Recently, I have been wrestling with this in my books. Biblically, it seems as though all "magic" would be considered witchcraft, whereas, something that we would call magic today, could really simply be seen as God's power in biblical times.

In the novel I am currently working on, an elite group of seven people known as the Parya have the ability to produce "magic" however it's really simply an ability that they were created to have and use for good.

What I am wondering, is if this ability would be seen as demonic, (especially since several of the Parya turn it to evil uses, and decide to serve the Shadow.)

Mindy,

This is a very difficult topic, which is why I allocated an entire room for it. I voted 'yes' because of the nature of the questions that you gave.

There is witchcraft used in the Bible for bad, and power used for good. In a fantasy world both should be acceptable if dealt with in a similar manner. That is something that is obvious to me, although it might be argued over for a while.

The hard part is 'green' or 'neutral' magic that is very common is fantasy stories. This is where the distinctions become difficult to draw, and although I believe that I have done so to my satisfaction for my stories, I will not judge others who come to other opinions on it (so far). What conclusions have you come to?

With joy and peace in Christ,
Jay Lauser

I personally believe that Magic is fine, as long as it has a defined source. (In many fantasy books, it's simply in the form of vague "spells" etc...that leave the whole moral aspect of it up in the air.)

I also believe that magic such as soothsaying, potions, and certain charms should always be dealt with negatively as it is in the Bible.

I agree with your assessment. Have you read all of my Tribe series? I partly deal with my 'neutral magic' application in those.

No, I'm afraid I haven't read those, however Luke 11:23 says "He who is not for Me is against me..."

So I think if magic is unspecified, then it is probably witchcraft, especially if it has a darker aspect to it.

They are in this room: the other threads by me.

Exactly. However, 'neutral magic' need not be unspecified. My brother calls it 'cobha,' to avoid having to use the phrase 'neutral magic.'

Mindy, in my main story, magic is a general term for all sorcery and black arts. However, my elves have abilities that, to my humans, seem "magical". These are really just abilities and skills that elves have that humans don't, and it seems like magic. Your description of your Parya reminded me of this. The way you described it, the Parya are born with abilities that most humans don't have, and abilities can be used for good or evil. Say that there was a small group of blind people. A person that could see would have the ability to help the blind folks, or rob them...uh...blind (sorry, that wasn't intentional). That's my writing perspective. I do agree, though, that I dislike the neutral magic that is just energy or something that can be channeled through special people. Most fantasy writers that I've read don't explain such origins to my satisfaction (if they did, though, their books would probably be much too long and dull).

P.S. If this post replies to the wrong person, I apologize. This is the first time I've ever posted on a forum.

Elestar,

You did very well! Thank you for your post.

I like the way you describe your set up. In my world, I very carefully describe where everyone's 'power' comes from, or doesn't come from. I try to make it very interesting (very), and I hope I succeed. I agree that 'neutral' magic is a term that most people misuse, which is why my brother invented 'Cobha.' Maybe I will get him to describe it for the blog.

With joy and peace in Christ,
Jay Lauser aka Sir Emeth Mimetes

Oh, I hope he will! What does Cobha mean? Is it from a language he created? I admit, it's very intriguing.

Hmm... it is hard to give a definition and not an article. It is from one of his languages in a way. He says that for now, it means: "Something in a story or a world of ideas that is impossible physically, but is used for expression like in a dream." He likes to say that Cobha is like the 'impossible' things that happen in dreams, which are actually possible because they are in a dream. Confusing, but whatever.

Wow...that would make sense...if his story takes place in a dream.

But wouldn't that make it just fairly normal? How is it magical?

What he is saying that all stories are in a sense like dreams, and so behave according to similar rules as dreams.

Nope, is transforming a spear into a wand of flame by drawing the fire into it from a hearth and then hurling it into the heart of a warrior, paralyzing him normal? No it isn't, but it is possible if you made up the world. At least, that is what he says. I do not always understand him, and so it is hard to articulate his arguments.

Idk...if your world has different laws of physics/gravity, it might be normal.

