A Goodreads user
asked:
I'm sorry but this book is an insult to all Christians, demons and angels never work together. The rapture should never be made fun of, because the Antichrist is real. Satan and God are real, this man is a deceiver. How can anyone read this hogwash?
To answer questions about
Good Omens: The Nice and Accurate Prophecies of Agnes Nutter, Witch,
please sign up.
AC
Sir, I do not truly believe you are sorry. Nevertheless, as a Christian, approximately qualified (lacking in titles but not learning, and having read in full the Revelation of John and the rest of the Bible) I think it may be within my powers to explain to you the shortcomings of the forming of your question, and then, in turn, to answer it.
You call the book "An insult to all Christians"- in some sense you may be right. You took it as an insult, and you profess to be a Christian. Although I will dispute your use of the word "All"- it is an insult, of course, to those who take offense to the work, but I am a Christian, and my siblings are Christians, and my former boss is a Christian, and we none of us were offended. We were in fact, quite tickled by the narrative- it is not ever implied that it ought to be taken seriously, and so I (and my companions) felt quite comfortable laughing at it, and were not in the least offended. Surely a greater insult to all Christians are those who profess to know God and have achieved positions of authority in the flock and yet continue to live in sin and use the power of their position to abuse their flock.
"demons and angels never work together" Is in fact, one of the premises of the book- Crowley and Aziraphale are outliers- they have spent so much time among humans that they have grown to resemble them. The book is not an examination of Angel/Demon relations, but of human relations. The main point is that humans are neither inherently evil or good, and they are generally inclined toward doing what they want.
You mention the rapture, and that it should not be made fun of. I do not think that the rapture (being defined as it is popularly used, as the taking up of all righteous humans into heaven, either just before or shortly after the trials and tribulations of the end times) is in fact featured in Good Omens.
Nevertheless, I shall address your reference to it: The rapture as it is described in popular theology, and as I assume that you use the term, is fictional. It is completely unfounded, scripturally. In the main verse cited to support it ("One will be taken and the other left" Matt 24:40, Luke 17:34-37) It is unclear whether the righteous man or the unrighteous man is taken. And why would Christ leave Earth, his finest creation, only full of unrighteous people? It doesn't make sense. Why would a good God create something, only to destroy it? Why would he not simply have humans live with him in heaven to begin with? But that is beside the point. Yes, God will again walk among humans, but logically speaking, he will most likely do so on earth, hence the title Second Coming, as opposed to calling the end times our first going.
You speak of the Antichrist, you say that he/she/they/it is real. Surely, there is such a thing, but would it not be more reasonable to state that there is not one, but many Antichrists? Is not anyone in whom Christ does not live, an antichrist, being in their actions and their heart, against Christ? We should not, as Christians, be concerned with identifying the worst one, but rather with ensuring that at Christ's second coming, there are as few as possible. Is not our duty as Christians, to sow the seed, not to go out and pull the weeds?
You also say "Satan and God are real, this man is a deceiver. " To call satan as real as God, in contrast to a third who is less real, a deceiver, could be called heresy. God is the most real, Satan is not even real enough to touch him. And if Satan is real, is he not the true Deceiver? Christ himself, calls Satan the prince of lies. To whom do you refer, with this third character? The antichrist? In the previous sentence, you say the antichrist is real, so it must not be him. To the authors of Good Omens? There are two of them you know. And they did not deceive: the book is framed as a satire, the forward explicitly states that it is in no way intended to be taken as fact. They are no more deceivers than any other fiction author. Certainly, their tales are not true, but that fact is public knowledge.
Finally, you ask, "How can anyone read this hogwash?" Well, good sir, most likely the same way they read anything: by looking at the ink on the page, or the pixels on their screen, and converting those markings into words, and those words into a narrative, using their brains which have been trained to do just that. If they are blind, or visually impaired, or simply dislike that method, they might listen to the audiobook, which is as readily available as the print and ebook editions- in which case their task is even easier- they need only convert speech into meaning. it is quite simple. Of course, if the book were literally hogwash, it would become more difficult- I hear it's rather hard to get ink to stick to that.
