- Woah! What's going on with the 'Aslan's Divinity' section?!? Poggin 18:29, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
- What do you mean? It seems okay to me. It could use a little work, but it's not like somebody made the whole thing up. Rain Thalo 20:32, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
- Well, firstly, words such as biological and organism seem out of place - this is not a scientific article. Also he should be discussed along with the Emperor Over The Sea and the relationship between the two, and further reference to what is actually said about them in the books before we go on to discuss the matter of divinity. Do remember that Lewis has never clearly said 'Aslan is God' anywhere in the books, only that he is King, so any such discussion is merely speculation about unconfirmed symbolism in the book (I know it is blatant that Aslan is meant to represent God, but we can't take that for granted). Also I am uncomfortable with phrases such as '[Aslan] arose immediately to God-like status' being in the article - are we saying that Aslan is only in the 'Godlike' position because everyone else chose to put him in it? Again, the use of 'God' doesn't fit here - he is never treated like a normal God (as seen in human history) by any of the characters - Anybody see and temples anywhere? People praying to Aslan? My last main objection is talk of an 'imperfect' Aslan, which it totally unsupported by the books, and seems out of line with the rest of Lewis' ideas. If you aguing that Aslan is divine, the a suggestion of him being imperfect would surely be a counterargument to this? Poggin 10:23, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
- I don't particularly like the use of the words 'salvation' etc, and saying that Narnia is a "testing ground" to see who is worthy to come into Aslan's country- this could be talked about in a section about interpretations, but it never says anything of the sort in the actual books. From what we are actually told, Narnia is more of a place where people can get to know Aslan more before they join him in his country- Aslan says something along the lines of this to Lucy at the end of VotDT after he has said that she and Edmund will not return to Narnia again. --Lindisse 15:05, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
- I agree with both of you on most points, a lot of that should be in the interpretation section. However, a fair amount of the stuff in there is safe, so long as we that Aslan is "God-like" or representative of God. I know Poggin objected to the term "God-like," but I think we can use it because it is a very broad term. It doesn't necessarily mean treated like God, it means having attributes normally associated with God. For example, Aslan is omniscient, he definitely knows everything. He can come and go as he pleases and appear to whom he wishes. He created the world, and then returned to end it. He died and came back to life. All of these things have always been associated with God or gods, depending on the culture. And since Lewis has said that Narnia is a Christian allegory of a sort, we can safely call Aslan representative of God. Rain Thalo 16:14, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
- Ok, I'm fine with the use of 'godlike' here, but I would just like the section restructured a little, so as to list the relevant descriptions of Aslan and then show how this is consistant with him being divine. And with the phrase '[Aslan] arose immediately to God-like status' it suggests either that the creatures attitude towards Aslan changed to treat him like a God (the view I took above), or that Aslan himself changed to become like a God - of course neither of such situations are true to the book. As with the examples of prayer, we must not take them for granted (although I do agree with you Arvan Swordwielder). I would just say that such situations must be described first and then followed by the suitable interpretation - i.e. could be seen as examples of prayer to Aslan. Poggin 17:29, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
I replaced the distorted pic of PC Aslan with an equal, undistorted one, but now the layout has suffered. Someone more experienced with Wiki please fix this. ReepI 16:08, June 1, 2010 (UTC)
- That's great, thanks :P ReepI 01:37, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
That bit in the trivia about Aslan/Arslan being "adopted" later into Turkish is clearly wrong. The word Arslan used to define "lion" has been in use since the time before there was Turkey. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kara-Khanid_Khanate
Either Lewis wrote used Aslan as the name for his lion in reference to that, or it's some unlikely coincidence or maybe even some subconscious memory.
Yo what you talking about that page was fine. so who gives a crap. come on dude lighten up.18.104.22.168 14:54, March 1, 2012 (UTC)
Hi Aryvan I was wondering if you could please please please answer my last qestion. thanks
By Robert Paul Green.
"The Emperor-over-the-Sea is similar to Eru Ilúvatar of J. R. R. Tolkien's Middle-earth, in His separation from His creation, or considerable equivalent to God."
Several problems with this "trivia" item: first, it's completely unsourced. Secondly, it's in the wrong article: if anywhere, this should be in the Emperor-over-the-Sea article. More importantly, it's entirely spurious. If Aslan is Christ, and we assume -- just for the sake of argument -- that mainstream trinitarian Christian cosmology is correct, then he and E-o-t-S are essentially the same being, and Aslan is hardly "separate" from Narnia. Most crucially of all, however, is that this is just flamebaiting those people who consider Tolkien to be the seminal founder of modern fantasy, and Lewis to be a bunch of odiously preachy claptrap. 22.214.171.124 16:54, April 24, 2012 (UTC)
Narnia was really nice movie. Azlan was a great lion. Narnia is a place that all creatures are welcome, but that was for the mean time but when the kings and queens go back to their real world Narnia becomes a world of hatred and war between human and other creatures came, but the kings and queens came back to make sure Narnia will be a peaceful world again. I was a fan of this Movie Series. Hope more of Narnia will come to movie again.