In the Bible, God sometimes gave the Israelites things that contained power from Him: The Ark of the Covenant, the Bronze Serpent, Samson’s hair... Can you think of any other objects of power from the Bible? Do you think objects of power, given by God, can be used in Christian fantasy? Do you plan to use holy objects of power in your writing?

Well, the most obvious Biblical example, apart from what you mentioned, is the Precious and Life-Giving Cross. Following the Orthodox Church, I also believe signs and wonders are worked through other objects associated with Christ and the saints, especially the remains of the latter.

As for whether they can be used in fantasy, whether you're Orthodox, Catholic, or Protestant, they are in the Bible, as you pointed out, Jonathan. Given that, I'm not sure what theological objection could be raised to them.

Regarding my own writing, in my incipient project Symbolikos, the key cobha is that the prototype is always present in the symbol, so the stories will be chock-full of holy objects, mostly images of Christ and the Saints, crosses, etc. You could say these objects have supernatural powers, but bear in mind that it all comes from the presence of the prototype. They're not just objects that can be manipulated at will, but rather they invoke the presence of a person. You cannot wave a cross around and set a village full of innocent people on fire, for instance, because Christ is in the Cross and He doesn't make a habit of murder. Likewise, it would be hard (though perhaps in some circumstances not impossible) to put the power of a demon to a good or holy use through an image of him.

Oh; interesting idea! I know that the Holy Grail was a popular holy object of power in the Medieval Ages... I haven't used any of these sorts of objects of power yet, but my creative juices are flowing now... It seems like a good idea.

While I know a number of "Things" in the Bible are holy and imbued with power. I try to shy away from this for fear of Idolatry. Not saying it's necessarily bad as I do have imbued Items in my world it's just the Idea of a "Holy Artifact" might be a bit troublesome.

As far as the cross goes it is only a symbol believing it has any power in and of itself bothers me. Honestly I believe it is Christ who has all the real power.

But that's just me.

For the sake of clarity, how would you define "idolatry" and who do you fear will commit it? Surely you're not afraid you or your readers will be tempted to worship objects that don't actually exist?



It comes down to a deeper theological issue, I think: Can matter be sanctified? The Orthodox tradition holds that all creation is sanctified through Christ. That's why the Cross is holy. That's why the Holy Icons are holy. That's why the world itself is becoming holy. We're very Incarnation-centric in our theology. We also consider man a composite being of body and soul, or perhaps it would be more correct to say a composite soul of body and spirit or something like that. (I'm new and rather fuzzy on the precise terminology). Western Christians, and especially Evangelical Protestants, tend to believe in a much sharper division between soul and body, and this extends to their view of the world as well.

Obviously, these theological differences are not going to be settled in this thread, and that really isn't the point of the thread anyway, but we should be aware of them and each of us should know where he stands and how that affects his writing. For myself, I believe in the sanctification of matter and so have no problem with holy objects. An iconoclast, such as a Moslem or a Reformed Christian, might view things differently.



I doubt if anything is "only" a symbol. But this is back to the sanctification of matter. And for the record, I was not referring (in the context of the real world) to just any cross (like, for instance, the kind you wear around your neck,) although I do believe those have power, but rather the True Cross, on which Our Lord actually died. Whatever else it may be, that Cross is no mere symbol. Moreover, our tradition records at least two signs performed through the True Cross when it was found.

First of all, it was buried together with the two other crosses of the thieves with whom Christ died. No one knew which was which, so a sick woman was told to kiss each one in turn. When she kissed the final cross, which we believe to have been Christ's Cross, she was instantly healed.

Secondly, at that time a funeral procession was passing by. They stopped and placed the body of the dead man on each of the crosses--and when it lay upon the True Cross, he came back to life.

Now, whether you believe this or not (most Evangelicals probably won't), that's the view of the Cross that informs my writing.



The phrase "in and of itself" bothers me too. You could probably define it in such a way that I'd agree that the Cross has power in and of itself, but I think it's better to say that it has the power of Christ in itself.



Where do you think I think the Cross gets the power?

While I will admit that your points have merit I FEEL CEMPELED TO HAVE A LITTLE FUN WITH THIS ONE.

Idolotry- The worship of Physical things.

Um there are religions out there like Jedi Knight, Pastafarianism, and even a sect of Trekkys's that worship the enterprise.

Ok the last one was just a joke but I wouldn't be surprised.

