sdeering@athena.mit.edu (Scott E Deering) (10/23/89)
Hey everyone!
I was wondering if anyone has read "This Present Darkness" or the
sequal "Piercing the Darkness" by Frank Peretti (sp?). I just finished
them and wanted to find out what other people think about them. I thought
they were great; some of the best fiction I have ever read, secular or
non-secular.
The book was eye-opening in terms of spiritual warfare and for me it
really drove home the seriousness of and need for consistent prayer,
especially intercessory prayer. This was the kind of book that can spur
you on to start praying and seeking God in a serious way once you begin
to understand the meaning behind Ephesians 6 "We fight not against flesh
blood but against principalities...". I had heard this passage taught
several times before, but this was the first time I really began to see
why saints need to pray and keep praying.
It helped me in a time where I didn't "feel" like praying and my time spent
with the Lord was suffering from the lack of power and peace I had once
walked in. It was a time of spiritual apathy where you search for an
understanding of why God commands us to do things (like prayer and worship).
I had heard from many people, "You should always pray...", but for me it
didn't strike home like it needed to for me to really motivate myself when
no one was reminding me to. It was really a question of maturity and
a sense of responsibility and purpose in light of what God has provided.
I guess that we all reach a place in our spiritual maturity where you have
to decide for yourself what the character of your walk will be and just how
close to God you want to get. It's a question of will I passively sit by and
do absolutely nothing or will I be like David and seek God with all my heart.
Pastors and preachers can preach about prayer or whatever for years
,but until you really reach a place where you understand it and make a serious
decision, the reality of the situation doesn't grab you. This is not a
condemnation of anyone(aside from myself), but is a bit of personal testimony
about how God is moving in my life and changing me for the better. He used
this book to open my eyes, forcing me to examine the seriousness and
earnestness
of my relationship with him. He also used it to show me that I am in the
midst of a spiritual war that has some very real consequences.
There are only two options for any human in this conflict; be a warrior
standing
with God or be a prisoner of war. The prisoners of war come in two
forms; those
who are being used/abused by the enemy while being captives to sin and those
who have been saved by God, but refuse to fight(i.e. remain neutral). The
warriors are those who decide to take a stand and fight using the power and
equipment that God provides for those who are redeemed by Him. The rub is that
this is a war; there can be no bystanders or spectators since the goal of
one side (the enemy) is the total destruction of all mankind, saved or unsaved.
In other words there is no Switzerland and no neutrality; a person who
refuses to fight or acknowledge that there even is a fight is simply a juicy
target for a pounding or at least imprisonment for later torture. In
terms of my
apathy I realized that I couldn't play games with God and that I had to
be serious
about my life and my relationship to Him. This is not a depressing thought
(being closeto God is better than anything else I have ever experienced), but
it is a sobering one. While I don't look for an attack of the enemy under
every bush, I do have to recognize that I am at war spiritually and that
I do have a enemy striving to do me in. While I fight the good fight of
my faith, the important thing is to rejoice with the fact that my name
is written in
heaven forever and that I have the victory in Christ(Luke 10:19-20).
Well, this started out as a short post about the books, but I really wanted
to find about some of the ideas and issues they raised. I have been
blessed by them and want to find out what types of reactions other people
have had to them. I'll probably post a review of the first (with hidden
spoilers
of course :-))sometime soon if anyone wants to hear about it and I hope
to have some interesting discussions with whoever is interested. Bye for now...
