• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Happy Potter and the Agnostic Atheists

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Don't all get excited now. J.K. Rowling isn't doing a book where Harry becomes a member of religious forums or anything. :D

Suppose for a moment that a weird cult, professed that Harry Potter was a sacred text documenting real-life historical events. Perhaps they assert that the films are documentary evidence or re-enactments.

Do you assert that you simply "lack belief" in the existence of Harry Potter because of "lack of evidence" for it and are open to the possibility of the existence of Harry Potter, or do you categorically deny his existence by asserting he is a fictional character with no real existence in any place at any time?

Do you merely "lack belief" in the existence of platform 9 and 3/4, or do you know that such a platform does not exist at Kings Cross station? Or would you be convinced by evidence that 9 and 3/4 exists and could take you to Hogwarts school of Witchcraft and Wizardry?

And would this photograph of a platform 9 and 3/4 constitute evidence of the existence of such a platform at Kings Cross Station? What would constitute evidence for you to reassess your "lack of belief" in such a place?

platform-9-3-4-of-harry-potter-kings-cross-london-united-kingdom_l.jpeg

I'm more religious figures could have existed and many have historical evidence for them too (not just in christianity). However, I don't believe that any religious figure can perform miracles and anything of that nature thousands of years ago but no longer replicate such things today. It makes it seem that thousands of years ago the laws of physics was at a standstill and all of the sudden, we can no longer do the things that was said back when. Almost as if we went into a different universe somewhere between.
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Suppose for a moment that a weird cult, professed that Harry Potter was a sacred text documenting real-life historical events. Perhaps they assert that the films are documentary evidence or re-enactments.

Do you assert that you simply "lack belief" in the existence of Harry Potter because of "lack of evidence" for it and are open to the possibility of the existence of Harry Potter, or do you categorically deny his existence by asserting he is a fictional character with no real existence in any place at any time?
Magic is the alteration of reality independently of the rules of reality. The number of authenticated examples of magic is still zero.

So I accept that the HP books are fantasy, albeit didactic in a positive way, with a plot arguably employing Christian ideas ─ Harry has to 'die' voluntarily to be cleansed of his evil element, for instance.

(Incidentally, there's a well-written and very readable fan-take in which Harry endeavors to reconcile magic with science, called Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality.)
Do you merely "lack belief" in the existence of platform 9 and 3/4, or do you know that such a platform does not exist at Kings Cross station?
I have no reason to think the claim might be possible, let alone accurate as a statement about reality; but the story invites me to accept it on the story's terms, as is common in fiction, and that's what I do.
Or would you be convinced by evidence that 9 and 3/4 exists and could take you to Hogwarts school of Witchcraft and Wizardry?
If the evidence were of such a quality as to overcome the "incredible claims" problem, then yes. However I foresee very little likelihood of that. Note too that the Hogswarts Express is surrounded by unanswered questions, such as where the line runs from Kings Cross station out of London; and why even in Potter Reality anyone would bother with a train at all, and a line from London to Scotland, rather than some version of apparating suitable for youngsters. Let alone a train that only does three return journeys a year.
And would this photograph of a platform 9 and 3/4 constitute evidence of the existence of such a platform at Kings Cross Station? What would constitute evidence for you to reassess your "lack of belief" in such a place?
No. Apart from the obvious, that it's from a film set, it would have to overcome the "incredible claims must meet extraordinary standards of demonstration" problem as above.
 
Last edited:

Quintessence

Consults with Trees
Staff member
Premium Member
As much fun as this is and how big a fan I am of the franchise, personally if I were going to start a religion based on a fantasy series, my pick would be Lord of the Rings. It’s already the holy Bible of geekdom

No way - the Elder Scrolls IP already has a very diverse and well-developed foundation for polytheist religion. Far more so than any other major fantasy IP I've encountered. Come on, LoTR is so last decade... :D
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
Don't all get excited now. J.K. Rowling isn't doing a book where Harry becomes a member of religious forums or anything. :D

Suppose for a moment that a weird cult, professed that Harry Potter was a sacred text documenting real-life historical events. Perhaps they assert that the films are documentary evidence or re-enactments.