That's fine, but be aware I'm going to turn it back on you.



This definition doesn't work. Christ is physical (I'd hesitate to call Him a thing, but I think He fits in here) and may lawfully be worshipped, whilst the genius of the Roman Emperor was considered non-physical, but its worship would still be idolatrous.



Just so you know, the "Jedi" and "Pastafarian" religions are both jokes. The latter, in fact, was quite explicitly created by atheists to mock religion. No one actually believes that he was touched by the Noodly Appendage of the Giant Spaghetti Monster, as awesome as that might be.

I noticed that, in the Bible, some objects of power had power that was only temporary (like the Bronze Serpent) or that could lose their power if used wrongly (like Samson's hair).

The Israelites eventually turned the Bronze Serpent into an idol, even though it apparently had no power beyond its use by Moses to protect against the plague of venomous snakes. Moses stood firmly against idolatry, and if we use objects of power in our books, we can make sure our stories show the same attitude towards idolatry as Moses.

I was really tired when I posted that. So let me correct my self.

Idolatry- the worship of inanimate objects.

As far as pastafarianism goes I am inclined to believe you. I can't be sure about Jedi Knight. However Scientology is pretty odd.

*can't believe he's actually chiming in on this*
I think one of the key things to keep in mind for this concept is that traditionally, objects of power function in a completely different manner in most fantasy than the biblical examples Jonathan mentioned. Objects of power in fantasy typically function like batteries, they hold some awesome power that the character controls. But the bronze serpent and the Ark of the Covenant were more like physical channels for God's power (for lack of a better way to word it). Their power wasn't just there for the taking.

The best example of this is in the book of I Samuel, where the Israelites take the Ark of the Covenant into battle with them, believing that it will grant them victory. They were defeated and the Ark of the Covenant was captured. See, the Ark of the Covenant served a specific purpose, it was a physical symbol of God's presence among his people. But the Israelites tried to manipulate God's presence and get him to do things their way and it didn't work. But not to have his name be tarnished, God then struck down the Philistine idols that the Ark was stored next to and inflicted the Philistines with tumors as a sign for them to know that He was not to be trifled with. When God chose, he worked his power in the presence of the Ark of the Covenant, but only when he chose. Similarly, the Bronze Serpent only healed the sick on that one specific occasion.

In fact, one could say (and I'm sure there are those that have said it) that the Serpent and the Ark had no power, imbued or otherwise, but that God worked his power in their vicinity and used them as visual reminders for his people. Yes, Sam, I know you disagree with that view, and you've made that perfectly clear in earlier posts, so need to rise up in rebuttal. Or one could say (like I tried to earlier in this post) that God channeled his power through the Ark and the Serpent on specific occasions, and that outside of those occasions, they had no power. Or you could go along with the notion that they had power that God imbued in them, but keep in mind that even in that case, it was still only available on His terms for His purposes. Honestly, I think advocating any of these views too strongly is a bit frivolous, because honestly, it's not something we can prove. As long as the main point that God used these objects to further his purposes and demonstrate his power is understood, I think you're free to believe whatever you want about how exactly he used them.

Now, for Objects of Power in Fantasy, there are actually two different ways to handle them. Ok, technically there are three, but whatever
The first is through Cobha. The objects, just naturally have their power. Obviously their powers still come from God, because He created everything and wrote the laws of Cobha for that world. But that's different than the Ark of the Covenant and the Bronze Serpent because in those instances, He specifically communicated that the objects were going to have power and that it would be His power at work.

Which leads us to approach number two, in which God specifically uses the object of power to further his purpose and demonstrate His power, love, etc. And if this is the case I think there are a few ideas we glean from the Ark and the Serpent:

1. God did it for a reason. He didn't just say, "You, know Mo, yall should build a fancy box, coat it with gold, and I'll give it special powers for the fun of it." Now, of course, he's not a tame lion, so in your world maybe he does do that
2. He communicated very clearly that the power was coming from Him and why He was doing it. He didn't leave it up to the imagination. The Ark didn't suddenly appear and start glowing without any explanation. The only times that God worked his power through the Ark without first giving instructions were when the Ark was captured by the Philistines and when Uzzah touched the Ark and died instantly.
3. God was driving. Like I mentioned at the beginning, the power wasn't just there for people to use willy nilly. The Ark and the Serpent were God's calling cards (so to speak) and as such, they only did spectacular things when He willed it.
4. In the event that people got off track and started focusing on the power or the object more than the source (aka God), God pulled the plug. He's a jealous God and is not about to be upstaged by His tools.