Scott Deering
sdeering@athena.mit.edu
613-726-0014
856 Grenon Avenue
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
K2B 6G3shralp@buhub.bradley.edu (Jamie McDonald) (04/29/91)
I just picked up Frank Peretti's book on spiritual warfare entitled _This_Present_Darkness. For those who have read/heard of it: Opinions? I think Mr. Peretti is very talented, using excellent imagery, and it's great to see the good guys win without worrying about whether their methods are good as well. Also, how much realism do you perceive in such things as "prayer cover," the casting out of demons, etc? I personally have difficulty with thinking that prayer suffices merely to help "heavenly warriors." I like to think it goes directly to the big guy. Yes, I realize that this is just a fictional work, yet because it's written as a _Christian_ fictional work it seems that some ideas of the author are included. BTW, anyone have knowledge of the movie that's is supposed to be made of it by the same people who did Indiana Jones? Or is this just an evil rumor? -- "Stephen J. Patrick, director of computing services, claims that he wishes to maintain freedom of speech over the system. The only case in which direct action would be taken would be when something inap- propriate would be placed in the notes."
psburns@lims04.lerc.nasa.gov (MAUREEN BURNS) (05/02/91)
In article <Apr.28.18.21.18.1991.20187@athos.rutgers.edu>, shralp@buhub.bradley.edu (Jamie McDonald) writes... > > I just picked up Frank Peretti's book on spiritual warfare entitled >_This_Present_Darkness. For those who have read/heard of it: > > Opinions? I think Mr. Peretti is very talented, using excellent >imagery, and it's great to see the good guys win without worrying about >whether their methods are good as well. > Also, how much realism do you perceive in such things as "prayer >cover," the casting out of demons, etc? I personally have difficulty >with thinking that prayer suffices merely to help "heavenly warriors." >I like to think it goes directly to the big guy. > Yes, I realize that this is just a fictional work, yet because >it's written as a _Christian_ fictional work it seems that some ideas of >the author are included. > > BTW, anyone have knowledge of the movie that's is supposed to be >made of it by the same people who did Indiana Jones? Or is this just an >evil rumor? > > > My opinion of the book (and the sequel "Piercing the Darkness") is that they are both excellent, not only from a literature point of view, but from a scriptural point of view. Ephesians chapter 6 talks about the spiritual warfare we as Christians are all involved in, in varying degrees. Second only to the Bible, the two novels did more to enhance and challenge my prayer life. I became more appreciative of the power of prayer, and I began to really see how God was answering them. I learned to be more specific in my prayers, and to be aware of prayer needs around me. I believe that Satan and his demons are influencing every aspect of our lives , and that they are repelled by the power and blood of Jesus. After all, they were completely defeated at the cross, and his eternal destruction and damnation is a surety. Maureen BTW--I have heard that there is a movie in the making based on the book. But as Hollywood rarely stands for anything Christian, I am curious to see how much of the Christian message of salvation, Jesus, prayer and goodness is preserved and emphasized, instead of the evil, darkness, Satanic influence which seems to appeal so much to the world.
tblake@bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu (Thomas Blake) (05/02/91)
In article <Apr.28.18.21.18.1991.20187@athos.rutgers.edu> shralp@buhub.bradley.edu (Jamie McDonald) writes: > > I just picked up Frank Peretti's book on spiritual warfare entitled >_This_Present_Darkness. For those who have read/heard of it: > > Opinions? I think Mr. Peretti is very talented, using excellent >imagery, and it's great to see the good guys win without worrying about >whether their methods are good as well. I found _This Present Darkness_ and _Piercing The Darkness_ to be *gripping* novels. I can't say I agree with all of the theology expressed, but he does raise some interesting questions. (Like differentiate for me between "Channeling" and "Demon Posession"). > Also, how much realism do you perceive in such things as "prayer >cover," the casting out of demons, etc? I personally have difficulty >with thinking that prayer suffices merely to help "heavenly warriors." >I like to think it goes directly to the big guy. I don't believe Mr. Peretti means to imply that prayer merely helps "heavenly warriors", I think he'd agree with you about prayer going straight to "the big guy". Mr. Peretti does personify many things, we see good things being worked by the "heavenly warriors", and bad things being wrought by "demons". My personal theology doesn't personify quite that much, but I have to admit he's got me thinking. > Yes, I realize that this is just a fictional work, yet because >it's written as a _Christian_ fictional work it seems that some ideas of >the author are included. Yeah, that's for sure. One clergy friend who I pointed to the books recommended them to another clergy friend (in my presence), said (heavy paraphrase), well, it's got about as much to do with theology as a good SciFi novel, but it's a great book! (We've often had discussions about the theology of SciFi novels, just so you don't think he completely dismissed the theology.) I heartily recommend both of these novels, I recommend them to mystery readers, fantasy readers, and Christians who just like a good read. Tom Blake SUNY-Binghamton
jclark@sdcc6.ucsd.edu (John Clark) (05/02/91)
In article <Apr.28.18.21.18.1991.20187@athos.rutgers.edu> shralp@buhub.bradley.edu (Jamie McDonald) writes:
+
+ I just picked up Frank Peretti's book on spiritual warfare entitled
+_This_Present_Darkness. For those who have read/heard of it:
+
+ Opinions? I think Mr. Peretti is very talented, using excellent
+imagery, and it's great to see the good guys win without worrying about
+whether their methods are good as well.
