on their behalf. It totally wasn't because the boys were the only ones to remember she was being miserable in a girls' loo and went to get her. They risked their own lives just trying to get her to safety because she was their classmate and worth that unplanned risk. Hermione's lie may have lessened the punishments all around but they wouldn't have become friends if they weren't already headed in that direction.
  
  In the pick-apart of '...The Chamber of Secrets', after Abanes pokes at the parallels of the various Hogwart's textbooks and books the exist in the real world as well as decrying the idea of a fantasy world that 'exists' in the present world, he goes after Mr. Arthur Weasley. Hagrid is old news. Mr. Weasley is the new terror. He's helping to raise horrible children who lie and steal cars. He works for the Ministry of Magic to protect Muggles and yet he dares to tinker with Muggle objects himself [something which becomes very important later in the series but I doubt Abanes got that far]. Arthur Weasley is a 'liar and a hypocrite' who even starts a brawl in a bookstore with another wizard. Yep, nasty Arthur Weasley started all the problems in the bookstore. Lucius Malfoy gets a total pass. In fact, Lucius Malfoy gets all the passes in this review. The only mention of his actual involvement with the whole Chamber event is a brief mention that he was the one to deliberately slip the knowingly cursed diary into Ginny Weasley's cauldron at the bookstore during the brawl that, naturally, was all Arthur's fault after all. All the other adults in the Wizarding World are horrible creatures who encourage law-breaking. Except the adult who deliberately decides to curse an 11 year old girl as well as threatens familial cursings to the governors of Hogwarts if others didn't join his crusade to remove the Headmaster [which would help greatly with the purging of any students that don't fit the pure-blood criteria]. He's the invisible man despite his every action being one of malicious intent.
  
  For '...Prisoner of Azkaban', Abanes needs to take a swipe at all the classes offered at Hogwarts, especially Divinations which he becomes absolutely obsessed with to the point that he carries that over into the fourth book's review. He even goes so far as to claim that Harry's random 'prediction' done during his Divination's final is supposedly Rowling's way of making Harry a 'True Seer'. As opposed to, you know, foreshadowing for the rest of the book and, at the very least, Harry making something up that he'd like to see happen in order to finish up an annoying class final.
  
  Swearing is a mortal sin. Especially the word 'git' which means little to nothing to everyone not British and even then isn't exactly a fighting word. The equivalent of calling someone a 'moron' is the height of literary terrors in a children's book though. Hagrid's sins are back because he's an adult who drinks when he's off duty and not responsible for children. All lies told by 'good characters' are the absolute worst of the worst no matter the reason. Dumbledore lies in order for a young Lupin to actually get a real Wizarding education despite his disability? Absolutely disgusting of course. Werewolves aren't people and should be left uneducated and homeless somewhere for something they can't control. Mocking Dudley for being the size of a small whale because all he does is eat is an unforgivable affront to fat kids everywhere though. More on the Dursleys in a bit because Abanes loves them enough to ignore everything they do.
  
  '...Goblet of Fire'...pure Cliff Notes review and not even that to be honest. The book is about the Tri-Wizard Tournament but that's barely mentioned. This review is more rehashing of the types of grievances brought up in the previous reviews with nothing new to add except more complaints about real world = Wizarding world cross-overs like books that cover the same topics in both areas and the ever present hatred of Arthur Weasley and all other 'good characters' who do nothing but lie, steal, cheat, and behave poorly with no signs of remorse for their actions or punishments dished out. How does Abanes know that Mrs. Weasley doesn't smack Mr. Weasley upside the head with a spoon for saying or doing something stupid once the kids are out of sight? The series is taken predominately from the view of Harry, after all. You know, the kid who has to survive all this stuff and honestly has better things to focus on because of that. And Dumbledore pacing his office at all hours of the day and night [according to the Marauder's Map] definitely isn't a sign of someone having to do a lot of thinking about things.
  
  And now to my problem with Abanes and the Dursleys. At absolutely no point anywhere does he have anything to say about the Dursley's treatment of their nephew. Their horrible, abusive, and at points criminal treatment of their nephew. One can only gather that Abanes thinks they are the greatest people in the world and everything they do is perfectly acceptable because he never mentions jack-squat-one about what they do or how any of that could have any effect on Harry's view of the world and how it works. Harry lives in a cramped storage space under the stairs until he's 11 years old, given things that Dudley has either outgrown or outright busted, receives no gifts at all while in the Dursley's exclusive care [the birthday cake that Dudley steals and ruins with his gluttony being literally the first gift Harry had received in known memory], is outright beaten for things he has no official control over [such as his hair growing back immediately when the Dursley's deliberately cut the ever-loving crap out of it], and is locked in a room with nothing but a cat flap for little bits of food to be pushed in when they remember to do so the second they realize he isn't allowed to deliberately use magic outside of school. Harry making them supposedly cower in fear at the start of book two is such a bad thing? Really? It was the only thing keeping the Dursleys from continuing to abuse him as they had for the last 11 years. Once that particular 'threat' was gone, they locked him up and started starving him. Is that acceptable 'Christian' behavior considering this book is aimed at Evangelicals? Must be. Feel free to beat, abuse and starve your kids as long as it's done to beat, abuse and starve the strange out of them.
  
