The New Earth and caring for the environment we have now

Tomorrow is Earth Day. E. Stephen Burnett has written a fine blog post, with plenty of scriptural material, on how care of the current earth relates to the New Earth.

You may also want to read my own post, more extensive, but not on the New Earth, about what the Bible says about environmental stewardship.

Thanks for reading. Read Burnett!

Sexual slavery in Hollywood

Some recent articles refer to sex in Hollywood (aka the US entertainment industry) productions, and claim that some of this amounts to sexual slavery.

One of these articles, by E. Stephen Burnett, refers mostly to the HBO series "Game of Thrones," which is based on George R. R. Martin's series of novels, collectively called "A Song of Ice and Fire." See here and here for my reaction to the books -- I did not finish the series, for reasons I explain in the posts. My second post discusses and refers to some reaction to Martin's work by Christianity Today and by award-winning author of fantastic literature Elizabeth Moon.

Burnett claims that the HBO series includes pornography. He says that "naked people who act out sexual scenarios in public media in order to get money is porn." He also refers to John Piper, who says, in a post on "Game of Thrones:" "God calls women to adorn themselves in respectable apparel with modesty and self-control (1 Timothy 2:9). When we pursue or receive or embrace nudity in our entertainment, we are implicitly endorsing the sin of the women who sell themselves to this way and are, therefore, uncaring about their souls."

Piper also says that violence on-screen is not real -- no one gets killed. But nudity is real. People really expose their bodies. Further, he says that it is not ever necessary to have nude actresses in order to tell a story.

Piper dealt almost entirely with nakedness in women. There is, of course, also nudity by men on-screen. I don't know the frequency of occurrence of one versus the other.

A Cap Stewart has written two posts, here and here, in which he claims, with some anecdotes to back them up, that women are sometimes coerced into becoming sex objects. He says, with some justification, that some of them are a sort of sex slave.

None of the three authors (all of them wrote about "Game of Thrones," and other things) discussed the pornography film industry. My guess is that there might be some actual full-time sex slavery in that industry, but I have no facts to back that up. None of the authors discussed homosexual sexual activity.

Thanks for reading. Be careful what you watch. Since this post concerns pornography, I expect that it will get more views than most of my blog does, which, in itself, tells us something.

Sunspots 433

Things I have recently spotted that may be of interest to someone else:

The Arts: Wired reports on how an artist has created art based on the movements of the London Underground (that's the subway, if you didn't know this.)

Christianity: E. Stephen Burnett heads an insightful discussion on whether the Harry Potter books teach occultism. (He doesn't believe so.) There are a lot of comments, almost all done in a respectful manner. Burnett says, among other things, that "trusting [occult practices] instead of God as a means to manipulate one’s world and control one’s life. (This is the goal behind any real occult/witchery attempts, including the infamous 'prosperity gospel' heresy.)"

Christianity Today reports that too many non-Christians don't even know a Christian.

Computing: A National Public Radio reporter allowed an MIT professor to examine the metadata from the reporter's Gmail account, in a way similar to how the NSA can use our metadata. The professor learned a lot, without reading any of the e-mail.

Education: None of the more than 24,000 students taking entrance exams for the University of Liberia obtained a score high enough for entrance.

Science: (And Philosophy, and Christianity) Books and Culture, sister publication to Christianity Today, has re-published an essay, by Karl Giberson, a physicist, about the theoretical work of Stephen Hawking.




Image source (public domain)

A definition of Christian speculative fiction

E. Stephen Burnett, of the excellent Speculative Faith blog (there are a few other authors of this blog) has written a post entitled "Define 'Christian Speculative Story.'"

It's an excellent read, if you are interested in this sort of thing, as I am. I have also written about this subject, a few times. The main post is here.

Read Burnett. Perhaps you will read my post, too.

Thanks.

Will fiction last forever? A series by E. Stephen Burnett

I have subscribed to the "Speculative Faith" blog for several years. One of the reasons is the writing of frequent contributor E. Stephen Burnett (I don't know anything about him, except what I read in the blog.)

He has recently finished a series on the question of whether fiction will last forever. In other words, will there be made-up stories in heaven. You've probably never thought about that, but you probably should.