What do you mean by this statement, "The end justifies the means?".
Shouldn't 'the Good Guys' worry about both the end and the means?
--
John Clark
jclark@ucsd.edu2fntnougat@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (05/03/91)
Hi... I'm new here & this is my first post In article <Apr.28.18.21.18.1991.20187@athos.rutgers.edu>, shralp@buhub.bradley.edu (Jamie McDonald) writes: > I just picked up Frank Peretti's book on spiritual warfare entitled > _This_Present_Darkness. For those who have read/heard of it: I just ordered it myself, after hearing the radio series (Saturday evenings, KJTY Topeka, 88.1 FM). > Opinions? I think Mr. Peretti is very talented, using excellent > imagery, and it's great to see the good guys win without worrying about > whether their methods are good as well. Well, the radio series has been (so far) *excellent*! (We're in episode 5 or so.) > I personally have difficulty > with thinking that prayer suffices merely to help "heavenly warriors." > I like to think it goes directly to the big guy. I don't know. I remember reading in the Bible about how God sends angels to minister to certain people. > BTW, anyone have knowledge of the movie that's is supposed to be > made of it by the same people who did Indiana Jones? Or is this just an > evil rumor? I heard about them talking about it on KJTY, so I think it's being made, tho I don't know by whom. They're showing "China Cry" a Christian-but-commercially-produced movie in Kansas City and Topeka... I've been too busy with classes to go there to see it yet, but I've read the book and it's very powerful. Ian
iadt1kr@prism.gatech.edu (J. Kenneth Riviere (JoKeR)) (05/05/91)
My brother and his new wife gave me This Present Darkness and were
wildly enthusiastic about it. When I read it I found that it was
somewhat interesting as a fantasy novel (I read fantasy novels
regularly) but I had serious problems with its theology.
One thing that bothered me about it was the hero pastor's ("The Praying
Man") pursuit of sinners. At one point he gave a brief description of
his view of his calling as a pastor and one of his top priorities was
to punish sinners or condemn sinners or some such thing (I don't have
the book with me right now to get the exact phrase). This bothered me
since we are instructed to "Judge not lest ye be judged".
There is also the point that he took steps to expell a member from his
congregation. It seems rather presumptuous to believe both that we
are sin-free enough to be able to cast the first stone and that we
know enough to pick which sinner to expell if we are perfect enough
to judge since we are all sinful creatures due to the fall of Adam.
Besides that, it is the sinners who need to hear the word of God,
isn't it? How are we following in Jesus' footsteps if we refuse to
embrace sinners (while hating the sin) when He repeatedly associated
with those who needed to hear His word rather than speaking only to
the righteous?