Exactly: normal is relative. And if you make an alternate world you can make a different normal, just like in a dream. Then magic would be something abnormal for that world. Cobha is basically something that is normal for your world, but isn't for our world. Make sense?

Yep! Totally.

Your "magic" is really interesting. Personally, I use little magic in my stories. I prefer swords or words because I am more famiiliar with them. I applaud all of you for using magic in a godly way. Keep up the good work!

This is a very fascinating and difficult topic, and we need to tread lightly. I ran across Revelation 22:15 where it lumps "those who practice magic arts" with those excluded from God's holy city".

Magic, strictly speaking, in a fantasy world is equivalent to someone seeking ungodly power in our own world. The bad guys, I think, can use this, but we need to make it clear that their source of power is demonic in nature.

This does not mean that the good guys cannot use what appears to be magic, but we need to make it clear that what they do is (a) sourced in God's power, and (b) a gift given by God. In that sense, it is not "magic", but rather falls under the camp of "miracle", etc. Elijah and Elisha are examples to us of this.

Of course, if the world where the story takes place has different laws of physics, then of course "magical" things can happen, but we need to make sure these kinds of things are understood by the reader as that world's equivalent of "science".

Now, some of us will draw the line differently to reach a different audience, and that's okay. What I have given above is, I think, a clear delineation if you want to keep your book readable by a Christian audience. But be sure you know why you are breaking the above rules and why God is calling you to do that.

I wrote a blog post about the use of magic in fiction, covering an interview someone had with Stephen Lawhead about this topic.

Very interesting!

I really enjoyed your blog post, and I definitely agree with you! So you would say that demonic magic is fine, as long as it is portrayed as evil?

I agree with what you said. I personally don't use magic, but when used, it should either be evil or directly from God.

I don't think that magic IS from God, but in another culture it might be acceptable. It all depends how you use it! "Good magic" might be the response to demonic power. But when used for your "bad guys" it should be demonic in nature.

Cool! I had never thought about anything like that, but...somehow...it make sense! And I really like the creativity.

Personally I only allow my evil charries to use magic when I write a story. It's easier for me to just say magic is an evil force than to try to explain why my good charries can use magic, when God is against witchcraft and such. However if you can come up with a good reason for good charries to use magic, by all means go for it. It's just not something I'm good at, myself.

Oooh... my favorite subject. I hate white magic in the sense of it being "white magic". In the end of the Hobbit when Gandalf is talking about the Necromancer and said "We White Wizards have decided to put an end to him" or something to that effect I wanted to jump up and down and pull my hair and gnash my teeth. Because there are no white wizards! You're all the same thing! Your power comes from the same place, your very name acknowledges that, and the only difference is how you use it and that is no difference at all!!!
(Don't get me wrong, I love Gandalf, but I can't stand the term "white wizard.")
I wrote a book, called the Last Wizard, proving this entire point. Morgon is a healer, very skilled, with some magical powers of his own. (which he fears.) However, sometimes, despite all he can do, someone dies. (Naturally.) One day his father, (a wizard,) comes to him and offers to teach him wizardry, to control the power he was born with, the power to heal anyone, and to kill. (A little bit like Anakin, I guess.) Morgon refuses. Morgon continues to refuse. Morgon is the most powerful wizard to be born in centuries, he's terrified of what he knows he's capable of, but he would die sooner than use that power. Because he knows it's also capable of killing and he's not willing to take that risk. The ends never justify the means. Even though, of anyone, Morgon you would say is the most suited to wield that power. He's compassionate, gentle, a healer, he could destroy the wizards and rule the land. But doing so would destroy him and everyone he loves and he refuses. And refuses. I think, if I ever finish the book, I'll make my point. But I used magic to make it. So I believe magic is acceptable in Christian fantasy...

Despite all that. I'm a great fan of a subtle trick called "Gifts." Someone has a 'gift', an instinctive ability to do something that might others think unusual. Darlene can change her shape. Janin can see things he was not witness to. This is not unlike the characters from my first SciFi novel who could control things with their minds. That's science fiction, this is fantasy, it's all the same thing and we're all happy.

