Homestar Runner Wiki Forum

Has anyone read this series of books, as a thriller it's top notch but how true to the bible is it? Your thoughts please

_________________
RIP Nathan "Buz" Buzdor

I have not read any of the series, but I am thoroughly familiar with the theological premise. There is no biblical basis for it. The Bible says very clearly that when the rapture occurs, it will take place AT the Second Coming, not seven years prior to (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17). Furthermore, during the so-called "Great Tribulation", the Church is warned to remain faithful and not fall away. But according to dispensational theology, there won't be any Church on earth during that time because it will be taken away.

Dispensationalists base their theory on a certain reading of Revelation, yet the book of Revelation does not even speak of a rapture. In fact, it is my contention that much of the symbolism of Revelation has to do with event that took place during St. John's lifetime. (there is very strong evidence that 666 is a reference to Emperor Nero--and the 7-headed beast is most definitely a reference to the Roman Empire). In fact, Chapter 12 describes the birth of Christ, which is not a future event at all, but history even to St. John.

Dispensationalists read Revelation as if it describes only future events, ignoring the fact that St. John lived 2000 years ago, and what is future to him is our history. The "Tribulation" was the severe persecution the Church suffered during the first two centuries AD.

So then, what is the application of Revelation for Christians today? Simple: be on guard. History has a tendency to repeat itself. The Church will suffer persecution as it carries out its mission here on earth. Don't believe that? Take a good look at what Christians have to endure in countries like Pakastan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, China, etc.

Revelation also has for us a message of hope. No matter how bad things get down here, no matter how twisted and wicked fallen humanity becomes, God is still the winner. Those of us who are on His side will ultimately triumph when he raises us from the dead.

For more information, take a look at these two documents:

http://www.lcms.org/graphics/assets/media/CTCR/LeftBehind.pdf

http://www.lcms.org/graphics/assets/media/CTCR/endtme-2.pdf

_________________

ummm....cool, I haves one more question for Mr. Didymus. When Christ rises the people from the dead will it be like a zombie movie, or will they(the people) be returned to their former glory?

_________________
RIP Nathan "Buz" Buzdor

They will be returned to their human form. Those who are brought into God's kingdom will be transformed into something even greater, but those who are not will suffer eternal death (maybe they will be like zombies).

_________________

I work in a Christian book store where we sell the Left Behind series, but we stuff a flyer in every one with scriptures that show the books' innaccuracies.

There is a new eschatological fiction series being written by Hank Hanegraaff and Sigmund Brouwer. Book 1, "The Last Disciple," came out recently. It takes a Preterist view and tells the story of 1st century Christians under the reign of Nero. I haven't read it yet, so I can't really tell you if it is more Biblical, but it is being touted as a biblical alternative to Left Behind.

I've read a little about the Preterist view, and, from what I understand, it is widely believed to have been the view held by most first century Christians. Didymus can probably explain it better than I, but the main idea of the moderate Preterist view is that most of what is written in Revelation (the great tribulation, the antichrist, etc.) took place in the first century at or around the time of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. An extreme Preterist will tell you that even Christ's second coming has already taken place, but I'm fairly certain these books won't espouse that view.

I've got too many non-fiction books on my wishlist before I'll check this series out, but I hope to read it eventually. When I do, I'll let you know how good it is.

I read an editorial not long ago (I think it was in some news magazine, Salon, Slate, The New Yorker, I can't recall) about the series. The author of the editorial was a non-Christian but read the series just for the heck of it, but then found that none of his Christian friends wanted to discuss it with them because the few who admitted to having read them all thought the books were trite, boring, and nigh on unreadable. He even went to a church social and couldn't find anybody who admitted to liking the series. His conclusion was that the sole reason the books have sold so well is that there's pretty much no other entertaining contemporary Christian literature on the market.

Grr, I can't find the article, but I did find an article about the series by an ordained Christian minister called Fundamentally Unsound.

_________________

I assume that you imply fiction. There's most likely some. There's plenty if you're willing to drop "contemporary" and go back 10, 50, or 75 years. There's TONS if you're willing to go non-fiction.

I don't read too much fiction (though I do like Anglican contributions such as the work of Lewis and Rowling, Catholic writings like those of Tolkien, etc... but I don't think that's what people mean when they say "Christian Fiction"). Perretti has some great youth-targeted books that are pretty adventuresome. I don't remember who wrote the Blood of Heaven trilogy, but that was like one of the action-thriller mega-fat-novels that people have to have on the NYT top seller list all the time.