Another point that bothered me was the simple-minded picture presented
of most people being either good or evil. There were some people in the
book who were shown to be uncertain about what they should be doing,
but most of the people who were not good and incorruptable were actively
EVIL. I don't doubt that there are people who actively pursue evil ends,
but my view of the world is that most people are trying to do good but
simply aren't able to consistently do the best thing or even determine
what the best thing is. This narrow view that the faithful few have THE
answer and all others not within their select group are not just
mistaken but actively possessed by demons is the kind of paranoid
delusion which can easily lead to fanatical extremes which can be
detrimental to spiritual growth (or so it seems to me).
In this vein, the scene wherein the the newspaper publisher meets with
the bad pastor (literally demon possessed) and the author has this EVIL
man speak words of tolerance for others deliberately makes the implication
that such tolerance of others is clearly EVIL. This is not a message
which I can accept easily.
I am not a regular reader of this group and I suppose I am opening myself
up to being flamed for daring to criticize this "inspiring" novel, but
this book has troubled me since I read it and I am hoping that this
discussion in this newsgroup will help me to be in a better position to
discuss this with my brother when I tell him why I didn't find it as
inspirational as he and his wife did. I may or may not respond to
future responses to this posting, whether posted or emailed, but I will
try to read this group for the next few days to see if there is anything
new of interest on this topic.
--
J. Kenneth Riviere (JoKeR)
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
uucp: ...!{allegra,amd,hplabs,seismo,ut-ngp}!gatech!prism!iadt1kr
ARPA: iadt1kr@prism.gatech.eduhikaru@buhub.bradley.edu (Michael Podeszwa) (05/07/91)
In <May.4.22.14.38.1991.21812@athos.rutgers.edu> iadt1kr@prism.gatech.edu (J. Kenneth Riviere (JoKeR)) writes: >My brother and his new wife gave me This Present Darkness and were >wildly enthusiastic about it. When I read it I found that it was >somewhat interesting as a fantasy novel (I read fantasy novels >regularly) but I had serious problems with its theology. >One thing that bothered me about it was the hero pastor's ("The Praying >Man") pursuit of sinners. At one point he gave a brief description of >his view of his calling as a pastor and one of his top priorities was >to punish sinners or condemn sinners or some such thing (I don't have >the book with me right now to get the exact phrase). This bothered me >since we are instructed to "Judge not lest ye be judged". I've always been taught that "Judge not lest ye be judged" was not to say that we shouldn't judge, but that whatever standards we use to judge will be used for us as well. If we couldn't judge, who could say murder is wrong? >There is also the point that he took steps to expell a member from his >congregation. It seems rather presumptuous to believe both that we >are sin-free enough to be able to cast the first stone and that we >know enough to pick which sinner to expell if we are perfect enough >to judge since we are all sinful creatures due to the fall of Adam. >Besides that, it is the sinners who need to hear the word of God, >isn't it? How are we following in Jesus' footsteps if we refuse to >embrace sinners (while hating the sin) when He repeatedly associated >with those who needed to hear His word rather than speaking only to >the righteous? The steps the pastor took are from Paul. The sinner has heard the word of God. The pastor pointed out to him where he sinned and the sinner refused to repent. In that refusal to repent, the pastor had him brought before the church and excommunicated. For me, the worst part of the book was that everything was caused by Demons. Nobody seemed to do evil because it was their nature, but because they were demon possessed. -- Michael Podeszwa <>< hikaru@buhub.bradley.edu <>< Whoever called it necking was a poor judge of anatomy. -Groucho Marx "Let your love be stronger than your hate or anger. Learn the wisdom of compromise, for it is better to bend a little than to break." -H. G. Wells
gilham@csl.sri.com (Fred Gilham) (05/07/91)
J. Kenneth Riviere writes:
----------------------------------------
There is also the point that he took steps to expell a member from his
congregation. It seems rather presumptuous to believe both that we
are sin-free enough to be able to cast the first stone and that we
know enough to pick which sinner to expell if we are perfect enough to
judge since we are all sinful creatures due to the fall of Adam.
Besides that, it is the sinners who need to hear the word of God,
isn't it? How are we following in Jesus' footsteps if we refuse to
embrace sinners (while hating the sin) when He repeatedly associated
with those who needed to hear His word rather than speaking only to
the righteous?
