Reviews Comments: Interesting Storytelling Techniques, Schizophrenic Fanbase
Interesting Storytelling Techniques, Schizophrenic Fanbase
The Bible is a historical goldmine, worth a read purely so one understands the myriad references present in perhaps millions of texts across the world. Being written and compiled over nine-hundred years has affected the editions one has access to, for example the "recent" King James Edition, containing perhaps the inner bigotry of the old King himself filtered in. This does not detract from the main message of the story, however, since that has already been lost in translation. The majority of the story concerns God's revelation to man. Written and serialised as part of some unknown form of distribution that is now lost to time, the effort of the author to convey a story never before seen is obvious and elegant. The other and shorter testament is about Jesus, an incarnation of God that walks the earth and maintains peace among humans for a time. This part of the Bible is far less gory than the previous one, and is of interest to the more intellectual readers. It takes place from the perspectives of several of his followers and generally is more philosophical than the earlier one. Though through this it is made obvious the story has changed hands in terms of author, the style is greatly welcomed and refreshing. Of course, the shortcoming of the Bible is one not at all it's fault, but must be talked about. Over the many hundreds of years since it's creation, it has gained a sizeable set of fans who defend it, quite literally, with the sword. Some level of inexplicable "defence" of this work and it's fans has led even to this very review becoming "blasphemous" for equating it to the normal standards of fiction. This detracts from the literary genius behind the book(s). If only those who use this fictitious design as a basis for their moral compass would realise they are ruining it for everyone else - in quite the same way fans of the Twilight series would if Twilight was well-written.
Agreed with wellinever about the cleverness of the review. Although I have to say, that book has incredible pacing problems. I don't think I've seen any other book that stopped to throw genealogy at me.
comment #493 WilliamWideWeb 26th Jun 09
Gee, thanks guys.
comment #495 HarryBrewis 27th Jun 09
Everyone who attacks the King James Version should read any translation made after the New International Version, particularly "The Word." I like the New Testament better, so thanks for the compliment about New Testament fans. I appreciate the middle finger to Twilight. Three Stars out of Four.
comment #497 126.96.36.199 27th Jun 09 (edited by: loracarol)
Regardless of whatever moral or historical value it may have, I can't say I've ever been impressed by the bible as a piece of literature. I've always been an extremely patient reader, but I've rarely found any book as much of a chore to read cover to cover.
comment #498 Desertopa 27th Jun 09
The funny thing about the King James Version translation is that it makes the book a better piece of literature but loses some historical (if not moral) value in the process.
comment #499 silver2195 27th Jun 09
William Wide Web: I take it you haven't read some of Tolkien's works. He has a habit of doing that as well.
comment #635 188.8.131.52 22nd Jul 09
184.108.40.206, well that's weird when you take account of the massive plot holes, contradictory (and brutal) rules, and the "based on a true story" thing is no better than Blair Witch. (And the pacing is just god-awful, as mentioned.) Inspiration? Ecclesiastes 3: 19 "Man's fate is like that of the animals; the same fate awaits them both: as one dies, so dies the other. All have the same breath; man has no advantage over the animal. Everything is meaningless." D'oh! Russell's Teapot has more. Read the comics too. Those have an interesting take on this subject.
comment #639 Mr. Lostman 22nd Jul 09 (edited by: Mr. Lostman)
58: I have read the Hobbit and the first LOTR book, but it was a long time ago so I didn't fully remember it. I do remember quitting in boredom though.
comment #644 WilliamWideWeb 22nd Jul 09
To be honest, I found Revelations the only thing exciting in there.
comment #669 Dick Richardson 26th Jul 09
Mileage May Vary incarnate. I loved the review but I have only one problem with it- there isn't one "author" per se. The Bible was written by ~nearly forty people~ over a 1500 year period (or possibly longer). The fact that ANYTHING connects to anything else is in and of itself, a miracle.
comment #779 220.127.116.11 11th Aug 09
The Book of Daniel is to the Old Testement what The Revelation of St. John is to the New Testement. It's got action, drama, AND crazy-looking monsters of prophesy.
comment #781 Dracomicron 11th Aug 09
The Book of Daniel is like The Revelation, but the frame story isn't a possible drug trip on an island, its mob politics and a royal coup. As a piece of literature, the Bible is best viewed as a pre-modern postmodern mindscrew with a Gainax Ending and massive cases of Anvilicousness, Authorship on Board, and Viewers are Geniuses Syndrome.
comment #813 18.104.22.168 15th Aug 09
I found this to be a fair and clever review except until the last part where you go on a tangent about your personal ideology without listing counterpoints. For one, you brand ALL Christians with the same brush regardless of context. For another, how much historical accuracy the Bible contains is a highly debated subject, and simply brushing it off as 'fiction' is outright insulting. And, while I am not defending the Twilight series, the jabs against it are getting old.
comment #815 22.214.171.124 15th Aug 09
Excellent review, well written. Keeps up to the standard of the page: changing perspectives and viewing the Bible as a work of fiction is refreshing for the mind, and allows one to understand the vision the majority of the world (who believing to non-Abrahamic religions or have forsaken religion itself). Keep up the good work. As for the "believers", please cool your heads. I suggest you to have a look at gnosticism if you really want to feel angry.
comment #828 Raw Power 17th Aug 09 (edited by: loracarol)
Interesting review. Definitely pretty funny.
comment #833 Wulf 17th Aug 09 (edited by: Wulf)
If one wants to be technical about the pacing; The Bible is actually an anthology, written by different authors from different time periods about common themes and characters. The boring stuff (Levitcus, etc.) are like supplementary material that happens to be placed chronologically rather than in an appendix at the end. Also, I feel compelled to point out that as a Christian, I don't feel obligated to complain that you don't believe in it. I fully understand the whole Fan Dumb of the Bible, and I get pissed off at it myself. I may base my morals off it, but I don't believe that I should force others to follow it.
comment #1044 JapaneseTeeth 24th Sep 09
Well, this is interesting. Funny review!
comment #1045 OuttaTheBLAM 25th Sep 09
In response to: "He states that anyone who believes in the Bible -ever- was a crazed fanatic. That is ridiculous" I think you may have misunderstood something I said. I mentioned that a lot of fanatics have come about, but not that everyone who comes about is a fanatic.
comment #1234 HarryBrewis 6th Nov 09
If you believe in talking snakes, you might just be a little crazy.
comment #3408 126.96.36.199 15th Jul 10
Or you're Harry Potter
comment #5327 Ramenth 3rd Dec 10 (edited by: loracarol)
A well-balanced and interesting review. I commend your levelheadedness.
comment #8338 Kastorr 28th Jun 11
In order to post comments, you need to