I pity you, Sir, in the Christian sense. You seem to be an angry person, and I have never had the energy for anger. I have been told, by my friends in psychology, that anger is a secondary emotion- that someone who is angry was hurt, or sad, or something of that ilk before they became angry- that anger is a symptom of a deeper disease(in the Middle English sense- a lack of ease, of contentment). I wonder, what your dis-ease is. What is the root of your discontentment, that you express it by lashing out at something so harmless as the readers/writers of Good Omens? I recommend that you spend some time reading C.S. Lewis's essays on Christian literature. Or if you find them difficult to read(they were originally intended as speeches) you might listen to them.
You call the book "An insult to all Christians"- in some sense you may be right. You took it as an insult, and you profess to be a Christian. Although I will dispute your use of the word "All"- it is an insult, of course, to those who take offense to the work, but I am a Christian, and my siblings are Christians, and my former boss is a Christian, and we none of us were offended. We were in fact, quite tickled by the narrative- it is not ever implied that it ought to be taken seriously, and so I (and my companions) felt quite comfortable laughing at it, and were not in the least offended. Surely a greater insult to all Christians are those who profess to know God and have achieved positions of authority in the flock and yet continue to live in sin and use the power of their position to abuse their flock.
"demons and angels never work together" Is in fact, one of the premises of the book- Crowley and Aziraphale are outliers- they have spent so much time among humans that they have grown to resemble them. The book is not an examination of Angel/Demon relations, but of human relations. The main point is that humans are neither inherently evil or good, and they are generally inclined toward doing what they want.
You mention the rapture, and that it should not be made fun of. I do not think that the rapture (being defined as it is popularly used, as the taking up of all righteous humans into heaven, either just before or shortly after the trials and tribulations of the end times) is in fact featured in Good Omens.
Nevertheless, I shall address your reference to it: The rapture as it is described in popular theology, and as I assume that you use the term, is fictional. It is completely unfounded, scripturally. In the main verse cited to support it ("One will be taken and the other left" Matt 24:40, Luke 17:34-37) It is unclear whether the righteous man or the unrighteous man is taken. And why would Christ leave Earth, his finest creation, only full of unrighteous people? It doesn't make sense. Why would a good God create something, only to destroy it? Why would he not simply have humans live with him in heaven to begin with? But that is beside the point. Yes, God will again walk among humans, but logically speaking, he will most likely do so on earth, hence the title Second Coming, as opposed to calling the end times our first going.
You speak of the Antichrist, you say that he/she/they/it is real. Surely, there is such a thing, but would it not be more reasonable to state that there is not one, but many Antichrists? Is not anyone in whom Christ does not live, an antichrist, being in their actions and their heart, against Christ? We should not, as Christians, be concerned with identifying the worst one, but rather with ensuring that at Christ's second coming, there are as few as possible. Is not our duty as Christians, to sow the seed, not to go out and pull the weeds?
You also say "Satan and God are real, this man is a deceiver. " To call satan as real as God, in contrast to a third who is less real, a deceiver, could be called heresy. God is the most real, Satan is not even real enough to touch him. And if Satan is real, is he not the true Deceiver? Christ himself, calls Satan the prince of lies. To whom do you refer, with this third character? The antichrist? In the previous sentence, you say the antichrist is real, so it must not be him. To the authors of Good Omens? There are two of them you know. And they did not deceive: the book is framed as a satire, the forward explicitly states that it is in no way intended to be taken as fact. They are no more deceivers than any other fiction author. Certainly, their tales are not true, but that fact is public knowledge.
Finally, you ask, "How can anyone read this hogwash?" Well, good sir, most likely the same way they read anything: by looking at the ink on the page, or the pixels on their screen, and converting those markings into words, and those words into a narrative, using their brains which have been trained to do just that. If they are blind, or visually impaired, or simply dislike that method, they might listen to the audiobook, which is as readily available as the print and ebook editions- in which case their task is even easier- they need only convert speech into meaning. it is quite simple. Of course, if the book were literally hogwash, it would become more difficult- I hear it's rather hard to get ink to stick to that.
I pity you, Sir, in the Christian sense. You seem to be an angry person, and I have never had the energy for anger. I have been told, by my friends in psychology, that anger is a secondary emotion- that someone who is angry was hurt, or sad, or something of that ilk before they became angry- that anger is a symptom of a deeper disease(in the Middle English sense- a lack of ease, of contentment). I wonder, what your dis-ease is. What is the root of your discontentment, that you express it by lashing out at something so harmless as the readers/writers of Good Omens? I recommend that you spend some time reading C.S. Lewis's essays on Christian literature. Or if you find them difficult to read(they were originally intended as speeches) you might listen to them.