----------------------------------------
While I agree with most of the poster's points about the book, I think
this one needs to be looked at more carefully.
My understanding of how so-called ``church discipline'' is supposed to
work is that it is breaking fellowship with someone who is unrepentant
about some open sin. The intent is not to condemn, but to help the
person to realize the significance of his actions and to preserve the
rest of the body from contamination. If we take the destructive
nature of sin seriously, and keep in mind our own weaknesses, this
seems a reasonable course to take, as well as being supported by the
bible. The example of the case outlined in the books to the
Corinthians, where someone was brought to repentance and
reconciliation by applying this, seems like the intended case.
--
-Fred Gilham gilham@csl.sri.com lieuwen@cs.wisc.edu (Dan Lieuwen) (05/07/91)
>>There is also the point that he took steps to expell a member from his >>congregation. It seems rather presumptuous to believe both that we >>are sin-free enough to be able to cast the first stone and that we >>know enough to pick which sinner to expell if we are perfect enough >>to judge since we are all sinful creatures due to the fall of Adam. >>Besides that, it is the sinners who need to hear the word of God, >>isn't it? How are we following in Jesus' footsteps if we refuse to >>embrace sinners (while hating the sin) when He repeatedly associated >>with those who needed to hear His word rather than speaking only to >>the righteous? >> The church must maintain discipline to be faithful. Jesus said some pretty harsh things to the Pharisees. He drove moneychangers out of the temple with a whip. We are to take into fellowship ANY repentant sinner, but if a person will not repent (which was the case in the book), it is the duty of the church to excommunicate. Paul talks about "expell[ing] the wicked man from among you" and mentions turning two men over to Satan (excommunicating them) so that their souls could be saved through this harsh punishment. It is only by forcibly letting them know that they are ALREADY OUTSIDE THE CHURCH by their refusal to repent of known sin that they can really hear the gospel. The gospel is good news because it tells us how to be reconciled with God. If we think things are great between us, we have no need to turn from our sin. Dan
henning@acsu.buffalo.edu (Karl colossal Henning) (05/08/91)
Michael Podeszwa writes: >I've always been taught that "Judge not lest ye be judged" was not >to say that we shouldn't judge, but that whatever standards we use >to judge will be used for us as well. If we couldn't judge, who >could say murder is wrong? That's a socially pragmatic interpretation, perhaps; but really, that's not what it /says/. It doesn't /say/ "do unto others as you would have them do unto unto you"; it /says/ "do not judge -- or you'll be judged yourself". kph -- "The study of crime begins with the knowledge of oneself. All that you despise, all that you loathe, all that you reject, all that you condemn and seek to convert by punishment springs from you." -- Henry Miller
@vm.cc.purdue.edu:ROSSJB@PURCCVM (John Ross) (05/08/91)
I've never posted on netnews before (hello all) and only infrequently view messages here. I've been following the discussion on Present/ Piercing Darkness with some interest, though, especially the comments on (to paraphrase) tossing church members out the door. Some people think it is harsh to "excommunicate" 'members' of the church. Which is harsher, to force the person in question to come to grips with their sinful behavior or to allow what happened to Ananias and Sapphira? "Then Peter said, 'Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? Didn't it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn't the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied to men but to God. When Ananias heard this, he fell down and died. . ." His wife also dies. Acts 5:1-11 Seems to me that the Spirit of God was pretty harsh in dealing with these two sinners. . . more harsh than we've been dealing with our own, eh? I guess Peter should have said, "Now, now, that's quite all right -- it is not your fault that you lied. Here, here, now, go on out and tell your wife that it's ok, we allow people to sin within our church's doors. . ." Maybe it is better for a person to be severed from the church for a time so he or she can contemplate just how wrongful their actions have been. Maybe if they realize their sin, the will repent, before they are struck down by their own sinfulness. (Asbestos armor zipped up: Flame at will!) John
