HE'S BACK!
The Harry Potter phenomenon is a once-in-a-generation phenomenon so compelling and so widely hyped that it is impossible for church young people to ignore.

The previous event of this magnitude was the release of the first "Star Wars" movie. At the time, These Times, one of the church's "missionary" magazines, had a Star Wars logo on its cover and discussed the themes the movie raised. Our Weekly Reader magazines in church schools featured stories about it. Even Adventist children who didn't see the movie (I was one of them) could scarcely escape learning the basic details of the plot and story line.

No matter the content of the Harry Potter movies and books, we must accept that somehow our young people will be exposed to it. We should therefore think carefully about our response.

The books are far from perfect, and there is objectionable material in them to be sure. There is far too much talk of ghosts, obsession with dying, and contacting those in the afterlife, a trend that only increases in the newer books. Equally troublesome is the idea of possession and control of one person by others.

We should, however, be careful before we rise up in righteous anger to condemn the books outright. We are well served to follow Philippians 4:8 and think on things that are true, honest, and of good report; but a knee-jerk condemnation will ring hollow if it is based on a poor understanding of the books and a desire to read into them what we think is there, instead of what actually is.

The "wizardry" depicted in the writings of J. K. Rowling is, first of all, completely imaginary. Nobody ever has done any of the spells, charms, or jinxes that are described in the books. No child will be caught up trying to do this magic because it won't work; it can't work. This is consistent with the statements of Rowling herself that she is not advocating the occult. Of the thousands of her fans she has met, none has ever told her that they have taken up the occult thanks to her influence.

The foes of the Harry Potter books, on the other hand, are all too real. By tearing them down as witchcraft they are trying to build themselves up as right and proper. It's a discourse of condemnation that could easily be used against other targets in the future, perhaps even our own church. By joining the anti-Harry Potter groundswell we empower those who would train us to accept these type of discourses unquestioningly. John Todd and Mike Warnke are but two of them that have proven to be false in the past.

This is not a question of something like the New Age movement, where Christian writers gave it more publicity than it would otherwise have gotten. We need not fear about giving undue publicity to the Potter phenomenon, that would be impossible. Thus, it is appropriate to discuss it, and to examine the ethics and underlying theology of the book. The ethics of the behavior of the various characters in the book provide much useful matter for discussion. So, too, does the question of the similarities between the imaginary world of wizardry and the Adventist church itself.

At the end of the day, could the most perplexing problem with this book be that it is but another in a long string of phenomena hyped by the popular culture; culture that is not pro-God or anti-God, but rather ignores God altogether?

Steven C. Timm, Ph.D.
Chicago, Illinois

It is absolutely abhorrent that the Adventist Review, a publication that should be presenting Christian truth, continues to print articles defending the occult-laced Harry Potter books. As a minister who has witnessed first hand young peoples' lives destroyed by a young Wicaan woman who was allowed to attend one of our universities, I find it deplorable that this magazine continues to present the "other side" of this argument. Anyone who defends these satanic books is going against the expressed Word of God, period. Quit fence-sitting and start defending the Bible instead of J. K. Rowling.

These books tempt young impressionable minds to look into witchcraft and desensitize them to the soul-destroying dangers of the occult. It is long past time to start protecting our children instead of promoting the "positive" aspects of these books. Any perceived "good" is grossly outweighed by the tremendous damage these books are doing.

Come on, Review editors, start acting like Christians who are concerned about the souls of our youth instead of like politicians obsessed with being "politically correct"!

R. F. Burke
Alberta, Canada

I have been reading about all the Potter mania for the last week or so over the new book. I have also read some of the articles in the Review concerning Rowling's books. I have come to a conclusion that the only way for people to really find out for themselves if these books are good or bad is to buy the book, read it, and come up with their own decision, guided by the Spirit of God.

The real question should be, if a child wants to read a book more than 800 pages long, why does he or she find it so hard to read The Desire of Ages, The Great Controversy, and for that matter, the Bible?