  Harry not trusting adults with the 'truth' when asked about things doesn't make Harry the most horrible liar on the planet. It makes him a child who grew up in an environment where you got punished for telling the truth and still called a liar. It makes him a child who grew up having to fend for himself because the adults he knew during his young impressionable years couldn't be trusted. But that sort of revelation doesn't sell books to the targeted Evangelical crowd. It would be like selling mirrors to the Amish.
  
  This book of reviews reads as if the author only read the titles of the chapters, the first and last paragraphs of said chapters, and then asked small children to summarize things once it got too much. He definitely knows his audience as to what to complain about but literally anyone in that audience who actually took the time to read the books themselves should be able to point out the biases and outright cherry-picked crap as being just that - biases and cherry-picked crap. Christian Publications, Inc. should ask for their money back in light of this. Unless they are all for people who lie as long as the lie is in their particular favor. That isn't hypocrisy or anything. That's called 'marketing'.
  
  Read this book if you like Harry Potter themed train wrecks written by people who got paid to hate in the name of religion. Or if you want to make up your own drinking game every time you read something extra stupid. Fair warning though, you could end up in the hospital before you get halfway through.
• 
  Matthew Williamson

  This was a huge disappointment. I admit I bought it out of morbid curiosity, but that's not to say I didn't come into it with an open mind; I *wanted* to hear some good arguments for a secret underlying message for the Potterverse, something that I could reread the books under a whole new perspective.
  
  Unfortunately what I got was some of the most frustratingly baseless and flawed arguments in quite some time. One particular highlight was that if you took a sentence from the book, wrote it backwards and then rearranged the structures, it would form a different sentence! Or the fact where she has admitted to having read alot of history books on the subject of witchcraft in preparation for her books. That alone was considered damning evidence.
  On this basis I could only assume Karin Slaughter is a wanted criminal for all of the research she's gathered over the years.
  
  I couldn't even get myself worked up on either side of the argument; as a Potter fan rallying to defend the accusations, nor could I find myself conceding to the points brought up. I am not convinced this was designed to convert, but to just preach to the masses; people with no intention of learning about Harry Potter because they had already been told of its evils, and this was just to add confirmation to their assumptions.
  
  Hell even the mocking chapter titles couldn't be bothered, with the rather limp "Sorcery in a Stone" and "Azkaban's Prisoner". In the end I came away from a biased attack piece without my strong emotions, and I feel that speaks more of its failure than anything I could ever put into words.
• 
  Lacey

  I am not against any books such as these. I think people should be able to write their views or respond to a piece of literature. It annoys me, though, when a person begins reading a book solely for the purpose of wanting to critique it, or writing a book about it, in the future. Even so, I may be willing to accept their book if they have no grammar mistakes, do not incorrectly quote said book, and do not misinterpret the text. In my edition, the book did all three of these things and more. The book was clearly written only for those who shared the same perspective and religion as the author. It praised other fantasy books of like, but all the while saying how different Rowling's works were from them. The author believed that Harry Potter was evil because he "steals, lies, and cheats." I would dare him to find any child-fictional or not-that has never done any of these things. The author also believes that Rowling is lying about everything, or hiding a darker truth; he only picks splices of quotes that support that belief.
  
  I'm going to stop now, I could write a thicker book on the failings of Richard Abanes, "Harry Potter and the Bible: The Menace Behind the Magic."
  
  (And yes, I did spell that wrong on purpose.)
• 
  Yvonne Carter

  I know everyone is in love with the Harry Potter series. Me, not so much. One of my grandsons made the comment when the first book was out, "Nana, I had a strange, negative feeling as I read it and I put it aside." I thought, Mmmmmm. Later, looking for a reference book on Shakespeare for the festival I came across this book. He was working on his master's thesis on the occult and witchcraft, and came across some very interesting facts about the author, the names she uses, some of the practices in series, etc. Are the 'good' people really 'good'; notice how normal people are derided in all of the books. The children succeed through magic; is life magic? What does this series teach our children. This is a book worth considering.
• 
  Matthew Jackson

  This book is horrible. It was given to me by someone who was truly concerned about the content of the Harry Potter stories. I read as much as I could, but the combination of constant factual errors and sheer silliness eventually led to my putting it down before the end.
• 
  miketheboy89

  One star for the laughs.
• 
  Kat

  While this book wasn't quite as entertaining as I thought it would be, it also wasn't as openly unreasonable or vitriolic as I thought it might be either. The entire premise remains silly, but at least it is earnest and does it's best to be reasonable in its suggestions (which basically boils down to "CONSTANT VIGILANCE!" on the part of the parents as to what their kids are reading and discussing it with them in relation to the Bible.)
  