fuhry@think.com (Debbie Fuhry) (05/10/91)
In article <May.8.03.47.12.1991.10504@athos.rutgers.edu> henning@acsu.buffalo.edu (Karl colossal Henning) writes: >Michael Podeszwa writes: > >>I've always been taught that "Judge not lest ye be judged" was not >>to say that we shouldn't judge, but that whatever standards we use >>to judge will be used for us as well. If we couldn't judge, who >>could say murder is wrong? > >That's a socially pragmatic interpretation, perhaps; but really, >that's not what it /says/. It doesn't /say/ "do unto others as >you would have them do unto unto you"; it /says/ "do not judge -- >or you'll be judged yourself". > >kph >-- Regarding the attitude a church should take to sexual immorality by its members, Paul writes: "I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people - not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave the world. But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swinder. With such a man do not even eat. What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. Expel the wicked man from among you." (ICor. 5:9-13) It doesn't get much clearer than that, I think. Unfortunately, much of the Christian church has gotten it backwards. We fall all over ourselves judging the world (which is so obviously sinful -- but that's God's job, not ours), and let people get away with almost anything as long as they are part of the church! Scripturally, expelling someone from the church for blatant and unrepentant immorality is clearly mandated. Debbie Fuhry fuhry@think.com
tblake@bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu (Thomas Blake) (05/10/91)
In article <May.8.03.47.12.1991.10504@athos.rutgers.edu> henning@acsu.buffalo.edu (Karl colossal Henning) writes: >>I've always been taught that "Judge not lest ye be judged" was not >>to say that we shouldn't judge, but that whatever standards we use >>to judge will be used for us as well. If we couldn't judge, who >>could say murder is wrong? > >That's a socially pragmatic interpretation, perhaps; but really, >that's not what it /says/. It doesn't /say/ "do unto others as >you would have them do unto unto you"; it /says/ "do not judge -- >or you'll be judged yourself". Thousands of times in my life I've prayed that God would hold me to the same standards I hold others to. I say it, "Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us." (I'll bet you say something similar.) I was taught that this was the kind of prayer that Jesus suggested. With that in mind, I think that the above interpretation might be close to what Jesus had in mind. Tom Blake SUNY-Binghamton
smithjh@moondance.CS.ORST.EDU (Jeremy Smith) (05/11/91)
In article <May.8.04.19.01.1991.11318@athos.rutgers.edu> @vm.cc.purdue.edu:ROSSJB@PURCCVM (John Ross) writes: > >Maybe it is better for a person to be severed from the church for a time so >he or she can contemplate just how wrongful their actions have been. Maybe >if they realize their sin, the will repent, before they are struck down by >their own sinfulness. > >(Asbestos armor zipped up: Flame at will!) > >John Touche' John. We are told not to socialize with any so called brother who does not accept the teaching of scripture, not regarding him as an enemy but admonishing him like a brother. My reference is I Thessalonians chapter 3. Peace and Grace. Jeremy Smith
chappell@antares (Glenn Chappell) (05/13/91)
In article <May.8.03.47.12.1991.10504@athos.rutgers.edu> henning@acsu.buffalo.edu (Karl colossal Henning) writes: >Michael Podeszwa writes: >>I've always been taught that "Judge not lest ye be judged" was not >>to say that we shouldn't judge, but that whatever standards we use >>to judge will be used for us as well. If we couldn't judge, who >>could say murder is wrong? >That's a socially pragmatic interpretation, perhaps; but really, >that's not what it /says/. It doesn't /say/ "do unto others as >you would have them do unto unto you"; it /says/ "do not judge -- >or you'll be judged yourself". I'd just like to point out that the Bible *does* in fact say both of those: "Do not judge, or you too will be judged." - Matt 7:1 (NIV) "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets." - Matt 7:12 (NIV) GGC <><
nlt@gboro.glassboro.edu (Nancy L. Tinkham) (05/18/91)
I too have just finished Peretti's _This_Present_Darkness_.