Do you assert that you simply "lack belief" in the existence of Harry Potter because of "lack of evidence" for it and are open to the possibility of the existence of Harry Potter, or do you categorically deny his existence by asserting he is a fictional character with no real existence in any place at any time?

Do you merely "lack belief" in the existence of platform 9 and 3/4, or do you know that such a platform does not exist at Kings Cross station? Or would you be convinced by evidence that 9 and 3/4 exists and could take you to Hogwarts school of Witchcraft and Wizardry?

And would this photograph of a platform 9 and 3/4 constitute evidence of the existence of such a platform at Kings Cross Station? What would constitute evidence for you to reassess your "lack of belief" in such a place?
JK Rowling has clearly given us a peek at something real but which she doesn't understand. Muggles are actually very powerful wizards that have been placed under a sleeping spell voluntarily, and its kept secret.
 
Last edited:

SomeRandom

Still learning to be wise
Staff member
Premium Member
No way - the Elder Scrolls IP already has a very diverse and well-developed foundation for polytheist religion. Far more so than any other major fantasy IP I've encountered. Come on, LoTR is so last decade... :D
The true believers will never die!!!!

(Although elder scrolls is pretty epic, ngl)
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
The true believers will never die!!!!

(Although elder scrolls is pretty epic, ngl)
Can you or someone enlighten me how to play through the previous versions before Skyrim? They aren't all on Steam. Before I play Skyrim I feel I'd like to have access to the previous ones, first.
 

SomeRandom

Still learning to be wise
Staff member
Premium Member
Can you or someone enlighten me how to play through the previous versions before Skyrim? They aren't all on Steam. Before I play Skyrim I feel I'd like to have access to the previous ones, first.
I think you can buy box sets from like Amazon and the like these days. Though that would depend on how much money you wish to spend. Otherwise try EB games or Retro Games (or whatever the equivalent is in your area.) Usually can buy older games from games stores and electronics stores (JB Hi Fi) at discounted prices.
Or maybe try EBay
But I live in Australia so your mileage may vary :shrug:
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
There are 7 HP books, and in the books Voldemort makes 7 horcruxes, breaking his soul into 7 pieces in order to live forever. Coincidence, I think not, I'm on to you JK.
The number '7' is a key number in creation. So that seals it. Time: Angel Numbers: Number 7: Biblical Meaning Number 7

Or if you prefer a purported secular source:Symbolism of the number 7 - Wikipedia
 

The Hammer

[REDACTED]
Premium Member
The number '7' is a key number in creation. So that seals it. Time: Angel Numbers: Number 7: Biblical Meaning Number 7

Or if you prefer a purported secular source:Symbolism of the number 7 - Wikipedia

I like my version better. :p
 

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
Don't all get excited now. J.K. Rowling isn't doing a book where Harry becomes a member of religious forums or anything. :D

Suppose for a moment that a weird cult, professed that Harry Potter was a sacred text documenting real-life historical events. Perhaps they assert that the films are documentary evidence or re-enactments.

Do you assert that you simply "lack belief" in the existence of Harry Potter because of "lack of evidence" for it and are open to the possibility of the existence of Harry Potter, or do you categorically deny his existence by asserting he is a fictional character with no real existence in any place at any time?

Do you merely "lack belief" in the existence of platform 9 and 3/4, or do you know that such a platform does not exist at Kings Cross station? Or would you be convinced by evidence that 9 and 3/4 exists and could take you to Hogwarts school of Witchcraft and Wizardry?

And would this photograph of a platform 9 and 3/4 constitute evidence of the existence of such a platform at Kings Cross Station? What would constitute evidence for you to reassess your "lack of belief" in such a place?

platform-9-3-4-of-harry-potter-kings-cross-london-united-kingdom_l.jpeg

I get your point, but that's not quite how agnostic atheism works, at least in my case.
To be clear, I don't think there are any Gods. And I would go further, and suggest that if there are, I don't think they conform to the general claims about them made by humans. If you were talking about very specific claims and dogma, then I might easily go further and say 'I deny that's true'. But agnostic atheism isn't tied to a specific claim, but instead the broad concept of 'God/s'. That's much harder to categorically deny, and I my position isn't about equivocation so much as acknowledgement of the difficulty in denying a very vague and amorphous concept.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Can you or someone enlighten me how to play through the previous versions before Skyrim? They aren't all on Steam. Before I play Skyrim I feel I'd like to have access to the previous ones, first.
You haven't played it until you enter Skyrim in VR.