(If I could remember everything I've written I might be able to remember more examples...)

Random thought on Gandalf:

Tolkien defended his term 'white wizard' because of the linguistics of said term.

Wizard comes from the root 'wise'. Which describes Gandalf. Which is why he doesn't throw around traditional wizard-spells and what-have-you... he's always more of an advisor.

It also explains pretty clearly someplace (it might've been in the appendices to LotR) that he's non-human and has inherent gifted power, being some kind of an angel-like character...

But in modern fantasy literature that for some reason has a strong desire to 'borrow' things from LotR rather blatantly, often the wizards do not follow the old linguistics, just sticking with the whole magic deal... not something I read! (not only because of the magic, but because I can only put up with so many LotR-copies...)

I like Gandalf. And he annoys me to no end. And I can live with the term "Wizard." To some extent. So... I'm not quibbling with that, just using it more as an example. I looked up the etymology of wizard myself and it literally means wise man. Or sage. Or Mage. Or whatever... it just kind of morphed to mean what it does today. (Hey! Maybe that was Tolkien's fault! Anyone know the first work to actually have a 'wizard' in ?)

Unlurking here. This is my favorite topic! Squee!!! So much fun!
Okay, well, I might be the only one here but I love Harry Potter. I'm not going to defend Rowling here, because that's not what it's for, but I am going to pull a bit from her, as well as from Lewis, and, of course, Tolkien. I am perfectly fine with magic in literature, because, at least for me, when I read about not practicing magic, I read it as demonic magic. In the Bible we never read about anyone practicing magic for good, because in the Bible all that practice magic get what power they have from the devil. But, in a different world, unless you're writing perfectly strict to every law in the Bible, I think it's ok. I, at least, tend to pull from the "tone" of the Bible, as I believe Lewis and Tolkien did. There is a lot in their work that doesn't follow the Bible directly, such as the river gods in Narnia, and I'm okay with that. You are writing your own world, and you are really writing your own God. As much as people like to say Aslan, Iluvatar, and Yahweh are exactly the same and basically interchangable, they're not. They all have elements of eachother, but neither Tolkien or Lewis wrote allegory, they simply wrote and many of their views slipped into their writing, which is what I, at least, like to do with whatever I write. As much as we all hope to write a God as close to the True God as possible, it's impossible. We do not know the entire God, so how can we translate Him into a different world? But what I think matters is, again, the tone and above all the worldview. The God in your world doesn't have to be exactly the God in our world, but he does need to regain the basics, love, forgiveness, omnipotency. I know alot of people just stay away from magic, and I totally respect that. But I also feel magic in literature can be lovely when done well, and shouldn't been automatically tabooed and labled wrong simply for being magic.
Now, kinds of magic. My favorite types of magic come from Tolkien's world. The magic is so prevalent yet so subtle, and most really are powers mainly coming from the type of creature that is using it, such as the hobbits who have the everyday magic of being able to walk quietly or the elves whose magic is basically used with maintaining their homes and upkeeping what parts of the world are still good. Then there is the evil magic of Sauron, Morgoth, etc. that still is acually streaming from Iluvatar, who created all. It's the classic dark lord, and I don't think it really needs to be discussed. No one really ever has a problem with magic being presented as evil. Then we have Gandalf. I love this guy. People seem to have a problem with him a lot though, because he's a wizard. Yet his magic isn't an infallible thing, he's not invincible and he's not indestructible. He's not a god.
And that is my next point. Why does God not want us practicing witchcraft? It is my belief that He doesn't want us putting ourselves equal with Him. If you were able to move things around at will with just a few words, don't you think you'd feel a little bit special? You might start thinking you don't need God, that you have your own power. And that is why I believe He does not want us practicing magic, not because magic in itself is bad, but because humans tend to be weak, and "above all desire power." Totally LotR. Men got magic, were overcome by it, became wraiths, over to the dark side, the end. Yet the elves, wise, and the Hobbits, humble, are able to have what magic they possess without thinking they're amazing. And this, above all, it what I think matters. Why. Why is magic bad, why does your character/race have magic, and above all what do they do with it? "It is our choices...that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." In this world, magic is bad. We are humans, we are weak. Even Gandalf felt that to possess great power would turn him bad. Yet in a fictional world, where the characters do not by the magic become stronger than whatever God you may have and use the magic in a controlled way in their own spheres, I think it's okay. Magic should not be used to make a character invincible and it should not be without any sort of "string" attached. Yet is magic in itself a taboo? I say no.
I really hope I didn't offend anyone. Please feel free to tell me where and how I went wrong, as I'm sure I did somewhere. I don't even think that made any sense.