The book is a fairly good "whodunit" story, with two of the central
characters hunting down clues to uncover and stop a sinister plot. It was
suspenseful enough to keep me reading to the end and to interest me in
the sequel.
I have, however, some complaints about the book. I will list three
of them, two minor and one more significant.
First, the book too easily identifies the members of some groups as
good and other groups as bad: all the conservative Christians are good
guys, and all the liberal Christians and the members of the fictitious
new age religion are bad guys. None of the liberals say "I don't
believe in devils, but what so-and-so is doing is wrong, so I'll help
stop him," and none of the new-agers say "I don't believe in the
Christian God or Devil, but I can tell that some of the spirits here are
doing good and some are doing evil, so I'll help the good ones." Those
few "evil" people in "good" groups or "good" people in "evil" groups
eventually switch their group allegiances; evidently, it is not possible
to be a liberal or a pagan and still work for good. Alas.
Second, I am somewhat concerned about the effect that some of
Peretti's plot choices may have on his readers, in that he reinforces
some widely-held, harmful beliefs. The book centers around a "new age"
conspiracy to take over the world -- and neo-pagans already have a hard
enough time convincing people that no, they aren't devil-worshippers and
no, they aren't coming to get us in our sleep, without Peretti reinforcing
that image. The book also contains several instances of women or girls
falsely accusing someone of rape, and this similarly bothers me: I fear
that Peretti's book may strengthen the notion that women who have been
raped either "wanted it" or are inventing the whole story. I hope Peretti's
readers are wise enough not to generalize from a few incidents in a work
of fiction to real life; I wish Peretti had been wise enough to make
better choices.
A third and more serious complaint is that _This_Present_Darkness_
does not succeed for me as a *religious* book. His Christians live well
and try to do what is right, and they even seem to stumble onto some of
the tricks of spirit-battle, but I'm not persuaded that they strongly
perceive God's presence or that they truly understand the "battle" of
good and evil. Worse yet, his angels are not holy enough and his demons
are not evil enough. The demons keep referring to "the living God" and
"the heavenly host" -- they're awfully reverent for evil monsters. And
the angels are mere warriors -- they do battle in response to orders,
but the orders could be from any reasonably sane emperor without
changing the story much. Further, the struggle between angels and
demons over the humans does not have enough of the strength and subtlety
of good and evil in it: angels inspire their wards merely to shrewd
strategy, not to love, and demons clumsily attack their victims in
physical horror-movie fashion, rather than tempting and seducing them.
Lest this review seem completely negative, I will repeat my overall
summary: while _This_Present_Darkness_ does not have the religious
insights of a C.S. Lewis or Charles Williams novel, it is an
entertaining story, it did make me think, and I look forward to reading
the sequel.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"That's right," shouted Vroomfondel, "we demand Nancy Tinkham
rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!" nlt@gboro.glassboro.eduJohn.Shipley@ebay.sun.com (John Shipley) (05/24/91)
What drove me crazy while reading This_Present_Darkness was the dichotomy between: 1) The amount of detailed description in the sword-fighting. 2) No angel ever gets "killed", nor does any angel or devil ever have any conception of an angel being "killed". I mean we're talking about something in a class with "Battlestar Galactica"! I get to the end of the book where there is this big sword fight between an angel and a devil - the angel's wings are shredded, one of his arms is immobilized because of his "cuts", and I'm talking to the author: "C'mon Frank, give me a clue whether this angel is in any real danger". But no, the fight drags on and then some prayer heals the angel so he's instantly as good as new again. Pretty silly, IMHO. I pretty much agree with some of the criticisms about the theology of the book (Nancy Tinkham's is one example), but I did like the incident with the angel on the motorcycle. Actually did make me a little teary-eyed. Take care, John Shipley "All shall be well, and all shall be well, and all manner of things shall be well." - Julian of Norwich