[EatingPie]

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

Simply combining blood and sacrifice isn't sufficient to constitute proof. That's no more specific to Christianity than either alone would be.

Did you read the bullet items in my posts? I spelled out 5 or 6 elements specifically associated with the sacrifice that allude to a Christ figure. I've repeated them multiple times.

And the question is how close a compliance is required for it to be the case.

Good question. There's no hard-and-fast rule. The strength of the allusion is what matters to me. For example, the new Terminator: Salvation movie has a Christ Figure, as the movie starts out with him executed, spread out as if on a cross. The cross is an image strongly associated with Christ in our culture. And the image acts as a foreshadowing to a sacrifice later in the movie. The director McG actually stated of this scene, "Here we see him in the Christ position."

While we don't see Harry in the "Christ position," having 5 or 6 Christian allusions specifically associated with sacrifice and protection/redemption strikes me as pretty good.

Sure. But Lewis was a devout Christian, and specifically trying to do an allegorical retelling. I'd say the jury is still out on Harry, unless Rowling should specifically state that what you mentioned was intended as Christian allegory.

One correction: a Christ Figure is an allusion, not an allegory. I probably confused things by citing Aslan, but I wanted to illustrate that the demand for 1-to-1 correspondence was not required.

Harry Potter is not an allegory, nor a re-telling of the Christ story. It is a book about a wizard who makes a Christ-like sacrifice, linked with other actions that allude to Christ.

But indeed, I agree, unless Rowling rubber-stamps each thing with a "yes" or "no" we don't know for sure. She won't do that, though, as she wants the books to largely speak for themselves... at least that's my impression. That's why I insist on the term "evidence" in examining the text rather than "proof."

You've produced evidence good enough for you. The question is whether it's good enough for others.

Hence... discussion!

Sorry, but state of mind is absolutely critical, and even central to the discussion.

How convincing your evidence will be depends on the mindset of the person examining the evidence. You are a Christian, and find it so. I'm an agnostic who doesn't care one way or the other whether Harry is a Christ Figure, save as a possible point of academic interest, so your evidence doesn't convince me. It might well convince another Christian.

Okay, as stated this way, I am in at least partial agreement. The previous statements (not necessarily by you) struck me as a way of patting me condescendingly on the head, "you silly Christian, you, you need HP to be a Christ thing." Sheesh! Particularly offensive when I am actually providing textual evidence for an intellectual discussion, and am open to other views.

Why I agree with your wording now is that you're talking about our worldview. How our beliefs and ideas can influence how we see things. It's not about need, but about perception. Initial perception, anyway. When dealing with book and film, I often need to put aside my initial perceptions in order to examine what I consider to be the author's intent. I'm not always successful, but that's how my mind works. Ironically, I didn't see Harry as a Christ Figure until I read the last book a second time. And then the more I debated it on the Leaky Cauldron, the more evidence I found (at least I believe I found).

-Pie