The sheer scale of actually being there as opposed to a 2d screen.

All I can say is wow!

More to the question, there is backward compatibility with various emulators out there. All the way back to Morrowind.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
Don't all get excited now. J.K. Rowling isn't doing a book where Harry becomes a member of religious forums or anything. :D

Suppose for a moment that a weird cult, professed that Harry Potter was a sacred text documenting real-life historical events. Perhaps they assert that the films are documentary evidence or re-enactments.

Do you assert that you simply "lack belief" in the existence of Harry Potter because of "lack of evidence" for it and are open to the possibility of the existence of Harry Potter, or do you categorically deny his existence by asserting he is a fictional character with no real existence in any place at any time?

Do you merely "lack belief" in the existence of platform 9 and 3/4, or do you know that such a platform does not exist at Kings Cross station? Or would you be convinced by evidence that 9 and 3/4 exists and could take you to Hogwarts school of Witchcraft and Wizardry?

And would this photograph of a platform 9 and 3/4 constitute evidence of the existence of such a platform at Kings Cross Station? What would constitute evidence for you to reassess your "lack of belief" in such a place?

platform-9-3-4-of-harry-potter-kings-cross-london-united-kingdom_l.jpeg
You just can't wrap your head around atheism at all, can you?
 

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
Do you assert that you simply "lack belief" in the existence of Harry Potter because of "lack of evidence" for it and are open to the possibility of the existence of Harry Potter, or do you categorically deny his existence by asserting he is a fictional character with no real existence in any place at any time?
I lack belief in Harry Potter, which is to say that I don't believe that Harry Potter exists in actuality. I am not open to the possibility that Harry Potter exists, per se, because Harry Potter is a fictional character, with but fictional existence.

I'm not agnostic about Harry Potter.
 
Last edited:

Samael_Khan

Goosebender
Don't all get excited now. J.K. Rowling isn't doing a book where Harry becomes a member of religious forums or anything. :D

Suppose for a moment that a weird cult, professed that Harry Potter was a sacred text documenting real-life historical events. Perhaps they assert that the films are documentary evidence or re-enactments.

Do you assert that you simply "lack belief" in the existence of Harry Potter because of "lack of evidence" for it and are open to the possibility of the existence of Harry Potter, or do you categorically deny his existence by asserting he is a fictional character with no real existence in any place at any time?

Do you merely "lack belief" in the existence of platform 9 and 3/4, or do you know that such a platform does not exist at Kings Cross station? Or would you be convinced by evidence that 9 and 3/4 exists and could take you to Hogwarts school of Witchcraft and Wizardry?

And would this photograph of a platform 9 and 3/4 constitute evidence of the existence of such a platform at Kings Cross Station? What would constitute evidence for you to reassess your "lack of belief" in such a place?

platform-9-3-4-of-harry-potter-kings-cross-london-united-kingdom_l.jpeg

Well, we know that JK Rowling created the book and its characters. Therefore we know that it is fiction. The cult are just a bunch of lunatics.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
Don't all get excited now. J.K. Rowling isn't doing a book where Harry becomes a member of religious forums or anything. :D

Suppose for a moment that a weird cult, professed that Harry Potter was a sacred text documenting real-life historical events. Perhaps they assert that the films are documentary evidence or re-enactments.

Do you assert that you simply "lack belief" in the existence of Harry Potter because of "lack of evidence" for it and are open to the possibility of the existence of Harry Potter, or do you categorically deny his existence by asserting he is a fictional character with no real existence in any place at any time?