Pastor Javier Diaz
Alabama

LIBERALS AND LEGALISTS
Oh, to have writers who communicate! Nathan Brown presents in his column, "Liberalism as a Form of Legalism" (June 19, 2003), just one example of such a failing of a writer.

First, Brown does not define what he means by either liberalism or legalism, which is essential in any discussion, since the meaning that people place on these words is extremely wide.

Then he quotes the following, "Liberals are often just fundamentalists with a different set of beliefs." I can't imagine anyone originating such a poorly reasoned statement, but Brown apparently thought it worth repeating. The possibilities for such statements are infinite: "Christian are often just atheists with a different set of beliefs," or, "Snails are often just fundamentalists with a different set of genes."

Please, in the future spare us such drivel (that sounds almost cruel but look up the word in the dictionary, it seems to fit perfectly here).

Legalism and Liberalism may be problems in the church, but they are not the same thingsa fact that could have easily been documented if the author had defined his terms. Brevity may be the soul of wit, but vagueness is the bane of reason. And reason is something sorely needed in the Seventh-day Adventist church today. Maybe to clear up our understanding of what Brown means, he could deal with Liberalism and Legalism separately. Both are certainly worthy of independent evaluation and recommendations.

Ron Corson

In "Liberalism as a Form of Legalism," Nathan Brown provides some helpful insights into the destructive nature of liberalism. Yet, by separating law and gospel, he destroys the understanding necessary for recovery from it.

Both legalism and liberalism result from an inadequate understanding of the relationship between law and gospel. Legalists go beyond law as a condition of salvation (Romans 2:13; Revelation 22:14) and make it partly, at least, a cause of salvation. Legalists do the right things for the wrong reasons (Romans 9:30-32).

On the other hand, liberalism thrives on separating the law from the gospel, leading invariably to assurance of salvation while living in sin. Liberalism confuses even obedience by faith (Romans 16:26) with legalism. Yet Paul did not believe he had fully preached the gospel until sanctified obedience was evident (Romans 15:16-19). God approves when we do the right things for the right reasons in His strength alone (Hebrews 13:20, 21).

In summarizing the scriptural testimony, Ellen White wrote: "The law and the gospel cannot be separated. In Christ mercy and truth are met together; righteousness and peace have kissed each other. The gospel has not ignored the obligations due to God by man. The gospel is the law unfolded, nothing more nor less. It gives no more latitude to sin than does the law. The law points to Christ; Christ points to the law" (Bible Echo, Feb. 8, 1897).

The recovery of this perspective in Adventism is our most urgent task if we are serious about avoiding the pitfalls of legalism and liberalism and finishing the distinctive work that we have been given to do. It would be encouraging to see the Review take the lead in this matter.

Barry Harker
Flaxton, Queensland

Nathan Brown's column is one of the most intelligent pieces I've ever read in the Adventist Review. All of us can easily begin placing our confidence in our behavior, whether it's our faithful adherence to certain rules or our open-mindedness and tolerance.

Brown reminds us that Jesus is our only source of salvation, and that becoming like Him is our supreme goal reminds that cannot be repeated too often. Liberalism and conservatism are not ends in themselves.

Rachel Whitaker,
Assistant Editor
Guide Magazine
Hagerstown, Maryland

CONCERNS ABOUT COMPETITION
I nearly cried when I saw the news item, "Fourth Commandment Goes to Court" in the latest on-line edition of the Review. It saddens me to see this effort to allow our young people to play in basketball tournaments. How did we ever come to this? There was a time when the counsels given to us from Ellen White were enough to keep competitive sports out of our schools. Now it seems that every one of our colleges and academies has teams that compete against others.

I realize many in the Adventist church today feel that Ellen White's counsels were for former generations. However, it would be wise to see what she had to say on this topic.