  This is an older book, as when it was published the fourth Harry Potter novel had just come out. To my surprise, it actually does a good job of fairly summarizing the various Harry Potter books before deconstructing them, rather than focusing in too much on objectionable content. "Harry Potter and the Bible" doesn't accuse J.K. Rowling of outright trying to teach children occultism and "magick" (a.k.a. "real" vs. stage "magic"), but rather that reading the Harry Potter novels may act as a kind of gateway of curiosity that children may decide to explore. It actually focuses far more on divination than I was expecting, I guess because things like fortune-telling, astrology, and so on are easier to fake than actual transfiguration and other more flashy spells, and therefore more plausibly exist in the real world. (I did giggle every time I saw the phrase, "...the dangers of real occultism.") However, the author seems to miss the fact that most of the time spent in Divination class is ridiculing Professor Trelawney and basically saying how pretty much all of it is silly and useless.
  
  The book also focuses on the lack of clear morality and the dangers relativism, which I think makes the characters more relatable and realistic (because what person doesn't lie at some point?) but could understand the frustration at how Harry breaks so many rules and yet rarely gets punished for it. Of course, i would argue that plenty of books that lack magic in them follow a similar format because those are the kinds of stories children (who are relatively powerless in the world compared to the adults) like to see. So I can understand that objection to the books, as it doesn't relate to the existence of magic, but rather the standards upon which we teach kids right from wrong. There's room for debate, but the argument (until we get into basing morality on the Bible) at least has a leg to stand on.
  
  What did surprise me was the relatively light focus on the violence in the Harry Potter books (and oh, boy, the author would have had a field day with Books 5-7!) Which, focusing on divination and Wicca rather than violence as a reason for objecting to the books may have been wise, because I would have to point out that the Bible is just as bad, if not worse, than Harry Potter in terms of violence. (Ever hear of that guy nailed to a cross and left to die a slow, horrible, and very public death? Or God charging the Israelites to rip open the stomachs of pregnant women? Or to dash babies to death on stones? Yeah...)
  
  It does bring up the comparison of Harry Potter to Lord of the Rings and Narnia and how Harry Potter isn't like them at all (contrary to what some supporters say.) I would argue that, yes, Harry Potter can't really be compared to LOTR or Narnia, but it isn't really meant to be. It has a different purpose from those other two. The style, language, and time period are also very different and their magic styles are different as well. Just because it's more vague doesn't make it any less magical... but there's all comes from a God figure whereas apparently Harry Potter magic doesn't...? Yeah, things get kind of wishy-washy, but the point is that I always find it hilarious when those comparisons and refutations are being made because aside from being epic fantasy, those three works are quite different. (I do wonder what the Christian reaction to Narnia would be if it WASN'T written by an obviously Christian author... would it still have the same Christian allegory applied to it? Somehow I think not...)
  
  Anyway, a mildly interesting read that you may want to check out if you're interested in these kinds of literary criticism.
• 
  Samantha

  Ugh, ok, so as a fan of the Potter franchise I did read this with an open mind...But...There were too many snags in this book for me to actually like it and even take it seriously. In the beginning, the only thing the author hones in on are the "lies" that Harry and the adults at Hogwarts tell as well as the "rule breaking". It's far too apparent that the author hasn't really looked into why the rules were broken nor why the lies were told. In the beginning, Harry didn't know who to trust and had to told everything to everyone, would Voldemort really have been vanquished in the end? Considering also the book's aged resources which are counted as up to date quotes (one resource was from the 1980s, I'm sure you could find more current material even though this book was written when only the first 4 Harry Potter books were out, we all still had the internet people) Not to mention the incredibly glaring grammatical errors (how did those get by the editor?), we then come to the most gut wrenching and heart stopping chapter...Which will take you completely off course of Harry Potter and tell you everything you needed to know about Sean Sellers, a Satanist killer from the 1980s who reformed and became a Christian while incarcerated...Ok...Drastic turn as it was, that's the only chapter that actually had all of my attention and had me gripped and turning those pages rapidly. Everything else fell under the bar and Abanes really makes Catholics and Christians sound like we hate anything that's fun, and equally so that we believe that even lying will send you to hell. I think that most Catholics and Christians know that there are boundaries and that a lie like "mom I didn't eat the chocolate" when the child actually did isn't going to make the child a criminal or a mass murder in the long run of their life. It's all hype, barely any facts and it's spread very thin and the text jumps around basically in order to make you question Rowling. While that may be fine, you can question her all you like, you shouldn't write a book that is propaganda for questioning her and is filled with filler and outdated news.
• 
  Lindsay

  As a fan of the Harry Potter series, I read this book with as open a mind as one so biased could manage. With that said, consider my review with a grain of salt.
  