Here's a brief sample: "But could some genius author create a new genre that doesn’t require traditional villains or opposing causes, which is still just as entertaining and honoring to the God who had long since defeated all real-life villains?"

Thanks for reading. Read Burnett. Please.

E. Stephen Burnett on "safe" stories, and on story pointing us to God.

E. Stephen Burnett is always good reading. In this post at Speculative Faith, he says a couple of things that I would like to say myself, but he says better.

They are these:

Christians shouldn't confine themselves to reading, or watching, only "safe" stories. (This is not to say that we shouldn't be discriminating -- he's not advocating, for example, watching a movie which glorifies senseless violence against women.)

And the second main point is that reading, watching, or listening to good stories, or good art of all kinds, can give us an experience that brings us closer to God. See here for visual representation of Philippians 4:8, which bears on that point.

I've made Burnett's main points, but he makes them better, with discussion and illustration, and he has another point to make, too.

Thanks for reading!

Remaking God in fiction, re-done

E. Stephen Burnett wonders if authors are on safe ground when they remake God in fiction. (He says that The Shack did that, for example.) He asks, but does not answer, three good questions, which he extrapolates from the writing of C. S. Lewis.

The questions (paraphrased) are:
1) Can a Christian writer write a story about a God who is different? (Different commands or personality.)
2) Can a Christian writer write a story with a character who defies God?
3) What purpose is served by doing either 1) or 2)?

Burnett is a good writer, but he does not make clear, at least to me, exactly what he is asking. I think he is asking if a Christian writer can do these things and remain in God's will.

Let me muse about these matters.

Question 1 - Can a Christian writer write a story about a God who is different?

As I see it, there is possible danger in such writing. I believe that it would be possible to write a story about a God who was so different from the Christian God that the story would be blasphemous. It would also be possible for a reader, or the writer, to become too interested in a false god -- a violation of the first of the Ten Commandments.

However, in a sense, the Old and New Testaments present seriously different views of God. The Old Testament God required sacrifices, and adherence to Jewish dietary laws. The New Testament God was a sacrifice, and Christians are no longer required to keep the dietary laws. But, of course, this was not fiction.

J. R. R. Tolkien, an influential writer, usually considered to have been a Christian, presented a false god, or several of them, in his writing. Sauron, although he was, in Tolkien's phrase, "but a servant,"of a more powerful being, was worshiped, and demanded such worship. He was clearly thoroughly evil. Melkor/Morgoth, the great enemy, Sauron's master, was even more powerful, and more evil, and also was a god, to some. In fact, Tolkien had a whole pantheon of lesser beings, some good, some not so. Was he blasphemous? Most would say that he was not. He was merely telling a story. These evil beings were the equivalent of Satan, the real enemy of God, and of God's people, and lesser demons. The good ones were something like angels. Some of them, possibly, were like saints, in the Roman Catholic sense of the term. (Tolkien was a Roman Catholic).

Even though Tolkien had some evil gods, they were not supreme. As in the real world, there was a supreme, good God.

It seems to me that it could be legitimate to present God in a different way, as Tolkien did, if maintaining his goodness, love and supremacy. Some readers might become too obsessed with such fictional deities, but that would be their doing, not the author's. It would be possible to fantasize lustfully about Salome, or Bathsheba, or to covet Solomon's wealth or wisdom, but that would not be the fault of Matthew and Mark, or of the author of 2 Samuel or of 1 Kings.

It seems to me that The Shack also presents God in a legitimate way, although apparently I disagree with Burnett about this.

Elizabeth Moon, an important writer of fantasy and science fiction, has written several novels in an imaginary setting. I have previously posted on the question of whether these works should be taken as Christian novels, or not. I am not sure if Moon meant to portray a polytheistic religion, with a supreme God, and lesser gods, or one that is like Roman Catholicism, with a supreme God, and saints, especially Gird, who was once a living man. As a Protestant, I don't believe in the efficacy of prayer to any but the Triune Supreme God, and believe that prayer to saints comes close to, perhaps is, a violation of the first of the Ten Commandments.* To expand on that, there are some Christian elements. (See my post.) Moon, who is an Episcopalian, and active in her church, has posted a summary of the religion in these books.