To use magic or not to use magic? I would say it depends on what you mean by the term and how it's used. I know in my stories I only refer to power gained from the "Shadow" as magic, the rest is called Talent, because, in those cases, it is a god-given gift to use. But someone can choose to let go of their Talent and take up Magic and serve the Shadow - which will, most probably, make them very powerful, but they basically sell their souls to get that power...

But I'm ok with magic as long as it's explained... and the 'good magic' doesn't involve demons, necromancy... that type of thing.

Just my two cents' worth!

Marsh

*sigh*

Gandalf is only called a wizard in the books, because that is how men understand him. He isn't REALLY one if you read where he came from and where he gets his power.

There's my two cents.

But here's the question; What is a wizard?
Here are some definitions
`A male witch or a man who practises or professes to practise magic or sorcery
`A person who practices magic; magician or sorcerer.
`And then the Biblical definition: a pretender to supernatural knowledge and power, "a knowing one," as the original Hebrew word signifies. Such an one was forbidden on pain of death to practise his deceptions

Then, what is magic?
`The art of producing a desired effect or result through the use of incantation or various other techniques that presumably assure human control of supernatural agencies or the forces of nature
`The art that, by use of spells, supposedly invokes supernatural powers to influence events; sorcery
`The art that purports to control or forecast natural events, effects, or forces by invoking the supernatural
`And then the biblical definition (more like rant)
The Jews seem early to have consulted the teraphim (q.v.) for oracular answers (Judg. 18:5, 6; Zech. 10:2). There is a remarkable illustration of this divining by teraphim in Ezek. 21:19-22. We read also of the divining cup of Joseph (Gen. 44:5). The magicians of Egypt are frequently referred to in the history of the Exodus. Magic was an inherent part of the ancient Egyptian religion, and entered largely into their daily life. All magical arts were distinctly prohibited under penalty of death in the Mosaic law. The Jews were commanded not to learn the "abomination" of the people of the Promised Land (Lev. 19:31; Deut. 18:9-14). The history of Saul's consulting the witch of Endor (1 Sam. 28:3-20) gives no warrant for attributing supernatural power to magicians. From the first the witch is here only a bystander. The practice of magic lingered among the people till after the Captivity, when they gradually abandoned it. It is not much referred to in the New Testament. The Magi mentioned in Matt. 2:1-12 were not magicians in the ordinary sense of the word. They belonged to a religious caste, the followers of Zoroaster, the astrologers of the East. Simon, a magician, was found by Philip at Samaria (Acts 8:9-24); and Paul and Barnabas encountered Elymas, a Jewish sorcerer, at Paphos (13:6-12). At Ephesus there was a great destruction of magical books (Acts 19:18, 19).

These definitions get skewed so often that I thought it might be helpful to put them out there. I have made my bit, if someone directly quotes me I'll respond but for the most part I'll sit back and lurk and enjoy this discussion that will most likely never end

Definitions are not as important as the intent behind words. As Tolkien himself once explained, he only used names to evoke an image, not to refer to the definition.

I would use it as long as it is clearly defined. There is a distinct difference between good and evil, dark and shadow. Things go wrong when you try to blur them to gray. There are gifts from God (like prophets), and He has given us spiritual power, and there are also evil powers in this world. I personally prefer to use gifts, given by The Maker.