Maybe JoeyDay will chime in with some selections that are good. But I don't think it's that there's a lot of people wanting literature that no one's writing. It's that there's not much of a market for it in the first place so many of the the authors go unpublished. Christians I've observed, as a group, are more thrifty and less likely to spend on entertainment in general. Perhaps I'm generalizing too much, or perhaps I'm assigning moral value to the way people spend money. But I don't think the market is pretty much saturated.

_________________

Good point Buz which brings me to my next topic. Has anyone read the Devine Comedy(AKA Dante's Inferno)?

_________________
RIP Nathan "Buz" Buzdor

Yup, about 10 years ago. But don't expect me to be able to help you with your homework with what little I can remember.

_________________

Ted Dekker is fairly popular in our store. I've read one of his books, "Thr3e" (the first fiction book I've read in a long time), which I thought was quite entertaining. He just finished the last book in his trilogy, "The Circle". The three books are "Black", "Red", and "White". I've heard they are good, but I haven't read them.

When it comes down to it, though, I'm afraid Buz is right. the best Christian fiction books are the classics from yesteryear: Bunyan, Lewis, Tolkien, etc.

How do you see Tolken as a christian fiction author?

_________________
RIP Nathan "Buz" Buzdor

Here I think I will attempt to clear up a controversy and strike a balance.

Tolkien did not INTEND to write what we might call "Christian" fiction. That is to say that the predominate themes are not meant to be theological in nature. He is not writing an allegory. He in fact detested allegory and criticised C. S. Lewis for his overt use of allegory in THE CHRONICLES OF NARNIA.

Tolkien is writing what he considered myth. He and Lewis both shared a deep love of mythology as a literary genre. Tolkien wrote THE HOBBIT as a children's story. But, like all good faerie tales, it has its origin deep in mythology. THE LORD OF THE RINGS and THE SILMARILLION are the mythology behind that faerie tale. That's why LOTR reads much more like adult fiction rather than TH.

Incidentally, in the movies, Peter Jackson intended for Gandalf's hat to be symbolic of the faerie tale nature inherited from TH. Once the tale turns really serious (at the gates of Moria), Gandalf loses his hat, and the faerie tale is engulfed in the darker mythos of Middle Earth.

So why is it that some believe that TH and LOTR are Christian fiction? Well, Tolkien himself was a devout Christian of the Roman Catholic faith. Much of his own worldview (not theology, per se, but his overall outlook on life) is found in these tales. This should not surprise us. Middle Earth is Tolkien's creation, after all. And part and parcel of Tolkien's worldview are the Christian beliefs of the fallen nature of humanity, the destructive and SEDUCTIVE nature of evil, divine providence, the ideal of self-sacrifice and suffering for the cause of good.

There are some who note similarities between certain characters of LOTR and figures from the Bible. For example, many see in Gandalf a symbol of Christ.

He enters this world as a frail old man (as opposed to a frail infant),
he sacrifices his life to save his friends (and that doing battle with a devil!),
and he is resurrected in a glorified form, full of new power.

Aragorn, likewise, makes a good Christ figure.

He is a long lost king from an ancient bloodline,
the kingdom of his ancestors was divided into Northern and Southern kingdoms (Arnor and Gondor, just like Samaria and Judah),
his true identity was known by his healing abilities (not very evident in the movies, but clearly seen in the books),
and the restoration of his kingdom resulted in a golden age of humanity (as Christ's return is to bring about redemption of the world).

But these similarities between Aragorn and Gandalf and Jesus Christ are not meant to be understood as symbolism, but as TYPOLOGY. Tolkien, a lover of myth, was thoroughly familiar with the way in which similar themes keep cropping up in mythologies. For example, Mithras, King Arthur, the Fisher King, Baldur the Bright, and other mythological figures bear some striking resemblances to Christ. Tolkien actually took this as evidence that the whole world--and not just the Jews--were looking for a Messiah. He regarded such legends as "splintered light", refractions of the truth of Christ that somehow found their way into the different mythologies of the world. The difference? Jesus Christ was that legend entering into human history. Fact and myth are made one and the same in HIM.

So are Gandalf and Aragorn supposed to symbolize Jesus? No. Do they bear striking resemblance to Him? Yes.

Incidentally, Tolkien was directly responsible for C. S. Lewis becoming a Christian. It was through their common love of myth and Tolkien's theory of "splintered light" that "baptized my imagination," as Lewis later put it.