Lois McMaster Bujold is also an important writer of both fantasy and science fiction. Like Moon, she has incorporated religious ideas into the fabric of one of her imaginary worlds. (There is a fantasy series by Bujold that I have yet to read, and I would guess that she has done that for this sub-creation, also.) I have also written previously about whether one of her novels can be classified as Christian, and, again, concluded that, although there are Christian elements, it can not. Bujold has done some experimenting -- she has constructed a theology based on five more or less co-equal gods. These gods can reveal themselves to people, and are otherwise real to some of her characters. I do not know whether Bujold is a Christian. There are a few Christian ideas, and apparently a Christian character, in her science fiction series.

C. S. Lewis, perhaps the most important Christian writer of the twentieth century, wrote fantastic fiction, for children, and for adults, as well as about Christianity. In fact, Barnett uses Perelandra, a fantastic novel by Lewis, as a focal point in his essay. By emphasizing Lewis, I think Barnett has answered his own question, with a firm "yes." Why? Because Lewis also wrote a sequel, That Hideous Strength, wherein Merlin is possessed by angelic beings, a non-Biblical concept. And, especially, Lewis wrote Till We Have Faces, a book set in a pre-Christian time, with a pagan goddess, Ungit, who was represented by an idol, and with the god of the mountain, apparently the Greek Cupid.

Question 2 - Can a Christian writer write a story with a character who defies God?

Again, I turn to the Bible. Job and Paul defied God, at least at first. Pharaoh, and several Israelite and non-Israelite kings also did so, for their entire lives, or began by following God, but ended up defying Him, as apparently Saul and Solomon did. And let us not forget Satan.

Enough said. The answer is "yes."

Question 3 - What purpose is served by doing either 1) or 2)?

As to writing about a character who defies God, the purpose should be to set forth an example that we must not follow, or of the error of such defiance. (Kings David and especially Manasseh defied God, but repented, and so can and must we.)

What about writing about a different God, or god?

Till We Have Faces made a point that Christians must take to heart. That point is that God is not required to answer our questions. He is, Himself, the answer. Could this point have been made in a book written of a time and society where there were Christians? I suppose so, but it would have been a drastically different book, and perhaps Orual's defiance, had it been of the one true God, would have turned Christian readers off, whereas defying pagan gods is not so likely to. Defiance, and its answer, was necessary to make Lewis's point.

Bujold's gods of Chalion seem to me to be a different matter. She seems to have done what writers of fantastic literature should do, namely present us with a universe like ours, but with some substantial difference, then describe what that would be like. Ursula K. Le Guin did this about gender in her The Left Hand of Darkness, for example. What would it be like if gender was not fixed? But is it legitimate to tinker with a universe by imagining different gods? I'm not sure. Not to have done so would have made the story quite different, but there could still have been goodness, service, and sacrifice in it, as Bujold's Cazaril showed so well. And creating a theology with no single supreme being strikes me as dangerous.

Let me answer the question for Elizabeth Moon (I have used Bujold and Moon because I am familiar with their work, and because of their prominence.) What about Moon's whole zoo-full of gods (or maybe saints) and spirits? Is that wrong, for a Christian writer? Well, let's put it this way. I submit that Tolkien did the same thing. There are all sorts of evil spirits, and good ones, and a pantheon of gods, in his sub-creation. There is little or no worship of a supreme being, private or public. There is no clear Christ-figure. Yet what he did is accepted as having been good, even Christian fiction, by many Christian writers, probably including Burnett.

I would say that if there is a story that an author must tell, and the author herself is not in defiance of God, there may be legitimate reason to write such a story, even though it presents different gods. I think that's what happened to Tolkien. There are certainly dangers. Pride and idol worship, being attracted by the occult, or having gods before the one true God, come to mind. Prayerful care must be taken. I also think it is possible to write a story with a god who differs from God, or including defiance of God, if the author's intent is to present a lesson that is best presented in that way.

Thanks for reading. Read Burnett's essay.