Under the heading, "The Danger in Sports," she wrote: "I do not condemn the simple exercise of playing ball; but this, even in its simplicity, may be overdone. I shrink always from the almost sure result which follows in the wake of these amusements. It leads to an outlay of means that should be expended in bringing the light of truth to souls that are perishing out of Christ. The amusements and expenditures of means for self-pleasing, which lead on step by step to self-glorifying, and the educating in these games for pleasure, produce a love and passion for such things that is not favorable to the perfection of Christian character" (Note Book Leaflets From The Elmshaven Library .097.004).

You would be surprised how quickly the expenses for college athletic programs add up. At Southwestern Adventist University, the athletics program (including scholarships), was costing nearly $140,000 per year. When Donald Sahly came to the university recently as its new president, he and many of the board members had the conviction and courage to stand up to the students and scale back the athletic program. The money saved went toward shoring up deficiencies in the English Department. I thank the Lord for principled leaders like Dr. Sahly.

I wish all our schools would look at the unnecessary expenditures they are putting out for competitive sports. If this money would be used to train our young people to win souls for Christ, it would be much better spent. This is where our priorities should be; not in twisting the arms of athletic associations so that our young people can compete in their tournaments. Our final judgement will not consist of how many baskets we can make from the free throw line, or state championships won.

Pastor Jim Landelius
Decatur, Arkansas

Let's see: We sue over sports when we are not supposed to be involved in sports and we are not supposed to sue either. What ever happened to church standards? What a horrible example to anyone who knows what a real Adventist stands for and what we believe in.

Mike Walston

NEW THEOLOGY?
The column, "Theologian's Syndrome" by Ed Christian (June 19, 2003) concludes with the statement, "Salvation depends on what team we're on, not on whether we can pass a theology exam." This must be a new theology. I thought Seventh-day Adventists taught that salvation depends on an individual, not a team work. Have we changed the theology of salvation?

Won Bae
Marlboro, Massachusetts

IN THE PRESENCE OF ROYALTY
A personal response to the article "Blooming in the Heart of Thailand" (June 12, 2003): It was a very interesting article, especially with Her Royal Highness, Princess Soamsawali, present and having a part in the graduation service.

The bit about how to conduct oneself in her presence, etc., made me think how we should dress and conduct ourselves when we meet every Sabbath, when we go to church and meet with the King of the universe, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit.

There are congregations in southern California where the minister comes to church dressed in a sport shirt and jeans and preaches sitting on a stool. The congregation is encouraged to come dressed in blue jeans.

This is surely a contrast to what took place at Mission College when Princess Soamsawali, the member of a small country's royal family, was present.

Lyle Hamel
Yucaipa, California

SINCE YOU ASKED
In his editorial, "Since You Asked" (May, 2003), Bill Johnsson states that the Review did not take any position on America's war with Iraq because "the Review is not about controversy."

This, however, has not always been the case. There was a time when the Review did take positions on things that matter. During the Spanish-American War of 1898-1899, for example, Adventists emerged as outspoken critics of America's imperial foreign policy. In opposition to other churches that embraced the war as a Christianizing and civilizing campaign, they pointed to the glaring inconsistency of linking the cross with militarism of any sort. "Christianity is one thing; war is another, and far different thing. Christians are one sort of people; warriors are another and different sort of people," thundered former army sergeant A. T. Jones.

Percy Magan's, "The Peril of the Republic," rushed to print in 1899, similarly denounced American actions in the Philippines as mere "colonial greed and rapacious lust" and as evidence of the beast at work. Better, Magan argued, "for a few missionaries to lose their lives at the hands of heathen savages than for heathen savages to lose their lives at the hands of those calling themselves Christians."

It is a great irony, then, that while America acts increasingly like the beast Adventists long proclaimed it to be, the prophetic movement has proved an increasingly timid and sycophantic page at the dragon's side.

Ronald Osborn
Mission College
Thailand