Do you merely "lack belief" in the existence of platform 9 and 3/4, or do you know that such a platform does not exist at Kings Cross station? Or would you be convinced by evidence that 9 and 3/4 exists and could take you to Hogwarts school of Witchcraft and Wizardry?

And would this photograph of a platform 9 and 3/4 constitute evidence of the existence of such a platform at Kings Cross Station? What would constitute evidence for you to reassess your "lack of belief" in such a place?

platform-9-3-4-of-harry-potter-kings-cross-london-united-kingdom_l.jpeg

First of all you should realize that Harry Potter is called fiction. If the author called herself a prophet and that the books are god given revelations then one could consider the evidences you cited.
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
Don't all get excited now. J.K. Rowling isn't doing a book where Harry becomes a member of religious forums or anything. :D

Suppose for a moment that a weird cult, professed that Harry Potter was a sacred text documenting real-life historical events. Perhaps they assert that the films are documentary evidence or re-enactments.

Do you assert that you simply "lack belief" in the existence of Harry Potter because of "lack of evidence" for it and are open to the possibility of the existence of Harry Potter, or do you categorically deny his existence by asserting he is a fictional character with no real existence in any place at any time?

Do you merely "lack belief" in the existence of platform 9 and 3/4, or do you know that such a platform does not exist at Kings Cross station? Or would you be convinced by evidence that 9 and 3/4 exists and could take you to Hogwarts school of Witchcraft and Wizardry?

And would this photograph of a platform 9 and 3/4 constitute evidence of the existence of such a platform at Kings Cross Station? What would constitute evidence for you to reassess your "lack of belief" in such a place?

platform-9-3-4-of-harry-potter-kings-cross-london-united-kingdom_l.jpeg

I'ld be an agnostic a-potter-ist.

For the simple reason that you can't falsify / disprove the unfalsifiable.

Yes, I consider it extremely implausible - just like I consider islam, christianity, hinduism,... extremely implausible. Pretty much in the exact same way for the exact same reasons.

I live my life as if none of these stories / claims are true.

Do I actively assert them to be false? No, because I can't possibly know that.
Do I assume them to be false going forward? yes.
 

Clara Tea

Well-Known Member
I'm sure J.K. could do a video on twitter insisting that they were fictional works and many of these hypothetical "potterists" would insist lord voldermert is impersonating her with polyjuice potion...

But I like your optimism. :)

J. K. Rowling (author of the Harry Potter series of books) made Professor Dumbledore Gay. Surely the beloved character was meant to widen acceptance for Gays.

JK Rowling responds to critics over her transgender comments

Rowling worried about children with transgender clothing. Indeed, their hormones have not yet kicked in, and though they still are uniquely one sex or the other (or some bi), they have yet to feel the powerful tug of hormones. What would happen to the psyche of per-adolescent kids if they consummated what they perceived their sexual preferences were, then were embarrassed in later years (perhaps with some reminders or sneaked pictures)?

To distinguish between men who choose to be women, vs women who are born women, she used the term "people who menstruate." She obviously didn't mean for that to be offensive. Intent should count for something.

link says: Rowling: "“I stand alongside the brave women and men, gay, straight and trans, who’re standing up for freedom of speech and thought, and for the rights and safety of some of the most vulnerable in our society: young gay kids, fragile teenagers, and women who’re reliant on and wish to retain their single sex spaces," she said in her post Wednesday."

link says: "Radcliffe published a lengthy essay about Rowling’s tweets on a website for a nonprofit organization dedicated to crisis intervention and suicide prevention for LGBTQ people. He said “transgender women are women.”"

Radcliffe had his own brush with teen sex issues as he tried to make the difficult transition from child actor to adult actor. He felt that he would be taken as an adult if he performed nude (the movie Eqiis about loving a horse and loving to ride naked). He said that he was shy at first, but after five minutes he no longer noticed. Oh, Harry Potter.

Children are sometimes driven to do sexual acts before they are mature or psychologically prepared. They lack life's experiences of adults. They're bodies are battlefields of raging hormones.