*On October 2, 2011, I changed a key sentence about Elizabeth Moon's Paksenarrion novels, which was "In a word, they are polytheistic, hence not Christian," to the two sentences before the asterisk in the work above. The reason is that I have re-read the books, and it seems clear that they describe one Supreme God, who is to be worshiped. I didn't come away with that impression in my first reading, several years ago, but I should have. I also changed what I said about Tolkien, adding the idea that some of the good beings, who are no longer mortal, may have been saints, rather than minor gods, and made a few minor editorial changes, related to the ones just described, or to improve the clarity of the post.

This is a re-post, with some revisions, of a post from April 13, 2009. I have removed (unintentionally) the previous post.

Fantastic Literature - E. Stephen Burnett points out how the Bible supports it, part 2

In a previous post, I briefly described the Biblical arguments of E. Stephen Burnett, who claims that, first, Christians can produce fiction, and, second, that that fiction can be fantastic, even have elements of paganism in it. (If you wish to skip my post, and go directly to Burnett, go here and here. But I did more than just point to Burnett.)

Burnett has now gone further, claiming that, first, story-telling was a critical part of the ministry of Jesus, and, second, that at least some of the parables of Jesus were fictional. Burnett's claims are based on what the Bible says about the parables.

Thanks for reading. Read Burnett.

Fantastic Literature - E. Stephen Burnett points out how the Bible supports it

Some Christians think that, say, the Harry Potter books have no place in a Christian's reading, because they have to do with magic. The same has been said for books that have some sort of pagan religion, or even, like the Narnia books, minor characters (such as Tumnus the faun) that are based on non-Christian mythology. I recognize that there are some books that I shouldn't read, because of some sort of sinful content, and that some Christians probably have no business reading the Harry Potter books, or maybe even the Narnia books, because of their own personal make-up and experience, which might open them up to temptations that I don't think are particularly dangerous for me. But I disagree with the idea that no Christian should be reading books with magicians or some sort of pagan religion, and certainly disagree with crossing off all fantastic literature.

See here for a post on a series of books that I decided not to continue reading. See here for a post on the work of a particular author who is a self-declared Druid, but whose work is clearly sympathetic toward Christianity. Here is a post, attempting to describe Christian novels. Here is an examination of Christianity, or lack thereof, in the Harry Potter books.

E. Stephen Burnett is one of the authors of the Speculative Faith blog. In two recent posts - here and here - he opened my eyes about two pertinent Biblical facts. First, Daniel, and his Israeli companions, had to be conversant with the literature of Babylon. (See Daniel 1, particularly verse 17.) That literature almost certainly included stories about pagan deities. Second, the Tabernacle, as God directed its construction, almost certainly included materials given to the Israelites by the Egyptians, and most likely some of those materials were related to Egyptian idol worship. (See here for the source of some, or all, of the Israelite gold, and here for the instructions to use gold in the building of the tabernacle.)

Thanks, Burnett. It seems that God-serving people could know about the stories of pagan gods, and that the worship of God could use materials that had previously been related to the worship of other gods. So fantastic literature can also be used to God's glory, and the edification of Christians, even though it contains elements of magic or paganism. I have thought so for a long time, but this confirms it.

Actually, Burnett goes even further, because he thinks he needs to. Some Christians think, and argue, that no fiction, of any kind, is suitable for Christians to read. (See here for documentation.)

Thanks for reading. Read Burnett.

"Legalism": Christian attitudes toward reading fiction

E. Stephen Burnett deals with important issues related to Christianity and fantastic literature. Now that another Harry Potter movie is out, he has written about what he calls "fiction legalists." Here's his first part, here's the second, and here's the third, and last.

Burnett is reacting, in part, to statements like this one, on a website for homeschoolers, which seems to argue that there is no such thing as good fiction, especially for children. There have been other voices, from Christians, condemning the Harry Potter books and movies, which, although not perfect, can be an influence for good, even for Christianity.

I have posted previously on faith fiction, and tried to answer the question "What must be Christian about a Christian novel?" In particular, I have mused on that question, in relation to the Harry Potter books.

Thanks for reading.