  The book succeeded in enlightening me to the author's personal views on Harry Potter, allowing me to understand why he has chosen to eschew the series. A stance I happen to respect, actually. It did not, however, convince me that the HP books themselves are a problem. I view the Potter series in the same light as I do alcohol: Not in and of itself evil or good, being problematic or positive depending on who is consuming it (and how). Just like a glass of wine means very different things to, say, a baby, an alcoholic, a heart patient, an adult diner, and someone participating in communion. To focus on the baby and alcoholic and then declare wine for everyone "a menace" is painting with broad brushstrokes where finer detail is warranted.
  
  Needless to say, I wasn't convinced by Abanes's arguments. I found the book to be riddled with logical fallacies, inconsistent reasoning, and confirmation bias. (I know it's not fair that I don't reveal examples-- but for brevity's sake, alas....) These rhetorical oversights wouldn't be an issue for me were I speaking with someone who was sharing their personal opinions regarding HP-- personal views are often reached in nuanced and complex (and, dare I say, illogical) ways!-- but when they are used to undergird a persuasive piece intending to convince an entire group that something is right or wrong...it's less excusable.
  
  I did appreciate being exposed to the "other side," so to speak. And I actually learned a lot about the occult, paganism and satanism that, ironically, I would never have known simply by reading Harry Potter.
  
  (Edited to add: I do adhere to Abanes's belief that practicing magick is prohibited by the Bible-- therefore, I do not engage in occult activities. We diverge at the conclusion that reading HP essentially crosses that line, however. Likewise, I wouldn't believe that reading a murder mystery makes me guilty of murder or more inclined to commit it.)
• 
  Amy Meyers

  I feel that Abanes tried to answer some of the pertinent questions that will arise about HP. Is it good (ethically, morally, theologically) for a Christian to read? is it detrimental to a Christian to read? if it's bad, why then could Christians read Tolkien and Lewis's fantasy novels?
  
  I don't feel that he always did a great job at answering, but in general, I agreed with some of his concerns listed. I read #1, 3, & 7 of the HP books almost a decade ago, so I would like to re-read them all before I allow my kids to read them. I've heard Christians on both side of the issue, defending or attacking the series. I think it's fair for Abanes to bring up questionable ethics in the books--heroes not acting very "good." Sometimes his arguments seemed like a stretch--a straw man. I'm trying to keep this review short, so I'll just say that in general I agreed with this book more than the other one I read (Christian-pro-HP). I do have concerns that it is not worth it for my kids to read 3,000 pages of an imaginative series that will draw them in, if it is not true, good, and beautiful--IOW if it gives them the wrong sensibilities The main reason I docked it to a 3 (from a 4) is that I wish he had updated it or waited to write it until the end of the series, because so many Christians seem to think that HP as a Christ-figure justifies the whole series, without thinking a little more deeply into some of the frustrating elements--like crass humor or the teacher in divination class being possessed and speaking in a lowered voice--what is that outside of demon possession according to the Christian worldview?
  
  #Lit Life 2 for 22 Two Books from Opposing Perspectives
• 
  Denise Kettering

  This book takes up a discussion of how the books of the Harry Potter series (1-4) create problems for Christian parents and readers. The arguments focuses on the ethical implications raised by the Potter books and images of the occult found in the books. Although the book is helpful for understanding why some people oppose Harry Potter, it is far too one-sided a positions. The argument throughout is not balanced. For example, he compares the Potter books to Lewis and Tolkien. His analysis of Lewis and Tolkien is probably the most helpful part of the book. However, he criticizes the Potter books as being violent, but largely ignores the violence in the Narnia and Lord of the Rings series. Thus, the book is best for explaining why some Christians may have problems with the content of the books, particularly what is identified as occult and the particular ethical concerns raised by each book. Abanes tends to gravitate towards two different ethical concerns: telling lies and breaking rules. Yet, many children's books involve these concerns, so it seems he is perhaps stretching in those sections. Overall, this book gives insight into the types of concerns raised by some Christians about the Potter books and why they might be concerning to some.