There are laws proposed in California to allow little boys, dressed as girls, to use the girl's bathrooms. I have a feeling, that most little boys would welcome the chance to look at little girls going to the bathroom (even if it means donning a wig and pretending to be a girl). This law might end up dressing all little boys as girls, just to peek. In the mean time, what are the little girls going to do if they need to go to the bathroom and don't want little boys peeking through cracks in the door hinges? Don't they need privacy to do private things? Isn't it taking away their privacy rights to have little boys invading their space?

Well meaning celebrities support Gays, and their wish to be open and free with their sexual orientation. Jonathan Taylor Thomas acted in "Common Ground." They want Gays to have rights. But did they consider that too many rights for one group takes rights from another? The so-called "Zero-Sum Falacy" is that giving to one group doesn't take from another. Yet, taken to extremes, it no longer is a falacy.

I remind Christians that only God is the judge. The bible clearly opposes Gays. Christians must be warm and supportive, not raging and mean. Lets find the middle ground where all may get along and maximize the rights of everyone.
 

SomeRandom

Still learning to be wise
Staff member
Premium Member
J. K. Rowling (author of the Harry Potter series of books) made Professor Dumbledore Gay. Surely the beloved character was meant to widen acceptance for Gays.

JK Rowling responds to critics over her transgender comments

Rowling worried about children with transgender clothing. Indeed, their hormones have not yet kicked in, and though they still are uniquely one sex or the other (or some bi), they have yet to feel the powerful tug of hormones. What would happen to the psyche of per-adolescent kids if they consummated what they perceived their sexual preferences were, then were embarrassed in later years (perhaps with some reminders or sneaked pictures)?

To distinguish between men who choose to be women, vs women who are born women, she used the term "people who menstruate." She obviously didn't mean for that to be offensive. Intent should count for something.

link says: Rowling: "“I stand alongside the brave women and men, gay, straight and trans, who’re standing up for freedom of speech and thought, and for the rights and safety of some of the most vulnerable in our society: young gay kids, fragile teenagers, and women who’re reliant on and wish to retain their single sex spaces," she said in her post Wednesday."

link says: "Radcliffe published a lengthy essay about Rowling’s tweets on a website for a nonprofit organization dedicated to crisis intervention and suicide prevention for LGBTQ people. He said “transgender women are women.”"

Radcliffe had his own brush with teen sex issues as he tried to make the difficult transition from child actor to adult actor. He felt that he would be taken as an adult if he performed nude (the movie Eqiis about loving a horse and loving to ride naked). He said that he was shy at first, but after five minutes he no longer noticed. Oh, Harry Potter.

Children are sometimes driven to do sexual acts before they are mature or psychologically prepared. They lack life's experiences of adults. They're bodies are battlefields of raging hormones.

There are laws proposed in California to allow little boys, dressed as girls, to use the girl's bathrooms. I have a feeling, that most little boys would welcome the chance to look at little girls going to the bathroom (even if it means donning a wig and pretending to be a girl). This law might end up dressing all little boys as girls, just to peek. In the mean time, what are the little girls going to do if they need to go to the bathroom and don't want little boys peeking through cracks in the door hinges? Don't they need privacy to do private things? Isn't it taking away their privacy rights to have little boys invading their space?

Well meaning celebrities support Gays, and their wish to be open and free with their sexual orientation. Jonathan Taylor Thomas acted in "Common Ground." They want Gays to have rights. But did they consider that too many rights for one group takes rights from another? The so-called "Zero-Sum Falacy" is that giving to one group doesn't take from another. Yet, taken to extremes, it no longer is a falacy.

I remind Christians that only God is the judge. The bible clearly opposes Gays. Christians must be warm and supportive, not raging and mean. Lets find the middle ground where all may get along and maximize the rights of everyone.
Hate to break this to you, but all bathrooms have private stalls. Which means no one can “sneak a peak.”
I have accidentally wandered into the “wrong” bathroom many times in life. Nothing happened. People, including kids, go to the bathroom to err go to the bathroom. And indeed I recall in high school there were certain boys who quite frankly belonged in the girls more than the boys room. And they were often found there, to the chagrin of nobody.
No one died or was perved on
 
Top