So is Tolkien's works Christian fiction? In the sense that Tolkien's Christian worldview shaped his writings, then yes. But they are not allegory of the Christian faith, like THE CHRONICLES OF NARNIA and PILGRIM'S PROGRESS.

I did not intend to write a doctoral dissertation on the subject, but I hope this will help.

_________________

So are you saying for example that Gandalf coming back after killing the Balrog(evil) is a direct refrence to the bible and Jesus?

_________________
RIP Nathan "Buz" Buzdor

I have read INFERNO and about 2/3 of PURGATORIO. That's about as far as I got. I have not read PARADISIO.

I actually took a class on INFERNO in college. I even wrote a paper on how it could be viewed as an allegory for our bondage to sin. I don't know if I still have it, though. The thing to keep in mind is that Dante did intend THE DIVINE COMEDY to be an allegory of his own spiritual pilgrimage.

_________________

Not a DIRECT REFERENCE, but a TYPOLOGICAL REFERENCE. You see, there's a difference. Aslan's death and resurrection in THE LION, THE WITCH, AND THE WARDROBE is a direct reference to the passion of Christ. Lewis wants his readers to make that connection. He wants his reader to equate Aslan and Christ.

Gandalf, on the other hand, is a TYPE. There are obvious similarities, but Tolkien is not trying to tell the story of Jesus. There are connections, but they are far more subtle than those between Aslan and Jesus. Tolkien does not necessarily want us to make that connection. In fact, you could just as easily argue that Gandalf's glorification is like the one we will experience when Christ raises us from the dead (think White Garments from Revelation) or even when we are baptized. But Gandalf makes clear throughout the entire series that he is a servant of higher powers, who themselves are servants of the One True Power (Illuvitar - God). He is not God incarnate, as Aslan was.

Gandalf is also very similar to Merlin from the Arthurian legends as well (and bears a lot more of his mystique and personality quirks). And if Gandalf is Merlin, then Aragorn is most certainly King Arthur (who is also a Christ Type). There are also some connections between the story of Boromir and THE SONG OF ROLAND, which, oddly enough, are tied together by Pippen.

The point is that Tolkien, a Christian, is telling a story--NOT AN ALLEGORY--with a rich heritage of mythology, history, and linguistics (Tolkien was a linguist by profession), which just happens to contain a few brief glimpses of his own Christian worldview. For some (like myself) it makes his writings Christian. To others, including perhaps those expecting theological fiction like LEFT BEHIND, it is not.

_________________

Um, the same way I see Rowling as a Christian, Fiction Author.

And as goes for typeology, Lewis would say that typification is necessary for myth. You can't have a compelling mythology without at least a nod to archetypes.

_________________

To further clarify, Tolkein intended for his books to be read as epic myth in the same tradition as THE ODYSSEY, THE EDDAS, BEOWULF, THE SONG OF ROLAND, and LA MORTE D'ARTHUR. He wanted us to enjoy the story for its plot, character development, imagery, and overall entertainment value.

In fact, the last time I read them, I noticed something about them. Tolkien wrote them in such a way that they actually FEEL like a translation of some ancient epic poem. It's hard to put my finger on exactly what gave me that impression. A lot of it had to do with the way the songs and poems in the story were written. The dialogue also gave me the impression of something that might very well have been translated from a different language. Or I might have been driven insane from studying Greek and Hebrew in college.

_________________

Of the possibilities, I think this one has the most merit.

However, Tolkien was an expert on linguistics. He may very well have intended his writings to seem as if they were translated. Heck, who's to say he didn't write the whole book in Elvish and translate it into English before pulbishing it?

It's entirely possible he did. He's been known to do things like that. Why, once he translated Beowulf from Anglo-Saxon into Scandinavian, just for fun!

_________________

Acts 26:24

EDIT:
I just heard this week (middle of December 2004, a while after this thread fell asleep) of a lady whose (grown) granddaughter got saved from reading Left Behind, and is actually bringing the rest of her daugher's lost family to Christ. She had prayed with the pastor at the end of the film and was so excited, she called grandma just to make sure she'd done it right. I thought the movie was merely cute fluff, but I guess the story has really had a powerful effect on some people the Holy Spirit's been working in already. So I take back anything I said that was really bad about this media phenomenon (though I stand by some of the stuff, God appears to be using it in spite of the flaws).

_________________