These are just observations, but if your writing is going to portray God acting directly in your world, then it would be wise to maintain a healthy level of consistency with the biblical records of His activities.

And the third approach is that a created being imbued the object with his/or her own power. Technically, this is a subset of the first approach, because whatever power they have, they have through cobha (aka God gave it to them). But the difference is that the object has power not because of natural/cobhaic properties, nor because God himself reached down and gave it power, but because somebody else gave it power.

Now to clarify, I'm not saying that this is an either-or scenario. I don't think you have to stick with one approach for every object of power in your world. Rather, what I'm saying is when you want an object in your rule to have cool abilities, these are three main ways it could happen. And I think having all three in your world would be awesome!

Now as for other examples of God working miracles through objects in the OT, there's jar of oil and jar of flour in I Kings 17 that never ran out as long as the drought lasted. Then there's similarly the widow's jar of oil in II Kings 4 that kept miraculously refilling long enough to fill a bunch of other jars with oil to sell. And there's the bones of Elisha that brought a dead man back to life when he was tossed in Elisha's grave. And you could almost include Elijah's cloak which he used to part the waters of the Jordan and which fell to Elisha as Elijah was ascending in the whirlwind, but honestly, that was more of a symbol of God's approval than it was an object of power IMHO.

Sorry for the long post, I really thought it was going to be shorter than this or I wouldn't have started replying to the thread at all

Good post, Seer! Well thought out.

I tend to go with the second approach, though not exactly. This topic definitely made me think it over some more (which was the entire point).

That post was even better than what I hoped for, so no apologies. Excellent thoughts.

Agreed.

Yeah, I should've left my wording a little more open, but I was still stuck on the biblical side of the discussion, and kinda missed that.

A broader way to word the second approach is to say that God himself imbues the object with properties that go beyond its natural/cobhaic properties...i.e. God gives the object special powers.

I'm glad you joined in, Jem! You don't give yourself enough credit.



Okay, that threw me. The Word is becoming holy? It is the Word of God. How do you believe the cross is holy, but the Word of God is not? *is curious and has no desire to debate this issue, I just want to know for curiosity’s sake *

World. With an L.

Ah ha!!! That makes waaaaay more sense! Thank you for the clarification. Maybe I should go have my eyes checked..... they say I have perfect vision, but I missed an L!

In a story that I have been working on for some time I have three objects of divine power that the characters, both good and evil, are searching for: the Eye of God, the Hand of God, and the Heart of God. Each one appears to be nothing more than a mundane object but actually contains power associated with a particular attribute of God. The Eye, which actually looks like an ordinary locket, allows whoever has it to see into the mind of another person and know their true intentions. The Hand can actually give someone control over the physical world to either create or destroy. The Heart is a bit of a mystery in the story, as no one at first really knows just what it does. What they will later learn though is that the Heart is necessary to not have any ill effects from the use of the other two. Without the Heart, if you were to try to use the Eye or the Hand there would be serious consequences. For the Eye, you could lose your sight for a while. With the Hand, your body will suffer for using it. If you used them with the Heart though, you would not suffer any of these consequences.

I set this up as a bit of an allegory. The Eye and the Hand are all about power and being able to do things that no human can do (or should be able to do, as far as I am concerned). The Heart is different though. It allows the power artifacts to be used without consequence and has no "power" of its own. I think of the artifacts as an illustration saying that when we try to seize and use power without the Heart, i.e. love, of God guiding us then all we are doing is hurting ourselves (and maybe also others, depending on what we do).

It's still very much a work in progress, but that's the basic idea. Thoughts? Comments? Suggestions?

That's a very good idea, benjaminiah. I wonder, though, if the Heart should represent God's will, which would include His love?

The Heart has been the one that I haven't exactly been sure what to do with. I wondered if I should just go with the description that I put in the post or something more along the lines of what you suggested. I think what you have suggested would work just as well. The whole idea is that when the Eye and the Hand aren't guided by the Heart, then they end up only causing trouble because they aren't being used in the way that they are supposed to be.

Yes. I figured that since we must follow God's will to be victorious, having the Heart represent His will would potentially offer the most theological clarity to the reader. The truth of the necessity of looking to God's guidance to succeed is much needed in the world, and I'm glad that you're seeking to use fiction to illuminate it.

Thanks!