Madeleine
A: Not everyone is christian B: It is fiction written for fun C: If you can't deal with it don't read it. + hogwash is fun to read.
Jill
Don't read it. I find christian stories an insult to my intelligence, so I don't read them.
Abby Rose
This seems like more of a sermon than a question. I'm religious, I believe in God and Satan, but I certainly don't feel my faith is so fragile I'll be "misled" by a spoof of The Omen. I think most people know this is a fictional book, not the gospel according to Pratchett and Gaiman. If this were released as a biblical aide, yeah, I'd be concerned, but it's a bleeding fantasy novel. Many real people have had books written about them that are fiction. Don't sweat the small stuff mate.
Michael
What you need to understand is that your religious fantasies aren't everyone's reality.
Regarding "Christians" I say if you don't want to be ridiculed don't believe in the ridiculous. Pretty simple really. :)
Regarding "Christians" I say if you don't want to be ridiculed don't believe in the ridiculous. Pretty simple really. :)
crowley
the book was written for fun, its under the comedy genre, not meant to be taken seriously. also hogwash is actually quite fun to read
Erin
Lol. No, your fairy tales aren’t real. Perhaps you should read this book and your Bible more closely to understand exactly how ridiculous Christian mythology is. Why would an omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent god create a tree with food that isn’t meant to be eaten when “he” already knows he will be disobeyed, has the power to stop the disobedience, and has the ability to be present to prevent the disobedience? If you can see the ridiculousness of other mythologies but believe yours is the truth, you’re practicing willful ignorance on an impressive level.
Rob Cook
This answer contains spoilers…
(view spoiler)
Peter Crick
Science is factual and is based upon objective evidence; religion is nothing more than a belief system based upon a completely subjective worldview founded on fictional stories of magic and hope. So Christians should be insulted by their own ignorance and not by Terry Pratchett's book, Good Omens, which openly claims to be a work of fiction; unlike the Bible which falsely claims to be non-fiction.
Tegan Andrew
This answer contains spoilers…
(view spoiler)
Radha
because its like really funny
lem◍nade
Because not everybody is Christian, and not everybody shares the same opinions :)
Amanda
Grew up Christian and honestly this book wasn't that bad when it came to "poking fun" at the religion. There are a lot of references in the book to actual biblical facts, so much so the authors had to have known quite a bit about the Bible to have written this story and most likely had to read it. Not just that but the characters themselves bring up a lot of good questions and thoughts people have about Christianity, making the story very thought provoking no matter who you are. It never goes far enough to be considered heresy or blasphemy in my opinion. I feel you can enjoy this book whether you are a believer or not. It's just a fantasy story based off a possible outcome to something that may or may not happen. It's not that deep.
SpideyWebz
This is a work of fiction, written by two highly educated, widely learned, incredibly intelligent, philosophical, imaginitive men who are lauded by thousands.
The Bible, on the other hand, is written by a bunch of narrow-minded, sexist bullies who contradict themselves every other passage and who lived in a permanent state of righteous indignation and heatstroke.
One of these books is heartwarming, entertaining and funny; the other encourages people to persecute and segregate anybody who is not like them. Unlike your book of fairy tales, Good Omens has never set out to cause division, or to spread hate. Which one is hogwash, again?
The Bible, on the other hand, is written by a bunch of narrow-minded, sexist bullies who contradict themselves every other passage and who lived in a permanent state of righteous indignation and heatstroke.
One of these books is heartwarming, entertaining and funny; the other encourages people to persecute and segregate anybody who is not like them. Unlike your book of fairy tales, Good Omens has never set out to cause division, or to spread hate. Which one is hogwash, again?
Jas
This comment is hogwash.
Nicole
You don't seem to know what "Fiction" is. Its not meant to be a documentary.
This might help https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiction
This might help https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiction
About Goodreads Q&A
Ask and answer questions about books!
You can pose questions to the Goodreads community with Reader Q&A, or ask your favorite author a question with Ask the Author.
See Featured Authors Answering Questions
Learn more